Honda CR-V 2012 vs Mazda CX-5 2012
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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: | 9.7 seconds | 9.2 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 0.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.6 | 4.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.7 l/100km | 6.9 l/100km | |
|
By specification Honda CR-V consumes 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 150 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Honda CR-V consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-5. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 58 litres | 56 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1030 km in combined cycle | 1210 km in combined cycle | |
| 1130 km on highway | 1360 km on highway | ||
| 860 km with real consumption | 810 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
|
Honda CR-V has 4x4: Vehicle has automatic four-wheel drive system that sends torque to front wheels under normal conditions. Electronically controlled multi-plate clutch transfers torque to rear axle when wheel slip is detected. The all-wheel drive system constantly interacts with the VSA dynamic stabilization system and electric power steering to provide full vehicle control, good traction and maneuverability in all road conditions. | |||
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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.53 m | 4.54 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.65 m | 1.71 m | |
|
Honda CR-V is smaller. Honda CR-V is 1 cm shorter than the Mazda CX-5, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Honda CR-V is 6 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 589 litres | 505 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1669 litres | 1620 litres | |
|
Honda CR-V has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Honda CR-V has 84 litres more trunk space than the Mazda CX-5. 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 Honda CR-V (by 49 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 (kg): | 2`200 | 2`035 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Mazda CX-5 scores higher in safety tests. The Mazda CX-5 scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| 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 (€): | 11 600 | 8800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Honda CR-V has
|
Mazda CX-5 has
| |