Mazda CX-60 vs Infiniti Q60

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.

Beautiful looks, good handling, but the driving experience of the Q60 GT is let down by a numbness and disconnection relative to what's happening under you. Refinement isn't on the same level as its BMW and Benz rivals, but the GT is a perfect match for the RC 200t, while remaining good value for money. If you have your heart set on an Infiniti Q60 then I'd skip straight to the top and opt for the Red Sport.

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.

The Q60 GT is a head turner – literally. Whenever I was driving slow enough to notice, people were rubbernecking to look at the long, low-slung coupe. I'm sure most had no idea what brand of car it was, but in its 'Iridium Blue' paint the Q60 looked amazing with its curvy, sleek profile.

There's only one small issue – the RC 200t and Q60 GT are way too similar looking, right down to their 'signature' shaped c-pillars. I prefer the grille of the Lexus but the rear of the Q60. While there might be a bit of copy-catting going on, both are prettier than their BMW or Benz rivals.

The Q60 GT feels fairly large to drive and the dimensions don't lie – 4690mm end-to-end, 2052mm across with the wing mirrors unfurled, but low at 1395mm.

The cabin treatment is just as emotional as the exterior, with its dual screens, swoopy dashboard and sectioned off driver and passenger cells.

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.

The short answer is not very practical - but then no two-door sports car really is. So while the front two seats are roomy (although the optional sunroof restricts headroom) the same can't be said for the back seats – at 191cm tall, not only can I not sit up straight (because of the sloping roofline), I can't fit my legs in behind my driving position.

While those large doors open wide the roofline and the lack of rear doors means trying to insert a toddler into his car seat was painful and involved kneeling in the street, there were days we took our much less fancy SUV just because it was easier.

This is a four seater – with two cupholders in between the rear seats and two more cupholders up front. Storage elsewhere is limited, with tiny pockets in the front doors and a small centre console bin to hide your phone and wallet.

The boot is also on the small side at 341 litres – don't compare this to the 423 litre of cargo capacity in the RC 200t which is measured in VDA litres. That said, there was more than enough room for our weekly shop which fitted in snugly, although you have to hoist your shopping bags high to clear that boot lip.

The Q60 GT has a list price of $62,900, undercutting the Lexus RC 200t by $2000, but what you might find surprising is that the Benz C200 Coupe is only $3500 more than the Infiniti, while the BMW 420i in the Luxury grade lists for $69,900. Depending on how you look at it, either the Germans are affordable or the Japanese are expensive. Perhaps a bit of both.

It's not bad value for money, but it would be good to see other features such as Apple CarPlay and Android Auto added.

What's for sure is that the Q60 GT's standard features list is substantial. There's 8.0-inch and 7.0-inch 'double-decker' screens, sat nav, reversing camera, front and rear parking sensors, six-speaker stereo, LED head- and fog lights, proximity unlocking, heated and power adjustable front seats and leather upholstery.

It's not bad value for money, but it would be good to see other features such as Apple CarPlay and Android Auto added along with adaptive cruise control.

The Q60 Sport Premium is the next grade up from the GT and lists for $70,900, while the Red Sport is $88,900.

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 Q60 GT has a 155kW/350Nm 2.0-litre four-cylinder turbo-petrol engine with drive being sent to the rear wheels through a seven-speed automatic transmission. The same engine is also in the Q60 Sport Premium, while the Red Sport packs a twin-turbo V6.

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.

An official combined fuel consumption figure of 7.7L/100km is fairly optimistic and our combination of urban, city and highway running saw the trip computer reporting back to us with 9.1L/100km. Still, that's not too bad considering how much time was spent in city traffic.

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.

I had a feeling this would happen - the GT was disappointing to drive after the Red Sport with the latter's twin-turbo V6, sports suspension, better steering and excellent Sport + drive mode. There's lots to like about the GT, though – the grip is great from the wide Dunlop SP rubber (235 40 R19 front and 255 40 R19 rear), the chassis feels taught, acceleration is good and it's a gorgeous looking car.

But there's a sense of disconnection from the driving experience I couldn't get past, such as the numb feeling in the steering which needed constant re-adjustment. I also think the suspension felt over sprung and lacked composure over small bumps in the road.

The GT and all Q60s don't have the same level of refinement as the C200 Coupe or 420i, evident from the clunky feel of the door handles to the road noise intruding into the cabin.

That 2.0-litre engine is great, but the transmission is a mood killer with it wanting to change up gears quickly to save fuel.

I'm not a fan of the cockpit. Sure it's brave and expressively designed, but the double-deck screens are confusing, there's one for nav, while the other's for media... I think. Then there are things you don't need, such as a digital compass – actually there are two, one on the display and another in the instrument cluster, but there's no digital speedo.

That 2.0-litre engine is great, but the transmission is a mood killer with it wanting to change up gears quickly to save fuel, even in 'Sport' mode.

Here's a curve ball call for you – I've just stepped out of a, Alfa Giulia Super. Close in price to the Infiniti, same sized engine, but infinitely more rewarding and fun to drive – plus you get an extra two doors.

The Q60 is yet to be rated by ANCAP, although it's good to see AEB with pedestrian detection is standard, even on the base grade GT. That said, it would be good to see blind spot warning and lane keeping assistance fitted as standard (as you'll find on the Benz C200 Coupe). It's not a lot to ask considering these comes standard on higher grades of the Nissan X-Trail.

There are two ISOFIX mounts in the back and two top tether anchor points.

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.

The Q60 GT is covered by Infiniti's four-year/100,000km warranty.

Servicing is recommended every 12 months/25,000km. Servicing is capped at $538 for the first, then $643 and then $849 for the third.