2009 Mazda CX-9 vs. 2012 Volvo S60
To start off, 2012 Volvo S60 is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2009 Mazda CX-9. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2009 Mazda CX-9 would be higher. At 3,726 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Mazda CX-9 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2012 Volvo S60 weights approximately 280 kg more than 2009 Mazda CX-9.
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, 2012 Volvo S60 (3,200 Nm) has 2834 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Mazda CX-9. (366 Nm). This means 2012 Volvo S60 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 | 2012 Volvo S60 | |
| Make | Mazda | Volvo |
| Model | CX-9 | S60 |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2012 |
| Body Type | SUV | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3726 cc | 2000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 5 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 273 HP | 0 HP |
| Torque | 366 Nm | 3200 Nm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | 6-speed shiftable automatic |
| Number of Seats | 7 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1329 kg | 1609 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5080 mm | 4628 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1940 mm | 1864 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1730 mm | 1483 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2880 mm | 2776 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 10.7 L/100km | 7.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 14.7 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 76 L | 67 L |
