Mazda 5 2010 vs Chevrolet Orlando 2011
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engines: | 1.6 - 2.0 | 1.4 - 2.0 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 115 - 150 HP | 130 - 163 HP | |
| Torque: | 165 - 270 NM | 176 - 360 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.2 - 13.7 seconds | 10 - 11.6 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.2 - 8.3 | 6.0 - 7.9 | |
|
Mazda 5 petrol engines consumes on average 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than Chevrolet Orlando. On average, Mazda 5 equipped with diesel engines consume 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chevrolet Orlando. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.59 m | 4.65 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.88 m | |
| Height: | 1.62 m | 1.63 m | |
|
Mazda 5 is smaller. Mazda 5 is 7 cm shorter than the Chevrolet Orlando, 13 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 5 is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 112 litres | 458 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1597 litres | 1499 litres | |
| Mazda 5 has 346 litres less trunk space than the Chevrolet Orlando. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda 5 (by 98 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 11.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 5 is 0.7 metres less than that of the Chevrolet Orlando, which means Mazda 5 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 2`115 | ~ 2`228 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 5200 | 6000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 5 has
|
Chevrolet Orlando has
| |