2005 Kia Optima vs. 2009 Mazda CX-7
To start off, 2009 Mazda CX-7 is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Kia Optima. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Kia Optima would be higher. At 2,360 cc (4 cylinders), 2005 Kia Optima is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Mazda CX-7 (244 HP @ 5000 RPM) has 106 more horse power than 2005 Kia Optima. (138 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Mazda CX-7 should accelerate faster than 2005 Kia Optima. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Kia Optima weights approximately 317 kg more than 2009 Mazda CX-7.
Both vehicles are front wheel drive (FWD). Which offers better traction when its slippery than rear wheel drive vehicles. 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, 2009 Mazda CX-7 (350 Nm) has 151 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Kia Optima. (199 Nm). This means 2009 Mazda CX-7 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Kia Optima.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Kia Optima | 2009 Mazda CX-7 | |
| Make | Kia | Mazda |
| Model | Optima | CX-7 |
| Year Released | 2005 | 2009 |
| Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2360 cc | 2260 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 138 HP | 244 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 5000 RPM |
| Torque | 199 Nm | 350 Nm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.0:1 | 10.0:1 |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1497 kg | 1180 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4730 mm | 4680 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1820 mm | 1880 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1420 mm | 1650 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2620 mm | 2760 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 7.8 L/100km | 10.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 10.7 L/100km | 13.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 9.4 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 65 L | 69 L |
