Mazda CX-3 vs MG MG4 Urban

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 MG4 Urban is not only the right car at the right time, perfectly catering to buyers looking to avoid rising petrol prices, it’s also a welcome return-to-form for MG as a brand.

MG is seemingly at its best when it sticks to small cars. It has traditionally excelled with the MG3 and ZS, smaller, more affordable products that keep expectations in check and can win over customers looking for the best bang-for-their-buck rather than simply the best car.

That’s not to say the MG4 Urban isn’t a good car. It offers tremendous value for money, excellent interior space and drives nicely, so anyone who has been considering making the switch to an EV should seriously consider this new arrival.

Note: CarsGuide attended this event as a guest of the manufacturer, with 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.

MG says the design inspiration for the MG4 Urban came from the $100,000 Cyberster. While there are certainly a lot of differences between that roadster and this hatchback, the air-intakes and wheel design are indeed very similar. And I guess the badge is the same too, so there’s that…

But, comparing it to the Cyberster misses the point. What makes the MG4 Urban’s design more interesting is the bits you can’t see. While it shares the same name as the MG4 Hatch, this car has almost nothing in common with it. That’s because this new MG4 Urban is based on the brand’s newer EV underpinnings that debuted on the MGS5 EV.

That means the MG4 Urban is front-wheel drive, whereas the hatch is rear-wheel drive, and because of the way the battery is integrated into the chassis, it creates not only a bigger hatchback but also one with a different shape.

The Urban is more ‘cab forward’ (to use design parlance) meaning a shorter bonnet, which creates more cabin room. It also means there is more boot space because the powertrain is located up front.

MG does a good job with cabin presentation too. It’s another step forward for the brand, improving the overall level of fit and finish from its earlier models, to create a cabin that looks modern and doesn’t feel like it has been built to a price.

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.

As I just mentioned, the cabin is bigger than the other MG4, which creates good space in both seating rows. 

Up front they’ve placed the gear selector on the steering column to create space for more storage in the centre of the car. That means there’s plenty of shelves, cubbies and cup holders to take care of your small (and not so small) items, spread across the cabin.

As for the boot, the switch to a front motor and a smaller rear suspension means a 382-litre boot with all seats up and 1266L if you drop the back seats. Plus there’s a 98L underfloor storage spot, in place of a spare wheel (with a puncture repair kit included instead).

The design of the key controls are simple and easy to use, with a digital display for the instruments ahead of the driver and a 12.8-inch multimedia screen in the centre of the dashboard.

Navigating the menus is relatively straightforward but in a victory for user-friendliness, MG has listened to feedback (and incoming Chinese government regulations) and added some physical controls. There are buttons and a dial for the air-conditioning system and a volume knob for the sound system.

MG made its reputation in Australia by selling some of the most-affordable models on the market, filling the hole left by mainstream brands like Toyota, Hyundai and Mazda as they increased the entry-level prices in their respective line-ups. Something MG itself tried with the HS, QS and U9, as it expanded beyond the once-popular MG3, MG5 and ZS.

The MG4 Urban is a return to form in that sense for MG, with this new small car starting at just $31,990 drive-away. For context, the MG4 Hatch starts at $37,990 drive-away, so this is a much cheaper proposition. That starting price is for the MG4 Urban Standard Range, the Extended Range variant is priced from $34,990 drive-away.

That pricing does not feel accidental from MG Australia, despite what they may suggest when pressed. That’s because the new BYD Atto 2, the direct rival to the Urban, starts at $31,990 plus on-road costs. Even so, BYD has the last laugh, because it offers both the BYD Atto 1, which starts at $23,990, and the Dolphin, which is priced from $29,990 - to undercut the MG4 Urban, even if neither are considered direct competitors.

In terms of specification, both the Standard Range and Extended Range have the same equipment with the exception of the obvious - a bigger battery, and more power from the motor.

Standard equipment highlights include 17-inch alloy wheels, LED headlights and tail-lights, a leather-wrapped steering wheel, PVC seat upholstery, heated front seats, Bluetooth connectivity with wireless Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, in-built navigation and a six-speaker stereo.

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.

The MG4 Urban Standard Range is powered by a 110kW/250Nm electric motor that drives the front-wheels via a single-speed transmission. The Extended Range has slightly more performance, 118kW and 250Nm, but aside from that they are the same motor.

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.

The biggest difference between the two MG4 Urban variants is the battery. The Standard Range has a 43kWh battery good for 316km of driving between charging, while the Extended Range gets a bigger 54kWh battery to make it capable of up to 405km.

We didn’t drive the car long enough to get a clear indication of real-world efficiency and range, but it performed well during our drive in suburban Sydney. The steady stop-start traffic gave the battery its best chance to perform well and the early indications are its range is close to claim, at least under the right circumstances. We’ll have to reserve definitive judgement until we’ve had a longer test drive.

What MG was very keen to highlight are the cost savings of buying an EV at a time of sky-high petrol prices. The company made a point that using off-peak electricity, which can be had for just 6c per kW from certain providers, means you can replenish the battery of the MG4 Urban Standard for just $3.44. 

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.

What really stood out about the MG4 Hatch is its rear-motor, rear-wheel-drive layout, which made it a very dynamic and almost sporty car. In my 2023 review I called it “a genuinely enjoyable small car to drive".

The MG4 Urban doesn’t quite leave the same impression. Again, we had only a brief and (appropriately) urban test drive around Sydney’s beachside suburbs, but the MG4 Urban proved competent rather than commendable.

But, let’s be honest, unless you’re looking for driving thrills in the wrong place (affordable, city-focused hatchbacks) the MG4 Urban does the job it is required to do. It’s as nice as any other mainstream hatch to drive from Point A to Point B.

The ride could be a little softer and more compliant, with the suspension feeling too firm at times, but with its electric motor it’s a quiet and relaxed driving experience. The electric motor provides adequate performance too, certainly more torque in less time than you’ll get in a petrol-powered hatch.

Curiously, MG Australia executives said the MG4 Urban was locally evaluated and tuned but could only offer a vague mention of ‘holistic’ changes to better suit it to local conditions, rather than pointing to any specific Australia-developed changes to the suspension, steering or powertrain.

It may be small and cheap, but that doesn’t mean MG has cut corners on safety. The MG4 Urban comes equipped with the MG Pilot and a suite of active safety features, including adaptive cruise control, autonomous emergency braking, lane keep assist, blind spot monitoring, driver attention monitoring and speed limit notification.

The latter two are the most evident, as they provide a steady soundtrack of beeps as you drive along. Take your eyes off the road for more than a few seconds as the driver attention system fires up, while the speed sign recognition gets busy in Australia’s ever-changing speed limits.

While MG has undoubtedly improved the sensitivity of some of these systems compared to other models, they are still more active than rival products. Perhaps more concerning, the speed limit recognition repeatedly beeped to tell me I was in a ‘25km/h’ zone, which is simply not a recognised speed limit on Sydney roads.

Like so many other brands, MG needs to further refine these active safety systems in order to make the driving experience more relaxed and less distracting.

MG says the MG4 Urban has secured a five-star rating from Euro NCAP, which is expected to be carried over by ANCAP. 

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.

The MG4 Urban is covered by the brand’s 10-year/250,000km warranty, as long as you service it at an official MG service centre. If you don’t get your car serviced with the company directly, your warranty reverts to seven-year/unlimited km coverage.

Servicing intervals are every 12 months or 25,000km and will cost you $1366 over the first five years. The cheapest visit is just $149 but the major service, after four years, is a pricey $472, which does push against the idea that EVs are cheaper to service due to less moving parts.