2007 Mazda CX-9 vs. 2009 Subaru Outback
To start off, 2009 Subaru Outback 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 3,496 cc (6 cylinders), 2007 Mazda CX-9 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2007 Mazda CX-9 (263 HP @ 6250 RPM) has 21 more horse power than 2009 Subaru Outback. (242 HP @ 6600 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2007 Mazda CX-9 should accelerate faster than 2009 Subaru Outback.
Because 2009 Subaru Outback is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2007 Mazda CX-9. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Subaru Outback 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, 2007 Mazda CX-9 (338 Nm @ 4500 RPM) has 123 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Subaru Outback. (215 Nm @ 4200 RPM). This means 2007 Mazda CX-9 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Subaru Outback.
Compare all specifications:
2007 Mazda CX-9 | 2009 Subaru Outback | |
Make | Mazda | Subaru |
Model | CX-9 | Outback |
Year Released | 2007 | 2009 |
Body Type | SUV | Station Wagon |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3496 cc | 2997 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | boxer |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 263 HP | 242 HP |
Engine RPM | 6250 RPM | 6600 RPM |
Torque | 338 Nm | 215 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 4200 RPM |
Drive Type | Front | 4WD |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 7 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Width | 1940 mm | 1780 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1740 mm | 1550 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2880 mm | 2680 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 9.8 L/100km | 9.8 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 13.1 L/100km | 13.8 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.8 L/100km | 14.9 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 76 L | 64 L |