Surely on this website I don’t have to explain what a sleeper is. I thought this was a common or garden-variety Mazda 626 until the oh-so-80s alloy wheels prompted me to check the right-hand rear of the car for that little word that adorned so many performance cars in the 80s.
But there it is. The subtle beige-ish paint, the tow bar (hitch), the worn-in looks; none of this would let you know that this was one of the quicker cars you could buy in 1988, with 108 kW or 145 bhp from its 2.2L 12-valve turbocharged engine. At just 1170 kg or 2580 lb that was enough to push it to 60 in the 7-sec bracket and on to a top speed of 125 mph or so. The only downside was some fairly harsh torque-steer.
Yet this performance lived within a cleanly- but anonymously-styled car, which has to be great for flying under the radar. Sales were no doubt limited by the $30k price, 60% more than an entry Toyota/Nissan/Ford midsize sedan (although the 626 sedan was $24k), and the herd has been thinned over the intervening 18 years by boy-racer types and the general hard living these cars would often have seen.
It may even be the case that the MX-6 coupe sold better than the 626 Turbo, because unusually it was actually cheaper by a few hundred dollars.
Surprisingly the 626 Turbo had little direct competition (in Australia at least), other than its slightly cheaper badge-engineered Ford Telstar Turbo cousin. A Holden Commodore SS was a couple of grand cheaper but significantly lacking in refinement. Anything European with nearly the same performance was much more expensive, eg the Peugeot 405 Mi16 was $10k more and a Saab 900 Turbo was another $10k.
The sunroof is another clue this was a top-spec car in its range. You can’t see much of the interior but it was also a nicely executed but unadventurous piece of work, unless you count the oscillating centre air vents as a major selling point! Did any other manufacturer get on that band wagon?
I am not sure whether this car has Mazda’s electronically-controlled four-wheel steering system (no mechanical connection that the Honda system had), which added nearly $5k to the cost of the car when new. The 4WS carried on to the following generation car but no more.
As a final comment on this car, it is surprising to see it bearing its original registration plates. There were a few years when there was a manufacturing fault that caused the reflective backing of the plates to peel to the point where there was a recall to replace the plates wholesale. My mother’s car at the time was affected, and she duly reported to the local office to receive a new set of plates, including a new registration number; they came from the normal ‘general issue’ pool no doubt because it was easier to do it that way.
If you wanted to keep your existing registration number you had to do a special order (and pay for!) the replacement plates instead, for most people this was more hassle than learning the new rego number.
The spiritual successor to this car is the short-lived Mazda6 MPS; perhaps they will do another in the future with the new 2.5 turbo engine from the CX-9?
Further Reading:
Curbside Capsule: 1985-87 Ford Telstar TX5 Turbo – In High Orbit
COAL: Mazdas Of A Lifetime, Part Two: 626: I’ve Seen The Light–Twice
This was a very interesting version of the 626. The turbo was rated at 145 hp, but that may have been conservative as the performance was well beyond the similarly rated Chrysler 2.2 turbo. The electronic suspension and 4ws add a lot of complexity all these years later but also added much sophistication at the time. Throw in the rare hatchback bodystyle and it really was an interesting choice for non conformists. I find myself much more attracted to offerings like this and the concurrent Galant GSR than the Camcords that were going for the jugular of the market at the time.
The turbo engine was also pretty clearly more powerful than the later Mazda 2.5-liter K-series V-6, which was rated at 164 hp. More torque, too — I think the turbo’s rated torque output was 190 lb-ft.
Looking at the specs, the turbo 2.2 has 145 bhp @ 4300 rpm and 190 ft-lb @ 3500 rpm; compare this to 164 bhp @ 5600 rpm and 160 ft-lb @ 4800 rpm. The V6 probably does make more power over say 4500-5000 rpm, but below that the turbo would have more. I dare say the turbo engine had more ‘under the curve’ over the usable rev range.
There is that, but the general consensus based on the car’s weight and performance — in particular its speeds at the end of the quarter mile (400 meters, give or take) — was that the turbo engine’s actual net output was more in the realm of 175–180 hp (say 130–135 kW). (A high trap speed at the end of the quarter mile/400m sprint requires developed horsepower; a fatter torque curve may reduce elapsed time, but it won’t get you across the line at higher speeds.)
The turbo engine in the previous 626 GT, a 1,998cc version of the same block, claimed only 120 hp and was probably underrated by a similar margin.
Putting this into conservative quarter miles/400 metres (Wheels mag), this car was a 15.5 second. The road test was titled “Unguided Missile”, I think. The NZ version with a nice, but the slower, twin cam and 4ws was the “Guided” one in their opinion.
The previous model was seen as quite sophisticated and smooth. It had about 87kws, if that, and covered the quarter in 17.1.
I’m guessing they weren’t greatly underrated, it was the turbo torque from higher tech and slightly bigger 12 valve engines which did the work. Compare to the early 80s turbos. Early, sportier cars, some on leaded fuel too here in Aus, were not as quick. Consider the following figures from Wheels Road tests:
Cordia Turbo: 110kw, 15.9 (literally one third of the price at 13.5k); Starion:125 kW, 16.3; Piazza: 110kw, 16.3 on unleaded; 300ZX Turbo: 155kw,16.0 on unleaded. Also, stock VL Commodore (sans Turbo!): 114kw, 16.3! VL Turbo: 150kw 15.5. All VLs unleaded, all cars manual.
I’m not talking about elapsed time, but rather about trap speed crossing the finish line. Elapsed time depends on a bunch of different things, including mid-range torque, gearing, and traction off the line — it’s entirely possible for a car with less power and more torque to achieve a lower elapsed time than a more powerful car that has less torque down low or isn’t properly geared for the purpose. (Well-known example: Chrysler 440 versus 426 Hemi in otherwise similar cars.) The speed at the finish line, however, depends mostly on horsepower, much more so than the time figures do.
I’ve seen only 1 example of this version of the 626, and that one was this same light brown color.
I have often wondered if Mazda was a victim of not being able to shake an “also ran” reputation. This car looked so subtle I can imagine folks asking themselves “why should I pay so much for this car when a near identical non-turbo model is so reasonably priced?” Then there was the badge, for folks who are so obsessed by what it means to drive a certain brand of car.
I might have bought one of the non-turbo hatchbacks if I could have found one with a manual transmission.
My parents had a 626 sedan of this vintage for a while, an LX five-speed with the non-turbo 2.2, which was really quite peppy. The official ratings (110 hp, 130 lb-ft) didn’t sound like much, but the normally aspirated engine was more than adequate, at least with manual shift, so it was easy to see how somebody might decide they didn’t need to spend the extra money for the turbo.
A classmate of mine’s boyfriend had one of these. It was my introduction (as a passenger) to the power of turbocharging. He had the habit of hitting the expressway and running it up to 170 km/h (which today would run the risk of getting you charged with stunt driving here) in what felt like no time to me (disclosure: vs. the ’74 Corona I was driving at the time) and I’m not sure how long it lasted, but it got me hooked!
Wow… didn’t know these existed growing up in the rural Midwest and the land were the domestics were king.
The only 626 I ever rode in what one from the end of production V6 model before they changed model names.
My father purchased a used 86 626 GT Turbo coupe in around 88 or so. It was black with a grey interior, 5 speed. It was a great car, I wish I had kept it after it was given to me. It had the oscillating center HVAC vent, headlamp washers, electronically adjustable suspension, power rear side windows (pivot outward) as well as the obligatory graphic equalizer. It had a turbo light in the IP rather than a boost gauge. It was a good car, very reliable. However, it had no safety equipment to speak of, and I was doing a lot of driving for work and school. I figured I needed a safer car so I ended up trading it in on a 95 Volvo 850 wagon, that I still have actually, with about 270,000 miles on it.
This made my day—here’s my car’s ancestor, arguably—yes on the hatch, yes on the specification level (if I’m not going to be driving a Mazda convertible at least I should have some solar access), yes on the anonymity, yes on the relative lightness, but no on the turbo (V6 instead).
It is interesting that the styling of the 626 generations has oscillated; none have been revolutionary or outlandish, but the first model was fairly striking while the second (this one) was pretty bland. The third generation was pretty neat and had the distinctive feature of the built-in wing on the hatchback, while the fourth generation was extra bland as most mid-1990s Japanese cars were.
The Mazda6 has been more consistent at least in being more attractive than average, to my eyes at least.
I have never heard of the oscillating centre air vents before. Apparently they were not available on the European 626’s so maybe that’s why. Odd feature.
I wonder if that is a self-perpetuating internet myths? It seems a strange change to make to the car.
I found this video. It’s like an office desk fan. Very strange.
Late here, but Mazda’s HC 929 had the oscillating centre vents (late HBs possibly too); as did the Australian XF Ford Fairmont Ghia and its long-wheelbase siblings, the ZL Fairlane and FE LTD. The XF shared some dashboard a/c switchgear with the HB 929, so I guess adding the oscillation wasn’t difficult. Pretty sure a few JDM Nissans of the late 80s/early 90s had oscillating vents too. Having spent time in an ’87 XF in 1991-2, I can confirm the oscillation worked well – rather than a continual stream of air coming at you, it sort of swirled, hard to describe but felt very pleasant.
Love the oscillating air vents – so cool, yet they never really caught on with other manufacturers. Not sure if Mazda still offers them on any of their vehicles.
These 626 Turbo sedans were somewhat rare in the states. I had a friend with an ’88 MX-6 4-cylinder that he really loved. Had it for over 160k miles and then had some tranny issues so he sold it. He almost bought a turbo but the insurance was insane so he went for a base 4-cylinder instead. When he test drove the turbo, he said it was one of the fastest cars he had ever driven. He had just come out of an ’85 Grand Prix with a V-8 and the Mazda would have blown the doors off that Pontiac!
I think turbos are the thing of the future. Many manufacturers are re-introducing them again in their models. I know the new Civic has one available. I think we will see more and more of them as time goes on.
I didn’t even know the turbo version was available in the States, only the base 4 and the V6. Maybe it was dropped when the 6 was introduced. Also the hatchback version was extraordinarily rare here; again, guessing it was not available the entire run. And a turbo hatchback? If even available here, now that would be a unicorn. I love the look of the hatch though–distinctive, no, but a very elegant design. The basic shape is undeniably “right”.
Nice find.
The turbo was only available until 1991 when it was effectively replaced by the V6.
I still love these GD series hatchbacks, except for the terrible wheels. Mine had no turbo, but nicer rims.
My boss in the early 90s had 2 litre 626 hatch which was a perfectly capable but slightly anonymous product to ride in.
What’s the rubber bung next to the central brake light covering though?
Keyhole
Nobody buys hatches in the US. That’s why this didn’t sell or most other hatches.
Great find, William!
I had to get the plates replaced on the Suzuki; the story going around was that the prisoners making them peed in the reflective paint. Victoria didn’t charge for the replacement plates, so Peanut is still registered CEY-590.
This was in Victoria too. I wonder if they changed the response after push-back from people who didn’t want to change their registration number? My mother’s car certainly got a different number.
I have seen the number plate production at Ararat Prison, nb I was there in a work capacity rather than residential!
I never did see many of these great find, Mazda used the same engine block as the petrol engine for their supercharged diesel also fitted to these, so even in turbo petrol guise it should last quite well.
i usually refer to cars like this as a Q-ship rather than sleeper, referring to WW1 & 2 british ships that were rigged to look like civilian craft but packing concealed weaponry.
Sounds decidedly unsporting.
In the C&D article posted earlier, about the MX-6 turbo, writer said “cops think it’s a Tempo, so …” 😉
I owned one of these in high school. Later I owned a Capri 5.0 (same as Mustang) and a non-turbo Porsche 911. This car was way more fun. It beat every IROC it faced that was automatic, and just barely got nudged if it was stick. (Close enough to see the look of shock and concern). It was even respectable running against the 5.0 Mustang. (And occasionally, they’d miss a gear). A friend bought a Quad4 at the same time. He refused to race after I did a burn out and take off. All this and 30 mpg!!?? If I found one of these in a garage that someone forgot about, I’d take it! Lastly, I loved the torque in the steering. A 4 cylinder that can snatch the wheel out of your hand, just made it that much more fun. (Top end was 129 mph… it just wouldn’t get to 130).
I know that car the owner was kind enough to sell/gift it to me . Nice straight car with clean interior , had 350,000 km on the odometer. The rust around the windscreen was to serious a fix for me so I moved the car on to someone else . I did eventually find a very nice super low km blue non turbo that I still own !
I owned two of these. A light brown hatchback 87 (standard stick) and a four-door white 88 with blue interior (automatic). Never lost a race in either. Raced/beat a new Porsche on 56th street in Indianapolis – at next light he pulls up next to me and asks “what the hell is under that hood?” Had a sunroof on the white one, with oscillating front air vents. Both great cars at a great time to be young. Some serious front end torque when that Turbo lit up. There was an interior “turbo” light on dash on 87 when it kicked in but they stopped the light on 88. Didn’t need it – u felt it kick in. Had a blast in both.