Ferrari 812 vs Mazda CX-30

What's the difference?

Clearly, this is not a car for everyone, and you’d have to question whether it’s a car for anyone, really, but people who like spending $610,000 on Ferraris, and waiting in a queue to do so, will be delighted, because it delivers the kind of exclusivity, and bragging rights, that you’d have to hope a car called Superfast would.

Personally, it’s a little too much, a little too over the top and definitely too mad, but if rockets are your thing, you won’t be disappointed.

About to enter its fifth year in market the Mazda CX-30 is holding up well and this GT SP FWD grade delivers solid value relative to its key competitors, of which there are many. It’s also space-efficient, practical and performs well with top-shelf safety, decent refinement and good dynamic ability.

Alternately, it’s crying out for a hybrid powertrain to improve fuel efficiency, the interior form and function is starting to date and while it meets the market the ownership promise could be sharper. But this little SUV is still worthy of a spot on your new-car short list.

It’s very… big, isn’t it? And it looks even bigger in the flesh with a bonnet you could use to put a roof over your tennis court. In all, the Superfast is 4.6m long, almost 2.0m wide and weighs 1.5 tonnes, so it certainly has presence.

Making something this big look good is a challenge even for those as talented as Ferrari’s design team, but they have nailed it. The front has what appears to be a mouth, poised to swallow lesser cars whole like some whale shark Terminator. 

The bonnet appears to be flaring its nostrils, and looks fabulous from the driver’s seat, and the swooping side and taut rear complete things nicely.

Personally, it still just looks too big to be a Ferrari, but then this is not a mid-engined super car, it’s a grand touring rocket ship, and the ultimate expression of unnecessary excess, and it pulls off that aura perfectly.

Mazda continues to follow a disciplined design path with everything from the MX-5 sports car to the BT-50 dual-cab ute sharing key attributes like the brand’s signature trapezoidal grille, simple flowing lines and sleek head- and tail-lights, all wrapped up with a subtle hint of chrome here and there.

Car-spotters with the GT SP on their checklist should look out for 18-inch black metallic rims as well as black exterior trim, including the mirror caps. 

Inside, the CX-30 maintains Mazda’s restrained approach with smooth surfaces integrated across the multi-layer dash and primo leather-trimmed seats.

That said, this car is starting to show its age with the multimedia screen plonked on the top of the dash (in typical Mazda fashion) and a largely conventional instrument cluster.

Yes, the main dial is configurable courtesy of a central 7.0-inch TFT screen, but next to more recent arrivals boasting sleek, often twinned, flat screen displays the CX-30 looks and feels out of touch. 

Functionally, there’s a sensible mix of digital controls and physical buttons (points for audio volume and ventilation dials!), but… the multimedia screen can only be accessed by a rotary controller in the centre console once the car is mobile (it works as a touchscreen when you’re stationary).

Some say touchscreens take your eyes off the road so the controller makes sense, but with a sequential app like Spotify it can take a lot of twirls to get to where you want to go, which upsets concentration and takes your eyes off the road, anyway. I’d prefer the relative ease of a quick press on a screen.

Aside from all that, the materials used are high quality with soft-touch surfaces across key contact points and hard plastics confined to high-wear areas. 

Practicality isn’t really your concern when you buy a two-seat mega car like this, so let’s just say it’s about as practical as you would expect it to be. Not very, then.

At just under 4.4m long, close to 1.8m wide and little over 1.5m tall (with a 2655mm wheelbase) the CX-30 is in the middle of the pack it competes with in terms of key dimensions.

And space up front is more than adequate, with an impressive feeling of roominess for a relatively small SUV.

For storage, there’s a large lidded box (which doubles as an armrest) between the front seats as well as a pair of cupholders in front of the gear-shifter with a bay for wireless device charging ahead of that.

The glove box is big, there are bins in the doors with room for decent size bottles and a drop-down tray for sunglasses sits overhead.

Move to the rear and the amount of space on offer is surprisingly generous. Sitting behind the driver’s seat, set for my 183cm position, I have plenty of head and legroom, although three full-size adults across the back seat will be an uncomfortable proposition for anything other than short trips. A trio of up to mid-teenage kids will be fine.

Adjustable air vents at the back of the front centre console are a welcome inclusion for back-seaters and storage runs to a map pocket (weirdly, on the back of the front seat only), a pair of cupholders in the fold-down centre armrest and bins in the doors with room for smaller bottles.

In-cabin power and connectivity includes two USB-C outlets and a 12-volt socket in the front centre storage box. No USBs specifically for those in the rear, which is a miss for road trips and no 12V in the boot which can be handy when camping or picnicking.  

Speaking of the boot, cargo volume with the rear seat upright is okay for the class at 317 litres, which expands to a healthy 1479L with the 60/40 split-folding backrest lowered. For comparison the Kia Seltos coughs up 433L with the rear seat upright.

The space is illuminated, there are tie-down anchors to help secure loose loads and there’s a space-saver spare sitting under the floor.

And if you’re keen on towing a tinnie or similar you’re good to go for a 1200kg braked trailer (600kg unbraked).

The Mazda CX-30 G25 GT SP FWD weighs in at $43,140, before on-road costs and our test example features the optional ‘Vision Pack’, the details of which we’ll get to shortly, raising the price $1300 to $44,440. 

Alternate options around that price point include the Hyundai Kona Premium N Line 2WD ($42,500), Kia Seltos GT-Line FWD ($41,850), Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross Exceed 2WD ($40,990), Honda HR-V e:HEV L 2WD ($42,900, drive-away), Nissan Qashqai ST-L FWD ($42,690), Peugeot 2008 GT FWD ($44,490), Renault Arkana Techno FWD ($41,000), Suzuki S-Cross Plus FWD ($41,490), Toyota C-HR 2WD GXL Hybrid ($42,990) and Volkswagen T-Roc Style FWD ($40,590).

That’s quite the automotive smorgasbord, the resulting price and specification cage fight meaning every included feature counts and the Mazda heads into battle with some significant weapons in hand.

Specifically, dual-zone climate control, a head-up display, a 10.25-inch ‘widescreen’ multimedia display, 7.0-inch driver’s multi-information display, 12-speaker Bose audio (with digital radio), wireless Android Auto and Apple CarPlay, ‘Burgundy’ leather seat trim, heated front seats, leather trim on the gearshift and heated steering wheel, wireless phone charging, power-adjustable driver’s seat (with memories), a glass power tilt and slide sunroof and a power tailgate.   

There’s also adaptive auto LED headlights, 18-inch black metallic alloy wheels, radar cruise control (with stop/go), a reversing camera, auto-fold (and tilt) heated exterior mirrors and keyless entry and start. 

It’s an impressive and competitive equipment list for a small SUV under $45K, even before we get to the performance and safety tech covered later in the review.

I did want to give the epic, enormous 6.5-litre naturally aspirated V12 engine a perfect 10 here, but when I paused to think about it I had to admit that it is, quite possibly, a little too powerful.

Yes, it is amazing to think Ferrari can build a car that has 588kW (800 horsepower - hence the 812 nomenclature; 800 horses and 12 cylinders) and doesn’t just dig itself a hole in the road as soon as you put your foot down.

And yes, it does provide the kind of performance that makes all other cars seems a bit piss poor and pathetic, even the really good ones. 

But honestly, who could ever use it all, or need it all? They might seem like irrelevant questions, I guess, because it’s all about conspicuous over-excess, a car like this, so really the question is, would anyone want to live with 588kW and 718Nm of torque, or is it just too scary in reality?

Well, a little bit, yes, but Ferrari’s engineers have been wise enough not to actually give you all of that power, all the time. Torque is limited in the first three gears, and maximum mental power is actually only available, in theory, at 8500rpm in seventh gear, at which point you’d be approaching its top speed of 340km/h.

The fact that you can rev an engine this big, and this lusciously loud, all the way to 8500rpm is, however, a joy that would never tire.

In more practical terms, you can run 0-100km/h in 2.9 seconds (although cheaper, less crazy cars can do that, too) or 200km/h in 7.9 (which is a tiny bit slower than the far lighter McLaren 720S).

What you can’t do, of course, is achieve any of those numbers on winter tyres, or roads with snow on them.

The CX-30 GT SP is powered by a 2.5-litre, naturally aspirated, four-cylinder petrol engine producing maximum power of 139kW at 6000rpm and peak torque of 252Nm at 4000rpm.

It’s a proven all-alloy unit featuring direct-injection as well as variable intake and exhaust valve timing with drive going to the front wheels via a six-speed auto transmission. 

The AWD version of the GT SP adds an electromagnetic multi-plate clutch pack (managed by a multitude of sensors) to selectively engage the rear wheels, as well. But its engine and transmission combination is identical to this FWD model’s.

Much as you can’t have a good volcano without some serious lava, you can’t have 800 horsepower without burning a lot of dead dinosaur goo. The Superfast has a claimed fuel-economy figure of 14.9L/100km, but on our drive the screen just said "Ha!" and we burned through a whole tank of fuel in less than 300km. 
Theoretical emissions are 340g/km of CO2.

The CX-30 GT SP FWD’s official fuel consumption figure on the combined (urban/extra-urban) cycle is 6.6L/100km, the 2.5-litre atmo four-cylinder engine emitting 154g/km of C02 in the process.

It features fuel-saving stop-start and cylinder deactivation functions as standard and over a combination of city, suburban and some freeway running we saw an average of 8.4L/100km, which is average for an SUV in this class. A comparable hybrid package would easily better this result.

Based on the car’s 51-litre fuel tank theoretical range between refills is 772km, which drops to just over 600km using our real-world test consumption number. But the good news is this CX-30 runs happily on cheaper 91 RON ‘standard’ fuel.

Insane. It’s a word that people often lift from their lexicon when describing a supercar experience, because clearly, as forms of transport, things like Ferraris and Lamborghinis are not sane options.

But the Superfast really deserves the word, because it feels not only the opposite of sane, but truly bonkers. As if someone built it for a dare, realised it was a bad and possibly dangerous idea, and then put it on sale anyway.

Picture some tiny-handed child with his greasy, post-cheeseburger fingers poised over a big red button on his desk that could wipe out humanity, and that’s basically the situation your right leg finds itself in when driving the Superfast.

There is so much power on tap here - even the limited amount of it that the engineers allow you to access in lower gears - that it truly seems possible you’ll have a Road Runner moment, and simply dig a hole in the ground, if you push the throttle too hard.

Yes, on the one hand, the noises this extreme V12 makes above 5000rpm are memorable and moving, like Satan himself singing Nessun Dorma in a shower of sparks. At one stage we found a long tunnel, perhaps the only dry road within 500km that day, and my colleague forgot all about his licence and let rip.

The numbers on my 'Passenger Screen' spun like poker-machine wheels, then turned red and then implausible. I was shoved back into my seat as if by Thor himself, and I squealed like a small pig, but my co-driver heard nothing over the Monaco tunnel during F1 sound.

Even on dry road, of course, the winter tyres we were forced (by law) to run in the foul snowy conditions could not maintain grip, and we constantly felt the rear skipping sideways. Fortunately we were in Italy, so people simply cheered us on.

The likelihood that you will lose traction in this car is so high that the boffins have included a special feature in its new 'Electronic Power Steering' system called 'Ferrari Power Oversteer'. When you inevitably start going sideways, the steering wheel will apply subtle torque to your hands, 'suggesting' the best way to get the car back in a straight line.

A proud engineer told me that this is basically like having a Ferrari test driver in the car with you, telling you what to do, and that they used their skills to calibrate the system. You can override it, of course, but it sounds scarily like an autonomous-driving precursor to me.

What’s disappointing about this car having EPS at all, rather than a traditional hydraulic system, is that it just doesn’t feel muscular enough for a hairy-handed monster of a car like this.

It is accurate and precise and pointy, of course, and makes driving the Superfast, even in stupidly slippery conditions, almost easy. Almost.

It’s actually surprising how hard you can push a car like this along a windy and wet mountain road without careering off into a muddy field.

More time, and more traction, would have been appreciated, but you can tell it’s the sort of car you’d grow into, and perhaps even feel in control of, after a decade or so together.

So it’s good, yes, and very fast, obviously, but I can’t get past the idea that it’s all a bit unnecessary, and that a 488 GTB is simply, in every single way, a better car.

But as a statement, or a collector’s item, the Ferrari 812 Superfast certainly is one for the history books.

It’s rare in 2024 to find a small SUV that doesn’t have at least one turbocharger attached to its engine, the CX-30’s 2.5-litre ‘atmo’ four being one of those increasingly scarce examples.

But Mazda’s been laser-focused on extracting maximum power and efficiency from its non-turbo petrol engines for yonks and this one stands up well.

It doesn’t have the low-down punch a turbo typically delivers but maximum pulling power arrives at a useable 4000rpm and it’s eager enough for easy city and suburban running as well as confident freeway cruising.

Although Mazda doesn’t quote an official number you can expect a sprint from 0-100km/h in around 8.5 seconds, which is quick for the class.

Worth noting engine noise and a raspy exhaust note make their presence felt under acceleration and the throttle isn’t as refined as it could be. Not a huge deal, but a slight jerkiness is evident on initial, especially moderate, acceleration.

The six-speed auto is smooth and fuss-free, the steering wheel paddle shifters on hand if you need to intervene and select a specific ratio. ‘Sport’ mode peps things up, causing the transmission to shift down earlier and up later. But it’s aggressive in that it often holds onto a gear for too long and you find yourself diving back to the default normal setting.

Tipping the scales at just under 1.5 tonnes, the CX-30 is underpinned by a MacPherson strut front, torsion beam rear suspension and ride comfort on typically pock-marked urban surfaces is average for the category. That is, a bit jittery over bumps and corrugations but there’s no bone-jarring going on here.

Steering feel and response is good and the grippy steering wheel helps with a connection to the front tyres. Speaking of which, the standard rubber is high-performance (215/55) Dunlop SP Sport Maxx 050 which is  grippy and commendably quiet. 

Push on into a corner and the CX-30 remains balanced and predictable with body roll well under control. Torque vectoring, by engine and physical braking, is also onboard to reel things in if you overstep the mark.

Braking is by discs all around, vented at the front and solid at the rear, and they wash off speed effectively with a satisfyingly progressive pedal action.

Vision is good, which combined with the CX-30’s compact dimensions and 10.6m turning circle, means parking is easy. Especially when you factor in the hi-res reversing camera and front and rear parking sensors. 

The CX-30 carries a maximum five-star ANCAP assessment from early 2020 when the car was introduced locally.

It scored a stunning 99 per cent in the adult occupant protection category and an impressive 88 per cent for child occupant protection.

Active (crash-avoidance) tech includes AEB (operating from 4.0-160km/h) as well as lane keep assist, lane departure warning, traffic sign recognition, intelligent speed assistance, blind-spot monitoring, front and rear parking sensors, rear cross-traffic alert, a reversing camera and tyre pressure monitoring.

Mazda’s ‘Vision Pack’ is also standard which includes a 360-degree camera view, ‘Cruising & Traffic Support’, driver fatigue monitoring and front cross-traffic alert.

The airbag count runs to seven - dual front and front side, full-length side curtains and driver’s knee.

There are three top tether points for child seats across the second row with ISOFIX anchors on the two outer positions.

Once you’ve paid the vast cost of entry, it’s nice to know you will get some stuff for free, like your first seven years of servicing, including all parts and labour, carried out by trained Ferrari technicians, who even dress like pit crew. It’s called 'Genuine Maintenance', and is genuinely Kia-challenging in its scope.

Mazda covers the CX-30 with a five-year/unlimited km warranty which is the norm in the mainstream market, and it’s worth noting a growing number of competitors are now at six, seven or even 10 years, although the latter are typically conditional on authorised dealer servicing. Roadside assistance is provided for the duration of the warranty.

Service is recommended every 12 months or 15,000km and Mazda’s ‘Service Select’ program sets maintenance pricing out to seven years, the lowest over that period being $352 and the highest $626, for an annual average of $459, which is reasonable but not exceptional for the category.

For comparison, a similarly specified Toyota C-HR averages $330 per workshop visit over the same period.