Ford Kuga 2013 vs Mazda CX-5 2012
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 163 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 340 NM | 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.9 seconds | 9.2 seconds | |
|
Mazda CX-5 is a more dynamic driving. Ford Kuga engine produces 13 HP more power than Mazda CX-5, but torque is 40 NM less than Mazda CX-5. Despite the higher power, Ford Kuga reaches 100 km/h speed 0.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.9 | 4.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.5 l/100km | 6.9 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda CX-5 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford Kuga consumes 1.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-5, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford Kuga could require 195 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford Kuga consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-5. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 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. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.52 m | 4.54 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.70 m | 1.71 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Ford Kuga is 2 cm shorter than the Mazda CX-5, width is practically the same also the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 456 litres | 505 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1568 litres | 1620 litres | |
|
Mazda CX-5 has more luggage space. Ford Kuga has 49 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 52 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Kuga is 0.2 metres less than that of the Mazda CX-5. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`250 | 2`035 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Mazda CX-5 has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Ford Kuga, so Mazda CX-5 quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 11 000 | 8200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Kuga has
|
Mazda CX-5 has
| |