2009 Mazda CX-9 vs. 2013 BMW 3 Series
To start off, 2013 BMW 3 Series is newer by 4 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 3,727 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Mazda CX-9 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Mazda CX-9 (268 HP @ 6250 RPM) has 30 more horse power than 2013 BMW 3 Series. (238 HP @ 5800 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Mazda CX-9 should accelerate faster than 2013 BMW 3 Series.
Because 2013 BMW 3 Series is all wheel drive (AWD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2009 Mazda CX-9. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2013 BMW 3 Series 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, 2013 BMW 3 Series (407 Nm @ 5000 RPM) has 138 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Mazda CX-9. (269 Nm @ 4250 RPM). This means 2013 BMW 3 Series 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 | 2013 BMW 3 Series | |
Make | Mazda | BMW |
Model | CX-9 | 3 Series |
Year Released | 2009 | 2013 |
Body Type | SUV | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3727 cc | 2979 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 268 HP | 238 HP |
Engine RPM | 6250 RPM | 5800 RPM |
Torque | 269 Nm | 407 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4250 RPM | 5000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | AWD |
Transmission Type | Automatic | 8-speed automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4600 mm | 4636 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1940 mm | 2031 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1730 mm | 1434 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2340 mm | 2810 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 10.7 L/100km | 6.3 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 14.7 L/100km | 9.6 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 76 L | 60 L |