2020 Mazda CX-3 review & buyer's guide
The smallest Mazda SUV is in competition with the small car because bigger isn’t always better. It’s time to decide if you prefer practicality or poise…
The Mazda CX-3 is one of the smallest SUVs on the market. Warning: header image can be misleading…
Funny thing is, it looks bigger in the photos. The Hyundai Kona, new Venue and all-new Kia Seltos don’t quite suffer as badly from this warped perspective, possibly because they don’t have the bigger CX-5 sharing the family genes.
So you might get a shock the first time you see CX-3 in the flesh. It's tiny: in fact, it's built off the Mazda2 platform - not the Mazda 3 which numerically speaking seems like the most logical step. That’s what everyone else does.
What this means is you get a wheelbase that is only 2.57m long. That’s just 26cm longer than the 2.31m wheelbase in the seriously cramped MX-5 sports car. So you can understand my puzzled head-scratching at the reasoning behind Mazda’s decision to use the 2 as the CX-3’s backbone, not the Mazda3 which is a truly excellent small car and could easily make for a commodious small SUV with some raised suspension and matte black wheelarch cladding.
Mazda CX-3 uses the 2.0-litre engine from the Mazda3 and CX-5 for motivation, so despite the claustrophobia for six-footers-plus (quite common in this segment, to be fair) so yeah, it goes quite well. It has 320kg of less weight to haul than its bigger stablemates.
If you’re especially tall you’re shopping in the wrong aisle. A Hyundai Tuscon, Kia Sportage or Mitsubishi Outlander might be better sized for you - and especially if there’s a brood to accommodate.
SkyActiv-D for dead: Mazda says sales preferred petrol, but what’s not being said is why those sales preferred petrol and not diesel.
CX-3 is not going to do a particularly great job of moving a two or three-kid family around unless you’re particularly light packers. Having done the Club Breeder thing three times, I know you’re lying to yourself if you think packing light will mean you fit into a 264-litre boot cavity.
There was also a great 1.8-litre diesel with good fuel economy, 85kW @ 4,000rpm and 270Nm @ 1,600-2,600rpm, which has been killed off, sadly. I quite liked that engine.
So now it’s just the SkyActiv-G 2.0-litre petrol four-cylinder, in either manual or auto, and prices range from $24,000 for the accountant’s special Neo Sport in all it’s cheap glory, right up to $39,000 for the new Akari LE with all-wheel drive.
The LE stands for something to do with luxury and executive - my eyes glazed over at the marketing material. But basically you get Nappa leather, 18-inch bright alloy wheels (which I will admit, do look good), and unique interior styling just in case you happen to have slightly poorer friends with the regular Akari CX-3, whom you want to embarrass. I presume this is how the other half live.
CX-3 really does pull a short-barrelled .38 Smith & Wesson on the German thug competition in a dark wet alley, while wearing a Tom Ford suit. We’ll get to that.
Download the exclusive, 22-page 2019 Mazda CX-3 Australian press kit >>
Skip down to my 2016 launch review & video >> for a flashback to my younger days, back when dinosaurs ruled the Earth.
CX-3 plus two 'must-drive' direct competitors
See also:
My Subaru XV review >> Brilliantly equipped and practical. Ideal for rural buyers familiar with dirt roads, and soggy driveways. Subaru has a system called X-Mode - on all its SUVs - to extend the all-terrain envelope. It dulls down the throttle response at low speed to minimise the chance of you provoking traction-sapping wheelspin. Hardens up the limited-slip diff and also sharpens up brake response.
This is all for the slippery stuff, both uphill and downhill, under 40km/h. Under 20km/h it’s hill descent control allowing you to take your feet off the pedals and let the computer manage that, you just have to steer. It’s a real plus when traction is low - if you want to avoid becoming a toboggan - which, trust me, you do want to avoid.
Ground clearance for this kind of uncivil, reckless, non-bitumen driving is an impressive 220mm.
My Hyundai Kona review >> Exceptional performance from the turbo 1.6 petrol version. In my view the most dynamically responsive to drive with a kick-arse little 1.6 turbo with seven-speed dual-clutch transmission, that would/should embarrass plenty of bogans in their shitbox-heavy, thirsty V8s of old. Even the naturally aspirated 2.0-litre ain’t bad - it shits all over the Toyota C-HR anyway. Kona’s also really good value, especially mid-range Active or Elite (see Hyundai’s range comparison tool >>)
Looks are love or hate, but you can judge for yourself. You have eyes.
The CX-3 is a tiny SUV, but it's built really well. And it has a few quirks (such as no salient room for luggage if all the seats are in use). The CX-3 looks great but probably isn't as good value as a Mazda3, Subaru Impreza or Hyundai i30 in the context of overall practicality, for most buyers, dollar for dollar.
If you have your heart set on an SUV but you really don't want to - literally - step up into the larger SUV league then the Mazda CX-3 certainly is worth a look. Especially if you need a little more ground clearance than a car, or you've got a dodgy hip/knee/back, etc.
Check out the CX-3's bigger brother, the Mazda CX-5 >> Or if you’re shopping at the 99 Cents store these days, and you need the most budget-conscious options before you, try the Mitsubishi ASX >> It’s a sacrifice on all-out luxury and refinement in favour of the benchmark tech and safety you need/expect, at a better price point.
Back Lashes
CX-3: Not perfect with its fairly small 264 litre boot which won’t leave much room for people (or luggage) if you take up what space is set aside for either.
There’s a space-saver spare wheel across the whole range, and you can have all-wheel drive, but only the on-demand kind in the Mazda CX-3, Hyundai Kona and Kia Seltos. It’s a reactive system which waits for traction loss before engaging drive to the rear. Not ideal if you’re trying to go uphill, in which case you could look at the slightly heavier, slightly dearer - but much more capable - Subaru XV.
C-HR: Exceptionally average in so many ways. The 1.2-litre turbo petrol engine is underdone and demands 95 RON premium because, I suspect, Toyota never expected to sell enough to warranty tuning it to run on our cat’s piss 91 like every other competitor. It only offers 85kW @ 5600rpm and 185Nm @ 4000rpm with a kerb weight of 1440kg, meaning a 60.3 kW/t power-to-weight ratio. Hyundai Kona Go: 81.3 kW/t; CX-3 Neo Sport: 90.9 kW/t; Kia Seltos S: 81.2 kW/t; Subaru Impreza 2.0-i: 80.9 kW/t; Mitsubishi ASXES: 82.4 kW/t.
Hyundai Kona: Ground clearance is only 170mm against XV but 10mm higher than CX-3.
At its heaviest kerb weight, Highlander weighs 1414kg versus CX-3 Akari’s 1309kg. That’s because it’s so well-equipped, those features, incl tyre-pressure monitoring, head-up display, wireless phone charging, glass sunroof and cooled/ventilated seats adds weight. And cost.
Kona wheelbase is 2.6m, which is 30mm better than CX-3’s 2.57m. It offers wider tyres at 235/45 R18 versus CX-3’s 215/50 R18’s, therefore better handling and more grip. Front passenger also gets an electrically adjusted seat, unlike CX-3.
Top-spec Highlander is expensive: $45k with premium paint.
Mitsubishi ASX: No all-wheel drive - front-drive only, unless you go for the Eclipse Cross with Super-Select transmission which alloys you to run in a defacto 4-High quasi off-road mode on unsealed but well maintained roads, or even bitumen where the going might be slippery, icy or whatever. ASX is a great budget option, but doesn’t hold a candle to the premium feel in the Mazda; generally unrefined and a bit hollow.
I'll help you save thousands on a new Mazda CX-3
Just fill in this form. No more car dealership rip-offs. Greater transparency. Less stress.
LOVE
Great alternative to both a car and a big SUV, for anyone with a mobility issue who is sick of climbing up/down to access their current vehicle
CX-3 is a real point of difference from other, larger SUVs - and more polished than direct competitors
Both engines do a great job in this small package
1.8 diesel is amazingly efficient
Mazda's recent shift to 5yr/unlimited kilometre warranty puts them back in the game against competitors like Hyundai
Great packaging and ergonomics - except for luggage room (as there isn't any unless you fold the rear seats)
Excellent dynamics
CX-3 Akari packs a ton of standard equipment for about the same price as a Mazda3 SP25 Astina
August 2018 updates added some equipment and boosted interior refinement with things like electronic parking brake and redesigned console
HATE
Space saver spare tyre is unsuitable for long-distance Australian driving
CX-3's i-Stop system (automatic engine shutdown and re-start) detracts from overall refinement and saves bugger-all fuel
It's only 265mm shorter than a CX-5, and much less practical as an SUV
In the context of carrying four people and anything more than cut lunches all round, it's too small
Great styling, but hardly any luggage room with all seats occupied, and rear-seat vision for passengers is very limited
Lower spec 2WD models are merely pumped-up Mazda2s - and the Mazda2 is unbelievably better value provided you don't need the slightly greater elevation
2WD diesel isn't a happy combination - even though one is available. Too much low-rpm power overwhelms the front end too easily, and the wheels start to spin
Small SUV sales, 2019
MAZDA CX-3 SAFETY
Mazda CX-3 is very safe, even in 2020, despite having been crash tested and rated five years ago. ANCAP's tests awarded it five stars and a cracking good score of 36.44 out of a possible 37 (98.5%) when it was tested in 2015. All regions on the dummies were awarded 'good' or 'acceptable', and the whiplash rating was also 'good'.
Mazda CX-3 is not perfect, however: There are no chest-protecting side airbags for the second row (but there are head-protecting curtains). Nor are there knee-protecting airbags for the front occupants. There's no adaptive cruise control, and features like auto headlamps, auto-dipping high beam, daytime running lights and lane departure warning system are not available on the base model but are available higher up in the range.
See more on CX-3 safety testing >> by ANCAP or download the full ANCAP CX-3 crash test technical report >>
SPECIFICATIONS
2.0 PETROL
Power: 111 kW @ 6000 rpm
Torque 195 Nm @ 2800 rpm
Economy: 6.7 L/100km
Transmission: 6 sp auto
(or 6 sp manual on 2WD Neo Sport)
Manufactured: Japan
Length: 4275 mm
Width: 1765 mm
Height: 1550 mm
Ground clearance: 160mm
Kerb weight: 1193-1368 kg (model dependent)
Maximum tow capacity: 1200 kg
Seating Capacity: Five
Warranty: 5 years / unlimited kilometres
Service interval: 12 months or 10,000 km
(whichever comes first)
Roadside assist: N/A
Spare wheel: Space-saver
MISSING IN ACTION: Safety features like driver attention detection, lane departure warning and lane keeping assist, hill descent control, LED daytime running lights and tyre pressure monitoring are not available on the base model CX-3 Neo Sport, but are standard on Kona Go.
However, Kona got a slightly lower overall score. See Hyundai Kona’s 2017 ANCAP rating technical report >> for comparison.
Safety tech - Standard
“G-Vectoring”: controlling engine torque based on driver’s steering and accelerator inputs
Left-hand-side convex (wide angle) door mirror
Electric park brake with auto-hold
Hill launch assist
Auto emergency braking (“Smart City Brake Support”) up to 80km/h, forward & reverse
Rear parking sensors
Reverse camera
Airbags: front (driver & passenger); side (front); curtain (front & rear)
Powertrain spotting
Fortunately for the CX-3, you don’t have to work very hard to figure out how you want yours served. Mitsubishi could learn something here: less is more.
It’s now even simpler with the deletion of the 1.6-litre diesel. You get a 2.0-litre petrol four-cylinder naturally aspirated engine with either front-wheel drive or all-wheel drive.
Cylinder deactivation not available on CX-3, yet.
And there’s no tuning our computer trickery between the base model Neo Sport and the top-spec Akari. It’s the same performance across the board. Peak power is 110kW @ 6000rpm and 195Nm @ 2800rpm. CX-3 Neo Sport gets a 90.9 kW/t power-to-weight ratio, better than Hyundai Kona 81.3 kW/t, Kia Seltos S 81.2 kW/t; Subaru Impreza 2.0-i 80.9 kW/t and Mitsubishi Outlander ES: 82.4 kW/t.
The output is particularly good because of Mazda’s quite high compression ratio of 13.0:1. Hyundai kona gets close with 12.5:1, but it does offer a full-size spare and is a touch heavier, hence the better power-to-weight. But if you want the best handler with the most poke, the CX-3 has the South Korean licked.
The high compression ratio means dealing with knocking - the premature combustion of the air-fuel mixture caused by high compression and temperature - which is more likely to occur at “top dead centre” of the combustion chamber the higher the compression ratio. They’ve made the delivery of fuel even more efficient than before, so it explodes in the cylinder more evenly and with less unburnt fuel or soot.
Mazda’s SkyActiv engines, particularly in second-generation SkyActiv-G form (because names are very important to carmakers), are pretty good. They’ve got plenty of years under the belt now with very few problems overall. Very reliable, refined, punchy. I’m pretty confident they’ve got the R&D right, unlike, say, Ford or Volkswagen.
Unfortunately, you don’t get the cylinder deactivation feature of CX-5 on the CX-3 yet, but I wouldn’t worry too much about that. Expect it perhaps later in 2020 or early next year when they try to update CX-3 with something fresh. I think as a menial fuel-saving measure cylinder shutdown beats the shit out of stop-start systems - which I hate - for refinement and saving premature wear on ignition batteries. Unfortunately Mazda’s i-Stop stop/start ‘feature’ is standard on CX-3, even on the pov-pack Neo Sport manual for heaven’s sake. You’ll never notice the difference at the pump or on your bank balance.
Lab-tested fuel economy is claimed at about 6.7L per 100km on a combined cycle (urban, suburban and freeways), but this doesn’t really mean much in the real world. It’s going to be similar to all the others in the class. How you drive will be a much bigger factor for fuel economy than the engine itself.
The fuel tank is 48 litres in the base model Neo Sport but loses four litres in all-wheel drive variants.
But seriously, stop thinking about fuel economy and just enjoy driving the damn thing. If you wanna save fuel, don’t drive so hard - brake sooner, lift off the accelerator earlier, take off gently from the lights and keep your tyres correctly inflated. Job done.
Mazda also says CX-3 has had the suspension and steering tweaked. The alleged upgrades to the petrol engine are minimal - peak power is up from 110kW to 111kW at the same revs, while peak torque is up from 192Nm to 195Nm - again at the same revs. This is not the kind of thing you'll ever feel...
Note these comments about the 2019 model range re-jig if you proceed down the page to my review based on the launch of the CX-3 in March 2015. This is essentially still the same vehicle, but the modifications to the range noted above have been applied. They also changed 'Neo' to 'Neo Sport'.
2020 MODEL GRADES
Neo Sport
16-inch steel wheels with 215/60 tyres
Halogen headlamps
Power wing mirrors
7-inch infotainment screen (MZD connect - meaning no Apple CarPlay or Android Auto)
6-speaker audio
Bluetooth
Electric park brake
Multi-function 'Commander Control' dial
Push-button engine start
Reversing camera
Automatic emergency braking
Maxx Sport
16-inch alloy wheels
Auto on/off for headlamps
Rain sensing wipers
Rear seat centre armrest
Leather trim steering wheel and shifter
Climate air conditioning
GPS sat-nav
Blind spot monitoring and rear cross-traffic alert
sTouring
18-inch alloy wheels with 215/50 tyres
Auto fold power mirrors (body colour)
LED daytime running lamps
LED headlamps and tail lamps
Head-up display
Auto dimming rear-vision mirror
Proximity key
Driver attention alert
Front parking sensors
Traffic sign recognition
Akari
Power sunroof
Heated front seats with two memory positions (driver) and 10-way power adjustment (driver)
Leather trim (either black or white)
Adaptive cruise control
360-degree view monitor
Adaptive headlamps (turn with the steering wheel)
Lane departure warning
Driveaway pricing guide (may vary per state)
Front drive (2WD) petrol models:
Neo Sport: $23,990 (man.) or $25,990 (auto)
Maxx Sport: $26,490 (man.) or $27,490 (auto)
sTouring: $34,500 (man.) or $30,740 (auto)
Akari: $35,500 (man.) or $35,990 (auto)
Akari LE $37,990 (auto only)
All-wheel drive (AWD) petrol models:
Neo Sport: Not available
Maxx Sport: $30,490 (auto only)
sTouring: $32,740 (auto only)
Akari: $38,985 (auto only)
Akari LE $38,990 (auto only)
Akari LE
Nappa Leather Seats
18-Inch Bright Alloy Wheels
Unique interior design
If you’re looking at the higher end of the CX-3, it doesn’t make sense why you wouldn’t just get the Akari LE at essentially the same price as the non-LE. Why wouldn’t you want nicer leather?
.
MAZDA CX-3 2015 LAUNCH OVERVIEW VIDEO
The Mazda CX-3 was a thermobaric bomb in 2015 - in so far as its competitors in the SUV segment were concerned. Suzuki, Holden, Subaru and Nissan must have been so thrilled to see such a strong new entrant enter the market. With the CX-3, Mazda is hoping to seduce 12,000 buyers every year away from the the S-Cross, the Trax, the XV and the Qashqai.
In fact, sales were a runaway success. (This report might also help if you are in the market for a late-model used CX-3.)
MAZDA SKYACTIV TECH
The Mazda CX-3 CX-3 features all the SKYACTIV fuel-saving stuff from Mazda2, Mazda3, Mazda6 and Mazda CX-5. Mazda has done an outstanding job on technology and fuel efficiency since the Global Financial Crisis, and they’ve done it while many other leading carmakers have been asleep at the wheel.
Fuel economy of the Mazda CX-3 is excellent - officially rated at 6.1-6.7 litres/100km for the petrol and 4.8-5.1 litres/100km for the 1.5 diesel. But this obsession with fuel-saving is not all good news. See my comments on i-Stop, below.
More on the official fuel numbers - and why cars don't generally manage to deliver them in this report on official fuel consumption figures >>
Design
CX-3 features Mazda's so-called KODO ‘soul of motion’ design. Mazda says KODO promotes “a sense of oneness between the car and driver”. Like most forms of corporate masturbation, this something best left in the boardroom. Doing it in public, expecting outsiders to understand, is undignified. 'Soul of Motion', 'Sense of oneness', it's just a car. Quite a nice looking one, as it happens. But still: just a car.
The Mazda CX-3 is what happens when you put the Mazda CX-5 in a tumble drier without reading the instructions. Or else it’s a kind of automotive attempt at fois gras, from force-feeding a Mazda2. The Mazda CX-3 is only slightly taller and longer than Mazda2. So it’s a tiny SUV.
Predictably, the Mazda CX-3 is shorter and lower than a Mazda CX-5 - but this really is splitting hairs. The dimensional differences are not that great. The biggest difference between the Mazda2, Mazda CX-3 and Mazda CX-5 is the filthy lucre you’ll need to acquire one.
If you can squeeze into a Mazda CX-3 instead of a Mazda CX-5 you’ll save between $7000 and $13,000. If you step up from a Mazda2, that will cost you between $5000 and $16,000 more. The Mazda CX-3 is pretty much line-ball on pricing against Mazda3, even though it’s actually the Mazda CX-5 that shares more common ground mechanically with the Mazda3.
Model range
Mazda has a pretty straightforward desktop app to build and price your CX-3 >>
Car companies make model ranges notoriously complex, so let’s crack the kooky code of what you can and can’t have in your new Mazda CX-3. There are four model grades. From poverty to opulence: Mazda CX-3 Neo Sport, Mazda CX-3 Maxx, Mazda CX-3 sTouring and Mazda CX-3 Akari. (Akari means ‘light’ or ‘glimmer’ in Japanese.)
There are front-wheel drive and all-wheel drive Mazda CX-3s. The fine print in the Mazda CX-3 KODO ‘Soul of Motion’ spirit of oneness corporate wanking pre-nup agreement says: No all-wheel drive in the entry-level Mazda CX-3 Neo, and no diesel in the Mazda CX-3 Neo.
You can have front drive across the whole range in petrol. All-wheel drive petrol is on offer in Mazda CX-3 Maxx, Mazda CX-3 sTouring and Mazda CX-3 Akari, but all-wheel drive diesel is in Mazda CX-3 sTouring and Mazda CX-3 Akari only.
The Mazda CX-3 petrol comes with either a six-speed manual or six-speed auto, but the Mazda CX-3 manual is front-drive only. The Mazda CX-3 auto costs $2000. Mazda CX-3 diesels are all automatic. And the Mazda CX-3 auto is a conventional planetary gearbox - not a CVT or the even more hateful and potentially problematic dual-clutch transmission.
Conclusion
The Mazda CX-3 is not perfect, and while it's my job to jab its flaws mercilessly with a pointy stick (and also having a bit of fun with the ludicrous marketing concepts getting awfully lost in translation) you should be aware that this is a very impressive compact SUV. Whatever other vehicles you might be considering purchasing, make sure you test drive the Mazda CX-3. And make sure you’re okay with a space-saver spare wheel before pulling out the plastic.
Mazda is way ahead of most competing brands, and if I were you, I would be looking very hard at the all-wheel-drive, petrol Mazda CX-3 Maxx or sTouring if you desperately need the awesome LED headlights (maybe because you live in regional Australia). The Maxx however, is just sensational value, for under $30,000 - and it has proper, intuitively understood instruments, the MZD Connect seven-inch screen, satnav, blind-spot monitoring and rear cross-traffic alert, and cloth seats you can live with.
CX-3 really is a nice car to drive. Genuinely. The engine is a belter and is a real step forward for mass market internal combustion technology which normal people can ascertain. And the on-demand AWD will get you out of most questionable driving situations you’re likely to encounter in the real world.
It’s not the most practical among its competitors, but if you can make-do with the space available (and who doesn’t just chuck half their stuff in the backseat anyway?), you won’t go home disappointed.
More reports
The anatomy of the most common off-road disaster. Do not let this happen to you. The road to 4X4 hell: so often paved with good intentions. What could possibly go wrong?