Mazda CX-5 2017 vs Volvo XC60 2017
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 175 HP | 190 HP | |
| Torque: | 420 NM | 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.5 seconds | 8.4 seconds | |
|
Volvo XC60 is a more dynamic driving. Mazda CX-5 engine produces 15 HP less power than Volvo XC60, but torque is 20 NM more than Volvo XC60. Due to the lower power, Mazda CX-5 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 5.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.6 l/100km | 7.3 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo XC60 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda CX-5 consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC60, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda CX-5 could require 90 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda CX-5 consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC60. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 58 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1000 km in combined cycle | 1150 km in combined cycle | |
| 1090 km on highway | 1270 km on highway | ||
| 760 km with real consumption | 820 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo XC60 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
| Ground clearance: | 193 mm (7.6 inches) | 216 mm (8.5 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Volvo XC60 can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 380'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 12 years | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Mazda 6 | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Volvo V40, Volvo V60, Volvo V40 Cross Country, Volvo S90 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volvo XC60 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.55 m | 4.69 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 2.00 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.66 m | |
|
Mazda CX-5 is smaller, but slightly higher. Mazda CX-5 is 14 cm shorter than the Volvo XC60, 16 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda CX-5 is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 506 litres | 505 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1620 litres | 1432 litres | |
| Mazda CX-5 has 1 litres more trunk space than the Volvo XC60. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda CX-5 (by 188 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda CX-5 is 0.4 metres less than that of the Volvo XC60, which means Mazda CX-5 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`143 | no data | |
| Safety: | |||
| Volvo XC60 scores higher in safety tests. The Volvo XC60 scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | below average | average | |
| Volvo XC60 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda CX-5 has serious deffects in 25 percent more cases than Volvo XC60, so Volvo XC60 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 24 400 | 27 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda CX-5 has
|
Volvo XC60 has
| |