Land Rover Range Rover Evoque 2013 vs Mazda CX-5 2015
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 240 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 340 NM | 208 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.6 seconds | 9.4 seconds | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque is more dynamic to drive. Land Rover Range Rover Evoque engine produces 90 HP more power than Mazda CX-5, whereas torque is 132 NM more than Mazda CX-5. Thanks to more power Land Rover Range Rover Evoque reaches 100 km/h speed 1.8 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | no data | 6.7 | |
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 58 litres | |
| 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) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 300'000 km | 420'000 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: | 8 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Land Rover Freelander, Land Rover Discovery Sport, Jaguar XJ, Jaguar XF | 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Mazda CX-5 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. | |||
| Mazda CX-5 2015 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 2015 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.36 m | 4.56 m | |
| Width: | 1.90 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.61 m | 1.64 m | |
| Land Rover Range Rover Evoque is 20 cm shorter than the Mazda CX-5, 6 cm wider, while the height of Land Rover Range Rover Evoque is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 550 litres | 503 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1620 litres | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Land Rover Range Rover Evoque has 47 litres more trunk space than the Mazda CX-5. The Mazda CX-5 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.3 meters | 11.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque is 0.4 metres less than that of the Mazda CX-5. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`350 | 2`050 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 22 200 | 11 600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque has
|
Mazda CX-5 has
| |