What's the difference?
We live in a strange time, where cars are going the way of the dinosaur and SUVs will take their place as the primary offerings of the worlds oldest and biggest car companies.
Look at Ford, the brand that literally wrote the book on automotive mass-production will soon no longer sell cars in its home market of America (apart from the Mustang, of course…) There’s a story your grandpa won’t believe.
It makes SUVs, especially small ones like the EcoSport all the more important. Customers who once would have considered the Fiesta small hatch (on which the EcoSport is based) would now rather hop into one of these. At least, that’s what the data says.
So, is the EcoSport a worthy successor to the hatchback mantle? Is it even economical or sporty? And what happened to the spare wheel on the rear door? Read on to find out.
Mazda has updated one of its most popular, but rather old models.
Yes, the Mazda CX-3 is still around after more than a decade since its reveal, and it remains almost at the tippy-top of Mazda’s local sales charts.
With the brand having shifted 8221 CX-3s in the first half of 2025, it seems the light updates and modest price rise haven’t scared away any potential customers.
We’ve grabbed a CX-3 Evolve, the second-up of four available variants, to see if the popular light SUV still stacks up, or if you’re better off taking your money elsewhere.
So, should you buy a base-model Ford EcoSport Ambiente?
For the money it’s a great little daily commuter with an odd mix of dated trim and a great multimedia, but it’s definitely worth making room in your budget to investigate the Trend or Titanium grades.
Plus, it’s worth keeping in mind that many competitors now offer more comprehensive safety or more powerful drivetrains for not much more money.
‘You get what you pay for’ comes to mind with the CX-3, which is interesting given it’s neither the newest nor most feature-packed SUV in its class.
The ageing light SUV does however offer one of the best-put-together experiences in a car of this size and its engine is powerful for the class. Build quality feels well above par and there aren’t any annoying inclusions that are becoming more common in new cars.
There aren’t many downsides unless you were hoping for a big screen and the ability to play around with software functions, but at this end of the new car spectrum, a car that drives this well and remains stylish a decade on should be applauded.
Put aside its relative (but forgivable) lack of efficiency and somewhat smaller boot than rivals, and the CX-3 nails everything it needs to.
The EcoSport has had a second refresh this year, simply removing the spare wheel from the back. According to Ford, this was due to consumers not liking the extra 12kg it added to the rear hatch. Fair enough.
Personally though, I think it detracts from the EcoSport’s look, the rear spare was a cheeky stab at small soft-roaders of the ‘90s.
The lack of a spare also makes the side-swinging door a bit pointless now (it also swings the wrong way, toward the kerb instead of away from it, due to its European design origins) and just gives the rear three-quarter another anonymous SUV look.
Aside from that the EcoSport has come a long way styling-wise.
It has ditched the weird hatchback grille it used to have, instead employing a tough-looking single plastic grille insert, bringing it stylistically in line with larger Ford SUVs like the Everest and Escape. Plus, the plastic guards on the underside give it a fun off-roader look.
Importantly, it strays far enough from its Fiesta underpinnings to look like something new entirely, unlike the Holden Trax, which simply looks like a Holden Cruze on stilts…
Inside, it maintains a little too much of that last-generation Fiesta look. The dash juts too far into the cabin, feeling as though it reduces space, and there is an abundance of terrible plastics and hardly aesthetic textures across the entire cockpit.
The seat trim is some el-cheapo nylon material, but at least it will be easy to clean.
A saving grace is the slick-looking multimedia interface, but it looks so much newer than its surroundings its obvious Ford has simply tacked this on as part of a facelift. Thankfully, unlike some other current Fords, the volume, fan-speed and temperature controls are all dials instead of buttons.
The touchscreen itself, as with most new Ford products, is a pleasure to use and not difficult to navigate. The Apple CarPlay connectivity didn’t throw me any lag or problems.
In terms of interior trim, the Honda HR-V is still the target to beat in this segment, but the EcoSport shapes up pretty well compared to the Trax and ASX with their tiny media screens and equally average interior materials.
For one, there’s the way it looks inside and out.
The Mazda CX-3 hasn’t remained the most popular car in its segment on price, so the fact its styling continues to age gracefully in the design-focused light SUV segment (aimed at young or first-new car buyers) must have something to do with it.
While it’s been lightly updated a couple of times since 2014, the CX-3 is still in its first generation and has stood the test of time.
Looking like a jacked-up Mazda2, the CX-3 brings some traditional aesthetic to a category peppered with more divisive and daring (but admittedly admirable) designs like the Hyundai Venue, Suzuki Ignis (RIP) or the cute but prohibitively expensive Jeep Avenger.
Some elements of the CX-3, like the chrome trim around the grille or the black plastic cladding along the bottom of the body and around the wheel arches, seemed in the past like they had the potential to age poorly, but Mazda’s design language has only slowly changed since 2015, and the CX-3 still looks at-home in the brand’s line-up.
It’s not the most adventurous - even inside its layout is quite basic - but it does give off a premium vibe and the fact it plays things a little bit safe means the CX-3’s broad appeal is undeniable.
Despite being based on a car as compact as the Fiesta (complete with aforementioned dash design that feels like it detracts from space), the EcoSport has a good amount of head and legroom in both seating rows.
In terms of storage, there’s a little trench under the air conditioning controls, two decently-sized cupholders in the centre console and what has to be one of the smallest storage boxes I’ve ever used under the armrest.
Rear passengers get… um… not much. There are no storage areas in the doors, no drop-down centre armrest and no air vents in the back of the centre console. They do get two ISOFIX points on the outer seats, though. At least in terms of dimensions, space is decent back there.
The EcoSport’s boot is large. As Ford provides measurements in SAE rather than VDA, it’s hard to compare number for number, but the boot is deep and tall with the seats up, and with them down there’s a nifty variable boot floor so you can level it out or take advantage of the extra depth.
CarsGuide colleague Matt Campbell points out in his latest range review, that one of the EcoSport's main selling points in other markets is that it can fit a whole washing machine in the boot.
The HR-V still aces this segment in terms of flexibility, but the EcoSport possesses one of the most useful boots in its class.
Oh, and the missing full-size spare wheel on the back? That's now gone entirely, replaced with an inflation kit under the boot floor. Don't blame Ford, blame the consumers.
The Mazda CX-3 isn’t the most spacious light SUV on the inside, but from either of the front seats it’s clear a lot of thought has gone into the best way to make the cabin work.
For example, precious space hasn’t been wasted by two dedicated cupholders, instead there’s a cupholder in the central storage compartment that’s relatively easy to reach into.
Like its design and some of its features, the CX-3’s layout can’t hide its age - there are still big physical controls for the climate settings, the speedometer is a physical dial and the gear selector is a very traditional style.
Mazda’s soon-to-be-gone media control wheel persists in the CX-3, which is by no means a bad thing. It falls nicely to hand, as with many of the controls in the CX-3. Its seating position isn’t too high and the positions you’re able to get the seat and steering wheel into should accommodate most humans.
Behind the front seats it’s a little more spartan. Space is at a premium, with my 178cm frame fitting in the back seat just enough that I had a fair bit of headroom, but my knees were able to brush the seat in front, set to my own driving position.
There are no ports for charging or vents in the second row, but the fold-down armrest has a clever fold-away cupholder. The window shoulder is a little high for young kids to properly see out, but there’s enough light that it doesn’t feel cramped.
The boot is similarly diminutive, a 264-litre space becoming 1174L with the second row folded down. Compare it with the Hyundai Venue and its 355-litre boot, or the Toyota Yaris Cross and its 390 litres, and the CX-3’s simple, well-constructed interior starts to lose points.
We’ll start with one of the most appealing points of the EcoSport, and that’s price. Our Ambiente is the base-model and comes in at a total of $22,790 before on-roads.
That’s cheap. Especially when lined up against competitors, like the base automatic Holden Trax LS ($26,490), the automatic Mitsubishi ASX ES ($25,490), and the Honda HR-V VTi ($24,990).
It comes closest to the base-model Suzuki Vitara RT-S, which can be had in automatic form from $23,990.
Obviously cheapest doesn’t always mean best, and you’ll notice right off the bat items like the dorky 16-inch steel wheels with plastic hubcaps, cheap black plastic finishes on the door handles and wing-mirrors and bargain halogen headlamp fittings.
Better features for the price are the wing-mirror mounted indicators, new 6.5-inch multimedia touchscreen with DAB+, two USB ports, Apple CarPlay and Android Auto as well as a very welcome reversing camera and rear parking sensors.
Frustratingly, auto headlights are missing… a let down in any 2019 car.
The new touchscreen with Ford’s 'Sync 3' software is the most important value add for the base EcoSport, It’s way better than similar offerings in more expensive base-model competitors, although, unlike the Suzuki Vitara, does not offer sat-nav at this price.
One thing I’m not entirely sure of is why you wouldn’t simply stretch the extra $1700 to upgrade the EcoSport to the mid-spec Trend grade, as it scores a better turbocharged engine, alloy wheels, bigger 8.0-inch multimedia screen with sat-nav, ditches the dorky black plastic finish and adds a leather-trimmed steering wheel. Worth the money for sure.
Upon updating the Mazda CX-3, the Evolve variant is now a $32,100 ask before on-road costs, which is $900 more than before. It’s a little step up from the $30,370 entry price of the Pure, but falls well short of the top-spec Akari’s $38,890 sticker price.
The CX-3 range now comes with updated autonomous emergency braking and adaptive cruise control, with the Evolve specifically scoring new fog lights and keyless entry.
The Evolve also comes with black machined 18-inch alloy wheels, synthetic leather interior trim and front parking sensors.
This is all on top of the CX-3’s standard kit which includes a leather-wrapped gear shift knob, handbrake handle and steering wheel, keyless start, an 8.0-inch multimedia display, wireless Apple CarPlay and wired Android Auto plus LED headlights, daytime running lights and tail-lights.
For its segment, the CX-3 isn’t cheap. The Evolve grade is more expensive than pretty much the entire line-ups of rivals like the Kia Stonic or Hyundai Venue, and its price somewhat lines up with the newer, hybrid-powered Toyota Yaris Cross.
But there’s more to the CX-3 than just a list of features.
The EcoSport Ambiente is the only EcoSport in the range powered by a 1.5-litre non-turbo three-cylinder engine.
The Trend and Titanium levels get a more advanced 1.0-litre three-cylinder turbo engine bearing Ford’s 'EcoBoost' branding.
On paper the 1.5-litre in our car is underpowered. It produces just 90kW/150Nm, comparing poorly to four-cylinder competitors like the Holden Trax with its 1.4-litre turbo (103kW/200Nm), the Mitsubishi ASX with its 2.0-litre non-turbo (110kW/197Nm) and Honda HR-V with its 1.8-litre non-turbo (105kW/172Nm).
In practice though, it’s not too bad. Quite a bit of the available torque arrives early, letting the EcoSport zip around city surroundings with ease. It’s only really out on open roads where you’ll feel the power fade away at higher revs.
All EcoSports have a six-speed torque converter automatic transmission and are front-wheel drive only in Australia.
The Mazda CX-3 is still powered by a 2.0-litre, naturally aspirated, four-cylinder petrol engine, as has been the case for years. Its outputs remain at 110kW/195Nm.
It drives the front wheels only, via a six-speed automatic transmission.
The bad news for the 1.5-litre three-cylinder is clearly in this department.
Ford claims a not-great combined figure of 6.9L/100km, and after my mixed drive (freeways on the weekend, traffic during the week) I managed to add another 2.1 litres to that total, bringing my final number to 9.0L/100km.
An average score, considering you can extract better fuel figures from much bigger and more engaging engines. For comparison, I recently scored 8.0L/100km in the 1.4-litre four-cylinder turbo Suzuki Vitara.
All EcoSports have a 52-litre fuel tank, and happily drink base-grade 91 RON petrol.
Mazda claims the CX-3 sips 6.3 litres of fuel per 100km, minimum 91 RON petrol, though on test the small SUV returned an 8.1L/100km figure under a mix of urban, highway and some dynamic driving.
With its 48-litre fuel tank, that means you’re realistically likely to get about 550km to a tank, though theoretically given Mazda’s efficiency claim a 760km trip on a single tank would be possible - if you could recreate the test lab conditions.
The EcoSport is a great city companion. With long suspension travel that’s comfortable and compliant, neglected infrastructure didn’t bother the ride much at all, and it was surprisingly quiet during our week.
Prodding the accelerator too far will only lead to disappointment, the engine starts to make a bit more noise, but doesn’t propel the car with an equal amount of gusto. It’s hardly the most entertaining car to drive, even in the small SUV segment.
The steering is great, if a little light and the transmission makes itself largely unknown. Ford’s choice to stick with a torque converter rather than a CVT has probably saved this little engine from being a major let down.
All those features combine with a high seating position and great visibility for a little SUV that’s simply easy to pilot in urban surroundings.
More can be had from competitors like the HR-V with its excellent ride, and the Suzuki Vitara with its fun-packed engine, but Ford has nailed the experience for daily commuters.
The light SUV category is an interesting one, as it feels somewhat like a gateway to bigger SUVs for those who get a taste of the higher seating position. But in city and urban areas, a light SUV should be as much car as someone needs - unless they have two kids or a bunch of equipment to get around with.
This comes down to the fact cars like the CX-3 are more efficient and easier to manoeuvre than their larger counterparts. And as light SUVs go, the CX-3 feels solid, confidence inspiring and more capable when outside its inner-city comfort zone.
Its naturally aspirated engine is big for the class. Even if it doesn’t feel the punchiest off the line it offers plenty of flexibility at higher speeds and makes overtaking on the highway feel less daunting than it would otherwise be in a car this small.
Its steering is light, which is an advantage in everyday driving, but has enough feedback that more dynamic driving is still engaging. It’s not sportscar-sharp, but you wouldn’t want it to be.
While its age would suggest the CX-3 should feel unrefined compared to newer small cars and light SUVs because of what lies underneath, Mazda’s work on the little SUV over the years has resulted in a car that feels mature and capable.
The suspension isn’t perfect, but it manages low-to medium speeds elegantly and does a decent job of maintaining stability at high speeds. It feels better than you’d expect from a car this size on the highway.
The 1294kg kerb weight and small-enough 18-inch wheels mean there’s not too much weight to manage, and there’s enough cushion in the tyres that harsh bumps don’t come crashing into the cabin.
While the CX-3 feels refined for its class, don’t expect a dead-quiet ride, as some road and wind noise make their way in above 80km/h. Then there’s the fact its engine and transmission will sometimes need to get a bit raucous when accelerating quickly. Aside from this, the CX-3 around town and in suburban areas feels nice and calm.
The EcoSport carries a maximum five-star ANCAP safety rating as of December 2017, although it has not been rated to the more stringent standards introduced in 2018 that place a higher importance on autonomous systems.
No EcoSport grade has auto emergency braking (AEB), Lane Keep Assist (LKAS) or active cruise, but Blind Spot Monitoring (BSM) does become available on the top Titanium grade.
It’s a letdown given most competitors are now at least offering low-speed AEB.
Our understanding is that Ford doesn’t even plan to add those more recent active safety features to the EcoSport for the foreseeable future, unlike the Suzuki Vitara which is set to get features like AEB soon.
The Ambiente still has seven airbags, the standard suite of stability systems and hill decent control, as well as the aforementioned reversing camera and rear parking sensors.
The Mazda CX-3 is technically unrated by ANCAP, though only because its original maximum five-star rating expired after seven years. While this means it easily passes many of ANCAP’s main criteria for safety (and strict Australian Design Rules - ADRs - to be able to be sold here), the CX-3 is missing some recent, more complex safety features.
Not everything is standard across the line-up, either. The Evolve misses out on adaptive headlights, a surround-view parking camera and traffic sign recognition. The base Pure variant also misses out on a front parking sensor.
Fortunately, there are plenty of other key features like seven airbags, dual-front and front-side plus curtain airbags spanning the sides. The CX-3 also has ABS and emergency braking with forward pedestrian detection and rear cross-traffic alert.
There’s lane departure warning, forward obstruction warning, blind-spot monitoring and a driver attention alert for those times you might miss something or - hopefully not often - are distracted.
All these systems are programmed well to minimise interference while driving, making the CX-3 refreshingly trusting of the driver to actually do the job of driving.
Just like Mazda, Honda and Holden, Ford has updated its warranty recently to five-years/unlimited km coverage. Kia doesn’t operate in the small SUV segment (unless you count the quirky Soul) so five years is the bar to beat.
The 1.5-litre non-turbo three-cylinder engine option was not available in Ford’s service calculator tool at the time of writing but expect it to cost between $230-270 per regular service, jumping to somewhere just under $500 every four years (assuming it keeps a similar pricing structure to the previous engine options).
Ford offers a free loan car while your car is down for servicing, which needs to happen once a year or every 15,000km.
Mazda offers a five-year, unlimited kilometre warranty, which is behind the curve for a mainstream brand these days. Rival brands like Kia and Hyundai offer seven years, for example, with some offering up to 10.
Servicing is undertaken every 12 months or 15,000km, whichever comes first, with servicing costing between $353 and $633 per visit. Total cost over the first seven years currently sits at $3233, averaging $462 a service, which is pricey considering the relatively simple mechanicals under the CX-3.
Mazda says there are more than 150 certified service dealerships across the country, with a tool to find the most convenient one for you. Given the CX-3’s advanced age, chances are there won’t be too many mechanical issues that haven’t been worked out in the last decade.