BMW X1 2012 vs Mazda CX-5 2012
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 184 HP | 175 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 420 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8 seconds | 9.4 seconds | |
|
BMW X1 is more dynamic to drive. BMW X1 engine produces 9 HP more power than Mazda CX-5, but torque is 40 NM less than Mazda CX-5. Thanks to more power BMW X1 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.4 | 5.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.3 l/100km | 8.0 l/100km | |
|
The BMW X1 is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification BMW X1 consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-5, which means that by driving the BMW X1 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, BMW X1 consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-5. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 61 litres | 58 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1120 km in combined cycle | 1050 km in combined cycle | |
| 1190 km on highway | 1180 km on highway | ||
| 830 km with real consumption | 720 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW X1 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
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: | 17 years | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 3 sērija, BMW 1 sērija, BMW X3 | 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. BMW X1 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.48 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 6 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`145 | 2`120 | |
| 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 (€): | 10 800 | 9600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW X1 has
|
Mazda CX-5 has
| |