Mazda 3 vs Citroen C4

What's the difference?

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.

It’s weird, wonderful and fun, in more ways that one. I think every segment could use an oddball alternative like the C4. Citroen has successfully transformed it from a hatch to a small SUV with a difference. It’s not going to be for everyone – few Citroens are – but those who are willing to take a chance will be rewarded with a surprisingly competitive little package that stands apart from the crowd.

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…

It’s really hard to stand out in Australia’s busy marketplace, especially in this small SUV space, where there doesn’t really seem to be as much of a design rulebook as there is in other segments.

Rooflines are wildly different, as are beltines and light profiles. While some may decry the fall of the hatchback to these more high-riding options, at least some of them are bringing fresh design ideas to the car world.

Our C4 is a great example. An SUV perhaps in profile only, it sports a slinky descending roofline, tall, contoured bonnet, a frowny-face LED profile, and characterful plastic claddings, which are a continuation of Citroen’s ‘Airbump’ elements, which gave cars like the previous-generation C4 Cactus such a unique look.

The rear is this car’s most confronting angle, with a post-modern approach to the light profile, and in reference to C4s past, a spoiler integrated into the rear tailgate.

It looks cool, contemporary, and I think is successful in its aim to blend the sporty elements from the hatch world with the sought-after high-riding elements of an SUV.

It certainly caught a few eyeballs in my time with it, and if nothing else, a bit of attention is something the Citroen brand desperately needs.

In the past you could rely on this brand to give you a funky interior, but one that sadly also came with its fair share of sub-par plastics and strange ergonomic. So I’m pleased to report that the new C4 dips into the better looking and feeling Stellantis parts catalogue for a still interesting yet more coherent experience this time around.

The modern look and feel of this car continues with interesting seat designs, a high-riding dash with a higher degree of digitization than before, and improved ergonomic features (even over some notable Peugeots). We’ll talk more about those in the practicality section, but the C4 feels as weird and different from behind the wheel as you’d hope , with an odd dash profile, a fun and minimalist steering yoke, and attention-to-detail elements, like a detail strip that runs through the door trims and across the seats.

These elements are welcome and help separate this Citroen from its Peugeot siblings. It will need this going forward, as it also now shares much of its switchgear and screens with its sister brand.

This is largely a good thing, with the 10-inch screen looking and feeling good and slotting into this car’s design nicely.

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…

The C4 brings some interesting practicality elements. There are a few areas where it’s even better than the improved layouts of recent Peugeot models.

The cabin feels spacious, with the C4’s relatively long wheelbase providing ample room in both rows. Adjustability is good for the driver, although it is worth noting that the seats have an odd blend of manual adjust for sliding fore and aft, contrasted with electrical adjust for seat height and tilt.

Comfort is superb from the memory-foam stuffed and thick synthetic-leather-clad seats. I don’t know why more cars don’t adopt this approach to seat design. You sink into these seats and are left feeling like you’re floating above the ground rather than sitting on something. The feeling here is unmatched in the small SUV space.

The massage function is a wholly unnecessary addition, and with the thick seat cladding, it didn’t really add much to the experience.

The seat bases aren’t too high either, unlike some cars in the SUV class, but the dash design itself is very tall, so people shorter than my 182cm height might find extra adjustment is required to see over the bonnet.

There are large bottle holders in each door with a very small bin; dual cupholders in the centre console, and a small armrest console box.

There’s also an odd little two-tiered shelf under the climate unit, with a removable base for extra storage underneath. It seems to me that the top shelf is a missed opportunity to place a wireless charger, although connectivity is handy with the choice of USB-C or USB 2.0 to connect to the wired phone mirroring.

A big win is the presence of a full dial set for not just volume but the climate unit too. This is something the Citroen scores over some of the new Peugeots, which have moved the climate functions to the screen.

Somewhat less wonderful are the digital dash cluster and holographic head-up display. These seem to be a bit redundant in the information they display to the driver, and the digital dash has no customisation, leaving me wondering what the point of it is.

The C4 also has some interesting innovations on the front passenger side. It has an unusually large glovebox and a neat little sliding tray, which looks like something from a Bond car.

It also has a slide-out tablet holder. This odd little thing lets you securely mount a tablet to the dash to provide a multimedia solution for the front passenger, which may be good for entertaining larger kids on longer journeys. Or adults who don't want to talk to the driver. It’s a neat inclusion, but I’m not sure how many people will use it in the real world.

The back seat offers a remarkable amount of room. I’m 182cm tall and had heaps of knee room behind my own driving position. The nice seat trims continue, as does the patternwork and detailing, which is the kind of attention to detail you don’t always get from rivals.

Headroom is a little limited, but you also score dual adjustable air vents and a single USB port.

The boot comes in at a hatch-sized 380-litres (VDA). It’s a neat, square shape with no little cutaways at the sides and is just big enough to fit our full CarsGuide demo luggage set, but leaves no room to spare. The C4 features a space-saver spare wheel under the floor.

In recent memory, Citroen’s offerings (the smaller C3 hatch in particular) have decidedly missed the mark on value. It’s not enough to be a niche player in Australia anymore – we have too many brands for that - so Citroen has had to have a re-think of its pricing strategy.

The resulting C4 that launches in Australia comes in a single, highly specified trim level, at a price that is remarkably competitive for its segment.

Wearing an MSRP of $37,990, the C4 Shine is positioned to compete with rivals like the Subaru XV (2.0i-S $37,290), Toyota C-HR (Koba hybrid - $37,665), and equally funky Mazda MX-30 (G20e Touring - $36,490).

For the asking price you also get the full list of available equipment, including 18-inch alloys, full LED exterior lighting, a 10-inch multimedia touchscreen with wired Apple CarPlay and Android Auto connectivity, built-in navigation, a 5.5-inch digital dash cluster, a head-up display, dual-zone climate, full synthetic leather interior trim, and a top-down parking camera. This leaves only a sunroof ($1490) and metallic paint options (everything but white - $690) as available extras.

The Citroen also packs some unusual items that represent surprising value – the front seats have a massage function and are stuffed with a very nice memory foam material, while the suspension system packs a set of hydraulic dampers to iron out the ride.

While the C4 faces tough competition in the small SUV segment, I think it represents pretty solid value at the price, so long as you’re chasing a virtue like comfort over hybridisation. More on that later.

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.

The C4’s single trim level has a single engine, and it’s a good one; a peppy 1.2-litre three-cylinder turbo.

It appears elsewhere in the Stellantis catalogue and has been refreshed for the 2022 model year with a new turbo and other small refinements. In the C4 it produces 114kW/240Nm and drives the front wheels via an Aisin-sourced eight-speed torque converter automatic transmission.

No dual-clutches or CVTs to be found here. This sounds good to me, but is it good to drive? You’ll have to read on to find out.

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.

Despite the little turbocharged engine and the abundance of ratios in that transmission, the Citroen C4 disappointed me a little bit when it came to real-world consumption.

The official/combined consumption sounds reasonable at just 6.1L/100km, but after a week of driving in what I would consider realistic combined conditions my car returned 8.4L/100km.

While it’s not terrible in the wider context of small SUVs (a segment that is still packed with naturally aspirated 2.0-litre engines), it could be better.

The C4 also needs at least mid-shelf 95RON unleaded fuel and has a 50-litre fuel tank.

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.

Driving the C4 is an interesting experience because it approaches the road a little differently from most of its rivals.

It really leans into Citroen’s newfound comfort-focused niche with the seating and suspension. This results in an overall experience that is a bit unique in the market, and quite pleasant, too.

The ride really is quite good. It’s not a fully hydraulic system but has dual-stage dampers that essentially smooth out corrugations and much of the nasty stuff that comes into contact with the tyres.

It’s odd because you can hear the big alloys crashing about on the road, but ultimately you feel little of it in the cabin. What’s more impressive is Citroen has managed to imbue the C4 with this floating-on-the-road feeling, while maintaining enough of a ‘real’ driving position to make it feel like you’re sitting in the car and not on it.

The overall result is impressive. The comfort extends to the seats, as mentioned, which really do still feel floaty and supportive even after hours on the road. It also extends to the steering, which has a very light tune. This is a bit unsettling at first, as it feels like it has a large dead-zone in the centre, but it is also speed dependent, so once you’re cruising it regains a significant amount of feel. You can also manually bring back a bit of firmness by setting this car to its Sport drive mode, which is unusually good.

This means you can have an ease of operation in tight quarters while maintaining enough feel to make it fun to drive when you need to ask more of it. Clever.

Speaking of fun, the revised 1.2-litre three-pot is a hoot. It has a distant but entertaining gruff tone under pressure, and surges forward with just enough urgency to not leave you really wanting for power.

It’s not what I would call quick, but it has a raucous attitude paired with a well-behaved torque converter auto to make it truly entertaining. When you push it, there’s a moment of turbo lag followed by a lump of torque, which the transmission lets you ride out before decisively snapping into the next gear. I like it.

Again, it's not quick, but it punches just enough above its weight to leave you with a smile when you stick your boot in. To have that in a car otherwise so focused on comfort is an unexpected pleasure.

The dash cluster could use some work, as could visibility out of the cabin. The small aperture out the rear and tall dash line could leave some drivers feeling a bit claustrophobic. While the engine is fun to engage with, the turbo lag could potentially be a source for annoyance at times, too.

Brief negatives aside, I think the C4's drive experience really brings something unique, fun, and comfortable to the small SUV space.

There's not such a good story to tell here. While the C4 comes with today’s expected suite of active-safety items, it just fell short of a five-star ANCAP rating, scoring just four stars upon its launch.

Active items on the C4 Shine include auto emergency braking, lane-keep assist with lane-departure warning, blind-spot monitoring, adaptive cruise control, and driver-attention alert.

Some active items are notably missing, like rear cross traffic alert, rear auto braking, and more cutting-edge items like junction alert for the AEB system.

What cost this car its five-star rating? ANCAP says the lack of a centre airbag contributed, but the C4 also fell short on protection for vulnerable road users in the event of a collision, and its AEB system also had marginal night-time performance.

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.

Ownership has always been a tough topic for unusual Euros like the C4, and that seems to continue here. While Citroen offers a competitive five-year and unlimited-kilometre warranty for all its new products, it’s the service costs that will hurt the most.

While most Japanese and Korean brands are competing to really keep these numbers down, the C4’s average yearly cost, according to the provided schedule, comes in at an average of $497 for the first five years. That’s nearly double the cost of Toyota’s C-HR!

The C4 Shine will need to see a service centre once a year or every 15,000km, whichever occurs first.