BMW X1 2012 vs Mazda CX-5 2012
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 184 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.8 seconds | 9.2 seconds | |
|
BMW X1 is more dynamic to drive. BMW X1 engine produces 34 HP more power than Mazda CX-5, the torque is the same for both cars. Thanks to more power BMW X1 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.9 | 4.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.4 l/100km | 6.9 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 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-5, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the BMW X1 could require 45 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, BMW X1 consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-5. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 61 litres | 56 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1240 km in combined cycle | 1210 km in combined cycle | |
| 1380 km on highway | 1360 km on highway | ||
| 950 km with real consumption | 810 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 330'000 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: | 17 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 3 sērija, BMW 1 sērija, BMW X3 | 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. BMW X1 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| 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. | |||
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`045 | 2`035 | |
| 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 (€): | 11 000 | 9600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW X1 has
|
Mazda CX-5 has
| |