Subaru Forester 2011 vs Mazda CX-5 2012
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 147 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 350 NM | 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.4 seconds | 9.2 seconds | |
|
Mazda CX-5 is a more dynamic driving. Subaru Forester engine produces 3 HP less power than Mazda CX-5, whereas torque is 30 NM less than Mazda CX-5. Due to the lower power, Subaru Forester reaches 100 km/h speed 1.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.3 | 4.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.9 l/100km | 6.9 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda CX-5 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Subaru Forester consumes 1.7 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 255 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 56 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1010 km in combined cycle | 1210 km in combined cycle | |
| 1140 km on highway | 1360 km on highway | ||
| 920 km with real consumption | 810 km with real consumption | ||
| 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) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 380'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 18 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Subaru Outback, Subaru Legacy | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda 3, Mazda CX-7 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Subaru Forester might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.56 m | 4.54 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.70 m | 1.71 m | |
| Subaru Forester is 2 cm longer than the Mazda CX-5, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Subaru Forester is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 450 litres | 505 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
no data | 1620 litres | |
|
Mazda CX-5 has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, This could mean that the Subaru Forester uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Subaru Forester is 0.6 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`050 kg | 2`035 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`540 kg | 1`445 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 510 kg | 590 kg | |
| Subaru Forester load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 16 procentiem less than Mazda CX-5. Therefore, Mazda CX-5 is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 4000 | 7600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Subaru Forester has
|
Mazda CX-5 has
| |