Jeep Compass 2011 vs Mazda CX-5 2012
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 156 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 190 NM | 210 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.6 seconds | 9.3 seconds | |
|
Mazda CX-5 is a more dynamic driving. Jeep Compass engine produces 6 HP more power than Mazda CX-5, but torque is 20 NM less than Mazda CX-5. Despite the higher power, Jeep Compass reaches 100 km/h speed 1.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.6 | 6.2 | |
|
The Mazda CX-5 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Jeep Compass consumes 1.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-5, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Jeep Compass could require 210 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 51 litres | 56 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 670 km in combined cycle | 900 km in combined cycle | |
| 830 km on highway | 1050 km on highway | ||
| Mazda CX-5 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| 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: | 4.45 m | 4.54 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.66 m | 1.67 m | |
|
Jeep Compass is smaller. Jeep Compass is 9 cm shorter than the Mazda CX-5, 3 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 328 litres | 463 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1269 litres | 1620 litres | |
|
Mazda CX-5 has more luggage space. Jeep Compass has 135 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 351 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Jeep Compass is 0.4 metres less than that of the Mazda CX-5. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`890 | 1`945 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Mazda CX-5 scores higher in safety tests. The Mazda CX-5 scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 6600 | 8800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Jeep Compass has
|
Mazda CX-5 has
| |