Honda CR-V 2010 vs Mazda CX-7 2009
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.3 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 260 HP | |
| Torque: | 192 NM | 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.2 seconds | 8.2 seconds | |
|
Mazda CX-7 is a more dynamic driving. Honda CR-V engine produces 110 HP less power than Mazda CX-7, whereas torque is 188 NM less than Mazda CX-7. Due to the lower power, Honda CR-V reaches 100 km/h speed 2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.1 | 10.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.3 l/100km | 11.6 l/100km | |
|
The Honda CR-V is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Honda CR-V consumes 2.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-7, which means that by driving the Honda CR-V over 15,000 km in a year you can save 345 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Honda CR-V consumes 2.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-7. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 58 litres | 69 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 710 km in combined cycle | 660 km in combined cycle | |
| 860 km on highway | 820 km on highway | ||
| 620 km with real consumption | 590 km with real consumption | ||
| Honda CR-V gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 320'000 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 Honda CR-V engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 19 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Honda Accord | 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. Honda CR-V might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Honda CR-V 2010 2.0 engine: This engine is sensitive to both fuel and oil quality. Using low-grade gasoline can quickly damage the catalytic converter and lead to premature failure of the oxygen sensors.
Many Honda owners are annoyed ... More about Honda CR-V 2010 2.0 engine Mazda CX-7 2009 2.3 engine: Although the engine has a chain, its capacity is quite limited. The engine also requires high quality fuel and tends to use more oil at higher mileages. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.53 m | 4.70 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.87 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.65 m | |
|
Honda CR-V is smaller, but slightly higher. Honda CR-V is 17 cm shorter than the Mazda CX-7, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Honda CR-V is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 524 litres | 455 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 774 litres | |
|
Honda CR-V has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Honda CR-V has 69 litres more trunk space than the Mazda CX-7. The Mazda CX-7 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Honda CR-V is 0.4 metres more than that of the Mazda CX-7, which means Honda CR-V can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`050 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 7200 | 6200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Honda CR-V has
|
Mazda CX-7 has
| |