2009 Land Rover LR2 vs. 2008 Mazda CX-9
To start off, 2009 Land Rover LR2 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 (270 HP @ 6250 RPM) has 43 more horse power than 2009 Land Rover LR2. (227 HP @ 6300 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2008 Mazda CX-9 should accelerate faster than 2009 Land Rover LR2.
Both vehicles are four wheel drive (4WD) - it offers better handling, traction, and control in all driving conditions compared with front wheel drive or 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, 2008 Mazda CX-9 (370 Nm @ 4500 RPM) has 136 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Land Rover LR2. (234 Nm @ 3200 RPM). This means 2008 Mazda CX-9 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Land Rover LR2.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Land Rover LR2 | 2008 Mazda CX-9 | |
| Make | Land Rover | Mazda |
| Model | LR2 | CX-9 |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2008 |
| Body Type | SUV | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3192 cc | 3726 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 227 HP | 270 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6300 RPM | 6250 RPM |
| Torque | 234 Nm | 370 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3200 RPM | 4500 RPM |
| Drive Type | 4WD | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 7 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Width | 1910 mm | 1940 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 10.4 L/100km | 11.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 14.9 L/100km | 15.7 L/100km |
