Mazda CX-5 2017 vs Volvo XC60 2017
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| 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: | 194 HP | 249 HP | |
| Torque: | 258 NM | 350 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.5 seconds | 6.8 seconds | |
|
Volvo XC60 is a more dynamic driving. Mazda CX-5 engine produces 55 HP less power than Volvo XC60, whereas torque is 92 NM less than Volvo XC60. Due to the lower power, Mazda CX-5 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.1 | 7.2 | |
| Mazda CX-5 consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC60, which means that by driving the Mazda CX-5 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 56 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 780 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
| 930 km on highway | 980 km on highway | ||
| 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: | 440'000 km | 390'000 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: | 12 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda 3 | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Volvo S60, Volvo XC90, Volvo V60, 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. | |||
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`135 | 2`470 | |
| 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
| |