2006 Dodge Magnum vs. 2009 Mazda CX-9
To start off, 2009 Mazda CX-9 is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Dodge Magnum. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Dodge Magnum would be higher. At 5,654 cc (8 cylinders), 2006 Dodge Magnum is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Dodge Magnum (340 HP @ 5000 RPM) has 72 more horse power than 2009 Mazda CX-9. (268 HP @ 6250 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Dodge Magnum should accelerate faster than 2009 Mazda CX-9.
Because 2006 Dodge Magnum 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, 2006 Dodge Magnum 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, 2006 Dodge Magnum (530 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 261 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Mazda CX-9. (269 Nm @ 4250 RPM). This means 2006 Dodge Magnum will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Mazda CX-9.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Dodge Magnum | 2009 Mazda CX-9 | |
| Make | Dodge | Mazda |
| Model | Magnum | CX-9 |
| Year Released | 2006 | 2009 |
| Body Type | Station Wagon | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5654 cc | 3727 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 340 HP | 268 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5000 RPM | 6250 RPM |
| Torque | 530 Nm | 269 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 4250 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 5030 mm | 4600 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1940 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1490 mm | 1730 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3050 mm | 2340 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 9.8 L/100km | 10.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.8 L/100km | 14.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 72 L | 76 L |
