2004 Mazda 6 vs. 2002 BMW X5
To start off, 2004 Mazda 6 is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 BMW X5. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 BMW X5 would be higher. At 2,979 cc (6 cylinders), 2002 BMW X5 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2002 BMW X5 (227 HP @ 5900 RPM) has 128 more horse power than 2004 Mazda 6. (99 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2002 BMW X5 should accelerate faster than 2004 Mazda 6. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2002 BMW X5 weights approximately 725 kg more than 2004 Mazda 6. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2002 BMW X5 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2004 Mazda 6. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2002 BMW X5 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, 2002 BMW X5 (300 Nm) has 69 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Mazda 6. (231 Nm). This means 2002 BMW X5 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Mazda 6.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Mazda 6 | 2002 BMW X5 | |
| Make | Mazda | BMW |
| Model | 6 | X5 |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2002 |
| Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1596 cc | 2979 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 99 HP | 227 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 5900 RPM |
| Torque | 231 Nm | 300 Nm |
| Top Speed | 185 km/hour | 202 km/hour |
| Drive Type | Front | 4WD |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1345 kg | 2070 kg |
| Wheelbase Size | 2630 mm | 2830 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 7.2 L/100km | 12.9 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 61 L | 93 L |
