Mazda CX-5 2017 vs Volvo XC60 2013
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Petrol | 3.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 194 HP | 304 HP | |
| Torque: | 258 NM | 440 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.5 seconds | 7.3 seconds | |
|
Volvo XC60 is a more dynamic driving. Mazda CX-5 engine produces 110 HP less power than Volvo XC60, whereas torque is 182 NM less than Volvo XC60. Due to the lower power, Mazda CX-5 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.1 | 10.7 | |
|
The Mazda CX-5 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda CX-5 consumes 3.6 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 540 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 56 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 780 km in combined cycle | 650 km in combined cycle | |
| 930 km on highway | 860 km on highway | ||
| Mazda CX-5 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) | 230 mm (9.1 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 | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda 3 | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Volvo V70, Volvo S80, Volvo S60, Volvo XC70, Volvo V60 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.55 m | 4.64 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.89 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.71 m | |
|
Mazda CX-5 is smaller. Mazda CX-5 is 9 cm shorter than the Volvo XC60, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda CX-5 is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 506 litres | 495 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1620 litres | 1455 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, Mazda CX-5 has 11 litres more trunk space than the Volvo XC60. The Volvo XC60 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda CX-5 (by 165 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 11.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda CX-5 is 0.7 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`440 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Volvo XC60 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda CX-5 has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Volvo XC60, so Volvo XC60 quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 24 400 | 15 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda CX-5 has
|
Volvo XC60 has
| |