Mazda CX-3 vs Mazda CX-70

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.

For mine, the CX-70 is the pick of Mazda's premium SUV range, and if you can survive without a third row of seats, it's significantly cheaper than its CX-90 twin, too.

Note: CarsGuide attended this event as a guest of the manufacturer, with travel, accommodation and meals provided.

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.

Yes, the Mazda premium SUV range can look a little same-same, but Mazda insists there are critical differences.

That said, if you can immediately spot the difference between the CX-70 and CX-90 without taking a peek inside, you're doing better than me, given it is the same exact dimensions as Mazda's three-row flagship.

Sure, Mazda talks about things like this design being a “passion pursuer” that serves up "dignified performance” – all of which sounds utterly ridiculous – but the less marketing-speak version is that it looks like a shapely large SUV that ditches the boxy dimensions of a proper 4WD for a more sleek and swooping profile.

Inside, it's a plush and premium-feeling space, with lovely cabin materials, plenty of tech, and plenty of space.

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.

The CX-70 measures a substantial 5120mm long, 1994mm wide, and 1745mm tall, and it rides on a 3120mm wheelbase.

It will tow 2.5 tonnes no matter which engine you choose, and the expansive boot will swallow between 589 litres and 2015 litres, depending on how you configure the backseat.

All of that space translates to a hugely airy backseat experience, with the second row able to be fixed in a position that either prioritises leg room or boot space.

With the former, you've got tons of space in the second row. I'm 175cm, and my knee and leg room was ample, with only the intrusive tunnel that runs down the middle-centre of the cabin eating into leg room for the middle passenger.

There are also air vents and temp controls, twin USB charge ports, seat heating in the window seats and swathes of very nice materials.

The boot is massive, too. I can't even reach the back of the rear seats when I lean into it, and Mazda says it will swallow smaller surfboard or SUPs without needing to resort to roof racks.

Under-floor storage adds a bit more security for precious items, too.

We'll drill down on this a little more in the practicality section, but it's important to note here that the CX-70 is the same size as the CX-90 – both are 5120mm long, 1994mm wide and 1745mm high — which means the only real difference between the two models is the third row of seats in the CX-90.

And, as it turns out, that's a very expensive pair of chairs. The CX-70 starts with the GT trim at $75,970 before on-road costs for the petrol or $77,970 for the diesel, and then climbs to the Azami trim, which is $82,970 or $84,970.

The CX-90, though, is $82,577 or $85,785 for the GT, or $91,461 or $93,030 for the Azami.

That makes the CX-90's third row at least a $6600 option, but as much as an $8000 upgrade. Mazda has made moves to address this, with a drive-away "plate clearance" that closes that gap, but we suspect those offers will become permanent fixtures to make the jump from 70 to 90 less ferocious.

Anyway, Mazda has thrown just about everything they've got at the CX-70. The GT kicks off with plenty of high-end gear, including 21-inch black alloy wheels, adaptive LED headlights, a panoramic sunroof and a handsfree powered tailgate.

Inside, there are twin 12.3-inch screens with Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, a 12-speaker Bose stereo, leather seats that are heated front and rear, three-zone climate control and a heated steering wheel.

The Azami then adds things like ambient lighting, black Nappa leather seats, which are now ventilated in the front, footwell lighting, body-coloured wheel arches and lower cladding and body-coloured door handles.

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.

You can have one of two engines in the CX-70, with the cheapest being a 3.3-litre, six-cylinder turbo-petrol, producing 254kW and 500Nm. There's also a 3.3-litre, six-cylinder turbo-diesel, making 187kW and 550Nm. Both are equipped with a 48-volt mild hybrid system to marginally reduce fuel use.

All models are AWD, and pair with an eight-speed automatic transmission.

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.

Petrol-powered cars will sip 8.1L/100km on the combined cycle, while the diesel drops that to 5.4 litres.

Both models get a 74-litre tank, meaning a theoretical driving range of around 900kms in the petrol, and almost 1400kms in the diesel.

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.

Interestingly, the CX-70 has been tagged as the expected smallest seller of Mazda's premium SUV range, but I reckon it just might be the pick of the bunch.

Every one of the CX-0 models (60, 70, 80 and 90) all get slightly different suspension tunes, and while you can find harsh edges in the other models, the CX-70 feels utterly composed and refined, at least on the smooth-ish roads of our launch test route.

Perhaps most surprising, though, is the CX-70's ability to hold its own on a properly twisting road. We expected lots of weight transfer and the high-pitched sounds of tyres screaming out in pain, but instead found Mazda's massive SUV served up grip, composure, and very little in the way of sea-swell-style body roll.

The two big six-cylinder engines also feel perfectly suited to a vehicle in this space. There's tons of power whenever you need it, and solid levels of refinement in terms of engine noise or diesel rattles.

For mine, the petrol engine is the pick though, feeing just a little smoother than the diesel option. The latter can feel a bit jerky at slower speeds, whether that's the power delivery or the gearbox, and it doesn't seem to happen with the petrol engine.

The biggest caveat, though, is that we haven't driven the CX-70 in its natural environment, the city and suburbs, so while it largely shone on flowing country roads, how it performs on roads like the ones near your place remains a bit of a mystery.

The CX-70 hasn’t been ANCAP tested, but it does arrive with a pretty stacked safety offering, including a 360-degree-view camera, blind-spot monitoring, front and rear cross-traffic alert, and a total of eight airbags, including a knee airbag for the driver.

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.

Servicing is not particularly cheap in the CX-70, and the service intervals, at least in the diesel, feel a little short, too.

Buy that one, and you’ll be visiting the dealership every 12 months or 10,000kms, and the first five years of ownership will cost you $3298.

Petrol cars require servicing every 12 months or 15,000kms, and five years will set you back $3436.

The CX-70 is also covered by Mazda's five-year, unlimited-kilometre warranty.