Ford Escape vs Mazda 3

What's the difference?

The Ford Escape PHEV is a good option for a customer who knows they’ll live within the parameters set by the car. That’s the case with any plug-in hybrid, really, so in that regard, this new model is hardly a standout.

And it isn’t particularly outstanding in any other way either. I personally would have appreciated it if Ford had decided to add the plug-in powertrain to the Vignale flagship model instead - that model is more about luxury than sportiness, and would better fit the character of this powertrain in my opinion.

It’s a decent addition to the brand’s SUV range, and a welcome one to the segment, though it won’t be on its own for long.

Given how effortlessly it traverses the mainstream and premium small car classes, the Mazda 3 might be the best value small car on the planet.

With racy styling, sports car handling, classy interior presentation and impressive, intelligent efficiency, there’s plenty to sink your teeth into here.

Poor rear vision, a dark back-seat area and smallish boot aside, it doesn’t have any glaring faults.

In a world overrun with SUVs, props to Mazda for evolving the small car so brilliantly to mask a half-decade of existence. Continuous improvements have made the 2024 G25 Evolve SP Vision an essential small car shortlist proposition, regardless of price.

I haven’t really warmed to the “I wish I was a hatchback” styling of the Escape, which has a softer-edged look to it than most of its rivals. I mean, compared to a Hyundai Tucson or Toyota RAV4, the Escape looks like a blob.

That mightn’t be an issue for you, and it’s hardly a reason not to buy the car, but I was also a bit disappointed that there’s no real specific highlights to make you realise you’re buying the PHEV model, which - at $15,000 more than the equivalent petrol version - should have something to differentiate it other than the addition of a small badge and the additional filler cap on the front quarter panel for the plug.

Even a different set of wheels would have sufficed. Alas, it’s an identical looking Escape to the petrol. That means the ST-Line trimmings, such as black highlights on the grille and bumper, side skirts, a rear spoiler, and those 18-inch wheels and lowered sports suspension.

The interior, as mentioned in the pricing section, does have a few changes over the petrol version, but they’re hardly game-changing additions.

How is it that the current Mazda 3 is already five years old? This hatchback is still stunning, the sort of car you look back at when walking away.

The shape is sleek and almost coupe-like, with a shark-like nose, cab-backward-style long bonnet, upswept shoulder line and a fastback silhouette.

More importantly, it’s the way the light dances across the sculptured sides that draw the eyes in. Bereft of clutter, it makes you wish all mainstream manufacturers had the courage to be so daring.

We’ve said it before – the 'BP'-generation Mazda 3 (Axela in Japan) is the brand’s boldest C-segment hatch since the 1993 'BA' 323 (Astina/Lantis/323F).

But there’s a price to pay for such timeless beauty…

The Ford Escape looks like it has all the bits to make a midsize SUV buyer happy. And while a fair few of the boxes are ticked, there are some elements that could be better. 

The big party trick is that the second row is on rails, so you can slide it forwards or backwards to improve the space for receipt occupants or improve your boot space. The maximised cargo area is 556 litres to the ceiling, while if prioritise second-row occupant space there is easily enough room for a 182cm / 6’0” adult to fit behind someone of a similar size.

In the boot there are remote levers for the second row seats to fold down, a 12 V outlet, and a soft parcel shelf which is easy to remove, too.

During my time with the car I had the seats slid back as far as they go to maximise cabin space, though I did test out whether it was worth having them forward and the boot space was appreciably better especially for a pram and some baby stuff.

The second-row is a 60:40 split for the backrest, with the smaller portion on the driver’s side. That may sound trivial, but we had our baby seat set up behind the passenger, and had to move it to the driver’s side when we picked up a large parcel as it wouldn’t fit with the smaller portion folded down. There are dual ISOFIX child seat anchor points for the outboard positions, and three top-tether hooks.

The boot space is good too, considering it has some extra hardware to contend with under the body, there is also a space-saver spare wheel under there which is nice. However, there is no dedicated hidey hole for the charge cable, and it doesn’t come in a nice stowable bag either - just a plastic ziplock thing. 

Perhaps the biggest letdown of the interior is the fact that you still get the tiny little tablet-style 8.0-inch touchscreen media display, despite there being a big 12.3-inch digital instrument cluster. The two screens almost look at odds with one another, and what’s even more frustrating is that the driver information screen cannot be configured to include the energy flow screen that you see on the smaller tablet style unit. 

That means you can’t watch what’s happening between engine, electric motor and battery, or a combination where you might expect to see that - instead it can only be seen in illustrative form on the smaller central screen. Big issue? Maybe not, but if you’re an eco-conscious customer who wants to know what their car’s high-tech powertrain is doing, while also wanting to use sat nav, or Apple CarPlay or Android Auto, or change the radio station… Well, you’re out of luck.

There is a much more basic and rudimentary display on the driver info screen that shows a small icon of an engine and battery and illuminates them when each part is in use, but really, Ford should have used the real-estate of the big driver info screen better. Toyota, Kia and Hyundai know how to do it better.

The material quality is okay, but it certainly doesn’t feel like a very special environment.There are rubberised liners on the doors which don’t look terrific or feel fantastic, and why there are soft plastic elbow pads, and up high on the dashboard, it is not of the most pristine quality. 

Storage is pretty good. There are bottle holders in the doors and two cupholders in the centre console, and the storage nook in front of the shift dial houses a wireless phone charger and two USB ports, plus a 12-volt plug. There is a strange little shelf section in front of the centre console bin, which is not fantastic in terms of size. There are rear bottle holders in the doors, map pockets and a flip-down arm-rest with cup holders.

That rotary dial shifter which does take a little bit of getting used to. Unlike some others, there is no ‘P’ for park button - instead you have to dial it all the way left. 

There is a price to pay for all this quasi-coupe styling flair, and that’s a comparatively snug-feeling interior, though you’d never call it cramped.

Actually, the Mazda 3 is no less spacious than most of its competition in all but one area, with enough room even for 200cm drivers, along with sufficient shoulder width and ceiling height to match.

If you’re really tall, maybe that missing sunroof isn’t such a bad thing, after all.

Sat so low-down on cushy, enveloping front seats that offer plenty of comfort and support, this is the anti-SUV. Maybe Mazda should have called this the MX-3.

Sporty and spot-on, the driving position is a laid-back affair, with an emphasis on better ergonomics, as emphasised by the thoughtful placement of switchgear that’s all within easy reach, ahead of a beautifully flowing and layered dash. Proudly Japanese in flavour, it brings to mind functional minimalism.

Drilling into some of the 3’s finer interior details, the analogue-look digital instrumentation is super-legible, ultra-classy and gorgeously lit at night. As previously mentioned, the dials and surrounding air vents are reminiscent of the later Porsche 944 and 968.

It’s not just all for the sake of aesthetics, either.

Yes, it’s lovely, but the thinned-rim three-spoke steering wheel feels great to grip, with nifty little paddle shifters that are a delight to prod.

Same goes for the physical volume knob and climate-control buttons, sidestepping the need to get distracted and frustrated by virtual sub-menus.

And having a conventional gear lever with old-school Tiptronic-style shifts suits the 3’s athletic vibe.

Plus, forward vision is A-OK, ventilation is faultless, storage is better than you might expect, and the fit and finish is as good if not better than any of this 3’s German premium opponents.

Out back, the split-fold rear backrest is set at a comfortable angle, the cushion is well padded, and you’re provided with USB ports, air vents, and an armrest with two cupholders. More thoughtfulness.

But while knee room is fair, rear headroom isn’t great if you’re tall or wear a beehive, as the falling ceiling line reveals.

Vision out is limited by that rising window line and fat pillars. Getting in and out of the back requires some contortionist moves. And the small windows mean it can be gloomier in the back than a Smiths album.

Finally, at just 295 litres, the 3’s cargo capacity is disappointing. Sure, it eclipses the Corolla hatch’s 217L cubby, but other rivals are far larger back there.

At least the floor is wide and flat and there are 60/40-split backrests for cabin access for longer items.

Note that a space-saver spare wheel lurks underneath. Mazda argues there’s always the closely-related CX-30 if you need (slightly) more space (317L).

Meanwhile, at the other end of the 3…

Mazda has rationalised the MY24 3 range, with fewer grades and no more manuals, sadly.

The pretty little piece of automotive industrial design you see here is the mid-range Evolve SP Vision, which sounds less like a car and more like a posh hairdryer from Vidal Sassoon.

Priced from $36,520 before on-road costs (or about $41K drive-away before you start haggling), this Mazda 3 is a sporty and well-equipped alternative to the likes of the speedy Hyundai i30 N-Line Premium, spacious Kia Cerato GT Turbo, new Subaru Impreza AWD 2.0R and evergreen Toyota Corolla ZR. All cost roughly the same money.

The thing is, do Mazda’s upmarket aspirations mean the 3 possesses the ride quality and chic to embarrass at times substantially more expensive hatchbacks with premium pretensions? We’re talking rivals like the BMW 1 Series, Mercedes-Benz A-Class, Peugeot 308 and VW Golf, here.

Stay with us, because we reckon you might be surprised by how far the 3 has come since its humble 323 predecessors.

Anyway, this version comes with most of the good gear, including a full suite of driver-assist safety tech like front and rear Autonomous Emergency Braking (AEB), blind-spot alert, lane-keep assist and adaptive cruise control, as well as keyless start and walk-away lock, powered driver’s seat with memory, 360-degree camera views, a head-up display, digital radio, sat-nav, auto tilt/folding exterior mirrors, dual-zone climate control, Bluetooth phone/audio connectivity and 18-inch alloys.

Oh, and for 2023, an upgraded version introduces a smartphone charger and wireless for the Apple CarPlay/Android Auto function, along with USB-C port access front and rear.

What’s missing at the Evolve SP Vision’s price point? Some mainstream rivals offer leather and a sunroof, available respectively in the more-expensive GT Vision, from $40,000, and flagship Astina grades, from nearly $42,500.

Still, that’s quite a lot of small car for the money, given the quality of the presentation and design. Speaking of which…

The Escape PHEV is the only model in the range to get a 2.5-litre petrol engine, which runs on the more efficient Atkinson cycle, and has a continuously variable transmission feeding power to the front wheels - that’s right, this Escape is 2WD/FWD.

The tricky bit is that it also houses a clever electric motor and generator, which is teamed to a 14.4kWh battery pack - which is big for a plug-in hybrid car. 

The electric motor is capable of 96kW of power, while the petrol engine can produce up to 112kW. All told, the combined system output is pegged at 167kW, though there is no peak torque output figure. Even so, that amount of power is a sizeable number for any midsize SUV, even if this particular one weighs in at more than 1800kg.

Speaking of weight, the PHEV is the least capable towing vehicle in the Escape range. It has a maximum braked towing capacity of 1200kg, where all the others can tow up to 1800kg. Unbraked capacity is unchanged, at 750kg.

When you think about it, shoehorning a big torquey engine in a light and agile small car is a recipe for fun. Ford did just that with the Escort RS2000 in the 1970s… and Mazda’s now an expert at it, too.

The engine in question is the G25, a 2.5-litre four-cylinder naturally aspirated twin-cam petrol engine, delivering 139kW of power at 6000rpm and 252Nm of torque at 4000rpm.

As this Evolve SP Vision hatch tips the scales at 1415kg, it makes for a healthy, and consequently very lively, power-to-weight ratio of over 98kW/tonne.

That’s if you decide to use all the available revs, which the six-speed torque-converter auto makes great use of.

Driving the front wheels, it offers a 'Sport' mode to extend the revs even more, which is keeping in line with this Mazda’s sporty character.

Less so is the company’s decision to ditch the old multi-link independent rear suspension system a few years back for a more prosaic torsion beam arrangement. We’ll get to how that affects ride and handling in a moment.

Beware the PHEV fuel consumption figure. That’s a great thing to keep in mind if you’re shopping for one of these cars.

That’s because the combined cycle official figure only takes into account a mix of conditions across 100km of driving. That’s right - only the first 100km. So the best case scenario, for a car that is designed to use its battery to run emissions free until it runs out, before sparingly using the petrol engine to keep going.

As such, it is no surprise that the official combined cycle fuel consumption is just 1.5 litres per 100 kilometres, with CO2 emissions claimed at just 33g/km. That takes into account the WLTP battery range of 56 kilometres stated on Ford’s website.

For reference, I completed my test of the car with a total of 462.7 kilometres travelled, of which, the trip computer stated 292.3km was fully electric. Meaning the remaining 170.4km was driving using petrol.

The indicated energy efficiency was 20.0kWh/100km, which isn’t great against a claimed EV driving efficiency figure supplied by Ford, of 14.8kWh/100km to 15.6kWh/100km. 

While the indicated fuel consumption average was 3.1L/100km, so more than double the windscreen sticker’s indicated economy. 

However, when I did the maths, I used a real-world average of 3.9L/100km of petrol ($36.15 worth of petrol) and 43.2kWh of electricity (meaning a cost of $9.82 based on the NSW average energy price of $0.2274c/kWh).

So, to do 462.7km I paid $45.97. I think that’s okay, but bear in mind I included several longer trips (Sydney to Glenbrook, Glenbrook to the Southern Highlands and back, and Glenbrook to Sydney and back). 

As is always the case, if your intended operation for a PHEV is to use it primarily for urban running within its EV range capabilities, you will be better off than if you push it beyond and use the petrol engine excessively.

For reference, the fuel tank size is 45 litres, which is 12L less than the petrol-only versions. It can run on E10, but only if you can find E10 that is also 95RON premium unleaded.

If you wish, there’s also an app called Ford Pass Connect, which allows you to monitor your car’s state of charge, adjust its start and finish times for recharging and even works as a key for the car to allow remote access, too.

Worth noting the maximum charge rate on a 10-amp plug at home is 2.3kW, while on public charging (which typically runs a higher amperage rate) the max rate is 3.7kW.

Mazda claims the G25 averages 6.6L/100km on the combined cycle… for a carbon-dioxide emissions rating of 154g/km. On a 51L tank, that gives a potential distance of over 940km!

Driven good and hard in our hands, we managed 7.5L/100km, which isn’t bad given the speed and conditions it was subjected to.

Plus, the Mazda’s happy on 91 RON 'standard' unleaded petrol.

Being the ST-Line grade, you - like it or not - have to deal with the lowered ride and sportier suspension, which makes this car ride a bit more firmly than you might want.

I found the suspension to be the biggest detracting element in terms of the drive experience – the suspension picked up a lot of the small inconsistencies in the road surface and transmitted them into the cabin. It was fidgety a lot of the time, and on road surfaces with very poor quality, it could be a bit uncomfortable.

The steering was also bit too tuned for sportiness for a car that doesn’t really need to be quite so aggressively angled that way. It took a bit of getting used to – it was somehow both twitchy on centre but not quite as responsive across the radius of lock to lock as I’d thought it might be, given the initial steering response.

Having said all that, I threw it through a couple of twisty corners and there was a nice handling balance from the chassis and decent grip from the tyres, but I did notice that - being front-wheel drive, with all that power going through the front tyres, there were some instances of it scrabbling for traction, notably on wet roads and looser surfaces but also out of offset driveways.

Other gripes included brake pedal response that was quite abrupt and very sensitive to stopping inputs.

Now, let’s consider the driving modes.

There are different drivetrain setups depending on what you plan to do. EV Auto does the thinking for you, dipping between EV, hybrid and petrol modes. EV Now prioritises electric driving. EV Later saves your battery charge for when you think you’ll need it. And EV Charge means you’ll use petrol power to drive, and also to replenish the battery pack.

The throttle response was decent in EV mode, and in hybrid mode it is nice and quiet, and it drives in a very smooth way unless you really plant your foot hard, then it can be a bit vocal - but less raucous than a RAV4 under full throttle. 

The transition between the different drive modes was relatively seamless, as it will readily go between petrol or electric as required, and the four-cylinder is mostly hushed enough so that you won’t hear it too much, especially if you’re driving at higher speeds when it does.

Indeed it was relatively quiet for the most part, though the tyre noise was quite excessive at higher speeds on very coarse-chip surfaces. And in those instances I noticed I could feel the road surface through the steering wheel and the suspension, as it was quite jittery at times.

There is a low speed warning sound that is omitted below about 25km/h and it was quite handy while driving in enclosed car parks - no more accusations of creeping around silently at the shops.

Further, there are multiple drive modes, including Normal, Eco, Sport, Slippery, and Snow/Sand Assist, all of which are designed to make different situations easier to deal with. They will adjust engine transmission and steering response as well as stability and traction control limitations. I kept it in Normal, though a dabble in Sport showed that you’re allowed a bit more aggression from the powertrain in terms of acceleration.

Ask yourself. What do you want from a new small car?

Since the first Familia of the early 1960s, Mazda’s been at it constantly, through the 1300 and 323 eras and into the modern age of the 3.

The Hiroshima brand knows its stuff. Space, practicality, comfort, ease, reliability and affordability. But a small car has to offer more, specifically in the way it makes the owner feel.

That’s why, while the Focuses, Lancers, Astras and Pulsars are gone, the 3’s still here. And it isn’t just the lush visuals inside and out that are, well, sensory-rich.

As older Alfa Romeo owners know, there’s something special about an engine that sounds alive, and the moment you push the 3’s starter, it purrs into life. That’s the first clue.

Slot the refreshingly old-school lever into Drive, and the G25 leaps into action, and, if you need it to, will keep pulling forward strongly, engine buzzing, like it’s on a mission.

That describes the torquey urge of this big 2.5L four, paired perfectly with the sensibly-geared auto.

We miss Mazda’s magnificent manual immensely, but the 3’s instant response reflects its favourable circa-100kW/tonne power-to-weight ratio.

And, as we’ve harped on in the past, the twin-cam unit’s extra oomph beyond 4000rpm delivers muscular high-speed responses akin to a good turbo – or a great old-school Alfa. You can keep your laggy dual-clutch transmissions, Europe.

Now, sweet, smooth and speedy performance is one thing, but having the chassis tuned with precise and fluid steering for tactile handling, and confident roadholding, backed by nuanced driver-assist and traction controls, are another.

There is a consistent and unifying control to the 3’s linear and forgiving dynamics, reminiscent of past masters like the Focus (and today’s brilliant Peugeot 308) that makes it a joy to drive enthusiastically through fast corners, with the knowledge that it won’t suddenly snap-oversteer and bite an unalert driver back.

For a Mazda, the ride is quiet enough, but there is still some droning transmitted through the cabin, via the Bridgestone Turanza (215/45) tyres, on coarse-chip bitumen surfaces.

And while suspension comfort is pretty impressive for the most part, larger bumps reveal the torsion beam’s limitations, as the car can occasionally thud over them in a way that we remember the multi-link rear end wouldn’t.

Anyway, what we’re saying is that, overall, the 3 Evolve SP Vision is an immersive and interactive driving experience that is right up there with the best of them.

Brawny performance, exquisite agility and a refinement that, collectively, have eluded every small Mazda in living memory until this generation’s 2019 debut. This 3’s right on the money. Still.

Tested way back when this generation was new in early 2019, the Mazda 3 scored a maximum five-star ANCAP crash-test rating.

On the driver-assist front you’ll find front and rear AEB (with a working range of 40km/h to 200km/h) with pedestrian and cycle detection available between 10-80km/h, while the 'Forward Collision Warning' operates from 40-200km/h.

Blind-spot monitoring, lane departure warning, lane-keep assist, 'Forward Obstruction Warning', rear and front 'Cross-Traffic Alert', 'Secondary Collision', auto high beams, breakaway pedals, adaptive cruise control (with full stop/go functionality and cruising/traffic support), parking sensors front/rear, 360-degree round-view monitor, reverse camera, traffic sign recognition, driver monitor and tyre-pressure monitors are also included.

The lane-keep support systems work between 55-200km/h.

Seven airbags – front, side, curtain and a driver’s knee bag – are fitted, along with anti-lock brakes with 'Electronic Brake-force Distribution', 'Emergency Brake Assist', stability control, traction control, hill-start assist are also fitted, seat-belt pretensioners, and two rear-seat ISOFIX points as well as three top tethers for child seat straps.

As with the rest of the Ford range, you get a five-year/unlimited kilometre warranty on the car, while the battery pack has its own eight-year/160,000km warranty plan.

And just like most other models in Ford’s range, there is a lifetime capped-price servicing plan, with the first four maintenance visits (due every 12 months/15,000km, whichever occurs first) incurring a $299 fee, which is cheap for the class.

You also get up to seven years of roadside assist if you service your car with Ford’s dealers.

Mazda offers a five-year/unlimited kilometre warranty, with five-years roadside assistance… and that’s nothing special nowadays.

Service intervals are at 12 months or every 15,000km.

A fixed-price service scheme is available, averaging out to $434 annually over the first five years. Mazda shows pricing right up to 16 years and 240,000km on its website.