2009 Dodge Charger vs. 2007 Mazda CX-9
To start off, 2009 Dodge Charger is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2007 Mazda CX-9. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2007 Mazda CX-9 would be higher. At 3,518 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Dodge Charger is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2007 Mazda CX-9 (263 HP @ 6250 RPM) has 13 more horse power than 2009 Dodge Charger. (250 HP @ 6400 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2007 Mazda CX-9 should accelerate faster than 2009 Dodge Charger.
Because 2009 Dodge Charger 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 Dodge Charger. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2007 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, both vehicles can yield 339 Nm of torque. So under normal driving conditions, the ability to climb up hills and pull heavy equipment should be relatively similar for both vehicles.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Dodge Charger | 2007 Mazda CX-9 | |
| Make | Dodge | Mazda |
| Model | Charger | CX-9 |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2007 |
| Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3518 cc | 3496 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 250 HP | 263 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6400 RPM | 6250 RPM |
| Torque | 339 Nm | 339 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3800 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 | 5090 mm | 5080 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1900 mm | 1940 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1480 mm | 1740 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3050 mm | 2880 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 9.4 L/100km | 9.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.8 L/100km | 13.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.8 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 68 L | 76 L |
