2009 BMW 530 vs. 2008 Mazda CX-9
To start off, 2009 BMW 530 is newer by 1 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, 2008 Mazda CX-9 (271 HP @ 6250 RPM) has 17 more horse power than 2009 BMW 530. (254 HP @ 6600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2008 Mazda CX-9 should accelerate faster than 2009 BMW 530.
Because 2009 BMW 530 is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 2009 BMW 530. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2008 Mazda CX-9, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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, 2008 Mazda CX-9 (370 Nm @ 4500 RPM) has 70 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 BMW 530. (300 Nm @ 3500 RPM). This means 2008 Mazda CX-9 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 BMW 530.
Compare all specifications:
2009 BMW 530 | 2008 Mazda CX-9 | |
Make | BMW | Mazda |
Model | 530 | CX-9 |
Year Released | 2009 | 2008 |
Body Type | Station Wagon | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2995 cc | 3726 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 254 HP | 271 HP |
Engine RPM | 6600 RPM | 6250 RPM |
Torque | 300 Nm | 370 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3500 RPM | 4500 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 7 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4850 mm | 5080 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1470 mm | 1940 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1850 mm | 1730 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2880 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 6.8 L/100km | 8.9 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 70 L | 76 L |