Mazda CX-5 2012 vs Honda CR-V 2012
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 175 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 420 NM | 350 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.4 seconds | 9.7 seconds | |
|
Mazda CX-5 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda CX-5 engine produces 25 HP more power than Honda CR-V, whereas torque is 70 NM more than Honda CR-V. Thanks to more power Mazda CX-5 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.5 | 6.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.0 l/100km | 7.5 l/100km | |
|
By specification Mazda CX-5 consumes 1.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Honda CR-V, which means that by driving the Mazda CX-5 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 195 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Mazda CX-5 consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda CR-V. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 58 litres | 58 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1050 km in combined cycle | 850 km in combined cycle | |
| 1180 km on highway | 960 km on highway | ||
| 720 km with real consumption | 770 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 330'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Mazda 6 | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Honda Civic, Honda Accord | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| 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: | 4.54 m | 4.57 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.71 m | 1.69 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mazda CX-5 is 3 cm shorter than the Honda CR-V, 2 cm wider, while the height of Mazda CX-5 is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 505 litres | 589 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1620 litres | 1669 litres | |
|
Honda CR-V has more luggage space. Mazda CX-5 has 84 litres less trunk space than the Honda CR-V. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Honda CR-V (by 49 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.2 meters | 11.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda CX-5 is 0.6 metres less than that of the Honda CR-V, which means Mazda CX-5 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`120 | no data | |
| Safety: | |||
| Mazda CX-5 scores higher in safety tests, but Honda CR-V is better rated in child safety tests. The Mazda CX-5 scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | high | above average | |
| Mazda CX-5 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Honda CR-V has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Mazda CX-5, so Mazda CX-5 quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 9600 | 12 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda CX-5 has
|
Honda CR-V has
| |