Model Year | 2015 | 2013 | |
Model | Mazda CX-5 | Mitsubishi Outlander | |
Engine | 2.5L I4 DOHC-4v 137 kW@5700 251 Nm@3250 |
3.0L V6 OHC-4v 172 kW@6250 291 Nm@3750 |
|
Transmission | 6-speed shiftable automatic | 6-speed shiftable automatic | |
Drivetrain | AWD | AWD | |
Body | 4dr SUV | 4dr SUV | |
Difference | |||
Wheelbase | 2,700 mm | 2,670 mm | 0 mm |
Length | 4,539 mm | 4,641 mm | 0 mm |
Width | 1,839 mm | 1,801 mm | 0 mm |
Height | 1,669 mm | 1,679 mm | 0 mm |
Curb Weight | 1,602 kg | 1,745 kg | 0 kg |
Fuel Capacity | 56 L | 63 L | -7 L |
Headroom, Row 1 | 1,019 mm | 1,024 mm | 0 mm |
Shoulder Room, Row 1 | 1,461 mm | 1,433 mm | 0 mm |
Hip Room, Row 1 | 1,402 mm | 1,326 mm | 0 mm |
Legroom, Row 1 | 1,041 mm | 1,057 mm | 0 mm |
Headroom, Row 2 | 991 mm | 973 mm | 18 mm |
Shoulder Room, Row 2 | 1,410 mm | 1,425 mm | 0 mm |
Hip Room, Row 2 | 1,364 mm | 1,318 mm | 0 mm |
Legroom, Row 2 | 998 mm | 935 mm | 63 mm |
Headroom, Row 3 | 0 mm | 899 mm | -899 mm |
Shoulder Room, Row 3 | 0 mm | 1,265 mm | -1 mm |
Hip Room, Row 3 | 0 mm | 993 mm | -993 mm |
Legroom, Row 3 | 0 mm | 704 mm | -704 mm |
Total Legroom | 2,040 mm (over 2 rows) | 2,695 mm (over 3 rows) | 0 mm |
Cargo Volume, Minimum | 966 L | 422 L | 544 L |
Cargo Volume, Behind R2 | 34.1 | 1,025 L | 33.1 |
Cargo Volume, Maximum | 1,835 L | 2,056 L | -1 L |
2015 Mazda CX-5 Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Comment | |
There's no clear winner in rear seat room and comfort, either. The Mazda's rear seat is mounted a little lower than the Toyota's, and when sitting in it my knees are considerably closer (if still not close) to the front seat backs. Also, the Toyota's rear seat reclines, while the Mazda's does not. Neither car has air vents in the rear passenger compartment, but the RAV4 has a large vent high on the instrument panel apparently intended to push cool air into the rear seat via the ceiling. To counter these RAV4 advantages, the CX-5 offers about five inches more rear hip room. So three passengers will fit more comfortably. see full Mazda CX-5 review |
2015 Mazda CX-5 Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2015 | 4dr SUV 184-horsepower 2.5L I4 6-speed shiftable automatic AWD |
Soon after I bought the Mazda, I did an 8 hour trip in it. I found the seat comfort to be most satisfactory. I had no trouble finding a comfortable driving position using the power seat, and, the lumbar support. see full Mazda CX-5 review |
2015 Mazda CX-5 Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2014 | 4dr SUV 184-horsepower 2.5L I4 6-speed shiftable automatic FWD |
While recently shopping for a new car for the first time in over 10 years, I found that driver's seats are now made with high sides. For me, a 5'1" female driver, this makes it a bit awkward getting in and out. Combined with the higher ground clearance of a compact SUV, it's not the ideal setup. The Mazda CX-5 is not as bad as others, but it's still an issue. see full Mazda CX-5 review |
2013 Mitsubishi Outlander Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Comment | |
There's a reason three-row crossovers tend to be much larger than this pair. The third-row seat in the Kia Sorento doesn't provide enough headroom for the average adult male. Both comfort and knee room are also in short supply. You might think that a seat couldn't get any tighter than the Sorento's third row. But, based on the official specs, the Outlander has nearly four inches less combined legroom--a huge difference. Even children won't fit in the Mitsubishi's third row unless you slide the second row forward much of the way. The 2014's third row seat is at least a conventional seat. Last year it was little more than a sling. In either vehicle the second row split bench is roomy and comfortable, with enough height off the floor to provide adults with good thigh support. But the rear passengers in the Outlander don't get air vents. Those in the Kia do. see full Mitsubishi Outlander review |
None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2013 Mitsubishi Outlander.