2004 Buick Rainier vs. 2009 Mazda 5
To start off, 2009 Mazda 5 is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Buick Rainier. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Buick Rainier would be higher. At 4,195 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Buick Rainier is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Buick Rainier (275 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 122 more horse power than 2009 Mazda 5. (153 HP @ 6500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Buick Rainier should accelerate faster than 2009 Mazda 5.
Because 2004 Buick Rainier 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 2004 Buick Rainier. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Mazda 5, 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, 2004 Buick Rainier (387 Nm) has 186 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Mazda 5. (201 Nm). This means 2004 Buick Rainier will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Mazda 5.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Buick Rainier | 2009 Mazda 5 | |
| Make | Buick | Mazda |
| Model | Rainier | 5 |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2009 |
| Body Type | SUV | Minivan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4195 cc | 2260 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 275 HP | 153 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 6500 RPM |
| Torque | 387 Nm | 201 Nm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.1:1 | 10.8:1 |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 6 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4880 mm | 4620 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1920 mm | 1760 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1900 mm | 1640 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2780 mm | 2760 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 11.2 L/100km | 8.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 14.7 L/100km | 11.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 13.1 L/100km | 10.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 83 L | 60 L |
