1985 Mazda 626 Reviews - Page 2 of 2

1985 Mazda 626 gc 2.0 from Australia and New Zealand

Model year1985
Year of manufacture1985
First year of ownership2003
Most recent year of ownership2005
Engine and transmission 2.0 Automatic
Performance marks 6 / 10
Reliability marks 7 / 10
Comfort marks 6 / 10
Dealer Service marks 7 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 7 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.6 / 10
Distance when acquired360000 kilometres
Most recent distance393000 kilometres
Previous carVolvo 264

Summary:

It is steady and economical

Faults:

Head gasket blew out of nowhere. heated up regularly. besides that nothing else.

General Comments:

The car runs well if looked after probably.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 21st January, 2005

1985 Mazda 626 from Australia and New Zealand

Year of manufacture1985
First year of ownership1997
Most recent year of ownership2003
Engine and transmission Manual
Performance marks 9 / 10
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Dealer Service marks 7 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.4 / 10
Distance when acquired90000 kilometres
Most recent distance225000 kilometres

Summary:

Built to take whatever is dished out, an amazing little car!

Faults:

This little coupe has taken a real hammering from my nephew and it never skipped a beat.

The only things needing replacing were the CV joints, timing belt and battery.

The only thing I hated was the constant bonging of all the warning gadgets telling you the lights are on, the seatbelt is not done up etc..

General Comments:

This little 2 door coupe was fully optioned and it was punished during the time it was in our family, it never let us down once.

Frankly I'm amazed they could build a car so strong.

It never failed to start and was a pleasure to drive.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 25th October, 2004

14th Apr 2006, 07:34

Hi. I have one of these cars, and I have to admit, that I punish it beyond the limit. I have done "N" to "D" burnouts, handbrake slides, reved engine 700 rpm over the normal shift point of the auto box, etc. I've owned it for almost 1 year, and just now am starting to see small signs of early wear. I love this little car, but I think that it might be time to say goodbye.

1985 Mazda 626 LX from North America

Year of manufacture1985
First year of ownership2000
Most recent year of ownership2001
Engine and transmission Automatic
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 0 / 10
Comfort marks 5 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 1 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
3.3 / 10
Distance when acquired105000 miles
Most recent distance115000 miles
Previous carPontiac Parisienne

Summary:

Run away from this vehicle as fast as you possibly can

Faults:

The transmission went out at 107,000 miles. We then had the transmission replaced with a used one that had only 20,000 miles on it.

A seal in the new transmission had to be replaced 1,000 miles later.

The new transmission had to be completely replaced again after another 1,000 miles put on it. Fortunately it was under warranty.

The mass air flow sensor had to be replaced, which is not cheap.

The tensioner on the timing belt went out, but was not too expensive to repair.

General Comments:

This car drives great as long as no mechanical problems are going on.

For those of us who live paycheck to paycheck, you will go into extensive credit card debt for car repairs.

Mazda refuses to recall the transmission although it's a well known fact that they fail you in every Mazda 626 that they make. Unfortunately I wasn't aware of that when I bought mine.

If you purchase this car, plan on trading it in a year later with negative equity and $3,000 in credit card debt.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 2nd July, 2003

30th Jul 2003, 15:47

It seems the N. American 626 uses Ford's CD4E autobox - and it certainly seems unreliable and prone to failure. Our (S. Africa/Zimbabwe) 626's have a Jap (Mazda) autobox, which is better. My '92 626 auto has done 130,000km - absolutely trouble-free. My '99 626 auto has 70,000km and is still smooth as silk.

28th Apr 2012, 08:17

The 85 626 is carbureted; it doesn't have a MAF sensor...

1985 Mazda 626 2.0 from North America

Year of manufacture1985
First year of ownership2003
Most recent year of ownership2003
Engine and transmission 2.0 Automatic
Performance marks 8 / 10
Reliability marks 8 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.0 / 10
Distance when acquired148000 miles
Most recent distance151000 miles
Previous carPlymouth Valiant

Summary:

Get if if it's a good price!

Faults:

Car failed emissions test. Needed a part for the carburetor that wasn't available after market. I had to go to a wrecking yard to get a used carburetor to get the part off of.

Cruise control and electrical suspension did not work when I got the car and still do not work.

General Comments:

Fun car to drive, handles very well and has very good acceleration for a 4 cylinder auto.

Very good fuel economy.

A lot of passenger room and comfort for a small car.

Nice control layout, easy to understand and use. Pleasant appearance.

Poor mechanical design that you would expect from a Japanese car.

Thin sheet metal. Light duty parts used in manufacture.

Overuse of electrical components.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 21st May, 2003

1985 Mazda 626 L petrol from Trinidad and Tobago

Year of manufacture1985
First year of ownership1993
Most recent year of ownership1995
Engine and transmission petrol Automatic
Performance marks 8 / 10
Reliability marks 4 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 3 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
5.5 / 10
Previous carFord Cortina

Summary:

This is not a good car

Faults:

Engine drive belt burst.

Air conditioning fan switch failed.

Engine was constantly throwing oil into the air cleaner housing, and also throwing it out of the dipstick shaft.

Engine mysteriously used to overheat - never found out why.

Front wheel bearings failed - these are very expensive.

Had to overhaul steering rack due to leakage of fluid.

Starter failed, fuel pump failed, velocity joints failed.

When I finally got rid of this car, it was emitting a 'whistling' sound - never solved that one...

General Comments:

A nice car to drive with very good handling and acceleration.

Seats reasonably comfortable, perhaps a little low in height.

Devastatingly thirsty car.

Not a very reliable car, something seemed to go wrong every few weeks...

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 14th July, 2002

22nd Jan 2008, 20:32

Run from this car. I live in Trinidad and Tobago. I bought a 626LX 10 months ago; I paid $1,000usd for it only to spend almost $1,000usd in parts and repairs over the last 10 months. Finally I got rid of it two days ago. I got $900usd for it. Take my advice: RUN FROM THAT.

P.S. I am renting a Mazda 323F and it works great. But burns a little gas. If you can afford it I recommend it.

22nd Aug 2010, 19:19

I currently own a Mazda 626 LX 1.8. This is a very good car and comfortable too. The car is over 25 years old so all those other complaints I've read are only obvious.

The only problem I have had so far in the last years that I owned this car are that the starter failed and the air conditioning blower failed, but parts are very easy to get and reasonably cheap, but the only permanent fault is that the car uses a bit of gas due to the size of the engine (1.8L). If you love speed, you've gotta love to go to the gas station OK... LOL.

1985 Mazda 626 2.0L diesel from Australia and New Zealand

Year of manufacture1985
First year of ownership1998
Most recent year of ownership2002
Engine and transmission 2.0L diesel Manual
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 10 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
9.0 / 10
Distance when acquired70000 kilometres
Most recent distance198000 kilometres

Summary:

Extremely economical and cheap to run

Faults:

The alloy head cracked due to straining the engine when cold, had to replace it. Have had quite a lot of trouble with front wheel bearings. Front disc brake discs where warped when we purchased it, have had planing twice. Recently having problems with cooling system pressure.

General Comments:

This car is a good cheap car with unreal fuel economy. Can't argue with 800km's on a 50 litre tank. Easy to maintain being Diesel, but lacks power. Has very good handling, replaced rear shockers before they began to sag which is common in this car. Heaps of interior room for a medium car and is reasonably comfortable to drive.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 29th May, 2002

Average review marks: 7.2 / 10, based on 10 reviews