2009 Mazda CX-9 vs. 2005 Ford Explorer
To start off, 2009 Mazda CX-9 is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Ford Explorer. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Ford Explorer would be higher. At 4,016 cc (6 cylinders), 2005 Ford Explorer is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Mazda CX-9 (268 HP @ 6250 RPM) has 58 more horse power than 2005 Ford Explorer. (210 HP @ 5250 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Mazda CX-9 should accelerate faster than 2005 Ford Explorer.
Because 2005 Ford Explorer is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2009 Mazda CX-9. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2005 Ford Explorer 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, 2005 Ford Explorer (321 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 52 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Mazda CX-9. (269 Nm @ 4250 RPM). This means 2005 Ford Explorer will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Mazda CX-9.
Compare all specifications:
2009 Mazda CX-9 | 2005 Ford Explorer | |
Make | Mazda | Ford |
Model | CX-9 | Explorer |
Year Released | 2009 | 2005 |
Body Type | SUV | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3727 cc | 4016 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 268 HP | 210 HP |
Engine RPM | 6250 RPM | 5250 RPM |
Torque | 269 Nm | 321 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4250 RPM | 3000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | 4WD |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4600 mm | 5240 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1940 mm | 1830 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1730 mm | 1790 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2340 mm | 3030 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 10.7 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 14.7 L/100km | 15.7 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 76 L | 85 L |