Mazda CX-5 2017 vs Land Rover Discovery Sport 2019
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 175 HP | 180 HP | |
| Torque: | 420 NM | 430 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.5 seconds | 9.7 seconds | |
| Mazda CX-5 engine produces 5 HP less power than Land Rover Discovery Sport, whereas torque is 10 NM less than Land Rover Discovery Sport. Despite less power, Mazda CX-5 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 5.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.6 l/100km | 8.1 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda CX-5 is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Mazda CX-5 consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Discovery Sport, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda CX-5 could require 30 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Mazda CX-5 consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Discovery Sport. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 58 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1000 km in combined cycle | 1160 km in combined cycle | |
| 1090 km on highway | 1270 km on highway | ||
| 760 km with real consumption | 800 km with real consumption | ||
| Land Rover Discovery Sport 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: | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 12 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Mazda 6 | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including Jaguar XF, Land Rover Range Rover Evoque, Jaguar XE | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Land Rover Discovery Sport might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Land Rover Discovery Sport 2019 2.0 engine: This engine is known for its relatively limited lifespan. In early production models, balance shaft bearings wore out quickly and started making noise. The chain-driven timing system, located on the flywheel ... More about Land Rover Discovery Sport 2019 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.55 m | 4.60 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | no data | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.73 m | |
| Trunk capacity: | 506 litres | 963 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1620 litres | no data | |
|
Land Rover Discovery Sport has more luggage space. Mazda CX-5 has 457 litres less trunk space than the Land Rover Discovery Sport. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 11.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda CX-5 is 0.8 metres less than that of the Land Rover Discovery Sport, which means Mazda CX-5 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`143 | 2`590 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 22 600 | 27 600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda CX-5 has
|
Land Rover Discovery Sport has
| |