Mazda CX-3 vs Mercedes-Benz EQB

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.

I really liked the combustion version of this car, the GLB, for its funky style and flexibility and I was pleased to find how easily Mercedes has made the conversion to a fully-electric layout for the EQB.

Despite a tall price, the EQB 350 is a compelling option for those seeking something a bit more luxurious than the Tesla Model Y, something a bit larger than the Volvo XC40 Recharge, and something a bit smaller than the Audi e-tron or the EQC.

The main trade-off for this 350 variant is the loss of the seven-seat layout in favour of more performance. Instead it offers a huge boot, has a sufficient range for city-based buyers, and offers surprising levels of fun, too. 

Just make sure you’ve considered its rivals which may potentially offer more range or features for the same money.

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 EQB has a very predictable design in that it doesn't stray from the combustion car’s formula. At all.

The only evidence from the outside this is the electric version is the blanked out grille, and closer observers might notice the rear light bar which cuts across the boot lid is different from the split tail-light design which appears on the combustion car.

Still, to my eyes, the GLB is a cool design with its upright boxy look bucking the curvaceous trend of most EVs, and, indeed, the rest of the Mercedes line-up. 

Its rebellious streak makes it one of the most appealing SUVs in Mercedes’ current range, and it comes with a bit of toughness which is missing from the EQA. 

If nothing else, it’s a completely different look from Tesla’s amorphous Model Y, and this may be enough to appeal to some.

Inside is identical to other Mercedes models which sit on the MFA2 small car platform, immediately setting itself apart with the big high-resolution screens, glitzy ambient lighting, as well as an abundance of chrome and gloss black.

It’s designed to impress from the first time you hop in, and there’s no doubt it does, but it may be a bit over-the-top for some, particularly fans of the more conservative Mercedes designs of eras past.

The chrome in particular becomes a bit of a problem, as it has an annoying habit of catching the reflection of the sun and sending it directly into the driver’s eyes.

It all feels as plush as a circa-$100,000 luxury car should though, with the ‘Artico’ seat trim being one of the better synthetic options on the market, and soft-touch surfaces throughout the cabin selling the Mercedes promise. 

The GLB toughness is even reflected in the chiselled out finishes in the door, dash, and centre console, helping to set it apart from the tamer EQA.

The software is also fast, high resolution, and well presented, which bodes well given the amount of screen real-estate, and the amount of customization is impressive, too.

Again, there are many who will prefer its look and feel to the Apple-store chic of the Tesla Model Y, or the pared back Scandinavian approach of the XC40 Recharge, but also those who won’t. Like many new Mercedes products, it continues to polarise buyers.

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.

This should be the GLB’s calling card. It’s a car with an ideal footprint, not as wide or as long as most mid-size SUVs, whilst also offering a larger cabin and boot.

The big drawback for this variant in particular is the lack of a seven-seat option, as the all-wheel drive requires the under-floor space which is required to give rear occupants legroom. 

It’s a shame, too, because I found the two rear seats in this car’s GLB combustion equivalent to be surprisingly accommodating for even adults.

As a result of these missing seats, though, the full volume can be exploited in the boot, which comes in at a whopping 495 litres.

It’s rivalled by the Model Y, which also has a cavernous boot, although it has a much larger storage area than the Volvo XC40. 

As an added bonus, there is a decent under-floor storage area which has enough space for all your charging cables, although there is no so-called ‘frunk’ with what is normally the engine bay taken up by cooling and auxiliary hardware. 

At first glance there’s so much going on under there, you’d be forgiven for thinking the EQB has an actual engine!

The cabin is also enormous as well as configurable. The EQB has massive rear doors (as it’s designed to be a seven-seater) to make it easy to get in and out of, and once you’re settled in, the amount of space for me (at 182cm) behind my own driving position is very impressive, with ample leg, arm, and headroom.

Rear passengers score the same nice synthetic leather seat and door trim as the front passengers, a bottle holder in each door, as well as two in a flip-out caddy on the drop-down armrest, two nets on the backs of the front seats, dual adjustable air vents, and power outlets on the back of the console. There is also a separate section of the split sunroof to benefit those in the back seat.

Up front the cabin is equally flexible, although it immediately seems odd that the front seats are manually adjustable. Almost unforgivable in a $100,000 car. 

At least the trim is comfortable, and again, the space is configurable for people of all shapes and sizes. 

Storage options include large bins in each door, a split-opening armrest console with USB-C outlets inside, a slide-open area underneath the climate unit, which houses a wireless phone charger and additional power outlets, as well as the usual glove box arrangement. 

Soft trims continue into the doors, although one small annoyance is the excess of chrome trim which has the unfortunate habit of reflecting harsh Australian sun into your eyes if it hits at the wrong angle.

The software is nice and quick, but can be cumbersome and over-complicated to operate at times, particularly when using the centre touchpad, or adjusting the dash with the small touch elements on the wheel. 

It is also notable the Apple CarPlay as-tested only took up a centre portion of the screen, and is not set-up for widescreen mode to take full advantage of the hardware.

Minor complaints aside, though, the EQB follows its combustion GLB twin in having by far one of the most flexible and configurable cabins in its class.

The EQB range kicks off from $87,800, before on-road costs, for the base 250, but the car we’re looking at for this review is the top-spec 350 4Matic, which wears a price-tag of $106,700.

There’s no doubt it’s a hefty price, even for an EV, and especially for a sort-of ‘small’ SUV. There’s more to consider, too. As I mentioned in the intro, the all-wheel drive system precludes the seven-seat layout in this top-spec car, and it has less range than the front-wheel drive model, too, dropping from 371km to 360km.

On the upswing, the dual-motor powertrain is far preferable to the so-so front-wheel drive option, and the 350 also gains an AMG-spiced bodykit and flat-bottomed steering wheel, as well as a panoramic sunroof.

Outside of the extra flair, the EQB 350 is almost as well equipped as you could hope, with the flashy dual-10.25-inch 'MBUX' screen set-up, Nappa leather steering wheel and interior appointments with Mercedes’ signature 'Artico' synthetic seat trim, LED headlights, ambient interior lighting with fully customisable RGB controls, dual-zone climate, a wireless phone charger, 20-inch alloy wheels, as well as keyless entry and push-start ignition.

Given the EQB’s dimensions it would seem its most direct rival is the Tesla Model Y, although it may not be a favourable comparison. 

At over $100,000 the EQB 350 is still more expensive than the top-spec Model Y Performance, which is even more powerful than our Merc here.

Other more indirect rivals include the Volvo XC40 Recharge (from $74,490 in twin-motor form), or less performance-oriented Lexus UX300e ($80,691 for the top-spec Sports Luxury), although neither are as large as the EQB, and the Lexus has about half the performance.

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.

While the EQB 350 loses its valuable third-row seats, it gains a much more impressive drivetrain than the lesser EQB 250 variant. 

While that car has a so-so front-motor set-up producing 140kW/385Nm, the top-spec 350 sports a much more capable 215kW/520Nm dual-motor system.

This allows a 0-100km/h sprint time of 6.2 seconds, and while it’s not as fast as the entry-level Tesla Model 3, it’s still impressive for a 2153kg SUV.

The all-wheel drive capability also adds a level of confidence which can’t be matched by a front-drive, more on this in the driving section of this review.

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.

Regardless of which version of the EQB is chosen, the SUV has a 66.5kWh lithium-ion battery pack, and in the case of our all-wheel drive 350, this grants it a 360km WLTP-rated driving range between charges.

My car was reporting around 350km of range at or near a full charge, while my week of testing produced a dash-reported consumption figure of just 18.2kWh/100km.

This is surprising for two reasons. Firstly, I subjected the EQB 350 to a significant amount of freeway testing during my time with it, which usually produces worse consumption numbers for EVs, but it actually bested its official 21.0kWh/100km official figure by a decent margin.

Secondly, I’m puzzled to find this car outperformed the smaller and lighter EQA 250 I had on test in 2021 in terms of overall consumption, and by a significant margin. Very odd.

When it comes to charging up, the EQB can be charged at a rate of 100kW on a fast DC charger, for a 10-80 per cent charge time in a claimed 30 minutes. 

On the slower but cheaper-to-install AC standard, the EQB has an 11kW inverter, allowing a convenient ‘slow’ charge time of 4.1 hours. Expect between 25 and 30 hours on a standard wall socket.

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.

This is where the 350 version of the EQB shines. This car is a beast to drive with plenty of power available at your right foot, and incredible amounts of traction to match from its torque-vectored all-wheel drive system. 

This lets it be rapid, but not scary, and despite its square and upright body, might surprise you when it comes to carving a few corners.

Like many EVs, the EQB’s weight feels low and centred, but it appears the suspension has been adjusted to remove any bouncy quality, which might come with the additional weight added over the combustion variants, with nearly 500kg of lithium batteries under the floor.

In fact, the ride is also one of the things which impressed me most about the EQB. It even has huge 20-inch AMG wheels, yet it dealt with bumps of all shapes and sizes in an impressive manner, keeping the body under control, and communicating remarkably little in terms of vibration or unpleasantness into the cabin.

The steering offes a nice balance of feel and electrical assistance, a trait which combines with the EQB’s convenient size to make for an easy SUV to park and manoeuvre.

When it comes to the EQB’s traits as an electric car, there are several modes available to alter the experience. 

Using the paddle shifters, there are several regenerative braking settings to choose from. While none of them are a ‘single pedal’ mode, the D- mode is pretty strong, and clearly contributed to the EQB’s surprisingly good energy consumption in my time with the car.

Activating D+ mode, which can be combined with a sporty driving setting, tones down the regenerative setting almost completely and feels as though it unleashes more potential from the potent electric motors. 

While the sportier settings made the 2WD EQA I tested last year feel a little twitchy and prone to wheelspin, the all-wheel drive system keeps this well under control in the larger EQB for impressive acceleration characteristics.

The breadth of this SUV’s ability is perhaps its most impressive attribute. It can feel comfortable and tame around town, with alarming speed and tenacity when attacking the open road should you so desire. 

Sure, it’s not as whiplash-inducing as some of its rivals, particularly the Volvo XC40 Recharge or Tesla Model Y, but for a luxury SUV like this it’s more than what you could ask for. 

The EQB scores a thorough suite of active safety equipment including freeway-speed auto emergency braking (7.0-200km/h), lane keep assist with lane departure warning, blind-spot monitoring with rear cross-traffic alert, as well as one of the best adaptive cruise systems on the market.

In the event of an impact, the EQB scores dual front, side, and head curtain airbags (the side and curtain bags cover both rows) as well as a driver’s knee airbag. There are the usual dual outboard ISOFIX child seat mounting points on the rear row, as well as three top-tether points.

The EQB scored a maximum five-star ANCAP safety rating to the current 2022 standards, but this rating only covers the base 250 variant. It scored highly across all criteria.

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.

Mercedes offers a five year and unlimited kilometre warranty, with five years of roadside assist. The high-voltage battery components are also covered by a separate and industry-standard eight-year and 160,000km warranty.

Service intervals are once every 12 months or 25,000km and the service plan costs an average of $440 a year for the life of the warranty which is expensive for an EV, especially considering Polestar offers free servicing for the first five years, and Volvo’s electric offerings are around half the cost over the same period.