Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Mazda 626



  • edpagan88edpagan88 Posts: 20
    how about new jersey !!!
  • zoomzoom626zoomzoom626 Posts: 124
    is to see how many of them went 105K( and in those four states that is a timing belt change interval) with their 626's before changing the timing belt. I have 2000 LX-V6 with 60K and I believe I can go 90K before changing it. All 626's have same timing belts so I don't see a reason why the belt could not last 105K in rest of the country :-)!
  • maxx4memaxx4me Posts: 1,340
    I'm no help because my dealer ripped off its parent company by taking out my timing belt pretty early on (warranty item).
  • p100p100 Posts: 1,116
    According to my '99 Mazda 626 owner's manual, the 105 K mile timing belt replacement interval is applicable to cars initially registered in the following states:

    California, New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Delaware, Maryland, New Hamshire, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Maine, and Washington D.C.

    The manual calls for an inspection of timing belt at 60K and 90K intervals and replacement at 105K miles.
  • white626white626 Posts: 5
    I live in California and all the mechanics, Mazda and otherwise don't endorse the 105k mile interval. I had mine done at 60k, since replacingit didn't cost a tremendous amount more than inspecting it. On my 1988 626 we went to 75,000 miles with no problem. On our 1999 Protege, replaced the belt at 88,000 miles. The only bad part of that one was wondering if that would be the day it would break.
  • p100p100 Posts: 1,116
    You may be amused to hear that I owned two of the worst vehicles ever made:
    A 1988 Yugo, and 1982 Renault Le Car. I bought both of them slightly used, spent $ 1700 on the Yugo in 1990 with 18K miles, and $ 1100 on the '82 Renault with 30 K miles in 1984. And I had far fewer problems with either car than with my new 99 ES V6! Sold the Yugo in 1991 for $ 1500 with 30K miles, and the Renault for $ 500 with 65K miles in 1987. And both cars had better CV joints that the Mazda (no vibration).
  • qbrozenqbrozen Posts: 17,148
    you only drove the Yugo for 12,000 miles! I would hope you wouldn't have had any problems in that time.

    Hell, I've got an Alfa spider in my garage that I've put about 5,000 miles on in the 4 years I've owned it. It has not broken down once. I guess that means its the most reliable car I've every owned!

    '13 Stang GT; '86 Benz 300E; '98 Volvo S70; '12 Leaf; '14 Town&Country

  • zoomzoom626zoomzoom626 Posts: 124
    That one is made in my former country, Yugoslavia :-)...
  • zoomzoom626zoomzoom626 Posts: 124
    Thanks for info guys. So if I do timing belt inspection which in my case would involve just removing plastic cover and few bolts and the belt looks good I will be good for another 30K. I understand where the mechanics and repair shops are coming from. Something along lines of lube places which want us to change oil every 3000 miles. More money in their pocket.
    I know there is a risk of belt braking but this is non interference engine so only extra cost would be towing bill. I whish these V6 had timing chains instead!
  • p100p100 Posts: 1,116
    Even better than the timing chain is the direct gear drive arrangement found on some diesel engines. I had a 1982 Datsun pickup with a diesel engine. The cam was operated by a gear meshing with the crankshaft gear and the injection pump drive gear. No need to ever worry about timing belts or chains breaking or coming loose.

    This arrangement is unfortunately not possible on oeverhead cam engines and therefore some of the best diesel engines made, such as Mercedes Benz diesels, use timing chain to operate the cam. Still better than using a belt on a diesel, which VW still does on their Jettas.
  • tccmn1tccmn1 Posts: 278
    I don't own a 626, but drove a 2002 LX for two days while my MPV was serviced. I had a 4 banger and felt it was not very refined at all.
    The unit had 13K miles on it and looked to be in good shape. I felt it was noisy and handling and ride was rough. This compares to my 03 MPV 6cyl, granted, and my Toy Camry 4 banger. While 4's are noisy, I found the 02 626 to be noisier than my Camry and not as nice a ride. It just felt small in comparison and rough on the road.
    I like the cute electronic vanes that move back and forth...but that's about it.

    Just my 2 cents. I know the new Mazda 6 is the replacement, and they needed one based on my experience!
  • p100p100 Posts: 1,116
    I would gladly give up "the cute electronic vanes that move back and forth" for good quality heavy duty axles and CV joints, blemish free alloy wheels, folding outside mirrors, and ABS, and better engineered suspension in general. In fact I would give up the leather seats, sunroof, and the Bose stero as well. Unfortunately it is cheap gimmics like these vanes that make the car attractive to potential buyers at first glance. BTW, I never turn on the oscilating center A/C duct vents on in my car.

    It looks like Mazda finally realized that they cannot compete with the existing 626. Mazda 6 appears to be a much better vehicle. However, some of us who have been sold junk by Mazda will not be lining up to buy the new 6 any time soon.
  • maxx4memaxx4me Posts: 1,340
    he, he, he....I use my "swing" feature to circulate the AC all the time. Since I'm running the car into the ground, I want to take advantage of every button and gizmo the thing has before I take it to the junk heap. My biggest complaints on the 6 is that it is still too low to the ground and hard to get in and out of, and the engine takes on a Chrysler cab forward design, not allowing me to change the oil myself since the engine area is so small. The driver's leg room is poor as well. I am more comforatable in a Neon, than I am in the new 6.
  • p100p100 Posts: 1,116
    Speaking of Neon, do they still make that vehicle? I know several people who have these cars and without exception, the head gaskets blew on their cars around 45K miles. Appears to be a chronic problem with these cars. You can get a used one really cheap. A good alternative to a used 4 cyl auto 626, I think. Replacing a head gasket is a lot cheaper than replacing an auto transmission...every 45K miles.
  • maxx4memaxx4me Posts: 1,340
    geez, I'll be very happy if I can get 45K out of my 3rd transmission, since that would allow my 626 to last long enough to buy the new Maxx next fall. My second Ford tranny only lasted 7 months. I had to go to 2 Mazda dealers before I could get it replaced. The one dealer was claiming it wasn't the transmission. Yeah, right. As for Chryslers, I see those cars as Venus fly traps. They are so beautifully designed except for under the hood, where it can get awfully scary.
  • p100p100 Posts: 1,116
    I have done this on my V6 at 60K miles but could not find a drain plug on the engine block. Draining the radiator and disconnecting the lower radiator hose will drain only about half of the total coolant capacity. I asked a Mazda mechanic about a drain plug on the engine and he told me something about a plate on the engine block that could be removed to drain the coolant but he recommended against it. Anyway, I used the original Mazda orange long service coolant (about $12 a gallon). I only used about 2 quarts of it because I mixed it 50-50 with two quarts of distilled water.

    Any comments? I do not have the service manual for this car and if I keep it any longer, I will get one. Is there anything revealing in the service manual on this subject? And I think that the coolant replacement should be about 30K miles instead of 60 if all you can drain is half the coolant capacity.
  • 30k seems reasonable to me, even with the orange stuff. Coolant will retain its thermal properties for longer periods, but the additives to protect the cooling system don't last quite as long.

    I haven't heard this about the V6, but the four seems to be somewhat susceptible to air bubbles; if you don't purge the system carefully during coolant replacement, you're inviting a problem.

    (Neons are still in production, though only under the Dodge brand; Plymouth has rung down the curtain and joined the Choir Invisible.)
  • tccmn1tccmn1 Posts: 278
    I didn't know that the 626 was known as a bad vehicle until I posted my little opinion about my short use of one. I had thought that it was a good unit in comparison to the Camry and Altima...but I've learned a lot here. You folks support my opinion of it being a little rough around the edges. Thanks for enlightening me on this model. Glad I never pursued one in 99 when I bought my Camry 4 banger.

    I hope my MPV doesn't turn out to be sour grapes. So far it seems pretty refined and well put together...but that's after only 4K miles.
  • maxx4memaxx4me Posts: 1,340
    thanks for making me feel bad tccmn1. If I had half a brain and a little more money, I would be have bought a Camry Wagon (last model year) back in 1996, rather than this fine Ford 626. I too hope you have good luck with your MPV. I really like the current model, even though I don't come close to fitting in the driver seat. Keep sharing your experiences with it. You just might save someone from making a bad choice, or may help them into a great purchase.
  • p100p100 Posts: 1,116
    I could have bought a brand new 99 base model GXE Nissan Maxima for $1,500 less than I paid for the 99 626 ES V6 (considering all rebates and discounts at the time). The Maxima would have been worth at least $ 1500 more on resale right now, so I essentially lost $ 3K. Not to mention getting an unrefined and uneconomical car with high maintenance requirements.
Sign In or Register to comment.