BMW X1 2012 vs Mazda CX-5 2012
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 200 NM | 210 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.4 seconds | 9.3 seconds | |
|
Mazda CX-5 is a more dynamic driving. BMW X1 and Mazda CX-5 have the same engine power, but BMW X1 torque is 10 NM less than Mazda CX-5. BMW X1 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.9 | 6.3 | |
|
The Mazda CX-5 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. BMW X1 consumes 1.6 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 240 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 63 litres | 56 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 790 km in combined cycle | 880 km in combined cycle | |
| 1010 km on highway | 1030 km on highway | ||
| Mazda CX-5 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including BMW 3 sērija, BMW 1 sērija, BMW X3, BMW Z4 | 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 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`010 | no data | |
| 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
| |