1992-1995 Mazda 929: Full Review
Updated: 11/23/08
Reviews & Ratings
Pricing
Explore
Specifications & Safety
Related to Mazda 929
Related Reviews
View Another Vehicle
Pros
- Braking ability
- Steering/handling
- Antilock brakes
- Quietness
Cons
- Passenger and cargo room
- Driving position
- Wet-weather traction
Vehicle Highlights
Restyled for 1992, the 929 premium sedan remained Mazda's luxury flagship. This new 929 bore little resemblance to its predecessor of the same number, which had been boxier in shape. The redesign yielded a more-rounded, flowing body on a wheelbase that was 5 1/2 inches longer. Mazda also added dual airbags. Despite being nearly as long as before and close to three inches wider, trunk space shrunk. The 24-valve, twin-cam 3.0-liter V6 and standard antilock brakes of the previous S model were carried over, though the engine was revised a bit and gained five horsepower. A 4-speed automatic was the sole transmission, with "power" and "normal" shift modes.
Expert Ratings Summary (view detailed report)
| Category | Mazda 929 Rating | |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | 6 | |
| Fuel Economy | 4 | |
| Ride Quality | 7 | |
| Steering/Handling/Braking | 4 | |
| Quietness | 6 | |
| Controls/Materials | 6 | |
| Interior Room | 6 | |
| Room/Comfort (rear) | 4 | |
| Cargo Capacity | 3 | |
| Value within Class | 4 | |
| Total Score: | 50 |
Year to Year Changes
Our road test for the 1992-1995 Mazda 929 includes a full evaluation from the inside out. We've evaluated every aspect of the 1992-1995 Mazda 929 and highlighted the vehicle's performance with pros and cons. Use our comprehensive road test ratings to decide if this generation 1992-1995 Mazda 929 is right for you.
Consumer Guide® Road-Test Evaluation
Overall, the 929 pales when compared to the Acura Legend, Lexus ES 300, or Nissan Maxima. Its V6 lacks the refinement and verve and the 929 comes up short in too many areas to be a prime choice among used luxury cars.
Expert Ratings Summary
| Category | Mazda 929 Rating | |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | 6 | |
| Fuel Economy | 4 | |
| Ride Quality | 7 | |
| Steering/Handling/Braking | 4 | |
| Quietness | 6 | |
| Controls/Materials | 6 | |
| Interior Room | 6 | |
| Room/Comfort (rear) | 4 | |
| Cargo Capacity | 3 | |
| Value within Class | 4 | |
| Total Score: | 50 |
Trouble Spots
Consumer Guide® Estimated Repair Costs
| Item Name | Repair Cost |
| A/C Compressor | $1,535 |
| Alternator | $250 |
| Automatic Transmission or Transaxle | $780 |
| Brakes | $260 |
| Clutch, Pressure Plate, Bearing | $500 |
| Constant Velocity Joints | $705 |
| Exhaust System | $680 |
| Radiator | $540 |
| Shocks and/or Struts | $1,040 |
| Timing Chain or Belt | $315 |
| Prices | Good | Average | Poor |
|
|
|||
| 1995 | |||
| 929 | $1,900-2,500 | $1,300-1,700 | $300-400 |
| 1994 | |||
| 929 | $1,600-2,200 | $1,100-1,500 | $200-300 |
| 1993 | |||
| 929 | $1,400-1,900 | $900-1,200 | $200 |
| 1992 | |||
| 929 | $1,200-1,700 | $700-1,000 | $100-200 |
|
|
|||
Vehicle Dimensions
| Specification | 4-door sedan | |
| Wheelbase, in. | 112.2 | |
| Overall Length, in. | 193.7 | |
| Overall Width, in. | 70.7 | |
| Overall Height, in. | 54.9 | |
| Curb Weight, lbs. | 3627 | |
| Cargo Volume, cu. ft. | 12.4 | |
| Standard Payload, lbs. | -- | |
| Fuel Capacity, gals. | 18.5 | |
| Seating Capacity | 5 | |
| Front Head Room, in. | 37.4 | |
| Max. Front Leg Room, in. | 43.4 | |
| Rear Head Room, in. | 37.4 | |
| Max. Rear Leg Room, in. | 37.0 | |
|
Specifications Key: NA = not available; "--" = measurement does not exist. |
||
Powertrain Options and Availability
| Engines | cu. in |
Horse- power | Torque | Transmission: |
Consumer Guide Observed |
| dohc V6 | 3.0 / 180 | 193-195 | 200 | 4-speed automatic: 19/24 | 4-speed automatic: 19.2 |
|
Specifications Key: NA = not available; "--" = measurement does not exist. |
|||||
NHTSA Crash-Test Results
Vehicle crash test information not available at this time.The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) tests a vehicle's worthiness in front- and side-impact collisions and rates its resistance to rollovers. Front-impact crash-test numbers indicate the chance of serious injury: 5 = 10% or less; 4 = 10-20%; 3 = 20-35%; 2 = 35-45%; 1 = More than 45%. Sideimpact crash-test numbers indicate: 5 = 5% or less; 4 = 6-10%; 3 = 11-20%; 2 = 21-25%; 1 = More than 26%. Rollover resistance numbers indicate the chance for rollover when the vehicle leaves the roadway: 5 = Less than 10%; 4 = 10-20%; 3 = 20-30%; 2 = 30-40%; 1 = More than 40%.








