2006 Buick Rainier vs. 2009 Mazda 5
To start off, 2009 Mazda 5 is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Buick Rainier. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Buick Rainier would be higher. At 4,163 cc (6 cylinders), 2006 Buick Rainier is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Buick Rainier (291 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 138 more horse power than 2009 Mazda 5. (153 HP @ 6500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Buick Rainier should accelerate faster than 2009 Mazda 5.
Because 2006 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 2006 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, 2006 Buick Rainier (376 Nm @ 4800 RPM) has 175 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Mazda 5. (201 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2006 Buick Rainier will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Mazda 5.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Buick Rainier | 2009 Mazda 5 | |
Make | Buick | Mazda |
Model | Rainier | 5 |
Year Released | 2006 | 2009 |
Body Type | SUV | Minivan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4163 cc | 2258 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 291 HP | 153 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 6500 RPM |
Torque | 376 Nm | 201 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4800 RPM | 4500 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 6 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4920 mm | 4620 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1920 mm | 1760 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1900 mm | 1640 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2880 mm | 2760 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 10.7 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 |