Mazda Tribute 2008 vs BMW X1 2010
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Petrol | 3.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 171 HP | 218 HP | |
| Torque: | 232 NM | 280 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 7.9 seconds | |
| Mazda Tribute engine produces 47 HP less power than BMW X1, whereas torque is 48 NM less than BMW X1. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.0 | 9.3 | |
|
The BMW X1 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda Tribute consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW X1, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda Tribute could require 105 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 66 litres | 63 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 660 km in combined cycle | 670 km in combined cycle | |
| 730 km on highway | 870 km on highway | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 480'000 km | 380'000 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 Tribute engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda 3 | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 3 sērija, BMW X5, BMW 7 sērija, BMW 1 sērija | |
| 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. | |||
| BMW X1 2010 3.0 engine: The BMW N52 engine was the first water-cooled engine to feature a composite cylinder block made from a magnesium and aluminum alloy. It was included in Ward’s AutoWorld’s list of the top 10 engines in 2006 and 2007. While it offers many advantages, the ... More about BMW X1 2010 3.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.44 m | 4.45 m | |
| Width: | no data | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.78 m | 1.55 m | |
| Trunk capacity: | 889 litres | 420 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1903 litres | 1350 litres | |
|
Mazda Tribute has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Mazda Tribute has 469 litres more trunk space than the BMW X1. The BMW X1 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda Tribute (by 553 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.2 meters | 11.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda Tribute is 0.6 metres less than that of the BMW X1, which means Mazda Tribute can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 2`180 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | high | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 8000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda Tribute has
|
BMW X1 has
| |