Honda CR-V 2010 vs Mazda CX-5 2012
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 350 NM | 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.6 seconds | 10.2 seconds | |
|
Mazda CX-5 is a more dynamic driving. Honda CR-V and Mazda CX-5 have the same engine power, but Honda CR-V torque is 30 NM less than Mazda CX-5. Honda CR-V reaches 100 km/h speed 0.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.4 | 5.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.1 l/100km | 7.5 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda CX-5 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Honda CR-V consumes 2.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-5, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Honda CR-V could require 315 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Honda CR-V consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-5. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 58 litres | 56 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 780 km in combined cycle | 1050 km in combined cycle | |
| 930 km on highway | 1190 km on highway | ||
| 710 km with real consumption | 740 km with real consumption | ||
| 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: | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
|
Honda CR-V has 4x4: Car features Honda`s real-time four-wheel-drive system, which sends torque to the front wheels under normal conditions. A multi-plate clutch transfers torque to the rear axle when wheel slip is identified (pressure is provided to the clutch by a dual-pump system). To allow ABS to work seamlessly, the clutch is also disengaged during braking. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 330'000 km | 380'000 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 Mazda CX-5 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Honda Civic, Honda Accord | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda 3, Mazda CX-7 | |
| 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 2010 2.2 engine: The Honda N22B diesel is generally considered a successful and durable engine. Its main weak points are connected with the fuel system, emissions components, cold-weather operation, and several intake and exhaust-related parts.
One of the most frequent complaints concerns the injectors. Depending on the version, owners report problems with sensitive piezo injectors, while Bosch injectors themselves are usually ... More about Honda CR-V 2010 2.2 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.53 m | 4.54 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.71 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Honda CR-V is 2 cm shorter than the Mazda CX-5, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Honda CR-V is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 524 litres | 505 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1532 litres | 1620 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, The Mazda CX-5 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda CX-5 (by 88 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Honda CR-V is 0.6 metres more than that of the Mazda CX-5, which means Honda CR-V can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 2`160 kg | 2`050 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`773 kg | 1`480 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 387 kg | 570 kg | |
| Honda CR-V load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 47 procentiem less than Mazda CX-5. Therefore, Mazda CX-5 is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | high | |
| Mazda CX-5 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Honda CR-V has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Mazda CX-5, so Mazda CX-5 quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 6600 | 7400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Honda CR-V has
|
Mazda CX-5 has
| |