408 GT vs CX9 2.5T GS (AWD) Comparison
Car Information
Engine / Motor
/
210 km/h
Dimensions
5
7 Seater
4687
5075 mm
1848
1969 mm
1486
1716 mm
2787
2930 mm
536
407 L
Fuel Economy
/
11.8 Km/L
/
74 L
/
11.8 Km/L
Comfort
✓
/
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
Interior
Front Row Seats
✓
Front Row Seats
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Safety
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
Infotainment
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Transmission
Automatic
/
Chassis & Steering
/
All Wheel Drive
Key Spec
1.5 L - 2.0 L
2.5 L - 3.7 L
143 BHP - 215
226 BHP - 273 BHP
Automatic
Automatic
Gasoline & Petrol
Gasoline & Petrol
TBD
TBD
5 - 5
7 Seater
Exterior
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
/
✓
/
✓
Engine
1.6
2.5 L
Gasoline
Gasoline
215
230 BHP
158
/
5500
/
300
420 Nm
2000
/
Technologies
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
/
✓
Comparison of configuration highlights
408 GT
- Power Tailgate
- 360 Degree Camera
- Parking sensor rear
- Parking sensor front
- Lane Following Assist
- Driving Recorder
- Security System
- Parking Sensors - Front and Rear
- ABS
- Lane Departure Warning
- Lane Keeping Assist
CX9 2.5T GS (AWD)
- Parking sensor rear
- Parking sensor front
- Rear Camera
- ABS
Review Comparison
Positive
- No data found
Negative
- No data found
Positive
- No data found
Negative
- No data found
Related comparisons
Editor's PickCX9 2.5T GS (AWD)
Expert / Editor Recommendation
Choose 408 GT if you care more about overall equipment; choose CX9 2.5T GS (AWD) if you care more about price.
Popular Car Comparisons
Q&A
- According to fuel consumption data, 408 GT has a fuel consumption of No data, while CX9 2.5T GS (AWD) has a fuel consumption of 8.47. Therefore, No data is more fuel-efficient.
- In terms of interior space, 408 GT has a wheelbase of 2787, while CX9 2.5T GS (AWD) has a wheelbase of 2930 mm. Generally, the model with the longer wheelbase, CX9 2.5T GS (AWD), offers more room.
- Check drive type, ground clearance and torque together. 408 GT uses No data, while CX9 2.5T GS (AWD) uses All Wheel Drive.