Mazda CX-5 2015 vs Mitsubishi Outlander 2015
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Petrol | 2.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 192 HP | 167 HP | |
| Torque: | 256 NM | 222 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.9 seconds | 10.2 seconds | |
|
Mazda CX-5 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda CX-5 engine produces 25 HP more power than Mitsubishi Outlander, whereas torque is 34 NM more than Mitsubishi Outlander. Thanks to more power Mazda CX-5 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.3 | 7.7 | |
|
The Mazda CX-5 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda CX-5 consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Outlander, which means that by driving the Mazda CX-5 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 60 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 58 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 790 km in combined cycle | 770 km in combined cycle | |
| 950 km on highway | 920 km on highway | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Ground clearance: | 210 mm (8.3 inches) | 215 mm (8.5 inches) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 440'000 km | 380'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Mazda CX-5 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda 3 | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mazda CX-5 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Mazda CX-5 engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.56 m | 4.70 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.67 m | 1.68 m | |
| Mazda CX-5 is 14 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Outlander, 4 cm wider, while the height of Mazda CX-5 is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 503 litres | 477 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1620 litres | 1640 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, Mazda CX-5 has 26 litres more trunk space than the Mitsubishi Outlander. The Mitsubishi Outlander may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mitsubishi Outlander (by 20 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.7 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda CX-5 is 1.1 metres more than that of the Mitsubishi Outlander, which means Mazda CX-5 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`075 | 2`210 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | average | |
| Mazda CX-5 has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Mitsubishi Outlander, so Mazda CX-5 quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 15 400 | 18 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda CX-5 has
|
Mitsubishi Outlander has
| |