2008 Mazda CX-9 vs. 2012 BMW 535
To start off, 2012 BMW 535 is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2008 Mazda CX-9. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2008 Mazda CX-9 would be higher. At 3,726 cc (6 cylinders), 2008 Mazda CX-9 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 BMW 535 (300 HP @ 5800 RPM) has 30 more horse power than 2008 Mazda CX-9. (270 HP @ 6250 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2012 BMW 535 should accelerate faster than 2008 Mazda CX-9. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2012 BMW 535 weights approximately 955 kg more than 2008 Mazda CX-9. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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, 2012 BMW 535 (406 Nm @ 1200 RPM) has 36 more torque (in Nm) than 2008 Mazda CX-9. (370 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2012 BMW 535 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2008 Mazda CX-9.
Compare all specifications:
2008 Mazda CX-9 | 2012 BMW 535 | |
Make | Mazda | BMW |
Model | CX-9 | 535 |
Year Released | 2008 | 2012 |
Body Type | SUV | Hatchback |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3726 cc | 2979 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 270 HP | 300 HP |
Engine RPM | 6250 RPM | 5800 RPM |
Torque | 370 Nm | 406 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 1200 RPM |
Drive Type | 4WD | AWD |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 7 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1180 kg | 2135 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5080 mm | 4999 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1940 mm | 1900 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1730 mm | 1560 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2880 mm | 3071 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 11.2 L/100km | 8.7 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 15.7 L/100km | 12.4 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 76 L | 70 L |