Mazda CX-5 2012 vs Toyota RAV4 2013
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 149 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 340 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.2 seconds | 10 seconds | |
|
Mazda CX-5 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda CX-5 engine produces 1 HP more power than Toyota RAV4, whereas torque is 40 NM more than Toyota RAV4. Thanks to more power Mazda CX-5 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.8 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.6 | 6.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.9 l/100km | 8.8 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda CX-5 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda CX-5 consumes 2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Toyota RAV4, which means that by driving the Mazda CX-5 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 300 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda CX-5 consumes 1.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Toyota RAV4. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 56 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1210 km in combined cycle | 900 km in combined cycle | |
| 1360 km on highway | 1030 km on highway | ||
| 810 km with real consumption | 680 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda CX-5 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
|
Toyota RAV4 2012: It has proactive automatic four-wheel drive with Auto, Lock and Sport modes. In Auto mode, the car has front-wheel drive under normal conditions. If wheel slip is detected, torque is transferred to the rear wheels via an electronically controlled multi-plate clutch. In Sport mode, torque is transferred almost instantaneously between the front and rear wheels to improve cornering performance, with up to 50 percent of engine power going to the rear wheels. Lock mode can be activated at speeds below 40 km/h and provides constant four-wheel drive. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 380'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda 3, Mazda CX-7 | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Toyota Avensis, Toyota Auris, Lexus IS | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Toyota RAV4 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Toyota RAV4 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. | |||
| Toyota RAV4 2013 2.2 engine: The Toyota 2AD-FHV (2.2 D-CAT) is a powerful diesel engine, but it is also known for a number of serious reliability concerns. While it delivers strong performance, ownership costs can rise significantly once the mileage reaches around 150,000–200,000 km.
The most notorious weakness is failure of the ... More about Toyota RAV4 2013 2.2 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.54 m | 4.57 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 1.71 m | 1.67 m | |
|
Mazda CX-5 is smaller, but slightly higher. Mazda CX-5 is 3 cm shorter than the Toyota RAV4, width is practically the same , while the height of Mazda CX-5 is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 505 litres | 577 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1620 litres | 1705 litres | |
|
Toyota RAV4 has more luggage space. Mazda CX-5 has 72 litres less trunk space than the Toyota RAV4. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Toyota RAV4 (by 85 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.2 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda CX-5 is 0.2 metres less than that of the Toyota RAV4. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`035 | 2`240 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Mazda CX-5 scores higher in safety tests, but Toyota RAV4 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: | above average | high | |
| Toyota RAV4 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda CX-5 has serious deffects in 45 percent more cases than Toyota RAV4, so Toyota RAV4 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 7800 | 11 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda CX-5 has
|
Toyota RAV4 has
| |