Mazda CX-90 vs Mazda BT-50

What's the difference?

There are many reasons I quite like this CX-90. It sells the plush luxury promise when it comes to its interior and design, it feels big and purposeful, and has a refreshingly minimalist approach to its cabin tech. As a seven-seat SUV it’s particularly impressive, with plenty of amenity and a third row that can genuinely fit an adult in comfort.

However, there are areas where it could use more polish, from the drivetrain to the ride, and it ultimately strikes an odd point for price and ownership which feels lost between the premium segment and the mainstream rivals.

If you’re a long-term Mazda owner, I still think you’ll love it, and this Touring grade is definitely the best value in the range. It offers the lion’s share of equipment at a price more comparable to Mazda’s traditional mainstream rivals.

Key to the success of the BT-50 XS will be acceptance by fleet buyers. The vehicle, however, seems to be pretty well considered as far as that goes, although as with any stripped-down model, there are features that will be missed. Things like the manual air-conditioning probably won’t make much difference, but the lack of a tyre pressure monitoring system is a bigger issue for a working vehicle. Performance from the smaller engine is still well within acceptable parameters, but we reckon any buyer considering using much of the 3500kg touring capacity would be better off with the 3.0-litre engine offered in the rest of the BT-50 range.

The Mazda is not the best riding of its ilk, and there are competitors with bigger cabins, although, notably, at this point on the pricing ladder, these are often from China rather than Thailand where the Mazda is built. Ultimately it will come down to whether the smaller engine and reduced performance is an issue and also whether the money saved over the bigger-engined BT-50 is enough to justify that and the loss of some creature comforts. But since fleet managers are notoriously hard-nosed about this stuff, there’s a good chance to BT-50 XS will find a market.

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

The CX-90 is an impressive car to behold. Moving things onwards and upwards from its CX-9 predecessor, the CX-90 is bigger and even more refined in a lot of ways.

Mazda’s signature design language has evolved into something a bit beefier, trading out the delicate sharp angles and chromes of its front-wheel-drive predecessors for something a bit more upright, with a wide stance and tough proportions.

The long bonnet and expansive body panels stress the long-engined, fluid nature of this car’s design language. It certainly gives it a more premium vibe than the boxy American-influenced style of the Hyundai Palisade, and leans more European than the science-fiction styling of something like the Kia Sorento.

If anything, there’s some clear BMW influence in the shape of the tail and light fittings. Light lashings of chrome keep it in-line with Mazda’s previous design language, and on this base model at least, plastic claddings over the arches toughen it up a bit.

Inside is plush. In fact, it’s treading on Lexus territory when it comes to the design and feel of the seats, dash, doors and there are even padded leather touches down the sides of the centre console for your knees to rest against. Even the standard leather seats are nice (with softer Nappa leather available on higher grades), and I actually find the somewhat monochrome interior treatment on our test car to be the most modest option. It’s off-set by silver trims and a touch of chrome in the steering wheel and doors.

The dash is in a more traditional style (again, it feels influenced by BMW here) with a padded insert across the front, inset vents and a climate control panel leading down to a nice wide console with tasteful patterned trims, and an electronic shifter. The screen in this base car is of modest dimensions compared to most cars today, but those who aren’t sold on giant touchscreens will love it.

Even the digital dash elements are tastefully executed, although they’re not particularly customisable, which is a shame. 

Targeting tradies and fleet customers has meant Mazda has embraced the concept of factory accessories. Right now, there are options for tougher front bumpers, bull-bars, snorkels, drop-side trays, an awning, wheel-arch flares (for bigger, aftermarket wheel and tyre packages) driving lights, roof racks, canopies, tub-drawer systems and even a dual battery set-up. All these factory options carry the full Mazda warranty.

But Mazda has gone even further with accessory packs aimed directly at different fleet markets. For instance, there’s the Mine-Spec Pack which incorporates a park-brake alarm, high-mounted brake lights, a reversing buzzer, work-lights, LED rear lighting and pre-wired switches for auxiliary and beacon lighting.

Externally, Mazda's design brief for the BT-50 has clearly been to not frighten the horses. But it's better than that, because it has actually emerged as one of the better looking utes out there. In XS trim, even the steel wheels add a no-nonsense flavour to the overall effect. And where some of the competition appear to be trying very hard to ape the full-sized US-made pick-ups, the Mazda is its own thing.

Inside, the smaller info screens and simple layout in basic black tell the budget story. At the same time, there's a lot to like in terms of the clear, simple analogue gauges and the no-fuss controls including the conventional T-bar, park-brake and ignition key. There's a look and feel that also suggests this is a ute that should be able to take a few knocks in the course of earning a living.

The CX-90 is enormous, but despite its long bonnet, it feels on the inside like it makes good use of its dimensions.

Up front, it’s easy to find a seating position thanks to an array of adjustability, from the seats to the telescopic adjust for the wheel, and the cabin is wide and tall enough to accommodate pretty much anyone with ease.

Unlike some Mazdas which have a strange zoom-factor on their rear vision mirrors, the CX-90 doesn't have this problem, and visibility generally out the windows is impressive. I can see the long, tall bonnet and cosy dash design creating visibility issues for shorter drivers, however.

Padded materials are everywhere they should be (and more), and when it comes to storage there’s a large bottle holder in each front door, two more cupholders in the centre console (with a flip-out cover), a split-opening centre console box (which hides USB-C connections, great for cable management) and a wireless charging bay up front below the climate unit.

It’s rare these days to see a full array of physical buttons and toggles for a dual-zone climate set-up, but the Mazda has the whole lot. It’s a breeze to adjust on the fly and integrates into the design in a subtle way.

It’s also worth calling out the multimedia screen isn’t a touch unit. Instead, you need to control it through a handful of buttons and a rotary dial on the centre console. It’s nice to have a physicality to it, and it works well for the relatively simple base operating system, but it’s a clumsy way to interact with phone mirroring.

In my experience Apple CarPlay has simply too many icons and menu features to work around with a dial-operated system, to the point where it’s distracting to use on-the-go (thus, defeating the purpose of having physical controls).

The second row is a real highlight. Set to its default position, I have leagues of legroom behind my own driving position (at 182cm tall). Again, heaps of width and headroom here, and even the huge rear doors open nice and wide, which should make loading luggage and fitting child seats easy.

The seat trim is just as good as it is in the front, with decent side bolstering, and top-notch amenities, with shades built into the windows, decent-sized bottle holders in each door, a further two in the drop-down armrest, soft pockets on the backs of each front seat, and a separate climate zone with independent temperature and fan speed controls.

There are two adjustable air vents with a lock-off, as well as two USB-C ports for power. Top marks.

The third row is usually where things get tricky for SUVs like this, but the CX-90 isn’t out of tricks yet.

Access isn’t the easiest. The second row can fold forward, but the left over aperture for clambering in, even though the doors are quite large, isn’t great, which will make it a no-go for anyone with mobility issues.

However, once you’re back there, I was surprised to find a full-sized adult like me can fit in relative comfort. With the second row set as far back as it can go, my knees are hard up against the back, but when rolled forward for more third-row space, there's still plenty of room in the middle. I was left with ample room for my knees and feet in the back seats. The seat trim also offers decent padding and comfortable trims, which is rare for most three-row SUVs, and while you wouldn’t want to be too much taller than me, the roof was just tall enough to have a little airspace above.

The armrests are hard plastic, unfortunately, but offer two large bottle holders on each side, as well as a USB-C port, and vents with decent air flow, which is again, quite rare for a three-row SUV.

I’d go so far as to say this is one of the best SUV third rows I’ve been in when it comes to space, comfort and amenity.

Now for the luggage space. I was pleased to find, even with the third row up, I could fit the largest (124 litre) CarsGuide luggage case with room to spare on either side. Officially, space here is 257L, but it’s rare to fit a case this size in a three-row SUV.

With the third row folded down, space comes in at 608 litres, which is on-par for this segment, and with the second and third row down, it tops out at 2025L.

With such space on offer it’s probably worth keeping in mind the payload, which is 580kg, and for those who want to add a trailer to the mix, the maximum towing capacity is 2500kg braked or 750kg unbraked for the 50e petrol straight-six versions like the one we’re testing here.

With a choice of cab-chassis of pick-up tub, not to mention the option of a single or dual-cab body in cab-chassis form, the XS allows for a fair bit of creativity in how it’s configured. The cab-chassis, for instance, will accept a conventional drop-side alloy tray or any number of service body configurations right up to camper bodies.

The stock tub on the pick-up version gets a drop-in liner but there’s no power outlet or light that some of the competition offer. The tie-down points are also a bit disappointing with two lower points in the rear of the tub and a pair of higher points in the front. Experience tells us that high-mounted tie-down points are vastly less practical than anchor points mounted close to the cargo floor.

The move to the larger engine has, however, increased the Mazda’s towing ability. From the previous version’s 3000kg towing limit, the new 2.2 can now legally tow 3500kg (with a braked trailer and approved tow-hitch). Payloads vary according to specification, but range from about 1000kg right up to 1379kg for the XS singe-cab-chassis.

The factory-option drop-side tray carries it’s load up high, but offers a flat floor with no wheel-arch intrusions. The standard tub is not as large in any direction, but does have a damped tailgate for safety (you can’t drop it) and convenience (the gas struts help raise it).

In the cabin, you get USB charging ports (two in the front, one in the rear seat) and there are central air-vents for the rear seat of dual-cab models. The dual-cab also has an under-seat storage area, two gloveboxes and a 60/40 split fold rear bench. The doors feature bottle holders and there’s a flip-down glasses compartment in the roof lining.

While the front seats are comfy enough for bigger drivers, the rear seat also goes against dual-cab tradition a little by having plenty of room in every direction, as well as a rational seat-back angle.

While the XS remains the entry-level BT-50 variant, you once again have the choice of two or four-wheel drive, with price-tags to match. So, starting at the start, the 4x2 XS single-cab cab-chassis now kicks off at $37,900 before on-road costs with the dual-cab pick-up (styleside) 4x2 variant at $46,710.

Move up to all-wheel drive and there’s no single-cab option. Instead, things start with the dual-cab cab-chassis 4x4 at $53,120 and the dual-cab pick-up at $54,720.

Aside from the bigger engine and stronger performance, you now get an eight-speed transmission and there’s fuel-saving stop-start tech that was once only available on higher-spec BT-50s.

Other additions for the XS include LED headlights, adaptive cruise control, wireless connectivity for both Apple Car Play and Android Auto, a reversing camera and an 8.0-inch touchscreen. There’s also digital radio and hill-descent control.

But the XS’ place at the bottom of the BT-50 ladder is confirmed with the cloth-trimmed interior, vinyl flooring and plain steel wheels for all but the dual-cab pick-up 4X4 variant which gets alloy wheels.

Which is all fine and gives the Mazda something of a pointy stick with which to poke at the incoming competitors (mainly) from China, but where does that place the XS relative to the 3.0-litre BT-50? Well, if you take the XT variant with the 3.0L engine and the same body and driveline layout, the XS comes in at just $2500 less. That’s not a huge saving either as an outright number or in terms of the monthly lease repayments.

Part of that is because Mazda has also hiked prices across the BT-50 range in tandem with announcing the new XS. Which means that spec-for-spec 1.9 versus 2.2-litre XS is now $1500 more than it was. But even if Mazda had held prices on the XS variants, would $4000 be enough of a difference? For reference, the original XS sliced $3000 off the 3.0L price when it was launched back in late 2021.

There are areas where you can see where Mazda has pulled a few dollars out of the vehicle, starting inside with the small centre touchscreen, the truly tiny central dash-cluster screen, and the cloth trim. There’s also a bit of hard plastic in evidence and the air-conditioning lacks the set-and-forget function of climate control systems. The keyless entry and start has gone and the XS is started with an old fashioned ignition key. The XS specification also loses the front and rear parking sensors and the tyre-pressure monitoring system.

You might also imagine the drum rear brakes are another giveaway but, in fact, they’re standard across the whole BT-50 line-up.

The CX-90 gets a bit exciting under the bonnet with its big 3.3-litre in-line six-cylinder turbocharged petrol engine. It produces a whopping 254kW/500Nm, well above par compared to its mainstream rivals.

This engine is mated to an eight-speed automatic transmission. This is no run-of-the-mill transmission though. Instead of the usual smooth hydraulic coupling this style of transmission is known for, the Mazda uses a hybridised single clutch set-up instead.

This is in the name of efficiency. A single-clutch plate has less loss, and is therefore more fuel efficient, with a small electric motor helping to push things along as part of the mix.

The catch is, like the sometimes-derided dual-clutch automatics, it’s not as smooth to operate. More on this in the driving section.

Efficiency – What is its fuel consumption? What is its driving range? 8/10

As a result of this unusual transmission set-up, fuel efficiency isn’t bad for such a big and powerful engine, and for such a large vehicle.

The official combined fuel consumption for the CX-90 G50e is 8.2L/100km, which is already impressive, and in my week with the car over a few hundred (mostly urban) kilometres it landed close, at just 8.9L/100km.

It’s seriously impressive and runs rings around the six-cylinder Hyundai Palisade (10.7L/100km combined) while producing significantly more power than the more efficient Toyota Kluger Hybrid (5.6L/100km). On the flipside, you’ll need to fill its massive 75L fuel tank with mid-shelf 95RON fuel.

The new engine capacity of 2.2 litres is up from the 1.9 of the previous XS version but still well short of the 3.0 litres of the more expensive BT-50 versions. And the specifications are pretty much exactly what you’d expect with the new 2.2 just about splitting the difference between the old 1.9 and the 3.0.

In this case, that equates to 120kW of power and 400Nm of torque, while the 1.9 was good for 110kW and 350Nm, and the 3.0 sports 140kW and 450Nm. So, yep, somewhere right about the middle. And that makes sense given the new 2.2 uses the basic mechanical architecture of the 1.9.

But the switch up to the new engine brings one very important change and that’s the adoption of an eight-speed automatic to replace the six-speed unit fitted to the previous XS and the other BT-50s. That has an obvious potential benefit for drivability, but also for fuel economy.

Mazda has also added stop-start tech to the XS in the name of efficiency. But, as we’ve found many times before, the fuel economy benefits seem restricted to the official test results rather than the real world where this technology serves to annoy many drivers more than anything else.

If you opt or the four-wheel-drive variants, you’ll get a rear diff lock but you miss out on an on-road 4x4 setting. Considering the 2.2-litre’s newfound towing capacity (the full 3500kg of the competition), that lack of a 4x4 Auto setting is a shame, but not an unexpected one at this price-point.

For all its clever, efficient drivetrain, the CX-90 has a bit of a mixed drive experience. Initially, it comes off as impressive. It’s plush and quiet from behind the wheel, and the primarily rear-drive nature of its drivetrain gives it the big premium steering response missing from its mostly front-drive rivals.

The flaws with its tricky transmission quickly become evident, though. The clutch constantly needing to engage in stop-start scenarios makes for a slightly jerky and uneven experience, similar to the feel of a dual-clutch auto, particularly in traffic, while the at-speed gear shifts, which in a dual-clutch tend to be much smoother are telegraphed more physically by this Mazda system.

As evidenced by the actual fuel consumption, it’s clear this system does what it sets out to, and it even feels like it could be significantly better, but Mazda will need to invest some time in calibration. For what it’s worth, it feels better than its original implementation I drove at the launch of the CX-60, which was the first car to get this system.

A subsequent software update has solved some issues, but it still can’t compare to a regular auto when it comes to smoothness.

However, the engine is immensely satisfying. The big six has a low roar when pushed, and motivates the big CX-90 with ease when you step on it. It pairs nicely with the weighty steering to make for a car which feels purposeful and satisfying to steer when it gets going.

In this sense it nails the brief of elevating Mazda out of the regular crop of front-drive seven-seat SUVs, giving it a distinct and more premium edge.

As also noted with the CX-60 though, the CX-90 has the same issue with its ride quality. It’s a little too hard to give it the kind of refined response to road imperfections we’ve come to expect from brands like Lexus and BMW. The firm response to the road helps this big heavy SUV feel controlled in the corners, but it doesn’t deal with suburban bumps how it should.

Larger hits in particular are often communicated to the cabin. The CX-90 is better than its smaller CX-60 sibling, which went so far as to have its rear dampers recalled, but the brand is even considering similar updates to this large SUV, so keep an eye out.

While this version of the CX-90, the base Touring with its smaller alloys and larger tyres, is more comfortable than any other Mazda on this new platform I’ve driven, it still leaves room for improvement.

It’s a shame, because otherwise the CX-90 is a lovely and luxurious SUV to drive, with a quiet, plush interior and a satisfying engine. It’s so close to greatness that it’s frustrating.

Striking the right balance between ride comfort and load-lugging capacity has always been the big trick with utes in general. The fact is, there’s probably no ideal setting, especially considering the range of payloads a ute can be expected to carry on any particular day. In the BT-50’s case, Mazda has opted to go for a stiffer suspension tune. That means it can technically tow and haul with the best of them, but it also dictates that ride quality is far from what you’d call plush, even in this market segment.

The ute handles bumps best when the undulations don’t come too hot and fast. But strike a patch of high-frequency lumps and bumps and the suspension, particularly at the rear, starts to pogo about with a corresponding decline in ride control. The steering, too, seems to lack a little feel and is relatively slow-geared (although that has its benefits off-road).

The engine certainly does the job in isolation, but it’s likely to struggle a little with the full three-and-a-half tonnes on the hitch. It’s pretty noisy, too, and definitely sounds like a diesel, unlike some modern diesel designs that are more refined. There’s also a sense that Mazda has ditched some of the sound deadening of other BT-50 models, as the engine is certainly heard and felt. The optional snorkel moves the induction noise right into the driver’s window when it’s open, too.

But the new eight-speed automatic transmission is a beauty. Upshifts are crisp and smooth and even the downshifts as you approach a full stop are measured and calibrated to never intrude. And it’s nice to see a conventional T-bar shifter with no separate park button or non-intuitive movements required.

We didn’t get a chance to try the BT-50’s off-road chops, but past experience tells us that the Mazda will be pretty good. As with many four-wheel-drive utes, the limiting factor will be the standard tyres fitted at the factory.

While alloy wheels and carpets on the floor might be negotiable on a vehicle like this, a basic level of safety gear is not. So, the XS gets front, knee and side-curtain airbags, as well as givens such as anti-lock brakes and stability control.

But it doesn’t stop there with the BT-50 XS also fitted with the bulk of the current driver aids. Those include blind-spot monitoring, lane keeping assistance, lane-departure warning, rear cross-traffic alert and the reverse camera system. There’s also autonomous emergency braking which can also identify pedestrians and cyclists.

You also get Mazda’s own take on the controversial driver-attention monitor which many ute makers simply haven’t managed to get right in terms of the system’s calibration and how aggressively it acts. The BT-50’s is one of the less intrusive ones.

What’s missing? On a vehicle designed to tow big loads, a tyre pressure monitoring system is a great addition, but not one you’ll get on a BT-50 at this price. We’d also like to see an on-road 4WD setting which would allow the use of all-wheel drive when, say, towing on a bitumen road. More expensive competitors have this, but the Mazda is hardly alone in not offering this tech at this entry-level price.

The XS variant picks up the five-star ANCAP safety rating already awarded to the rest of the BT-50 line-up.

The usual five-year and unlimited kilometre warranty applies to the CX-90 range, with a matching five years of roadside assistance.

Servicing is required once every 12 months or 15,000km, whichever occurs first, and a schedule of costs on Mazda’s website extends to seven years. Over the first five years, prices fluctuate between $469 and $1304 annually, with an average yearly cost of $693.30. The price puts this big-engined Mazda up the premium end of mainstream automakers when it comes to service costs.

Mazda’s standard five-year/unlimited-kilometre warranty applies to the BT-50 range, and includes the first five years of roadside assistance, too.

Service intervals are every 12 months or 15,000km, whichever comes first. Capped-price servicing is available with the first five years of servicing costing $2188 on 4x2 versions and $2302 for 4x4 variants.

It’s worth mentioning that the BT-50’s new engine is Euro 5 compliant but doesn’t require AdBlue, reducing running costs.