2009 Chevrolet Equinox vs. 2005 Mazda 6
To start off, 2009 Chevrolet Equinox is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Mazda 6. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Mazda 6 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 86 more horse power than 2005 Mazda 6. (99 HP @ 4000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Chevrolet Equinox should accelerate faster than 2005 Mazda 6. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Mazda 6 weights approximately 79 kg more than 2009 Chevrolet Equinox.
Because 2009 Chevrolet Equinox is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2005 Mazda 6. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Chevrolet Equinox 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, 2009 Chevrolet Equinox (285 Nm) has 41 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Mazda 6. (244 Nm). This means 2009 Chevrolet Equinox will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Mazda 6.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Chevrolet Equinox | 2005 Mazda 6 | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Mazda |
| Model | Equinox | 6 |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2005 |
| Body Type | SUV | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3425 cc | 1596 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 185 HP | 99 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Torque | 285 Nm | 244 Nm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline - Premium |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1266 kg | 1345 kg |
| Wheelbase Size | 2860 mm | 2680 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.8 L/100km | 7.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 61 L | 61 L |
