2009 Chevrolet Equinox vs. 2004 Mazda MX
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 MX. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Mazda MX would be higher. At 3,425 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Chevrolet Equinox is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Chevrolet Equinox (185 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 25 more horse power than 2004 Mazda MX. (160 HP @ 6500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Chevrolet Equinox should accelerate faster than 2004 Mazda MX.
Both vehicles are front wheel drive (FWD). Which offers better traction when its slippery than 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 Chevrolet Equinox (285 Nm @ 3800 RPM) has 78 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Mazda MX. (207 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2009 Chevrolet Equinox will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Mazda MX.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Chevrolet Equinox | 2004 Mazda MX | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Mazda |
| Model | Equinox | MX |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2004 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3425 cc | 2261 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 185 HP | 160 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 6500 RPM |
| Torque | 285 Nm | 207 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3800 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 92 mm | 87.5 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 84 mm | 94 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.0:1 | 11.0:1 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Vehicle Length | 4800 mm | 4480 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1820 mm | 1750 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1710 mm | 1660 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2860 mm | 2760 mm |
