Mitsubishi Outlander 2012 vs Mazda CX-5 2012
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.3 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 175 HP | |
| Torque: | 360 NM | 420 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.7 seconds | 9.4 seconds | |
|
Mazda CX-5 is a more dynamic driving. Mitsubishi Outlander engine produces 25 HP less power than Mazda CX-5, whereas torque is 60 NM less than Mazda CX-5. Due to the lower power, Mitsubishi Outlander reaches 100 km/h speed 2.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 5.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.9 l/100km | 8.0 l/100km | |
|
By specification Mitsubishi Outlander consumes 0.3 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 45 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Mitsubishi Outlander consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-5. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 58 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1030 km in combined cycle | 1050 km in combined cycle | |
| 1170 km on highway | 1180 km on highway | ||
| 750 km with real consumption | 720 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 480'000 km | 350'000 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 Mitsubishi Outlander engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 15 years | 12 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mitsubishi L 200, Mitsubishi ASX | Used also on Mazda 6 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mitsubishi Outlander might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Mazda CX-5 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.66 m | 4.54 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.71 m | |
| Mitsubishi Outlander is 12 cm longer than the Mazda CX-5, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi Outlander is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 145 litres | 505 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
986 litres | 1620 litres | |
|
Mazda CX-5 has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Mitsubishi Outlander has 360 litres less trunk space than the Mazda CX-5. This could mean that the Mitsubishi Outlander uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda CX-5 (by 634 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): | no data | 2`120 | |
| 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
| |