Mazda CX-5 2012 vs BMW X1 2012
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 184 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.2 seconds | 7.9 seconds | |
|
BMW X1 is a more dynamic driving. Mazda CX-5 engine produces 34 HP less power than BMW X1, the torque is the same for both cars. Due to the lower power, Mazda CX-5 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.6 | 5.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.9 l/100km | 6.8 l/100km | |
|
By specification Mazda CX-5 consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW X1, which means that by driving the Mazda CX-5 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 60 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Mazda CX-5 consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW X1. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 56 litres | 61 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1210 km in combined cycle | 1220 km in combined cycle | |
| 1360 km on highway | 1290 km on highway | ||
| 810 km with real consumption | 890 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 380'000 km | 330'000 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: | 5 years | 17 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda 3, Mazda CX-7 | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 3 sērija, BMW 1 sērija, BMW X3 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. BMW X1 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The BMW X1 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: | 4.54 m | 4.48 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.71 m | 1.55 m | |
|
Mazda CX-5 is larger. Mazda CX-5 is 6 cm longer than the BMW X1, 4 cm wider, while the height of Mazda CX-5 is 17 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 505 litres | 420 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1620 litres | 1350 litres | |
|
Mazda CX-5 has more luggage capacity. Mazda CX-5 has 85 litres more trunk space than the BMW X1. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda CX-5 (by 270 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 BMW X1, which means Mazda CX-5 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`035 | 2`060 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Mazda CX-5 scores higher in safety tests. The Mazda CX-5 scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | above average | high | |
| BMW X1 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda CX-5 has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than BMW X1, so BMW X1 quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 9600 | 10 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda CX-5 has
|
BMW X1 has
| |