Mazda CX-9 2007 vs Toyota 4-Runner 2003
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.5 Petrol | 4.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 263 HP | 245 HP | |
| Torque: | 339 NM | 382 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 7.8 seconds | |
| Mazda CX-9 engine produces 18 HP more power than Toyota 4-Runner, but torque is 43 NM less than Toyota 4-Runner. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 11.5 | 12.2 | |
|
The Mazda CX-9 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda CX-9 consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Toyota 4-Runner, which means that by driving the Mazda CX-9 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 105 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 76 litres | 87 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 660 km in combined cycle | 710 km in combined cycle | |
| 770 km on highway | 770 km on highway | ||
| Toyota 4-Runner gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Mazda CX-9) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Toyota 4-Runner) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 1 years | 22 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Used also on Toyota Land Cruiser | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Toyota 4-Runner might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.07 m | 4.80 m | |
| Width: | 1.94 m | 1.88 m | |
| Height: | 1.73 m | 1.76 m | |
|
Mazda CX-9 is larger, but slightly lower. Mazda CX-9 is 27 cm longer than the Toyota 4-Runner, 6 cm wider, while the height of Mazda CX-9 is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Seats: | 7 seats | 5 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 487 litres | 1195 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | 487 litres | no data | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | no data | 1195 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
2852 litres | 2050 litres | |
| The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda CX-9 (by 802 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | no data | 11.1 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`635 | 2`322 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 6800 | no data | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda CX-9 has
|
Toyota 4-Runner has
| |