2009 Saab 03-Sep vs. 2013 Mazda CX-9
To start off, 2013 Mazda CX-9 is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2009 Saab 03-Sep. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2009 Saab 03-Sep would be higher. At 3,726 cc (6 cylinders), 2013 Mazda CX-9 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Saab 03-Sep (280 HP @ 5000 RPM) has 11 more horse power than 2013 Mazda CX-9. (269 HP @ 6250 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Saab 03-Sep should accelerate faster than 2013 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, 2013 Mazda CX-9 (366 Nm @ 4250 RPM) has 11 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Saab 03-Sep. (355 Nm @ 1900 RPM). This means 2013 Mazda CX-9 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Saab 03-Sep.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Saab 03-Sep | 2013 Mazda CX-9 | |
| Make | Saab | Mazda |
| Model | 03-Sep | CX-9 |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2013 |
| Body Type | Convertible | Crossover |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2792 cc | 3726 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 280 HP | 269 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5000 RPM | 6250 RPM |
| Torque | 355 Nm | 366 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 1900 RPM | 4250 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.5:1 | 10.3:1 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | 6-speed automatic |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 7 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4650 mm | 5108 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1770 mm | 1936 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1440 mm | 1728 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2680 mm | 2875 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 9.8 L/100km | 8.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 15.7 L/100km | 12.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 61 L | 76 L |
