Mazda CX-5 2017 vs Honda CR-V 2017
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.5 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 155 HP | 190 HP | |
| Torque: | 196 NM | 243 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | n/a seconds | |
| Mazda CX-5 engine produces 35 HP less power than Honda CR-V, whereas torque is 47 NM less than Honda CR-V. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.9 | 7.8 | |
|
The Mazda CX-5 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda CX-5 consumes 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Honda CR-V, which means that by driving the Mazda CX-5 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 135 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 56 litres | 53 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 810 km in combined cycle | 670 km in combined cycle | |
| 900 km on highway | 760 km on highway | ||
| Mazda CX-5 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 193 mm (7.6 inches) | 198 mm (7.8 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 | 13 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 2 other car models, including Honda Civic, Honda Accord | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mazda CX-5 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.55 m | 4.59 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.68 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mazda CX-5 is 4 cm shorter than the Honda CR-V, 1 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 477 litres | 497 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1620 litres | 1110 litres | |
| Mazda CX-5 has 20 litres less trunk space than the Honda CR-V. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda CX-5 (by 510 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 Honda CR-V, which means Mazda CX-5 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 2`025 kg | no data | |
| Safety: | |||
| The Honda CR-V scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Honda CR-V has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Mazda CX-5, so Honda CR-V quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 21 800 | 16 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda CX-5 has
|
Honda CR-V has
| |