Mazda CX-3 vs Volkswagen T-ROC

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.

So that’s the T-Roc, a bit of Euro style that’s still priced to take the fight to some small SUVs from Japan or Korea.

Is it the cheapest style-forward small SUV you can get? No, but it’s far from the expensive end of things.

Plus, if you can resist ticking some option boxes, it beats some value-focused rivals and looks good doing it.

If the feeling of a sturdy fit-out and a confidence inspiring drive is important to you, I reckon the T-Roc should be an entry on your shopping list.

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 T-Roc subtly stands out without being garish, avoiding becoming part of the highway or suburban camouflage without relying on extreme design decisions.

For example, the LED daytime running lights that wrap around the shapes below the LED 'I.Q' headlights where vents would otherwise be on the R performance variant are quite cute.

In fact, the whole front end of this small SUV has a friendly look, even if there’s nothing specific that’s particularly exciting about it.

This 'Petroleum Blue Metallic' colour is a $700 option, but anything other than white costs extra.

However, the black roof two-tone look is a standard for the Style, as are the black mirror caps and its 18-inch alloys.

There are roof rails up top, tinted privacy windows for rear passengers and for the rear window and a sloping roofline at the rear that adds a touch of ‘sport’ to the silhouette along with a small spoiler at the top.

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.

Inside the T-Roc is a bit of an interesting dichotomy.

Some of what’s in here is ‘old-gen’ Volkswagen stuff, but it still holds up today against even some recently introduced models.

The dichotomy is that while it’s very usable and slick, some of its materials and surfaces let it down a touch.

The good points are that the cabin tech is a perfect level of physical and digital. The buttons and controls are easy to use and feel solid and even though the climate controls could be more physical, they’re still good as far as touch panel style controls go.

The older VW gear is arguably better than a lot of what’s found in newer models where some use of touchscreens and haptic panels has drawn negative feedback from customers.

The multimedia software managed via the 8.0-inch touchscreen is more simple and sensible than the new version, plus the Digital Cockpit Pro display for the driver is clear and, importantly, customisable. It’s a similar cockpit system that used to seem quite impressive in high-end Audis.

But what doesn’t feel very high-end is some of the plastic and the decisions around function in the rest of the space.

The leather on the seats is not a cheap option box to tick at $3450, but it feels a little cheap to the touch. It’s a tad hard and even has a bit of a rough look to it.

That option also makes them heated and electrically adjustable, though, which is welcome in winter. Otherwise, cloth seats without the optional leather or heating would be absolutely fine, and that means you get a storage space under them, too.

This central space between the driver and front passenger, too, is a little awkward with the cupholder placement. It’s behind the shifter meaning a tall bottle will be in the way and it’s got slightly odd sizing for bottles or cups with nothing to stop them wobbling.

I am, however, a fan of the angled-away phone slot under the climate controls to minimise phone screen visibility (and distraction) and the traditional shifter itself is welcome.

Look up, and (in our test car) there’s an optional ($2000) panoramic sunroof there. It’s yours if you want it, and it does have an electric blind, but some Japanese and Korean cars at this price point get that as standard.

An average-sized adult will find the second row is spacious enough and relatively comfortable. There’s an armrest, dual-directional vents and two USB-C ports.

Behind that, boot space is generous at 445L with the seats up thanks to an adjustable floor, which is very useful for tall items and even manages to fit a space saver spare tyre under it.

It’s a total of 1290L with the split-fold seats down, too, though they’re not super flat with the adjustable floor down.

The specific Style test vehicle being reviewed here is priced at $38,890, before on-road costs. But it's worth noting a new example of the Style will cost you $39,790 at the time of writing, as its price has since ours was 'delivered'.

While the Style features some older VW fitout, it comes with a decent list of features.

A set of 18-inch wheels, self-levelling headlights (with cornering function), some cute LED DRLs plus chrome highlights with black contrast trim are the best way to spot a Style from the outside.

Inside, there’s an 8.0-inch touchscreen for multimedia paired to the driver’s 'Digital Cockpit Pro' display.

The multimedia screen is last-gen VW gear, but that’s not a bad thing.

There’s also dual-zone climate control with an allergen filter, ambient lighting, a six-speaker sound system, wireless phone charger and wireless Android Auto and Apple CarPlay.

There are a few options on our test car that nudge the price up quite quickly, like the metallic paint, leather upholstery, sunroof, plus the keyless entry or ‘Easy open and close package’.

All this brings the total price as-tested to $45,640, before on-roads.

The good news is you don’t need to tick all, or any, of those options for this to still be a compelling option. 

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 engine in the T-Roc - as with most Volkswagens - does what it says on the tin. Essentially, a 110TSI means there’s 110kW of turbocharged VW happening, in this case a 1.4-litre four-cylinder that also makes 250Nm of torque.

It’s paired to an eight-speed torque converter, which will be music to the ears of those who have been scorned by older VW dual-clutches.

It drives the front wheels only, and there’s no hybridisation or 48-volt system.

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.

A lack of electrification in a relatively small engine and a traditional drivetrain shouldn't scare you too much, in this case.

Combined cycle fuel consumption is a claimed 6.3L/100km. On test in mostly urban areas or for spirited driving we saw the fuel use rise a little higher than that but not by as much as you might think.

After a mix of primarily urban, some highway and a stint of dynamic test driving, the trip computer admitted to a figure of 8.1L/100km.

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 T-Roc is essentially a previous-generation Golf-turned-small SUV in terms of its platform, and that’s a great thing for anyone who likes driving.

The Golf 7.5 was a benchmark for everyday driving as far as hatchbacks are concerned, and even though the current Mk8 might be a bit more up to date, the T-Roc’s use of the platform it rides on is practical and fun.

It’s not as nimble as a Golf, but the T-Roc in front-drive Style guise, with a responsive turbocharged engine and no all-wheel drive system weighing it down, is not only more dynamically capable than most rivals, it’s also easy to access that capability.

The 1.4-litre engine feels well-tuned for its two modes accessible through the shifter - calm but not lazy in ‘Drive’ and eager but not thrashy in ‘Sport’.

It works well with the transmission on the move, picking right gears fairly accurately, though there are paddles behind the wheel for those who prefer to take charge.

The drive modes are also more customisable than just those on the shifter, with 'Individual' selections for steering and drivetrain able to be used rather than the standard 'Eco', 'Normal' or 'Sport' full-system modes.

While the steering wheel itself is a little thick and the feedback, while adequate, isn’t the most telling, it’s accurate and inspires confidence in cornering.

The T-Roc handles turn-in and exits well, even soaking up bumps and not becoming unsettled when braking.

Its safety systems are relatively subtle, and the active cruise control is well sorted, though the automatic braking at car park speeds can be overzealous. Something I’ve experienced in VW Group models several times over the years.

The main culprit for the T-Roc was a shrub beside my driveway that, while not touching the car, would set off the automatic braking system. Still, better than letting the car roll back if there was a proper obstacle or someone who could be hurt in the way.

Aside from that, the Volkswagen T-Roc is fun and easy to drive, and the work that’s gone into that puts its price into perspective a little more.

There are more expensive cars available that are less impressive, some even disappointing.

In 2017, ANCAP gave the T-Roc five stars for safety. For most people, that says enough, plus the list of features the SUV comes with is fairly comprehensive even in the Style.

While its rating is getting on in years, the only real downside to the T-Roc’s age when it comes to safety is it only having six airbags - front and side for the front passengers, plus curtain airbags for front and rear passengers.

But the list of tech isn’t lacking, with driver fatigue detection, pedestrian monitoring, parking bay and parallel parking assistance, pedestrian monitoring, side assist, rear cross-traffic alert and lane assist.

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.

Volkswagen’s five-year/unlimited kilometre warranty is pretty standard for a premium-leaning brand, with VW also offering roadside assistance for the warranty period.

In terms of servicing, VW offers care plans of three years or five years, covering servicing for $1515 or $2770 respectively. That's an average of $505 or $554 per workshop visit.

Otherwise, servicing costs at 12-month/15,000km intervals can cost from $470 for some to $1104 to the biggest service if you don’t go with the locked-in package.