Mitsubishi Outlander 2017 vs Mazda CX-5 2015
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Petrol | 2.5 Petrol | |
| 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: | 224 HP | 192 HP | |
| Torque: | 291 NM | 256 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.7 seconds | 7.9 seconds | |
| Mitsubishi Outlander engine produces 32 HP more power than Mazda CX-5, whereas torque is 35 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): | 10.6 | 7.3 | |
|
The Mazda CX-5 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mitsubishi Outlander consumes 3.3 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 495 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 58 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 560 km in combined cycle | 790 km in combined cycle | |
| 680 km on highway | 950 km on highway | ||
| Mazda CX-5 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
| Ground clearance: | 216 mm (8.5 inches) | 210 mm (8.3 inches) | |
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: | 4.70 m | 4.56 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.67 m | |
| Mitsubishi Outlander is 14 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 | 503 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | 292 litres | no data | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | no data | 503 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 | 11.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Outlander is 1.1 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: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | average | |
| Mazda CX-5 has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Mitsubishi Outlander, so Mazda CX-5 quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 16 000 | 11 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Outlander has
|
Mazda CX-5 has
| |