Mazda CX-9 2007 vs Mitsubishi L 200 2006
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.5 Petrol | 2.5 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: | 263 HP | 168 HP | |
| Torque: | 339 NM | 402 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | n/a seconds | |
| Mazda CX-9 engine produces 95 HP more power than Mitsubishi L 200, but torque is 63 NM less than Mitsubishi L 200. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 11.5 | no data | |
| Fuel tank capacity: | 76 litres | 75 litres | |
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 300'000 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-9 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 1 years | 30 years | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mitsubishi L 200 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.07 m | no data | |
| Width: | 1.94 m | no data | |
| Height: | 1.73 m | no data | |
| Seats: | 7 seats | no data | |
| Trunk capacity: | 487 litres | no data | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | 487 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
2852 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | no data | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`635 | 2`910 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 6600 | 8400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda CX-9 has
|
Mitsubishi L 200 has
| |