2007 Mazda CX-9 vs. 2013 Lincoln Navigator
To start off, 2013 Lincoln Navigator is newer by 6 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 5,400 cc (8 cylinders), 2013 Lincoln Navigator is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 Lincoln Navigator (306 HP @ 5100 RPM) has 43 more horse power than 2007 Mazda CX-9. (263 HP @ 6250 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Lincoln Navigator 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, 2013 Lincoln Navigator (495 Nm @ 3600 RPM) has 157 more torque (in Nm) than 2007 Mazda CX-9. (338 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2013 Lincoln Navigator 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 | 2013 Lincoln Navigator | |
| Make | Mazda | Lincoln |
| Model | CX-9 | Navigator |
| Year Released | 2007 | 2013 |
| Body Type | SUV | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3496 cc | 5400 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 3 valves |
| Horse Power | 263 HP | 306 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6250 RPM | 5100 RPM |
| Torque | 338 Nm | 495 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 3600 RPM |
| Drive Type | 4WD | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | 6-speed automatic |
| Number of Seats | 7 seats | 7 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 5080 mm | 5293 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1940 mm | 2332 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1740 mm | 1988 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2880 mm | 3023 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 10.7 L/100km | 11.3 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 14.7 L/100km | 16.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 76 L | 106 L |
