Land Rover Defender 2019 vs Mazda CX-9 2016
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.5 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 240 HP | 231 HP | |
| Torque: | 430 NM | 420 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.1 seconds | n/a seconds | |
| Land Rover Defender engine produces 9 HP more power than Mazda CX-9, whereas torque is 10 NM more than Mazda CX-9. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.8 | 8.8 | |
|
The Land Rover Defender is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Land Rover Defender consumes 1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-9, which means that by driving the Land Rover Defender over 15,000 km in a year you can save 150 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 90 litres | 74 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1150 km in combined cycle | 840 km in combined cycle | |
| Land Rover Defender gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 300'000 km | 350'000 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-9 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Jaguar XF, Land Rover Range Rover Evoque, Jaguar E-Pace | 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. Land Rover Defender might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.02 m | 5.08 m | |
| Width: | 2.01 m | 1.97 m | |
| Height: | 1.97 m | 1.75 m | |
| Land Rover Defender is 6 cm shorter than the Mazda CX-9, 4 cm wider, while the height of Land Rover Defender is 22 cm higher. | |||
| Seats: | 7 seats | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 231 litres | 407 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | 231 litres | 407 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 972 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
2233 litres | 2017 litres | |
| In 7-seat version Mazda CX-9 has more luggage space (by 176 litres). The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Land Rover Defender (by 216 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 13.1 meters | 11.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Land Rover Defender is 1.3 metres more than that of the Mazda CX-9, which means Land Rover Defender can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 3`215 | 2`640 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 68 000 | no data | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Defender has
|
Mazda CX-9 has
| |