Mazda CX-5 2.2 SKYACTIV-D 150HP automatic vs Citroen C-Crosser 2.2 HDI 160HP manual 4x4

Mazda CX-5 2.2 SKYACTIV-D 150HP automatic

Source: All Rights Released into the public domain

14 reasons for

Mazda CX-5, model available from 2011.
It has 2.2 SKYACTIV-D 150HP ic diesel engine produced from 2012.
Drive has automatic, 6 speed gearbox.

10 reasons for

Citroen C-Crosser, model available from 2007 to 2012.
It has 2.2 HDI 160HP diesel engine produced from 2007 to 2012.
Drive 4x4 has manual, 6 speed gearbox.

Citroen C-Crosser 2.2 HDI 160HP manual 4x4

14 reasons for Mazda CX-5 2.2 SKYACTIV-D 150KM automat in comparison to Citroen C-Crosser 2.2 HDI 160HP manual 4x4

Reasons for

Average consumption

5.1 > 7.3 l
The fuel economy is distinctly to Mazda CX-5's advantage. This car consumes 2.2 l less fuel in the mixed cycle when compared with the Citroen C-Crosser. Note that average fuel consumption in the mixed cycle for the small off-road 4x4 segment, in which the Mazda CX-5 is classified, equals to 7.5 l while the Mazda needs by 32 percent less amount of fuel than the average.

Urban consumption

6 > 9.7 l
The fuel economy (urban) is considerably to the Mazda CX-5 2.2 SKYACTIV-D 150HP automatic's advantage. This car uses 3.7 l less oil in city traffic in comparison to the Citroen C-Crosser 2.2 HDI 160HP manual 4x4. Better fuel econumy means less fuel cost passed on you.

Maximal torque RPM

1,805 > 2,005 revolutions/minute
The rotational speed where the maximum torque is reached tells us how fast an engine achieves its best output with increase in rmp. The lower rmp or the wider range at which the torque is the highest, the more the engine is flexible and the kick of acceleration is felt faster.

Extra-urban consumption

4.7 > 6.1 l


1,843 > 1,806 mm
The width of the car influences directly on passanger's inner room as well as stability of driving. The Mazda is 2 % wider in comparison to the Citroen. It is clearly perceptible by those sitting in front, who have more room for their elbows.


2,700 > 2,676 mm
The Mazda CX-5 has 24 millimeters longer wheelbase than Citroen C-Crosser 2.2 HDI 160HP manual 4x4. Therefore the Mazda is more safe and has a better stability. Besides, longer wheelbase affects convenient and more comfortable riding.

Ground clearance

209 > 173 mm
Ground clearance means the gap between the vehicle body and the ground. From these two cars, it is the Mazda CX-5 2.2 SKYACTIV-D 150HP automatic that has 21 % higher ground clearance in relation to the Citroen C-Crosser 2.2 HDI 160HP manual 4x4. This is why the Mazda CX-5 will deal better in difficult terrain and high curbs in the city. However, the higher ground clearance means a higher center of gravity, which can negatively affect the handling of the Mazda CX-5.

Engine capacity

2,191 > 2,180 cc
The Mazda has 1 percent bigger engine capacity in comparison to the Citroen C-Crosser. For the reason that the difference is little, the Mazda CX-5 2.2 SKYACTIV-D 150HP automatic should accelerate slightly dynamically, if other paramerters are equal.

Rear track

1,590 > 1,537 mm

Model release date

2011 > 2007
The difference in release date between compared cars is only 4 years, however, new technologies for automotive industry are appearing at a fast pace what may cause that the Mazda CX-5 may feature more advanced technologieswhich in a consequence may deliver you more joy of having it.


automatic > manual
For those who opt for more functional use of a car and don’t want complications resulting from the stick shift we recommend vehicles with automatic gearbox. For those who have a flair for sport driving a stick shift might be better because it gives a control of rmp range in which a shift take place.

Front track

1,582 > 1,540 mm

Front overhang

950 > 969 mm

Rear overhang

907 > 1,008 mm


10 reasons for Citroen C-Crosser 2.2 HDI 160KM manual 4x4 in comparison to Mazda CX-5 2.2 SKYACTIV-D 150HP automatic

Reasons for

Maximal power

160 > 150 hp
The horsepower of the Citroen C-Crosser 2.2 HDI 160HP manual 4x4 is 7 percent bigger in comparison to the Mazda CX-5. Because the difference is not big it should not affect the car performance largely.

Maximal torque

380 > 379 Nm
The Citroen has 1 Nm more torque when compared to the Mazda CX-5. Even though the vast majority of drivers do not take into account the maximum torque when buying a automobile, it reflects the best how fast a vehicle is speeding up. In this case the difference is insensible so the difference will not be much noticeable.

Acceleration 0-100 km/h

9.9 > 10 s
The Citroen C-Crosser accelerates from 0 to 100 Km/h in 9.9 s, which is 0.1 s less than the Mazda CX-5. But the difference is not as much significant to be taken into consideration when buying a vehicle.

Top speed

200 > 198 km/h
The top velocity possible to be reached by the ​​Citroen C-Crosser 2.2 HDI 160HP manual 4x4 is greater in comparison to this of the Mazda CX-5 by 1, which allows the Citroen C-Crosser to overcome quicker large distance of highway. The difference at the level of 2 kilometers/hour is small and will not be a very noticable in everyday driving.

Maximum load capacity

660 > 495 kg


4,646 > 4,537 mm
The Citroen C-Crosser is 109 mm longer in comparison to the Mazda CX-5. The length of the car is important when it comes to travelling comfort and room in the trunk. The Citroen C-Crosser probably will be offering to it's passangers more space for legs. Aditionally the Citroen C-Crosser will be better driven ,however, the Mazda CX-5 will be a little easier to park due to shorter length .


1,713 > 1,668 mm
The higher a car is, the better is the comfort of getting in to it and greater capacity of carrying big amount of thinks to it. The difference of 3 percent in favor of the Citroen is small and does not matter much.

Maximal power RPM

4,000 > 4,500 revolutions/minute


2,412 > 2,050 kg

Curb weight

1,745 > 1,555 kg

Cars specifications

Mazda CX-5 2.2 SKYACTIV-D 150HP automatic Citroen C-Crosser 2.2 HDI 160HP manual 4x4
    Gross trailer weight 2,003 kg -
    Price range popular popular
    Model release date 2011 2007
    Facelifting no no
    Class compact SUV compact SUV
By using this site, you agree to the storage and use of cookie files. OK