Mazda 6 2012 vs Mazda CX-5 2012
| Body: | Sedan | 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: | 2.2 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 210 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.4 seconds | 9.3 seconds | |
|
Mazda 6 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda 6 and Mazda CX-5 have the same engine power, but Mazda 6 torque is 170 NM more than Mazda CX-5. Mazda 6 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.8 | 6.3 | |
|
The Mazda 6 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda 6 consumes 1.5 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 225 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 62 litres | 56 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1290 km in combined cycle | 880 km in combined cycle | |
| 1470 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. | |||
| 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: | 4.87 m | 4.54 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.67 m | |
| Mazda 6 is 33 cm longer than the Mazda CX-5, width is practically the same , while the height of Mazda 6 is 22 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 489 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 26 litres more trunk space than the Mazda CX-5. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.2 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 6 is 1 metres less than that of the Mazda CX-5, which means Mazda 6 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | no data | 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 (€): | 6400 | 7400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 6 has
|
Mazda CX-5 has
| |