2007 Mazda CX-9 vs. 2009 Saturn Outlook
To start off, 2009 Saturn Outlook is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2007 Mazda CX-9. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2007 Mazda CX-9 would be higher. At 3,564 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Saturn Outlook is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Saturn Outlook (288 HP @ 6300 RPM) has 25 more horse power than 2007 Mazda CX-9. (263 HP @ 6250 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Saturn Outlook should accelerate faster than 2007 Mazda CX-9.
Both vehicles are four wheel drive (4WD) - it offers better handling, traction, and control in all driving conditions compared with front wheel drive or 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 Saturn Outlook (366 Nm @ 3400 RPM) has 28 more torque (in Nm) than 2007 Mazda CX-9. (338 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2009 Saturn Outlook will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2007 Mazda CX-9.
Compare all specifications:
| 2007 Mazda CX-9 | 2009 Saturn Outlook | |
| Make | Mazda | Saturn |
| Model | CX-9 | Outlook |
| Year Released | 2007 | 2009 |
| Body Type | SUV | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3496 cc | 3564 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 263 HP | 288 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6250 RPM | 6300 RPM |
| Torque | 338 Nm | 366 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 3400 RPM |
| Drive Type | 4WD | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 7 seats | 8 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 5080 mm | 5100 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1940 mm | 1990 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1740 mm | 1780 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2880 mm | 3030 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 10.7 L/100km | 10.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 14.7 L/100km | 14.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 13.1 L/100km | 12.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 76 L | 83 L |
