2012 Saab 9-5 vs 2002 Mazda 626
📊 Key Differences
- Fuel economy: 24 MPG vs 25 MPG combined — Mazda 626 is more efficient
- Annual fuel cost: $2500 vs $2400 — Mazda 626 saves $ per year
- Fuel type: Regular Gasoline vs Regular Gasoline
| Specification | 2012 Saab 9-5 | 2002 Mazda 626 |
|---|---|---|
| Year | 2012 | 2002 |
| Class | Midsize Cars | Midsize Cars |
| Fuel Type | Regular Gasoline | Regular Gasoline |
| Drive | Front-Wheel Drive | Front-Wheel Drive |
| Transmission | Manual 6-spd | Manual 5-spd |
| Cylinders | 4 | 4 |
| Displacement (L) | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| City MPG | 20 | 23 |
| Highway MPG | 32 | 29 |
| Combined MPG | 24 | 25 |
| Annual Fuel Cost | $2500 | $2400 |
| CO₂ (g/mile) | 370.2916666666667 | 355.48 |
🚗 2012 Saab 9-5
Midsize Cars with 24 MPG combined fuel economy. Runs on Regular Gasoline. Front-Wheel Drive drivetrain.
Full Saab 9-5 Profile →🚗 2002 Mazda 626
Midsize Cars with 25 MPG combined fuel economy. Runs on Regular Gasoline. Front-Wheel Drive drivetrain.
Full Mazda 626 Profile →🔗 Related