2009 Chevrolet Equinox vs. 2004 Mazda B4000
To start off, 2009 Chevrolet Equinox is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Mazda B4000. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Mazda B4000 would be higher. At 4,031 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Mazda B4000 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Mazda B4000 (208 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 23 more horse power than 2009 Chevrolet Equinox. (185 HP @ 5200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2004 Mazda B4000 should accelerate faster than 2009 Chevrolet Equinox. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Mazda B4000 weights approximately 406 kg more than 2009 Chevrolet Equinox. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2004 Mazda B4000 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2009 Chevrolet Equinox. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Mazda B4000 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, 2004 Mazda B4000 (310 Nm) has 25 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Chevrolet Equinox. (285 Nm). This means 2004 Mazda B4000 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Chevrolet Equinox.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Chevrolet Equinox | 2004 Mazda B4000 | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Mazda |
| Model | Equinox | B4000 |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2004 |
| Body Type | SUV | Pickup |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3425 cc | 4031 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 185 HP | 208 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Torque | 285 Nm | 310 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 92 mm | 100 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 84 mm | 85 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.0:1 | 9.0:1 |
| Drive Type | Front | 4WD |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 3 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1261 kg | 1667 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4800 mm | 5130 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1820 mm | 1790 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1710 mm | 1720 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2860 mm | 3200 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 9.8 L/100km | 12.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.8 L/100km | 15.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.8 L/100km | 14.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 76 L | 74 L |
