Mazda CX-5 KE vs Mitsubishi Outlander GF: specs side by side
Quick comparison from catalog data - no editorial review of this pair yet.
Mazda · 2012–2017
CX-5 KE
- Power
- 121 kW165 PS
- 0–100 km/h
- 9.2 s
- Top speed
- 200 km/h
- Kerb mass
- 1,390 kg
Mitsubishi · 2012–2021
Outlander GF
- Power
- 110 kW150 PS
- 0–100 km/h
- -
- Top speed
- -
- Kerb mass
- 1,495 kg
Version spec sheet All generations
Photo: Dinkun Chen / Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 4.0At a glance
Who suits what, worked out from the catalog figures of the versions above.
Categories won: CX-5 KE 2 Outlander GF 2
- Family Outlander GF Boot: 591 l vs 503 l
- City CX-5 KE Length: 4,555 mm vs 4,655 mm
- Performance CX-5 KE Power per tonne: 87 kW/t vs 74 kW/t
- Off-road Outlander GF Drive and body: Four-wheel drive (4×4) · SUV vs Front-wheel drive · SUV
In plain words
Mazda CX-5 KE has more power: 121 kW (165 PS) against 110 kW (150 PS) for Mitsubishi Outlander GF. Mitsubishi Outlander GF is 100 mm longer than Mazda CX-5 KE (4,655 mm vs 4,555 mm). Mazda CX-5 KE is lighter by 105 kg (1,390 kg vs 1,495 kg). Mitsubishi Outlander GF has the bigger boot: 591 l against 503 l. On the catalog figures, the Mitsubishi Outlander GF is the pick for family and off-road; the Mazda CX-5 KE is the pick for city and performance. Our catalog has no 0–100 km/h for the Mitsubishi Outlander GF yet, so some checks above leave it out.
Race Stats side by side
Each figure is a 0–100 score from the catalog numbers, the same as on the 1CARS Race cards. PI is the overall performance index (100–999) and its class D–S.
| Stat | CX-5 KE | Outlander GF |
|---|---|---|
| PI | C · 484 | C · 493 |
| Power | 46 | 40 |
| Grip | 34 | 49 |
| Handling | 56 | 53 |
| Top speed | 38 | 35 |
| Launch | 36 | 42 |
Grip and handling are estimates from drive type, weight, height and body (hover a figure to see where it comes from). 1CARS Race
Who wins a race?
Quarter-mile (402 m) drag from a standing start, dry road, no reaction time - the 1CARS Race physics on the catalog figures of these versions.
- 1 Outlander GF2.2 DI-D diesel · 110 kW (150 PS) 15.82 sat 135 km/h
- 2 CX-5 KE2.0 Skyactiv-G · petrol · 121 kW (165 PS) 16.67 sat 133 km/h · +0.85 s
Size and weight
Side view to scale, all cars from the front bumper.
| CX-5 KE | Outlander GF | |
|---|---|---|
| Length | 4,555 mm179.3 in † | 4,655 mm183.3 in +100 mm +3.9 in +2.2% |
| Width | 1,840 mm72.4 in † | 1,800 mm70.9 in −40 mm −1.6 in −2.2% |
| Height | 1,670 mm65.7 in † | 1,680 mm66.1 in +10 mm +0.4 in +0.6% |
| Wheelbase | 2,700 mm106.3 in † | 2,670 mm105.1 in −30 mm −1.2 in −1.1% |
| Kerb weight | 1,390 kg3,064 lb | 1,495 kg3,296 lb +105 kg +231 lb +7.6% |
| Boot | 503 l17.8 cu ft | 591 l20.9 cu ft +88 l +3.1 cu ft +17.5% |
| Fits a standard garage? | Yes | Yes |
Difference vs CX-5 KE (±). Garage check: a standard single garage takes a car up to about 5.0 m (16 ft 5 in) long and 1.9 m (6 ft 3 in) wide (width as listed in the catalog; some makers include the mirrors). Leave about 0.6 m (2 ft) to open the doors. † from another version of this generation.
Full specifications
| Mazda CX-5 KE | Mitsubishi Outlander GF | |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Version | 2.0 Skyactiv-G · petrol · 121 kW (165 PS) | 2.2 DI-D diesel · 110 kW (150 PS) |
| Production years | 2012–2017 | 2012–2021 |
| Body | SUV | SUV |
| Class | SUV / crossover | SUV / crossover |
| Country | Japan | Japan |
| Performance | ||
| Power Why it matters: More power means stronger acceleration and easier overtaking, especially with a full load. | 121 kW (165 PS) 162 hp Better | 110 kW (150 PS) 148 hp |
| Power, all versions | 110–141 kW (150–192 PS) 148–189 hp | 110–165 kW (150–224 PS) 148–221 hp |
| Torque Why it matters: Torque is the pulling force you feel when accelerating from low revs, towing or climbing hills. | 210 Nm 155 lb-ft | 380 Nm 280 lb-ft Better |
| 0–100 km/h Why it matters: A shorter 0–100 km/h time means quicker getaways and safer merging onto fast roads. | 9.2 s | No data |
| Top speed Why it matters: Top speed hints at how relaxed the car is at motorway speeds, even if you never reach it. | 200 km/h 124 mph | No data |
| Power per tonne | 87 kW/t 106 hp/ton calculated Better | 74 kW/t 90 hp/ton calculated |
| Engine and transmission | ||
| Fuel | Petrol | Diesel |
| Engine | 1,998 cc · 4 cyl 2.0 l | 2,268 cc 2.3 l |
| Gearbox | No data | 6-speed automatic |
| Drive | Front-wheel drive | Four-wheel drive (4×4) |
| Dimensions and weight | ||
| Length | 4,555 mm 179.3 in † | 4,655 mm 183.3 in |
| Width | 1,840 mm 72.4 in † | 1,800 mm 70.9 in |
| Height | 1,670 mm 65.7 in † | 1,680 mm 66.1 in |
| Wheelbase | 2,700 mm 106.3 in † | 2,670 mm 105.1 in |
| Kerb weight Why it matters: A lighter car is usually more agile and uses less energy. | 1,390 kg 3,064 lb Better | 1,495 kg 3,296 lb |
| Boot Why it matters: A bigger boot fits more luggage, shopping or a pram. | 503 l 17.8 cu ft | 591 l 20.9 cu ft Better |
| Fuel tank Why it matters: A larger tank means more distance between fuel stops. | 56 l 14.8 gal US | No data |
| Economy and running costs | ||
| Fuel consumption Why it matters: Lower consumption cuts running costs and CO₂ emissions on every trip. | 6.0 l/100 km 39.2 mpg US | No data |
| CO₂ | 139 g/km | No data |
| Fuel cost per year | €1,580/year estimated | No data |
| Range on a full tank | 933 km 580 mi estimated | No data |
| Safety | ||
| Euro NCAP | ★★★★★ (2012) | ★★★★★ (2012) |
These cars do not differ in the data we have.
Equal rows hidden (4): Body, Class, Country, Euro NCAP.
Better marks the stronger figure - only for measurable specs (power, torque, 0–100 km/h, consumption, boot, weight).
Estimated at 15,000 km a year with fuel at €1.75/l petrol. † from another version of this generation.