2004 Lamborghini Gallardo vs. 2009 Mazda CX-9
To start off, 2009 Mazda CX-9 is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Lamborghini Gallardo. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Lamborghini Gallardo would be higher. At 4,959 cc (10 cylinders), 2004 Lamborghini Gallardo is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Lamborghini Gallardo (500 HP @ 7800 RPM) has 232 more horse power than 2009 Mazda CX-9. (268 HP @ 6250 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Lamborghini Gallardo should accelerate faster than 2009 Mazda CX-9.
Because 2004 Lamborghini Gallardo is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2009 Mazda CX-9. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Lamborghini Gallardo will offer significantly more control. 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 Lamborghini Gallardo (500 Nm) has 231 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Mazda CX-9. (269 Nm). This means 2004 Lamborghini Gallardo will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Mazda CX-9.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Lamborghini Gallardo | 2009 Mazda CX-9 | |
| Make | Lamborghini | Mazda |
| Model | Gallardo | CX-9 |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2009 |
| Body Type | Coupe | SUV |
| Engine Position | Middle | Front |
| Engine Size | 4959 cc | 3727 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 10 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 500 HP | 268 HP |
| Engine RPM | 7800 RPM | 6250 RPM |
| Torque | 500 Nm | 269 Nm |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Front |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4310 mm | 4600 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1910 mm | 1940 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1170 mm | 1730 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2560 mm | 2340 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 15.7 L/100km | 10.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 26.1 L/100km | 14.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 90 L | 76 L |
