Subaru Forester 2016 vs Mazda CX-5 2015
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 198 NM | 210 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.6 seconds | 9.3 seconds | |
|
Mazda CX-5 is a more dynamic driving. Subaru Forester and Mazda CX-5 have the same engine power, but Subaru Forester torque is 12 NM less than Mazda CX-5. Subaru Forester reaches 100 km/h speed 0.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.0 | 6.2 | |
|
The Mazda CX-5 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Subaru Forester consumes 1.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-5, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Subaru Forester could require 270 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 56 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 750 km in combined cycle | 900 km in combined cycle | |
| 890 km on highway | 1050 km on highway | ||
| Mazda CX-5 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Ground clearance: | 220 mm (8.7 inches) | 210 mm (8.3 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Subaru Forester can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 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: | 16 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Subaru XV | 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-5 2015 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 2015 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.61 m | 4.56 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.74 m | 1.67 m | |
| Subaru Forester is 6 cm longer than the Mazda CX-5, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Subaru Forester is 7 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 505 litres | 503 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1564 litres | 1620 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 11.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Subaru Forester is 1.1 metres less than that of the Mazda CX-5, which means Subaru Forester can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 2`015 kg | 1`945 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`494 kg | 1`315 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 521 kg | 630 kg | |
| Subaru Forester load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 21 procentiem less than Mazda CX-5. Therefore, Mazda CX-5 is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 11 400 | 10 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Subaru Forester has
|
Mazda CX-5 has
| |