Mazda CX-3 vs Honda ZR-V

What's the difference?

‘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 Honda ZR-V has always been an engaging and fun car that’s the right size for many people. The frugal hybrid powertrain has always been the pick too.

It’s great that Honda has finally introduced more affordable hybrid trims with this update which addresses one of my biggest criticisms of this car previously.

If you’re willing to forgo some luxury features, this entry-level hybrid trim is a fantastic car that still offers enough creature comforts to be driven daily.

Hopefully Honda has some renewed sales success with this car as I believe it’s a clear benchmark for the segment.

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.

The exterior of the ZR-V has always left me feeling quite… meh. It’s a mundane and generic look that doesn’t stand out from the crowd, but that's no bad thing because not everyone wants a flashy car.

That said, I’m still not a fan of the front grille, which makes it look like this car has a moustache.

The dark red paint looks nice, though when it’s paired with these generic-looking grey alloy wheels and black wheel arch cladding, it cheapens the look. The top-spec e:HEV LX looks more attractive.

Inside, it’s similarly standard and doesn’t break the mould. Everything is where you’d expect it to be, which is great for functionality.

The wildest part of the interior is the centre tunnel which features a push-button gear selector and a split console section including a small storage area underneath that’s big enough for a phone.

Looking around, it’s a sea of black finishes, which is a bit boring. However, I do like the mesh panel that spans the dashboard and houses the air vents. It’s a premium touch.

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.

In base-model form, it’s expected the ZR-V will have fabric upholstery. However, the seats still feel premium and are deliciously padded. They’re manually adjusted but I was still able to find a good driving position with ease.

One feature I was looking for was heated seats, especially on these brisk Melbourne mornings. It’s rare for a car with fabric seats to get heated seats, though. If you want them that badly, they’re available on higher trims.

Ahead of the driver is a leather-wrapped steering wheel which feels lovely. I particularly like the tactile feel of the buttons and switches.

The digital instrument cluster is clear and crisp. It offers multiple views to customise it, as well as a range of infographic pages to cycle through. I wish you could see the fuel consumption and hybrid system graphics at the same time, but thankfully they’re just a single scroll away from each other.

Moving across, the central touchscreen multimedia system is looking a small in 2026, measuring only 9.0 inches, although it’s still high-resolution and the colours are vibrant.

It appears computing power has been given a boost along with the integration of Google Built-in, as jumping from menu to menu has never been snappier.

Speaking of Google Built-in, it’s great to have the flexibility of using the integrated Google Maps and apps like Spotify and Apple Music, without needing your phone.

However, it’s still nice having Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, though the latter is strangely only offered in wired form. With my iPhone 15 Pro Max, the wireless connection was rock solid, though known interference points did cause CarPlay to stutter.

It’s great to see Honda retaining a physical climate control cluster as it’s intuitive to use. The dials in particular have a satisfying click when twirled.

In terms of storage there are two cupholders, two USB-C ports, a big centre console box, as well as an adequately sized glove box. It’s worth noting this trim level forgoes a wireless charger, meaning you’ll need to plug in to charge your phone.

Moving to the second row, there’s a surprising amount of space, even for adults. At a leggy 182cm, I have plenty of legroom and headroom.

You would easily be able to get two adults in the second row, though you’d be pushing it to fit three as the middle seat is narrow and raised. Kids will be fine, though.

Adding to the annoyance of the middle rear seat, the seat belt is mounted from the roof, which can obstruct rear visibility.

In terms of amenities there are air vents on the back of the front centre console, two USB-C ports, map pockets on the back of each front seat, as well as a fold-down centre armrest with cupholders.

There are also ISOFIX points on the two outboard seats, as well as top-tether child seat anchorages on all three rear seats.

Around the back it’s expected the entry-level hybrid will feature a manually operated tailgate. It’s light to open and close.

With the rear seats upright there’s 380L of boot space available, which is decent for this size of car. This figure includes a small underfloor section.

If you fold the rear seats the boot space expands to 1312L, which is cavernous for this type of car. The rear seats cleverly fold forwards and down at the same time, creating a seamless flat floor.

Boot-related amenities include a number of hooks, a 12V socket plus some lights. As is the case with many hybrids, the ZR-V e:HEV doesn’t come with any spare wheel. You need to make do with a tyre repair kit, which is nowhere near as handy if you have a proper puncture away from a tyre repair shop.

Honda has shuffled the ZR-V line-up for 2026, decreasing the petrol variants to a single, entry-level trim, while increasing the hybrid grades from one to three.

On test here is the ZR-V e:HEV X, which is the cheapest hybrid. It’s priced from $43,400, drive-away, which is $3500 more than the base petrol trim and $8500 less than the top-spec hybrid option.

This is priced keenly against entry-level versions of the Hyundai Kona Hybrid and Toyota Corolla Cross Hybrid, while undercutting the Nissan Qashqai e-Power hybrid.

For the price you get standard 18-inch alloy wheels, adaptive LED headlights, a 10.2-inch digital instrument cluster, a 9.0-inch touchscreen multimedia system with wireless Apple CarPlay and wired Android Auto, dual-zone climate control and cloth upholstery.

Now standard across the ZR-V line-up is Google Built-in which allows for Google Maps integration, the Google Assistant, plus you can download a number of apps, including Spotify, from the Google Play Store.

If you’re after features like a power tailgate, premium sound system, wireless charger, leather upholstery, plus heated seats with electric adjustment, you’ll need to look higher in the line-up. These are largely all nice-to-haves than musts, anyway.

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.

Power in the ZR-V hybrid continues to come from a 2.0-litre four-cylinder petrol engine with two electric motors. Total system outputs are 135kW and 315Nm.

This is sent to the front wheels only via an electronic continuously variable transmission (eCVT).

The Honda hybrid system positions the engine primarily as a generator for the battery pack at lower speeds, however once you reach 60-70km/h it can couple with the front axle and directly power the wheels.

It’s a smart system that allows for an electric zippy feel at lower speeds with the backing of a petrol engine at higher speeds.

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.

Honda claims the ZR-V hybrid consumes an average of 5.0L/100km on the combined cycle, according to ADR testing.

In practice, I’ve seen way less than this, which is fantastic. On one particular drive around the city I achieved a mind-boggling average of 3.7L/100km, but my overall average hovered around 4.5L/100km.

There is a 57L fuel tank and a minimum of 91 RON regular unleaded petrol is required.

You should easily be able to travel more than 1000km per refill, so don’t expect to be visiting servos very often.

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 ZR-V’s hybrid powertrain has oodles of zip, thanks to there being two electric motors which handle a lot of the low-speed grunt.

It’s surprising how much of the driving can be done on electric power alone, provided there’s enough battery charge. Even at highway and freeway speeds the engine will switch off and coast on electric power alone.

When the petrol engine kicks on, you can barely feel it in the cabin or through the accelerator pedal. Instead you’ll only hear a familiar CVT-like drone as the engine charges the battery.

The petrol engine drone is noticeable but the note it makes more pleasant than a Toyota hybrid. Plus when you push the accelerator that bit harder it pretends to shift through gears, making the driving experience more engaging.

At higher speeds there’s plenty of oomph as the petrol engine and electric motors work in tandem. It feels like the powertrain is never stressed, making for an effortless touring feel.

There are a number of different regenerative braking modes accessed via the paddle shifters. The default is the weakest which allows you to coast more like a regular, pure-combustion car.

You can ramp up the intensity of the regenerative braking but there is no 'one-pedal' driving mode and you’re required to use the brake pedal to come to a complete stop.

From the driver’s seat you have a commanding view of the road ahead thanks to the elevated driving position. There are also large side mirrors and a big rear envelope, giving good all-around visibility.

Around town the ZR-V has a nimble feel thanks to its light-ish steering. This translates to a dynamic feel with a touch more weight out on the open road.

It’s surprising how engaging and fun this car is to drive, especially because it’s a regular SUV with no obvious sporty characteristics.

The suspension errs towards soft, but this helps soak up sharper bumps. This car never feels uncomfortable from behind the wheel which is at least partially down to the 18-inch alloy wheels being the right diameter for a car of this size.

The Honda ZR-V received a four- out of five-star ANCAP safety rating based on testing conducted by Euro NCAP in 2023.

Despite this, the entire line-up is stacked with standard safety equipment. Highlights include 11 airbags, autonomous emergency braking (AEB), blind-spot monitoring, rear cross-traffic alert, lane-keep assist, adaptive cruise control, front and rear parking sensors as well as a reversing camera.

It’s worth noting a surround-view camera is reserved for the top-spec hybrid trim only, which is a little annoying.

However, the ZR-V doesn’t have any annoying beeps and bongs that play while you’re driving. All the safety systems are well calibrated and only interact or engage when required.

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.

ZR-V owners receive a five-year, unlimited-kilometre warranty as standard, whereas the high-voltage battery is covered for eight years.

If you service at Honda dealers when required, however, the standard warranty coverage is extended to eight years. This is more on par with many mainstream brands.

Speaking of servicing, it’s required every 12 months or 10,000km. The latter may be troublesome if you do a lot of kilometres.

The first five services are capped at $199. This is very affordable and on par with Toyota.

There are close to 90 'Honda Centres' across the country covering state and territory capitals as well as key rural and regional centres.