Mazda CX-5 2012 vs Honda CR-V 2013
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.6 Diesel | |
| Petrol engines (Mazda CX-5) are generally quieter, smoother, and better suited for short trips due to quicker warm-up times. Diesel (Honda CR-V) engines, on the other hand, offer superior fuel efficiency and torque, making them ideal for long-distance driving and heavy loads. Read more: Petrol vs. Diesel: Fuel Economy and Key Differences. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 120 HP | |
| Torque: | 210 NM | 300 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.3 seconds | 11.2 seconds | |
|
Mazda CX-5 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda CX-5 engine produces 30 HP more power than Honda CR-V, but torque is 90 NM less than Honda CR-V. Thanks to more power Mazda CX-5 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.2 | 4.5 | |
|
The Honda CR-V is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda CX-5 consumes 1.7 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 255 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 56 litres | 58 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 900 km in combined cycle | 1280 km in combined cycle | |
| 1050 km on highway | 1340 km on highway | ||
| Honda CR-V gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
| Mazda CX-5 2012 2.0 engine: This engine is not well-suited for low-quality fuel, as it quickly clogs the fuel system. The use of substandard fuel often leads to the failure of expensive ignition coils, resulting in significant repair ... More about Mazda CX-5 2012 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.54 m | 4.57 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.67 m | 1.69 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mazda CX-5 is 3 cm shorter than the Honda CR-V, 2 cm wider, while the height of Mazda CX-5 is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 463 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 126 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: | 11.2 meters | 11.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda CX-5 is 0.6 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 (kg): | 1`945 | no data | |
| Safety: | |||
| Mazda CX-5 scores higher in safety tests, but Honda CR-V is better rated in child safety tests. The Mazda CX-5 scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | high | above average | |
| Mazda CX-5 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Honda CR-V has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Mazda CX-5, so Mazda CX-5 quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 8000 | 10 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda CX-5 has
|
Honda CR-V has
| |