Car Decision: 1997 vs. 1995

[NewGuy181]

Hi, I'm relatively new here, so I'll be fairly blunt and straight to the point. I'm attempting to choose betweeen a 1997 626 with 106,000 miles @ 5999 vs. a 1995 626 with 109,000 miles @3250 with no tax. The 1997 is in better condition, with CD player & sunroof, but we can't tell if the major work has been done yet (timing belt, etc.) and comes from a dealer 26 mi away. The 1995 is in a little worse condition, could use some cosmetic work, has a problem with the front fender, and comes from a local dealer. In doing my research on cars.com, I discovered that the 1997 has a worse mechanical rating of 2 stars vs the 1995 with 4 stars. Can someone please tell me why this is? Has anyone noticed any defects in these models? I would really appreciate your help.

 

[NewGuy181]

I didn't think this one posted!

 

[TheMAN]

is it an automatic?

 

[YellowMP5]

i think i heard/read that those 626 are crap. i could be wrong though. if you are buying a used vehicle I assume you don't have enought money for a new one. so you won't have lots of extra money to repair a used one if it breaks down and eventually it will like everything. so, make sure you get the one that is most reliable and more mechanically sound, whether its a Mazda or not. you will be happier in the long run.

 

[NegatiZE]

Stay away from any 93+ 626 that's a 4 cyl automatic. They have the Ford CD4E transmission that is known for failures.

 

[NegatiZE]

The 4-cyl manual's and 6 cyl automatic/manuals are good, however.

 

[NewGuy181]

Both cars are automatics.

 

[TheMAN]

then start looking for another car
automatic 626 = your worst nightmare