Nissan Qashqai 2013 vs Mazda CX-5 2012
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 141 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 196 NM | 210 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.1 seconds | 9.3 seconds | |
|
Mazda CX-5 is a more dynamic driving. Nissan Qashqai engine produces 9 HP less power than Mazda CX-5, whereas torque is 14 NM less than Mazda CX-5. Due to the lower power, Nissan Qashqai reaches 100 km/h speed 0.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.9 | 6.3 | |
|
The Mazda CX-5 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Nissan Qashqai consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-5, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Nissan Qashqai could require 90 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 65 litres | 56 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 940 km in combined cycle | 880 km in combined cycle | |
| 1180 km on highway | 1030 km on highway | ||
| Nissan Qashqai gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 15 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Nissan X-Trail, Nissan Serena | 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. Mazda CX-5 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. | |||
| Mazda CX-5 2012 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 2012 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.38 m | 4.54 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.59 m | 1.67 m | |
|
Nissan Qashqai is smaller. Nissan Qashqai is 16 cm shorter than the Mazda CX-5, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan Qashqai is 8 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 430 litres | 463 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1620 litres | |
|
Mazda CX-5 has more luggage space. Nissan Qashqai has 33 litres less trunk space than the Mazda CX-5. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Qashqai is 0.5 metres less than that of the Mazda CX-5, which means Nissan Qashqai can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`890 | no data | |
| Safety: | |||
| Mazda CX-5 scores higher in safety tests. The Mazda CX-5 scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| Mazda CX-5 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Qashqai has serious deffects in 35 percent more cases than Mazda CX-5, so Mazda CX-5 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 9400 | 10 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Qashqai has
|
Mazda CX-5 has
| |