Honda CR-V 2012 vs Mazda CX-5 2015
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.5 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 192 HP | |
| Torque: | 350 NM | 256 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.7 seconds | 7.9 seconds | |
|
Mazda CX-5 is a more dynamic driving. Honda CR-V engine produces 42 HP less power than Mazda CX-5, but torque is 94 NM more than Mazda CX-5. Due to the lower power, Honda CR-V reaches 100 km/h speed 1.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.8 | 7.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.5 l/100km | 8.7 l/100km | |
|
The Honda CR-V is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Honda CR-V consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-5, which means that by driving the Honda CR-V over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Honda CR-V consumes 1.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-5. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 58 litres | 58 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 850 km in combined cycle | 790 km in combined cycle | |
| 960 km on highway | 950 km on highway | ||
| 770 km with real consumption | 660 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: | 330'000 km | 440'000 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 | 11 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 | |
| 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.57 m | 4.56 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.69 m | 1.67 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Honda CR-V is 2 cm longer than the Mazda CX-5, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Honda CR-V is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 589 litres | 503 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1669 litres | 1620 litres | |
|
Honda CR-V has more luggage capacity. Honda CR-V has 86 litres more trunk space than the Mazda CX-5. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Honda CR-V (by 49 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | 11.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Honda CR-V is 0.1 metres more than that of the Mazda CX-5. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 2`075 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | high | |
| Mazda CX-5 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Honda CR-V has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Mazda CX-5, so Mazda CX-5 quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 12 600 | 15 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Honda CR-V has
|
Mazda CX-5 has
| |