2007 Mazda CX-9 vs. 2013 Nissan Juke
To start off, 2013 Nissan Juke 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 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 78 more horse power than 2013 Nissan Juke. (185 HP @ 5600 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2007 Mazda CX-9 should accelerate faster than 2013 Nissan Juke.
Because 2013 Nissan Juke is all wheel drive (AWD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2007 Mazda CX-9. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2013 Nissan Juke 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 (339 Nm @ 4500 RPM) has 99 more torque (in Nm) than 2013 Nissan Juke. (240 Nm @ 5200 RPM). This means 2007 Mazda CX-9 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2013 Nissan Juke.
Compare all specifications:
| 2007 Mazda CX-9 | 2013 Nissan Juke | |
| Make | Mazda | Nissan |
| Model | CX-9 | Juke |
| Year Released | 2007 | 2013 |
| Body Type | SUV | Crossover |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3496 cc | 1600 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 263 HP | 185 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6250 RPM | 5600 RPM |
| Torque | 339 Nm | 240 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 5200 RPM |
| Drive Type | Front | AWD |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | CVT |
| Number of Seats | 7 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 5080 mm | 4125 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1940 mm | 1765 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1740 mm | 1570 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2880 mm | 2530 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 9.8 L/100km | 6.6 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.1 L/100km | 8 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 76 L | 45 L |
