Mazda CX-5 2017 vs Renault Kadjar 2018
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.3 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 155 HP | 159 HP | |
| Torque: | 196 NM | 270 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 9.3 seconds | |
| Mazda CX-5 engine produces 4 HP less power than Renault Kadjar, whereas torque is 74 NM less than Renault Kadjar. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | no data | no data | |
| Fuel tank capacity: | 56 litres | 55 litres | |
| Ground clearance: | 193 mm (7.6 inches) | 200 mm (7.9 inches) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 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-5 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 13 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda 3, Mazda MX-5, Mazda 5 | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Renault Scenic, Renault Megane, Dacia Duster, Dacia Dokker | |
| 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 Renault Kadjar 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 2017 2.0 engine: The engine tends to idle unevenly. Engine problems may also include the thermostat and cooling pump. This engine tends to consume more oil at higher mileages. Renault Kadjar 2018 1.3 engine: The engine is reliable. However, in the event of problems, getting spare parts and repairs can be difficult. Fuel consumption is reasonable, and the engine is not too demanding on fuel quality. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.55 m | 4.49 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.61 m | |
|
Mazda CX-5 is larger. Mazda CX-5 is 6 cm longer than the Renault Kadjar, width is practically the same , while the height of Mazda CX-5 is 7 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 477 litres | 472 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1620 litres | 1478 litres | |
| Mazda CX-5 has 5 litres more trunk space than the Renault Kadjar. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda CX-5 (by 142 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | no data | 10.7 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`918 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| Renault Kadjar has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda CX-5 has serious deffects in 40 percent more cases than Renault Kadjar, so Renault Kadjar quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 24 400 | 18 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda CX-5 has
|
Renault Kadjar has
| |