Renault Espace 2010 vs Mazda 5 2010
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 1.6 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 115 HP | |
| Torque: | 340 NM | 270 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.6 seconds | 13.7 seconds | |
|
Renault Espace is more dynamic to drive. Renault Espace engine produces 35 HP more power than Mazda 5, whereas torque is 70 NM more than Mazda 5. Thanks to more power Renault Espace reaches 100 km/h speed 3.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.5 | 5.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.0 l/100km | 6.1 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 5 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Espace consumes 1.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 5, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Renault Espace could require 195 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Espace consumes 1.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 5. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 83 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1270 km in combined cycle | 1150 km in combined cycle | |
| 1450 km on highway | 1300 km on highway | ||
| 1030 km with real consumption | 980 km with real consumption | ||
| Renault Espace gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 175 mm (6.9 inches) | 130 mm (5.1 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Renault Espace 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. Note, however, that this Renault Espace version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 14 years | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Nissan X-Trail, Nissan Qashqai, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Opel Vivaro | Used also on Mazda 3 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Renault Espace might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Renault Espace 2010 2.0 engine: The engine has a good power to fuel consumption ratio and, with careful maintenance, a long service life. The most common problems with these engines are with the fuel injection system and lubrication. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.66 m | 4.59 m | |
| Width: | 1.86 m | 1.75 m | |
| Height: | 1.73 m | 1.62 m | |
|
Renault Espace is larger. Renault Espace is 8 cm longer than the Mazda 5, 11 cm wider, while the height of Renault Espace is 11 cm higher. | |||
| Seats: | 7 seats | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 291 litres | 112 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | 291 litres | 112 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
2860 litres | 1485 litres | |
| In 7-seat version Renault Espace has more luggage space (by 179 litres). The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Renault Espace (by 1375 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Espace is 0.4 metres more than that of the Mazda 5, which means Renault Espace can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`555 | 2`125 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | low | average | |
| Mazda 5 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Espace has serious deffects in 115 percent more cases than Mazda 5, so Mazda 5 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 4800 | 5200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Espace has
|
Mazda 5 has
| |