Mazda CX-7 2010 vs Mazda CX-5 2012
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.3 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 238 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 350 NM | 210 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.3 seconds | 9.8 seconds | |
|
Mazda CX-7 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda CX-7 engine produces 88 HP more power than Mazda CX-5, whereas torque is 140 NM more than Mazda CX-5. Thanks to more power Mazda CX-7 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 11.5 | 6.7 | |
|
The Mazda CX-5 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda CX-7 consumes 4.8 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 CX-7 could require 720 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 69 litres | 58 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 600 km in combined cycle | 860 km in combined cycle | |
| 740 km on highway | 980 km on highway | ||
| Mazda CX-5 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: | 320'000 km | 420'000 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: | 8 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Mazda 3 | 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. | |||
| 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. | |||
| Mazda CX-7 2010 2.3 engine: Although the engine has a chain, its capacity is quite limited. The engine also requires high quality fuel and tends to use more oil at higher mileages. 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: | 4.68 m | 4.54 m | |
| Width: | 1.87 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.65 m | 1.67 m | |
|
Mazda CX-7 is larger, but slightly lower. Mazda CX-7 is 14 cm longer than the Mazda CX-5, 3 cm wider, while the height of Mazda CX-7 is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 455 litres | 463 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
774 litres | 1620 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, Mazda CX-7 has 8 litres less trunk space than the Mazda CX-5. This could mean that the Mazda CX-7 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda CX-5 (by 846 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda CX-7 is 0.8 metres less than that of the Mazda CX-5, which means Mazda CX-7 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`289 | 2`045 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Mazda CX-5 scores higher in safety tests. The Mazda CX-5 scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 6200 | 8800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda CX-7 has
|
Mazda CX-5 has
| |