2001 Mazda CU-X vs. 2010 Ford Explorer
To start off, 2010 Ford Explorer is newer by 9 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2001 Mazda CU-X. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2001 Mazda CU-X would be higher. At 4,009 cc (6 cylinders), 2010 Ford Explorer is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Ford Explorer (207 HP @ 5100 RPM) has 108 more horse power than 2001 Mazda CU-X. (99 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Ford Explorer should accelerate faster than 2001 Mazda CU-X. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2001 Mazda CU-X weights approximately 373 kg more than 2010 Ford Explorer.
Because 2010 Ford Explorer is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 2010 Ford Explorer. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2001 Mazda CU-X, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. Let's talk about torque, 2010 Ford Explorer (254 Nm) has 14 more torque (in Nm) than 2001 Mazda CU-X. (240 Nm). This means 2010 Ford Explorer will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2001 Mazda CU-X.
Compare all specifications:
2001 Mazda CU-X | 2010 Ford Explorer | |
Make | Mazda | Ford |
Model | CU-X | Explorer |
Year Released | 2001 | 2010 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1970 cc | 4009 cc |
Horse Power | 99 HP | 207 HP |
Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 5100 RPM |
Torque | 240 Nm | 254 Nm |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Vehicle Weight | 1345 kg | 972 kg |
Wheelbase Size | 2680 mm | 3320 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 80 L | 85 L |