2008 Chevrolet Equinox vs. 2009 Mazda CX-9
To start off, 2009 Mazda CX-9 is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2008 Chevrolet Equinox. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2008 Chevrolet Equinox would be higher. At 3,725 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Mazda CX-9 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Mazda CX-9 (273 HP @ 6250 RPM) has 9 more horse power than 2008 Chevrolet Equinox. (264 HP @ 6500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Mazda CX-9 should accelerate faster than 2008 Chevrolet Equinox. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2008 Chevrolet Equinox weights approximately 871 kg more than 2009 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 Mazda CX-9 (366 Nm @ 4500 RPM) has 27 more torque (in Nm) than 2008 Chevrolet Equinox. (339 Nm @ 2200 RPM). This means 2009 Mazda CX-9 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2008 Chevrolet Equinox.
Compare all specifications:
2008 Chevrolet Equinox | 2009 Mazda CX-9 | |
Make | Chevrolet | Mazda |
Model | Equinox | CX-9 |
Year Released | 2008 | 2009 |
Body Type | SUV | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3600 cc | 3725 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 264 HP | 273 HP |
Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 6250 RPM |
Torque | 339 Nm | 366 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2200 RPM | 4500 RPM |
Drive Type | 4WD | 4WD |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 7 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 2200 kg | 1329 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4800 mm | 5080 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1820 mm | 1940 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1680 mm | 1730 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2860 mm | 2880 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 9.8 L/100km | 11.2 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 14.7 L/100km | 15.7 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 12.4 L/100km | 13.8 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 76 L | 76 L |