Mazda CX-60 vs GWM Tank 300

What's the difference?

Have no doubts. The MY25 version of the CX-60 is the SUV that Mazda should have launched in Australia in 2023.

It fulfils the promise of its sophisticated specification, builds on the extensive dynamic abilities of previous models, and now provides a compelling – and unique – choice for medium-SUV buyers who do not need an extended seven-seater.

It may still looks a bit daggy from some angles outside, and we’d like a little bit less suspension noise on the inside, but the CX-60 should now be on Australian family-car shortlists.

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

There’s a lot to like here. The GWM Tank 300 in any of its forms is a competent vehicle from the helm and backs up its off-road claims with real ability. The ride quality, in particular, is a highlight, and it’s a good size for couples or young families. Its value for money is also quite brilliant.

Add this plug-in hybrid driveline to the mix and the performance is quite astounding, while the petrol engine and EV potential have arrived at a critical point in history where such things carry more weight than ever before. It remains to be seen what happens globally and what effect that has on fuel prices, specifically the price gap between petrol and diesel. There’s also the question of what happens electronically when you dunk the Tank into Nolan’s Brook on the track to Cape York. But for now, this is a car whose time appears to have come.

But while the overall concept deserves praise, there’s still some work required in terms of the way the car drives and in its attempts at keeping its occupants safe. The calibration of both the throttle response and some of the driver aids is, frankly, in need of some final polish. And though it sounds odd, the Tank 300 would be a better thing to live with if GWM ditched the contentious driver aids and took the points hit on its ANCAP rating. Even better would be to stick with the tech but refine it to the point where it works in the background and not as an irritant.

If you’re searching for something new in the looks department for the CX-60, you won’t find it, since this is essentially the same car as last year’s model from the outside. Except there’s a new beige colour option.

Which means the same long-bonnet/cab-backward silhouette remains, along with the corporate wing-motif grille, hunched-over styling (that looks awkward from some angles) and short rear overhangs.

Still, the overall effect remains modern, clean and distinct from the nearly-identical and very closely-related CX-70, CX-80 and CX-90 further up the Mazda food chain.

Note that the CX-60 is usefully larger than the CX-5, with the former coming in at 4740mm long, 1890mm wide, 1675mm tall and 2870mm in wheelbase length, compared to the latter’s 4575mm, 1845mm, 1680mm and 2700mm dimensions respectively.

Which, of course, elevates it from an interior point of view.

Derivative is a strong word, but from most angles there’s a little bit of something else in the Tank 300’s exterior. We can easily see a bit of Suzuki Jimny in profile, and a dash of new Ford Bronco in the lights and grille. And if you squint there’s a blob of Jeep Wrangler in the wheel-arch extensions.

Which should mean it’s just a mash-up. Yet somehow, it isn’t, and the Tank has its own vibe.

Inside, that vibe suddenly becomes a bit overdone, and the plastic garnish above the glove box, in particular, looks like it will date pretty quickly (if it hasn't already). There's also a lot going on in here; this is a busy place and even the gear selector looks like a prop form the Star Wars franchise.

Like the exterior, the changes for the MY25 CX-60 are pretty much under the skin, with improved noise/vibration and harshness-quelling measures to quieten things down more.

And an exhaust-sound enhancer through the audio system to liven things up if you desire.

Representing the aforementioned $10K saving over the previous entry-level Evolve, the Pure does possess less opulent trim and (nice) cloth seat fabrics, but otherwise the CX-60 does present a larger-than-usual cabin environment compared to smaller medium-sized SUVs.

But fans of big, showy screens may be underwhelmed.

The dash is elegant but somewhat old-fashioned, especially compared to, say, the latest BMW X3’s dazzling displays. It feels like a hangover from last decade’s CX-9.

Yet there’s no denying how satisfyingly easy and logical most of it is, from the super-clear, electronic instrumentation to the simple and effective climate control layout, while the iDrive-style rotary controller means less time with eyes off the road. Safe, intuitive ergonomics. Thank you, Mazda.

Additionally, there’s a quality solidness to the fit and finish that elevates the social-climbing Mazda beyond what a CX-5 could achieve.

All the essentials are also well thought out, from storage and vision out to ventilation and, not least of all, space and seat support, especially when sat on over long distances.

That also carries over to the expansive back-seat environment, with air vents, USB ports, lighting, cupholders and grab handles. The CX-60 is an SUV that a family could grow into without it feeling excessive.

Is this ‘big-medium’ or ‘small-large’ sized?

From the boot’s perspective, either fits, and is one of the reasons why you might consider stepping up to a CX-60. The floor is low, wide, flat and easy to load, as well as beautifully finished.

The 40/20/40 split fold backrests can be folded remotely via Mazda’s Karakuri function, boosting capacity from 477 litres (VDA) to 1726L, while the in-line six-cylinder models have a space-saver spare wheel underneath, leaving PHEV owners with an inadequate tyre repair kit.

While GWM is by no means the worst offender, we still reckon the Tank’s interior would be better without such a degree of reliance of touchscreens and menu-driven functionality. While it’s obvious that there’s a lot going on in the cabin, it still seems odd that important functions such as shifting from conventional hybrid mode to EV mode would require a dive through the on-screen menus when a simple switch would be faster, easier and simpler.

And even when GWM has provided switches, the end result is muddy. Take the volume controls for an example. There’s no central volume knob accessible by both front seat occupants, so you rely on the steering wheel mounted up and down buttons to change the volume. Except they’re not marked as volume controls in any specific way. Okay, if you know, you know. But if you don’t know, you’ve just missed the news headlines.

Overall, it's disappointing. And I resent the fact that GWM (or anybody else) thinks it’s okay for me to have to learn to operate a car all over again. The dashboard is also full of tiny symbols and lettering making things difficult to decipher if you normally wear glasses to read, but not to drive.

We’ll take issue with the indicator stalk, too, which has an indistinct feel when trying to discern whether you turned the indicators on for an intersection, or just tipped them on for three flashes for a lane change. And if you have accidentally gone too far and they’re still flashing away merrily after the lane change, turning them off manually is a lottery that might see you succeed, or mistakenly turn on the other side flashers.

The rest is better with proper buttons for the various off-road drive modes, diff locks and hill holder. There’s even an analogue clock for some real nostalgia. You’ll also find a single USB-A and USB-C charge port in the dash, and a pair of cupholders buried deep in the centre console which also has a lid and sliding drawer.

It’s obvious that this is a smaller vehicle than some, and the four-door layout dictates shorter doors. But that doesn’t alter the fact that the driver’s seat slides back a few centimetres every time you shut the car down. The trouble with that if you’re tall, is that the seat is now tucked back in behind the B-pillar, meaning you have to climb out and around it to exit the car. Perhaps you can switch off this slide-back function, but I didn’t have the spare hour to troll through the menus to do so. Oh, and there should be a driver’s grab handle on the A-pillar, too. There isn’t.

The rear seat is better with an adjustable backrest that provides proper comfort, and leg and knee room that hides the 300’s smaller dimensions well. There’s lots of glass and light and a pair of USB charge points. You also get a pair of rear reading lights and central vents, but no climate controls.

Even the cargo area is a decent size with the five seats in place (360 litres, up to 1520L with 60/40 rear seats lowered) but the under-floor storage space has been consumed by the hybrid battery, meaning the jack and tools and charging cable live in the cargo area and the spare tyre is bolted to the tailgate.

The single-piece tailgate is hinged at the side, and needs a fair bit of real estate to be swung open fully.

The Tank features vehicle-to-load capability, too, which means you can operate your power tools using the vehicle as the power source, and there’s a 220-volt socket in the luggage area to do just that. But when camping, too, this feature can also power induction cookers, microwaves, and all the other stuff you probably should have left at home. And if the hybrid battery runs out of charge, the Tank can run its petrol engine to act as a generator (your camping neighbours are going to love that).

The real gadget freaks out there can also download the Tank app which allows you to operate functions such as power windows, climate control, seat heaters, central locking and check your charging status all from the comfort of your smartphone. You can also use this functionality to flash the hazard lights to help spot your Tank from everybody else’s in the carpark.

The Tank 300 PHEV is available in two trim levels, starting with the Lux at $55,990 drive-away. That gets you 18-inch alloy wheels, roof rails and side steps and, perhaps a little surprisingly, a sunroof.

There’s also power folding mirrors, keyless entry and start, paddle shifters, adaptive cruise-control and a rear differential lock.

Inside, there are leather accents for the seats, a pair of 12.3-inch multimedia, ambient lighting, digital radio, wireless connectivity, wireless phone charging, wireless Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, automatic headlights, full LED lighting, and dual-zone climate control. That’s quite a bit of gear for the money.

But throw another four grand on the sales rep's desk, and you into the Ultra grade which adds heated, cooled and massaging front seats, eight-way power adjustment for the driver’s chair, Nappa leather inserts, underbody protection, a front differential lock and no less than 64 colour choices for the expanded ambient lighting package.

Fundamentally, then, your extra $4000 is buying the clever front seats and front diff lock, but that’s easily worth the money anyhow. That said, the entry-level variant is one of the better equipped at that price-point, so either way, you won’t be slumming it.

For now, the base engine is the 209kW/450Nm G40e, a 3.3-litre turbo-petrol ‘six’ delivering the sort of healthy power figures that late-model Commodore and Falcon buyers would appreciate.

There’s also the 187kW/550Nm D50e turbo-diesel version, for extra pulling power and economy, and we’re getting into premium Euro territory here, because both offer a 48-volt, mild-hybrid system, employing a small electric motor located behind the engine to boost torque yet cut fuel consumption and CO2 emissions.

Mazda says new motor control and clutch slip control software facilitates “…smoother transitions as the electric motor is activated and deactivated”. We hope so!

Last but not least, there’s the 241kW/500Nm P50e plug-in hybrid electric vehicle powertrain, combining the familiar 2.5-litre four-cylinder petrol engine with a larger, 129kW electric motor powered by a 17.8kWh Lithium ion battery. The latter allows up to 76km of pure-electric driving, and can be recharged either by regenerative braking when driving or plugged into a Type 2 port.

All three engines use a revised eight-speed, wet multi-plate-clutch automatic transmission, still driving the rear or, as traction and/or performance needs arise, all four wheels.

Yep, this is essentially a rear-drive-biased family SUV, with a sophisticated double wishbone front and multi-link rear suspension set-up to keep everything in line.

So, what’s changed underneath compared to last year’s CX-60?

Among the modifications are stiffer dampers and softer rear springs to address ride-comfort issues with the old car; relocated front knuckle mounts; altered rear axle bushes and the removal of the rear anti-roll bar for more stable control; shorter rear bump stops for greater suspension travel; an extra joint in the steering column quells vibrations while updated software improves steering feel and electronic stability control operation. The goal is for noticeably smoother, comfier and more linear dynamics. 

Result? To find out how much better or worse Mazda’s latest mid-sized SUV is, we drove the it in a variety of conditions, from the push-and-shove of Melbourne’s bumper-to-bumper peak-hour traffic, to a series of demanding emergency-swerve and multi-speed ride and handling test manoeuvres at the legendary Lang Lang proving ground that shaped so many of our iconic Holdens.

More on that a bit later on.

The Tank’s plug-in driveline, starts with a petrol engine measuring 2.0-litres and contributing 180kW to the overall picture. But then there’s a single electric motor, sandwiched between the petrol engine and the nine-speed transmission. That means the Tank is still a mechanical four-wheel-drive platform, and when both powerplants are singing together, there’s an eye-opening 300kW and 750Nm of torque on tap.

The four-wheel-drive system operates as a rear-wheel drive on dry bitumen, and there’s the usual 4WD high range and 4WD low range. What there isn’t, is a 4WD-auto setting that allows you to use four-wheel drive in the dry on a paved road. That sounds minor, but for towing in particular, having all four wheels doing the driving is a major safety bonus.

All Tank 300s get a rear differential lock, but this version, the Ultra, also gets a locking front diff as well. Typically, the Tank also features a range of driving modes (no less than nine of them!) for the four-wheel-drive function, tailoring throttle, transmission and differential response according to the type of terrain being covered.

The Tank 300 is built the old fashioned way with a ladder-chassis upon which the body is bolted, and it still uses a live rear axle, too. But the front suspension is independent and the GWM uses coil springs rather than old-school leaf springs for much better ride quality.

One area where the Mazda did not need fixing is in its fuel economy.

All of the CX-60’s powertrains are rated at Euro 5.

Officially, the G40e 3.3-litre petrol averages 7.4L/100km, on the combined cycle, and emits 174 grams per kilometre of CO2. Urban and Extra Urban numbers are 9.9L/100km and 6.0L/100km.

Fitted with a 58L petrol tank, expect an average range of around 780km. And it will run on standard 91 RON unleaded petrol to boot.

Moving on to the D50e 3.3L diesel, it manages an impressive 5.0L/100km, for a CO2 figure of 132g/km, resulting in a range average of about 1160km. Its Urban/Extra Urban figures are 5.5/4.7L/100km respectively.

And, finally, there’s the P50e 2.5L PHEV, offering a theoretical 2.1L/100km, for a CO2 figure of just 49g/km, for an unlikely range average of 2380km from its 50L tank, though on 95 RON premium unleaded brew.

Out in the real world, and mostly driven harder than a typical owner might, the trip computer in the PHEV showed low sevens, while the diesel displayed mid-eights and the petrol high nines, which aren’t too bad at all.

The headline number here is GWM’s official fuel consumption number of just 1.9 litres per 100km. Or it would be if it had anything to do with the real world. As it is, nobody is going to achieve that, and our mix of urban running netted an average of about 11.0 litres per 100km, with that dropping to 8.5 litres per 100km in country conditions.

The truth is, your consumption in this vehicle can go from zero to, say, 12 litres per 100km depending on how and where you drive and how much battery charge you have available.

Speaking of charging, the Tank 300 can use a commercial fast charger to absorb voltage at a rate of 50kW. At that rate, it can go from 30 to 80 per cent charged in about 24 minutes. A wall box (GWM offers one as a factory option) can take the 37.1kWh battery from 15 per cent to fully charged in 6.5 hours. And, of course, you can also charge the Tank from a domestic wall socket in a claimed 14.4 hours. We managed to add about 6km worth of charge per hour on such an outlet during our time with the car.

As far as range goes, GWM reckons there’s 115km (NEDC) of EV-only range, while starting a journey with a fully charged battery and a full 70-litre fuel tank should see you covering somewhere between 900 and 950km between top ups.

This is the acid test. Does the CX-60 drive like a Mazda should?

In the engine department, definitely.

The changes that Mazda has made to the transmission calibration means that it no longer hunts indecisively between ratios like it used to, and that results in smoother shifts as well as a more relaxed driving experience.

And that's across the range, whether we're talking about the six-cylinder diesel or petrol, or four-pot plug-in hybrid. And the latter brings the biggest surprise, because the changes made to the gearbox have resulted in a much more pleasant car around town, with no more shunting or jerky movements to contend with.

And then there's the ride, which is palpably softer than before. The suspension is significantly more pliable and comfortable as a consequence, offering better bump absorption, improved control at speed and basically just a more refined experience. We tried several of the Lang Lang Proving Ground’s rough-road tests, which the CX-60 sailed over without any of the hard jarring of the previous model, which Mazda helpfully provided for back-to-back assessments.

So, how does all that translate in everyday driving?

Well, the latest CX-60 is way more comfortable to ride in across the board, it handles and corners with greater control and linearity, seems quieter and it's just a suppler experience overall.

As there was so much that was good with the original CX-60 anyway, including muscular performance from the inline six-cylinder turbos, impressive high-speed stability and exceptional body control through fast turns, the modifications for 2025 do much to elevate an already good thing.

So, it's a win-win situation. If you are in the market for a sub-premium, mid-sized SUV with performance and space, as well as newfound comfort and sophistication, you can do a lot worse than check out the CX-60. It is that much better than before.

GWM claims a 0-100km/h acceleration time of just 6.3 seconds for the Tank 300 PHEV, and that’s impressive. There are two caveats here. The first is that you need at least 40 per cent battery charge on board to extract maximum thrust. And, secondly, even in those circumstances, the Tank never feels that brisk. It’s more effortless than genuinely rapid, although the torque up hills is genuinely impressive.

There’s no getting around the refinement inherent in using volts for some of the time. And when the petrol engine does chime in, it’s all but imperceptible. You’ll eventually hear the engine if you wring it right out, but even then, vibrations are minimal.

All in all, the Tank’s relatively compact dimensions work in its favour in an urban setting, and the range of camera views (including an off-road one showing you the obstacles you’re about to encounter) make parking a lot easier than it might have been. Only a high degree of distortion in the birds-eye-view camera mode takes a bit of getting used to.

On the move the ride quality is quite exceptional, and those coil springs really do make a difference. Even the usual council speed bumps don’t bother the Tank and the short wheelbase pitching we’ve seen in some similar vehicles just never emerges. Well chosen damper rates help, too, and there has been some Australian input into the way the Tank handles. It shows.

Steering, too, feels light and natural, although the almost constant fidgeting at the helm by the lane-keeping assistance program is annoying. And switching it off is not only a multi-button job, it needs to be done every time you start the vehicle.

Far and away the biggest hurdle in living with the Tank, however, is a throttle calibration that is way off the mark. Pressing the accelerator pedal initially doesn’t seem to do much at all, and then suddenly, the power comes in and you discover you’ve input too much throttle as the Tank surges away down the road, threatening to actually spin its tyres if there’s any gravel about. But not until that initial hesitation has caused the driver behind you to wonder aloud (I can lip-read) if you’re ever going to move at all. This needs to be fixed as a running change.

The all-important off-road driving experience is pretty sharp and the Tank 300 is a genuine competitor in this discipline. It’s extremely stable and capable on unsealed roads and tracks and the front and rear diff locks make it a proper adventurer’s rig.

It’s relatively demure dimensions also mean that it fits down the tracks and trails that have been created by decades of vehicles of a similar size, unlike some of the bigger new off-roaders we’re seeing that simply don’t fit in to the terrain so neatly.

Ultimately, the Tank’s stock tyres will be the limiting factor, but there are plenty of alternatives out there for a bit more off-road bite.

The Tank has a strong safety story to tell, especially on paper.

Regardless of what specification you buy, you’ll get seven airbags including full-length side-curtain bags and a centre airbag to reduce head injuries in a side-impact crash.

There are rear parking sensors, a range of camera angles including an overhead view, tyre-pressure monitoring, Isofix child-restraint mounts, and the usual driver aids including autonomous emergency braking, rear cross-traffic alert and braking, blind-spot monitoring, traffic-sign recognition and rear collision warning.

But away from the brochure, features such as the lane-keeping assistance and the driver-fatigue monitor need work on their calibration. GWM is by no means on its own here, but it’s a fact that some other makers do a better job of making this tech transparent and vastly less intrusive.

The original Tank 300 launched in Australia in 2022 scored five safety stars in ANCAP testing, and that rating has been carried over to this car.

Mazda could also do a bit better with its warranty nowadays, since its five-year/unlimited kilometre warranty and roadside assistance is decidedly average.

Service intervals are at 12 months or every 15,000km, while a fixed-price service scheme is available, starting from $463 per service depending on powertrain. That’s for the petrol. The diesels start from $500 while the PHEVs commence from $435.

GWM offers a seven year/unlimited kilometre warranty on the Tank 300, as well as eight years of cover for the hybrid battery (also with no kilometre limit). There’s also seven years of roadside assistance thrown in, too.

Capped-price servicing is available for the first seven years, with the first service due at 12 months or 10,000km and subsequent services every 12 months of 15,000km after that. Prices for each service (in order) are: $320, $460, $460, $685, $685, $1075, and $370.

GWM has a network of 123 new-car dealerships able to handle servicing, and the company tells us that regional centres have not been forgotten.