2008 Ford Taurus X vs. 2007 Mazda CX-9
To start off, 2008 Ford Taurus X is newer by 1 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. Both 2008 Ford Taurus X and 2007 Mazda CX-9 are equipped with a 3,496 cc engine. In terms of performance, 2008 Ford Taurus X (264 HP @ 6250 RPM) has 1 more horse power than 2007 Mazda CX-9. (263 HP @ 6250 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2008 Ford Taurus X should accelerate faster than 2007 Mazda CX-9.
Because 2007 Mazda CX-9 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2008 Ford Taurus X. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2007 Mazda CX-9 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, both vehicles can yield 338 Nm of torque. So under normal driving conditions, the ability to climb up hills and pull heavy equipment should be relatively similar for both vehicles.
Compare all specifications:
| 2008 Ford Taurus X | 2007 Mazda CX-9 | |
| Make | Ford | Mazda |
| Model | Taurus X | CX-9 |
| Year Released | 2008 | 2007 |
| Body Type | Crossover | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3496 cc | 3496 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 264 HP | 263 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6250 RPM | 6250 RPM |
| Torque | 338 Nm | 338 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 4500 RPM |
| Drive Type | Front | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 6 seats | 7 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 5090 mm | 5080 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1910 mm | 1940 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1720 mm | 1740 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2870 mm | 2880 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 9.8 L/100km | 10.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 14.7 L/100km | 14.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 12.4 L/100km | 13.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 72 L | 76 L |
