Honda CR-V 2017 vs Mazda CX-5 2018
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 190 HP | 165 HP | |
| Torque: | 243 NM | 213 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 10.8 seconds | |
| Honda CR-V engine produces 25 HP more power than Mazda CX-5, whereas torque is 30 NM more than Mazda CX-5. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.1 | 7.2 | |
|
The Mazda CX-5 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Honda CR-V consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-5, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Honda CR-V could require 135 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 53 litres | 58 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 650 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| 740 km on highway | 930 km on highway | ||
| Mazda CX-5 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
| Ground clearance: | 208 mm (8.2 inches) | 193 mm (7.6 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Honda CR-V can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 420'000 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 | 12 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Honda Civic, Honda Accord | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda 3, Mazda MX-5, Mazda CX-3 | |
| 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: | no | yes | |
| 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: | 4.59 m | 4.55 m | |
| Width: | 1.85 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.68 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Honda CR-V is 4 cm longer than the Mazda CX-5, 1 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 497 litres | 506 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1110 litres | 1620 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, Honda CR-V has 9 litres less trunk space than the Mazda CX-5. This could mean that the Honda CR-V uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda CX-5 (by 510 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Honda CR-V is 0.4 metres more than that of the Mazda CX-5, which means Honda CR-V can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 2`080 | |
| Safety: | |||
| The Honda CR-V scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | above average | average | |
| Average price (€): | 22 000 | 27 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Honda CR-V has
|
Mazda CX-5 has
| |