Mazda CX-5 2.0 SKYACTIV-G 160HP manual 4x4 vs Ford Ecosport II 1.0 Ecoboost 125HP manual

Mazda CX-5 2.0 SKYACTIV-G 160HP manual 4x4

Source: wikipedia.org All Rights Released into the public domain

8 reasons for

Mazda CX-5, model available from 2011.
It has 2.0 SKYACTIV-G 160HP petrol engine produced from 2011.
Drive 4x4 has manual, 6 speed gearbox.

6 reasons for

Ford Ecosport II, model available from 2013.
It has 1.0 Ecoboost 125HP petrol engine produced from 2013.
Drive on the front axle has manual, 5 speed gearbox.

Ford Ecosport II 1.0 Ecoboost 125HP manual
Mazda

8 reasons for Mazda CX-5 2.0 SKYACTIV-G 160KM manual 4x4 in comparison to Ford Ecosport II 1.0 Ecoboost 125HP manual

Reasons for
135

Maximal power

160 > 125 hp
The Mazda CX-5 has by 28 percent more horsepower than Ford. The Mazda CX-5 2.0 SKYACTIV-G 160HP manual 4x4 will be distinctly better accelerate owing to grater amout of horses under its hoot. Also leaving behind other vehicles while driving should be much more easier for a car equipped with stronger motor.
50

Acceleration 0-100 km/h

10.5 > 12.7 s
A small difference in the amount of 17 % indicates that the Ford Ecosport II is the worst car of these two compared. In the „mini 4x4 segment, being represented by the Ford, the medium acceleration is 10.9 s and is by 1.8 s higher than this of Ford vehicle.
33

Top speed

197 > 180 km/h
The top speed possible to be reached by the Mazda is greater in comparison to this of the Ford Ecosport II which allows to drive the same distance on the highway faster. The difference at the level of 9 % is not big and is not realy noticable in everyday driving.
15

Wheelbase

2,700 > 2,521 mm
The wheelbase of a car means the distance between its front and rear wheels. The wheelbase significantly affects the driving because of better vehicle's weight distribution. Mazda CX-5 has 7 % longer wheelbase distance when compared to Ford Ecosport II. Wheelbase dimensions are crucial to the balance and steering. Thus, the mass of Mazda should be better distributed and driving should be easier and safer.
14

Cylinders

4 > 3
10

Number of gears

6 > 5 gears
The Mazda has only one additional speed in relation to the Ford. Sometimes the extra gear is used as an overdrive thanks to which the previous speeds can be narrower in order to give increased acceleration in the lower speeds. One more gear as well have an effect on decreasing fuel consumption and CO2 output.
8

Engine capacity

1,998 > 1,000 cc
The engine size of the Mazda CX-5 is by 100 % larger when compared to the Ford Ecosport II. As a result the Ford Ecosport II 1.0 Ecoboost 125HP manual will consume less fuel, however, the engine of the Mazda CX-5 2.0 SKYACTIV-G 160HP manual 4x4 will be of better performance, running more smoothly and less prone to breaking down.
6

Length

4,537 > 4,244 mm
The Mazda CX-5 is 293 millimeters longer than the Ford Ecosport II 1.0 Ecoboost 125HP manual. Long vehicles are more spacious and usually provide more storage space. While the Mazda occurs to be better pick for families or those who appreciate comfortable rides, the Ford Ecosport II may be more appropriate to the young because it will not make problems with parking and will be easier for turning in narrow streets.

Ford

6 reasons for Ford Ecosport II 1.0 Ecoboost 125KM manual in comparison to Mazda CX-5 2.0 SKYACTIV-G 160HP manual 4x4

Reasons for
112

Average consumption

5.3 > 6.4 l
The Ford Ecosport II burns up 1.1 l less in the mixed cycle in relation to the Mazda CX-5. The difference in the amount of 17 percent is not realy noticeable. However within some time it would allow you to make a considerable reduction of costs.
56

Urban consumption

6.8 > 7.9 l
The Ford Ecosport II consumes 1.1 l fewer petrol running around the town compared to the Mazda CX-5. The Ford, which comes from small off-road 4x4 class, consumes 2.8 l fewer gasoline. It is also worth to know that average fuel consumption in the urban for the mini 4x4 class equals to 9.6 l, whereas the Ford Ecosport II uses by 29 % less amount of fuel than the average.
24

Extra-urban consumption

4.7 > 5.8 l
22

Width

2,057 > 1,843 mm
Distance between two sides of a vehicle affects the amount of space for passengers as well as stability while driving. The width of the Ford is larger only by 214 millimeters in comparison to the Mazda and is not really important. The medium for the „small off-road 4x4” segment equals to around 1,797 millimeters and is by 260 millimeters smaller than the same attribute of the Ford.
1

Model release date

2013 > 2011
The difference in date of commencement of production between these two vehicles is only 2 years, however, new technologies for automotive industry are appearing at a staggering pace what may cause that the Ford Ecosport II 1.0 Ecoboost 125HP manual may feature more advanced solutions thanks to which everyday usage of it may be more comfortable.
1

Height

1,696 > 1,668 mm
If you are a tall man or you carry in the trunk thinks of large size, the Ford, which is by 2 percent higher than the Mazda CX-5 2.0 SKYACTIV-G 160HP manual 4x4, is better pick for you. However, compared vehicles do not differ much it the aspect of its height and it should not be much observable.

Cars specifications

Mazda CX-5 2.0 SKYACTIV-G 160HP manual 4x4 Ford Ecosport II 1.0 Ecoboost 125HP manual
    Gross trailer weight 1,803 kg -
    Price range popular popular
    Model release date 2011 2013
    Facelifting no no
    Class compact SUV compact SUV
By using this site, you agree to the storage and use of cookie files. OK