Mazda 6 2013 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: | Automatic | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 2.5 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 192 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 256 NM | 210 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.9 seconds | 9.3 seconds | |
|
Mazda 6 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda 6 engine produces 42 HP more power than Mazda CX-5, whereas torque is 46 NM more than Mazda CX-5. Thanks to more power Mazda 6 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.4 | 6.3 | |
| Mazda 6 consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-5, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 6 could require 15 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 62 litres | 56 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 960 km in combined cycle | 880 km in combined cycle | |
| 1210 km on highway | 1030 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. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 440'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 13 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 3, Mazda CX-5 | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda 3, Mazda MX-5, Mazda CX-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. | |||
| 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: | 2`040 kg | no data | |
| 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
| |