BMW X1 2009 vs Mazda CX-5 2012
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 204 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 400 NM | 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.3 seconds | 9.2 seconds | |
|
BMW X1 is more dynamic to drive. BMW X1 engine produces 54 HP more power than Mazda CX-5, whereas torque is 20 NM more than Mazda CX-5. Thanks to more power BMW X1 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.0 | 4.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.6 l/100km | 6.9 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda CX-5 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification BMW X1 consumes 1.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-5, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the BMW X1 could require 210 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, BMW X1 consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-5. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 61 litres | 56 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1010 km in combined cycle | 1210 km in combined cycle | |
| 1170 km on highway | 1360 km on highway | ||
| 800 km with real consumption | 810 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda CX-5 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
|
BMW X1 has 4x4: BMW xDrive is a proactive all-wheel drive system without a center differential that engages before the vehicle becomes unstable, unnoticed by the driver. Torque is distributed between the axles via an electronically controlled multi-plate clutch located in the transfer case. Most of the time, the clutch is partially locked and power is transferred to both axles in a 40/60 front/rear ratio, but the system is capable of sending 100% of the torque to either axle. At high speeds or when parking, for example, the clutch is disengaged and all power is sent to the rear wheels. DSC (Dynamic Stability Control) also brakes the wheels individually to regain traction and assist in cornering. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 300'000 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: | 18 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on BMW 1 sērija | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda 3, Mazda CX-7 | |
| 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 BMW X1 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. | |||
| BMW X1 2009 2.0 engine: The BMW N47 engine is sometimes called the worst BMW engine because of problems with the timing chain, which tends to stretch at 100 000 km. In addition, the engine has to be removed from the car to replace ... More about BMW X1 2009 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.45 m | 4.54 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.55 m | 1.71 m | |
|
BMW X1 is smaller. BMW X1 is 9 cm shorter than the Mazda CX-5, 4 cm narrower, while the height of BMW X1 is 17 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 420 litres | 505 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1350 litres | 1620 litres | |
|
Mazda CX-5 has more luggage space. BMW X1 has 85 litres less trunk space than the Mazda CX-5. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda CX-5 (by 270 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW X1 is 0.6 metres more than that of the Mazda CX-5, which means BMW X1 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`150 | 2`035 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | high | |
| Mazda CX-5 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW X1 has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than Mazda CX-5, so Mazda CX-5 quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 8000 | 8800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW X1 has
|
Mazda CX-5 has
| |