Mitsubishi Outlander 2012 vs Mazda CX-5 2013
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Petrol | 2.5 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 230 HP | 192 HP | |
| Torque: | 292 NM | 256 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.7 seconds | 7.9 seconds | |
| Mitsubishi Outlander engine produces 38 HP more power than Mazda CX-5, whereas torque is 36 NM more than Mazda CX-5. Despite the higher power, Mitsubishi Outlander reaches 100 km/h speed 0.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.9 | 7.3 | |
|
The Mazda CX-5 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mitsubishi Outlander consumes 1.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-5, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Outlander could require 240 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 56 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 670 km in combined cycle | 760 km in combined cycle | |
| 850 km on highway | 910 km on highway | ||
| Mazda CX-5 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 440'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 19 years | 12 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda 3 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.66 m | 4.54 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.67 m | |
| Mitsubishi Outlander is 12 cm longer than the Mazda CX-5, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi Outlander is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Seats: | 7 seats | 5 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 292 litres | 403 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | 292 litres | no data | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | no data | 403 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1792 litres | 1620 litres | |
| The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mitsubishi Outlander (by 172 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Outlander is 0.6 metres less than that of the Mazda CX-5, which means Mitsubishi Outlander can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`270 | 2`075 | |
| Safety: | |||
| The Mitsubishi Outlander scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | below average | high | |
| Mazda CX-5 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mitsubishi Outlander has serious deffects in 60 percent more cases than Mazda CX-5, so Mazda CX-5 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 9200 | 8800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Outlander has
|
Mazda CX-5 has
| |