Mazda CX-5 2012 vs Jeep Cherokee 2008
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.8 Diesel | |
| 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: | 150 HP | 177 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 460 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.2 seconds | 10.5 seconds | |
| Mazda CX-5 engine produces 27 HP less power than Jeep Cherokee, whereas torque is 80 NM less than Jeep Cherokee. Despite less power, Mazda CX-5 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.6 | 9.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.9 l/100km | 10.8 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda CX-5 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda CX-5 consumes 4.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Jeep Cherokee, which means that by driving the Mazda CX-5 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 720 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda CX-5 consumes 3.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Jeep Cherokee. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 56 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1210 km in combined cycle | 740 km in combined cycle | |
| 1360 km on highway | 890 km on highway | ||
| 810 km with real consumption | 640 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda CX-5 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 380'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 12 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda 3, Mazda CX-7 | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Chrysler Grand Voyager, Jeep Wrangler, Dodge Nitro | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Jeep Cherokee might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Jeep Cherokee 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 | 4.49 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.71 m | 1.74 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mazda CX-5 is 5 cm longer than the Jeep Cherokee, width is practically the same , while the height of Mazda CX-5 is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 505 litres | 878 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1620 litres | no data | |
|
Jeep Cherokee has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Mazda CX-5 has 373 litres less trunk space than the Jeep Cherokee. This could mean that the Mazda CX-5 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.2 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda CX-5 is 0.4 metres more than that of the Jeep Cherokee. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`035 | 2`520 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 8800 | 7400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda CX-5 has
|
Jeep Cherokee has
| |