BMW X1 2012 vs Mazda CX-5 2012
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 245 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 350 NM | 210 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6.1 seconds | 9.3 seconds | |
|
BMW X1 is more dynamic to drive. BMW X1 engine produces 95 HP more power than Mazda CX-5, whereas torque is 140 NM more than Mazda CX-5. Thanks to more power BMW X1 reaches 100 km/h speed 3.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | no data | 6.2 | |
| Fuel tank capacity: | 63 litres | 56 litres | |
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 | 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: | 7 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 3 sērija, BMW 1 sērija, BMW X3 | 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. | |||
| BMW X1 2012 2.0 engine: Until 2015, engines used to have problems with the timing chain guides, which have been resolved over time. Other problems with this engine are the oil pump performance and its drive chain, as well as cracking ... More about BMW X1 2012 2.0 engine Mazda CX-5 2012 2.0 engine: This engine is not well-suited for low-quality fuel, as it quickly clogs the fuel system. The use of substandard fuel often leads to the failure of expensive ignition coils, resulting in significant repair ... More about Mazda CX-5 2012 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.48 m | 4.54 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.55 m | 1.67 m | |
|
BMW X1 is smaller. BMW X1 is 6 cm shorter than the Mazda CX-5, 4 cm narrower, while the height of BMW X1 is 13 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 420 litres | 463 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1350 litres | 1620 litres | |
|
Mazda CX-5 has more luggage space. BMW X1 has 43 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`130 | 1`945 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Mazda CX-5 scores higher in safety tests. The Mazda CX-5 scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | high | above average | |
| BMW X1 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda CX-5 has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than BMW X1, so BMW X1 quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 10 400 | 8800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW X1 has
|
Mazda CX-5 has
| |