Small SUV Comparison Review: Hyundai Venue, Suzuki Vitara & Mazda CX-3

We aimed to get these three models as close to one another on cost as we could – sadly, we couldn’t get the exact equivalent CX-3 to match the others on list price (it would be the Neo Sport, not the Maxx Sport), but here’s how they compare on price as tested.

The Hyundai Venue Active is the most affordable of this mix, priced at $23,490 plus on-road costs.

The Hyundai Venue Active is the most affordable of this mix, priced at $23,490 plus on-road costs with the automatic transmission as specified here. That’s really affordable, but indicative drive-away pricing is $27,240 in Sydney. Premium paint will add a bit to that price.

The Suzuki Vitara costs $24,490 plus on-road costs.

Next up the pricing tree is the Suzuki Vitara 2WD, which doesn’t have a variant name like the others here. It costs $24,490 plus on-road costs, though drive-away pricing is set at just $24,990 for this automatic version – yeah, that’s a bargain. Metallic paint is extra.

The Mazda CX-3 Maxx Sport has a list price of $26,650 plus on-road costs.

And most expensive, as mentioned, is the Mazda CX-3 Maxx Sport, which has a list price of $26,650 plus on-road costs for the petrol automatic 2WD model. Drive-away pricing is pegged at $28,540 for this spec, but only two of the colours cost extra. A Neo Sport would have been closer on list price ($24,710), but we think you might be able to find some wiggle room at the dealership on these suggested prices.

Now, let’s take a look at the standard equipment on offer in these three models.

Keep those prices and specs in mind, plus the media screens and connectivity on offer in each of these models… and then there’s the safety equipment fitted, which also factors into value for money. But this is pretty close between these three, especially if you keep drive-away prices in mind.

The Hyundai Venue deserves an award for practicality.

It manages to package so much space into such a small footprint – it’s almost Skoda-like in its efficiency. It’s the shortest of these three models, yet has the second-longest wheelbase, is the second widest, second tallest and has the second biggest boot. But the length is its biggest – or, smallest – attribute, because its nose-to-tail measurement means you’re going to be able to fit into a lot more of those tight parking spaces you might otherwise avoid attempting.

Here’s a look at the sizes of these three SUVs, and also the boot capacity figures for them.

It’s a very close competition between the Venue and Vitara, while the CX-3 is really poorly packaged in comparison. It’s the longest, narrowest, lowest and has the smallest boot of these three by a sizeable margin. As you can see, we struggled to fit the CarsGuide pram in the back. It did fit, but with minimal room for other items, while the other two had additional space available. It was the same story with the luggage – check out the gallery to see what we mean.

It is worth noting, however, that all three of these models have load floors that you can lower to increase the space available, and that’s because all three have space saver spare wheels rather than a full-size spare.

Now, you mightn’t plan to use the back seat of your car that much – we get it. Compact SUVs are often bought by singles, young couples, or older empty nesters, and the accommodation in the back seats often doesn’t factor into purchasing decisions for a lot of these customers. But what if you live an urban life and have youngsters? Kids, dogs, friends – the back seat is an important consideration for some buyers, so here’s how they stack up.

The CX-3 is the worst for back seat occupants. It was the least comfortable due to its cramped headroom, kneeroom and space across the cabin, plus its raked window-line means those prone to motion sickness might find it challenging. I can’t wait to see the space management advantages that the new Mazda CX-30 offers over the CX-3, because it promises a considerably more thoughtful cabin for those who need the space.

The Venue is second for back seat space. It offers exceptional headroom due to its boxy shape, and the width across the back row is pretty good, too, though the kneeroom could be better – it’s a little better than the CX-3, but it has hard seat backs (plastic covered to stop kids from damaging the fabric on the backs of the front seats) and if you’re tall, your knees may be wedged into that plastic. Also, there’s hard plastic on all the elbow rest points in the cabin of the Venue, which makes it feel a little cheap.

The best for back seat space is the Vitara, which offers excellent room for this size of car. There’s more than adequate head room, knee room (an extra 2-3cm with the seat set in the same position – my driver’s spot, and I’m 182cm tall) and nice width the cabin, too. The seat is a bit flat, but that helps it feel open, and the large windows in the back are great if you have kids who appreciate being able to see out.

As for other practicality elements, the Mazda has an advantage: it’s the only one of these three SUVs with a fold-down centre armrest and cup holders (the others miss out), and it has two map pockets (the others have one each).

Now, what about front seat accommodation?

The pick for our team was the Venue, which felt the most like you’d expect a small SUV to. It has practicality at its forefront, with a neat little storage shelf in front of the passenger, a tidy centre console with cup holders and loose item storage in front of the shifter, and the nicest looking media screen of this bunch.

The Mazda CX-3 looks premium, with a stylish design that is definitely more car-like than SUV-inspired. There are lots of curves and lines, and the dashtop media screen looks a little old (it misses out on smartphone mirroring, is laggy and slow to load, and took the longest to pair to a phone) but it’s the only one with a rotary dial controller (because the touchscreen becomes inactive at speed). Its storage is good, but the cup holders are a bit flimsy.

The Vitara’s cabin looks fine, but it’s nothing special. There are some nice materials used, and the touchscreen is bright and colourful, if a little cheap looking and fidgety (we had some issues with the Bluetooth connectivity in this car). The storage in here is good, with usable space between the front seats and a nice two-tier shelf in front of the shifter.

Now here’s a detailed rundown on the media systems in these cars.

Our judges all felt the Venue’s screen was the quickest and easiest to use. And if tech matters to you, that could be enough to push the Venue ahead here. But all told, it was the Vitara’s cabin space and flexibility that made it our pick in this section of the test.

Our aim was to replicate what an average owner might see when they’re driving their car over a seven-day week: urban driving, running around, and a couple of long stints of highway driving. The figures you see below reflect that.

If you spend a lot of time negotiating traffic and dealing with lower speed driving, you can expect to see higher fuel use than we did. Our test loop had a couple of lengthy highway stints – which might replicate your commute, or it might not.

The fact that there’s still less than a litre between these three is enough for us to call this part of the test a draw.

Whether you’re buying a small SUV as an urban family run-around, or maybe there’s just two of you, safety is still a vital consideration.

And there’s a gap in terms of what you get in each of these particular models. The Suzuki is scant on safety gear as a base model, but you get better tech in the higher grades – likewise, if you get the base CX-3 or Venue you miss out on a few items. We tried to line these cars up close on price, and also had to consider what was available to us.

At the time of testing, the Hyundai hasn’t been put through the ANCAP crash test procedure, while the Mazda scored the maximum five-star rating in 2015, which was the same year the Vitara scored five stars. The Mazda has seen a range-wide upgrade to its safety gear, while the Suzuki scores better tech in the top grades.

Here’s a breakdown of the safety equipment levels of these particular variants.

As you can see, this spec of Vitara is poorly equipped by modern standards, so it scores accordingly for this part of the test. The fact it’s a circa-$5000 jump to the next model means it’s hard for budget-conscious consumers to get a good deal on safety in the Vitara ecosphere.

The Venue is well equipped, though still missing a few goodies the older CX-3 gets. But it does get auto high-beams, which is neat.  

It’s the Mazda that wins this section. Easily.

If you’re wondering: “Where is the Mazda CX-3 built?”; “Where is the Suzuki Vitara built?”; or “Where is the Hyundai Venue built?”; the answers are Thailand (CX-3), Hungary (Vitara) and South Korea (Venue).

You will make your own decisions about what your needs and requirements are. You might just be sold on the appearance of one of these models, or you might be sold on the ownership promise, or the value, or the safety equipment.

it’s no surprise that the result of this test very, very close.

And it’s no surprise that the result of this test was very, very close.

It’s a lack of advanced safety gear that lets the Suzuki Vitara 2WD down in this test. If it had the same tech you get in the model above (or either of its rivals), it would have been our winner in this test. But we ruled it out based on its lax safety tech offering, so it comes third.

Second place goes to the Mazda CX-3, which offers exceptional safety gear for the money. But our testers found it was let down by its practicality first and foremost. That might matter to you, or not, but it remains a polished offering in the class.

Our winner in this test is the Hyundai Venue Active. It has attractive pricing and equipment levels, a decent level of safety equipment, a really well packaged and nicely presented interior, and yet it manages to fit all of that into a very compact footprint. If you want a city-friendly SUV, this is a very impressive option.