2005 Mazda Tribute vs. 2013 Dodge CHARGER
To start off, 2013 Dodge CHARGER is newer by 8 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Mazda Tribute. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Mazda Tribute would be higher. At 5,700 cc (8 cylinders), 2013 Dodge CHARGER is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 Dodge CHARGER (365 HP @ 5250 RPM) has 165 more horse power than 2005 Mazda Tribute. (200 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Dodge CHARGER should accelerate faster than 2005 Mazda Tribute. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2013 Dodge CHARGER weights approximately 511 kg more than 2005 Mazda Tribute. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 2013 Dodge CHARGER (536 Nm) has 274 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Mazda Tribute. (262 Nm). This means 2013 Dodge CHARGER will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Mazda Tribute.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Mazda Tribute | 2013 Dodge CHARGER | |
| Make | Mazda | Dodge |
| Model | Tribute | CHARGER |
| Year Released | 2005 | 2013 |
| Body Type | SUV | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2965 cc | 5700 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 200 HP | 365 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 5250 RPM |
| Torque | 262 Nm | 536 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 89 mm | 99 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 80 mm | 90 mm |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | 5-speed automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1507 kg | 2018 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4440 mm | 5077 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1840 mm | 1905 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1780 mm | 1482 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2680 mm | 3052 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 9.4 L/100km | 8.5 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 11.8 L/100km | 14.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 62 L | 72 L |
