Mazda CX-5 2015 vs Honda CR-V 2015
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 1.6 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 175 HP | 160 HP | |
| Torque: | 420 NM | 350 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.4 seconds | 9.6 seconds | |
|
Mazda CX-5 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda CX-5 engine produces 15 HP more power than Honda CR-V, whereas torque is 70 NM more than Honda CR-V. Thanks to more power Mazda CX-5 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.9 | 4.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.6 l/100km | 6.6 l/100km | |
|
The Honda CR-V is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda CX-5 consumes 1.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda CR-V, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda CX-5 could require 180 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda CX-5 consumes 1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda CR-V. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 58 litres | 58 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 980 km in combined cycle | 1230 km in combined cycle | |
| 1090 km on highway | 1230 km on highway | ||
| 760 km with real consumption | 870 km with real consumption | ||
| Honda CR-V gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
| Ground clearance: | 210 mm (8.3 inches) | 165 mm (6.5 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Mazda CX-5 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 | 330'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 12 years | 12 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Mazda 6 | Used only for this car | |
| 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. | |||
| 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: | 4.56 m | 4.61 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 2.10 m | |
| Height: | 1.67 m | 1.69 m | |
|
Mazda CX-5 is smaller. Mazda CX-5 is 5 cm shorter than the Honda CR-V, 26 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda CX-5 is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 503 litres | 589 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1620 litres | 1669 litres | |
|
Honda CR-V has more luggage space. Mazda CX-5 has 86 litres less trunk space than the Honda CR-V. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Honda CR-V (by 49 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.7 meters | 11.7 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`140 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| 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 (€): | 13 000 | 14 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda CX-5 has
|
Honda CR-V has
| |