Mitsubishi Outlander 2015 vs Mazda CX-5 2015
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Hybrid | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 121 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 190 NM | 208 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 9.4 seconds | |
|
Mazda CX-5 is a more dynamic driving. Mitsubishi Outlander engine produces 29 HP less power than Mazda CX-5, whereas torque is 18 NM less than Mazda CX-5. Due to the lower power, Mitsubishi Outlander reaches 100 km/h speed 1.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 1.7 | 6.7 | |
|
The Mitsubishi Outlander is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mitsubishi Outlander consumes 5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-5, which means that by driving the Mitsubishi Outlander over 15,000 km in a year you can save 750 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 58 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 2640 km in combined cycle | 860 km in combined cycle | |
| Mitsubishi Outlander gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
| Ground clearance: | 190 mm (7.5 inches) | 210 mm (8.3 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Mazda CX-5 can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 19 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Mitsubishi Lancer, Mitsubishi ASX, Peugeot 4008 | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda 3, Mazda MX-5, Mazda CX-3 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| 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. | |||
| Mazda CX-5 2015 2.0 engine: This engine is not well-suited for low-quality fuel, as it quickly clogs the fuel system. The use of substandard fuel often leads to the failure of expensive ignition coils, resulting in significant repair ... More about Mazda CX-5 2015 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.70 m | 4.56 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.64 m | |
| Mitsubishi Outlander is 14 cm longer than the Mazda CX-5, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi Outlander is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 463 litres | 503 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1620 litres | |
|
Mazda CX-5 has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Mitsubishi Outlander has 40 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. | |||
| 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`370 | 2`050 | |
| 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 (€): | 16 600 | 13 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Outlander has
|
Mazda CX-5 has
| |