Honda CR-V 2012 vs Mazda CX-5 2012
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 175 HP | |
| Torque: | 350 NM | 420 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.7 seconds | 9.4 seconds | |
|
Mazda CX-5 is a more dynamic driving. Honda CR-V engine produces 25 HP less power than Mazda CX-5, whereas torque is 70 NM less than Mazda CX-5. Due to the lower power, Honda CR-V reaches 100 km/h speed 0.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.8 | 5.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.5 l/100km | 8.0 l/100km | |
|
By specification Honda CR-V consumes 1.3 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 195 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Honda CR-V consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-5. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 58 litres | 58 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 850 km in combined cycle | 1050 km in combined cycle | |
| 960 km on highway | 1180 km on highway | ||
| 770 km with real consumption | 720 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 330'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Honda Civic, Honda Accord | Used also on Mazda 6 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| 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: | 4.57 m | 4.54 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.69 m | 1.71 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Honda CR-V is 3 cm longer than the Mazda CX-5, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Honda CR-V is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 589 litres | 505 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1669 litres | 1620 litres | |
|
Honda CR-V has more luggage capacity. Honda CR-V has 84 litres more trunk space than the Mazda CX-5. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Honda CR-V (by 49 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Honda CR-V is 0.6 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`120 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Mazda CX-5 scores higher in safety tests. The Mazda CX-5 scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | above average | high | |
| 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 (€): | 12 800 | 9600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Honda CR-V has
|
Mazda CX-5 has
| |