Mazda 6 2012 vs Mazda CX-5 2012
| Body: | Estate car / wagon | Crossover / SUV | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crossovers and SUVs have better off-road capabilities (higher ground clearance, can have 4x4 drive), they are preferable for driving on unpaved roads and rural areas. Also, the driver's seating position is higher in a crossover or SUVs, which provides better visibility also in city. This usually comes at the cost of higher fuel consumption, increased weight and higher maintenance costs. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 145 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 210 NM | 210 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.6 seconds | 9.3 seconds | |
|
Mazda CX-5 is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 6 engine produces 5 HP less power than Mazda CX-5, the torque is the same for both cars. Due to the lower power, Mazda 6 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.6 | 6.2 | |
|
The Mazda 6 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda 6 consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-5, which means that by driving the Mazda 6 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 90 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 62 litres | 56 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1100 km in combined cycle | 900 km in combined cycle | |
| 1310 km on highway | 1050 km on highway | ||
| Mazda 6 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
| Mazda CX-5 2012 2.0 engine: This engine is not well-suited for low-quality fuel, as it quickly clogs the fuel system. The use of substandard fuel often leads to the failure of expensive ignition coils, resulting in significant repair ... More about Mazda CX-5 2012 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.80 m | 4.54 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.48 m | 1.67 m | |
| Mazda 6 is 26 cm longer than the Mazda CX-5, width is practically the same , while the height of Mazda 6 is 19 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 502 litres | 463 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
no data | 1620 litres | |
|
Mazda 6 has more luggage capacity. Mazda 6 has 39 litres more trunk space than the Mazda CX-5. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 6 is 0.6 metres more than that of the Mazda CX-5, which means Mazda 6 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`980 kg | 1`945 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`310 kg | 1`411 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 670 kg | 534 kg | |
| Mazda 6 load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 20 procentiem more than Mazda CX-5. Therefore, Mazda 6 is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | |||
| Mazda CX-5 is better rated in child safety tests. The Mazda CX-5 scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Mazda CX-5 has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Mazda 6, so Mazda CX-5 quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 5800 | 7400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 6 has
|
Mazda CX-5 has
| |