Nissan X-TRAIL vs Mazda CX-3

What's the difference?

For its silver anniversary, the X-Trail in e-Power guise remains better than ever. And the flagship Ti-L makes a convincing, value-packed, well-equipped and enjoyable to drive luxury medium SUV alternative for the family. Its only glaring fault is the omission of a full-sized spare wheel.

But other than that, given the Nissan’s warranty, reputation and the fact that it's still so functional, economical, gutsy and easy to live with, the e-Power remains one of our favourite mid-size SUVs. Our choice would be the Ti, though, chiefly because of its comfier 19-inch wheels.

‘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.

For its 2026 facelift, the T33 X-Trail Series II gains a fussy new grille design, different LED lighting elements, reprofiled bumpers front and rear, new colours and restyled alloy wheels.

But, essentially, it looks very similar to the previous model that was released locally back in 2022. Meaning this is a good-looking machine.

Proportionally, as with all previous iterations, today’s X-Trail blurs the fine line between SUV and crossover-wagon in silhouette – much more so than the latest Subaru Outback (that’s classed in the category above) manages.

Dimensionally, it’s bang in the middle of its class: 4690mm long, 2065mm wide (mirrors out) and 1725mm tall with a 2705mm wheelbase. Note, the e-Power rides lower, with 187mm instead of 205mm of ground clearance.

Stepping inside, the X-Trail’s interior presentation is conservative and perhaps dated to some eyes, with its separate central touchscreen and instrumentation displays. But, precisely because of this, it is neither compromised nor frustrating to understand or operate, like the worst of the inexplicably minimalistic single-screen applications beloved by most Chinese brands today. Physical buttons abound. This Nissan is for everyday people and the cabin design reflects this.

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.

Large and rectangular, the X-Trail is sized and packaged to be used. Nowhere is this more obvious than using the wide doors, with the rear pair opening at almost a 90-degree angle to facilitate entry/egress.

Climb inside, and – as with all three previous-gen versions – there is an abundance of space for heads, legs and shoulders. Occupants sit up fairly high, with easy views afforded by a big windscreen and deep side windows.

Except that Nissan now uses much-better looking and feeling plastics than back then. Nobody is going to mistake the Ti-L for a Lexus, but quality and finish is beyond reproach. No squeaks or rattles to report here.

Aided by a fine driving position, the dash is pleasant to look at and simple to use. A new steering wheel, up-spec digital graphics and updated camera views help keep things relatively fresh.

Yet it is the basics that make this interface so sound. Clear and obvious switchgear for the very effective climate controls (and other vehicle functions) that feel good to the touch, logical menus within the responsive touchscreen, an enjoyably strong audio experience, wireless Apple CarPlay that never dropped out and a sense of no-nonsense solidity. Nissan’s been making cars for almost a century and it’s in the little things that show up big time here.

Likewise, 700km-plus in the front seats over a variety of road conditions reveal appreciable comfort and support. Factor in plentiful storage and sufficient all-round vision, and the X-Trail’s interior is difficult to criticise unless you’re nit-picking. A fiddly gear lever and a one-pedal braking button that’s a bit of a stretch for the driver are about it.

The back-seat area is as fine as we’ve experienced in any mid-sized SUV rival, with the Nissan dutifully ticking all the required spec boxes: USB ports, rear-facing air vents, cupholders within a 40/20/40-folding, sliding and reclining backrests and – in this Ti-L – separate climate control access. And don’t forget how usefully huge those rear doors are.

Further back, the X-Trail’s wagon-esque shape comes into play with a long, wide and flat load area, measuring in at 575 litres VDA (10L fewer than the petrol versions), extending to 1298L in two-seater mode.

But there are two points of contention.

Firstly, given the length of the load area, there are no remote-release handles for the backrests, so the user must use the side doors to lower them. This is an annoyance.

Secondly, and this is more serious, is the lack of spare wheel, period, in the e-Power models like ours. The space is taken up by some of the hybrid tech, resulting in a tyre repair kit instead. Regular readers will know our disdain for such compromises, as these cannot patch up larger punctures, ruin the tyre in smaller ones and are costly to replace. It’s such a rubbish solution.

Our advice is to seek an aftermarket space-saver wheel and jack kit, which do not cost much more than replacing just one ruined tyre and spent repair kit. When will this foolishness end? If Toyota can manage a spare in their RAV4 hybrid, others can as well.

A sour note to finish on an otherwise noteworthy interior experience.

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.

Upon updating the Mazda CX-3, the Evolve variant is now a $32,100 ask before on-road costs, which is $900 more than before. It’s a little step up from the $30,370 entry price of the Pure, but falls well short of the top-spec Akari’s $38,890 sticker price.

The CX-3 range now comes with updated autonomous emergency braking and adaptive cruise control, with the Evolve specifically scoring new fog lights and keyless entry.

The Evolve also comes with black machined 18-inch alloy wheels, synthetic leather interior trim and front parking sensors.

This is all on top of the CX-3’s standard kit which includes a leather-wrapped gear shift knob, handbrake handle and steering wheel, keyless start, an 8.0-inch multimedia display, wireless Apple CarPlay and wired Android Auto plus LED headlights, daytime running lights and tail-lights.

For its segment, the CX-3 isn’t cheap. The Evolve grade is more expensive than pretty much the entire line-ups of rivals like the Kia Stonic or Hyundai Venue, and its price somewhat lines up with the newer, hybrid-powered Toyota Yaris Cross.

But there’s more to the CX-3 than just a list of features.

The X-Trail e-Power system is not a traditional hybrid set-up.

Instead of having an electric motor(s) and small battery assist an internal combustion engine (ICE) that does the driving (as per a Toyota hybrid), this one’s the other-way round: an ICE solely charging a larger battery that feeds an electric motor(s) that powers the driven wheels. No plugging in required. This is the essence of an EREV. The Holden Volt famously relied on such a system nearly 15 years ago.

In the X-Trail e-Power’s case, a 1.5-litre, three-cylinder, turbo-petrol engine making 106kW of power and 250Nm of torque is mated to a 2.1kWh battery, inverter and an electric motor on each axle (front: 150kW/330Nm - rear: 100kW/195Nm), for a combined 157kW and 525Nm, distributed to all four wheels.

That’s a lot more than the 135kW and 244Nm that the regular 2.5-litre four-cylinder petrol engine and CVT set-up can muster.

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.

Requiring 95 RON premium unleaded petrol, the e-Power drinks from the more-expensive bowser. It also comes with a capless filler, saving clean hands from handling dirty caps. How European of this Japanese SUV!

Nissan reckons the e-Power averages 6.1 litres per 100 kilometres, which translates to 139 grams/km of carbon dioxide emissions. The Urban rating is just 6.4L/100km and Extra Urban returns 6.0L/100km.

In contrast, the petrol CVT AWD’s corresponding numbers are 7.8L, 10L and 6.5L, respectively.

Out in the real world, over 700km of at-times very demanding driving, we managed a tad under 6.9L/100km – which is what the trip computer also calculated – while, driven more frugally – it dropped to under 5.5L/100km.

That’s impressive stuff, meaning you can expect around 800km between refills even if you don’t care about fuel economy, and over 1000km if you do.

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.

So, what's the X-Trail e-Power like?

Well, as it turns out, it marries really well with the Ti-L flagship, because it is a smooth, refined and sophisticated powertrain experience.

It's an EV first, and even though the petrol engine fires up and charges the battery regularly, pausing the electric dream for a few moments, it isn't noisy or buzzy, blending in with the general road, tyre and wind noise at speed. The ICE’s intervention is seamless, though it does rev away at a pre-set constant speed. That varies according to load and conditions, at between 2400rpm and 4800rpm.

That’s the theory. In practice, the X-Trail e-Power’s performance is one of its greatest attributes.

As with all good EVs, this one’s silky smooth and quiet as it zips away from standstill, whooshing forward with a determined, even lively, attitude. Turn the (cumbersome) driver selector to 'Sport' mode and the throttle response reacts accordingly, for rapid point-to-point performance. Give the 1900kg Nissan it’s head on a long empty road, and this thing can be downright fast. Hauling around 83kW per tonne, we recorded a 0-100km/h sprint time of seven seconds flat.

And here’s the thing. When the battery starts running low, there’s no shortfall in performance as you find in many PHEVs that feel neutered at this point, since the peaky little engine is feeding electricity back into the battery that drives the motors. It’s all so effortless.

Speaking of recharging, a single-pedal function provides a noticeable amount of braking off-throttle, collecting that otherwise wasted energy back into the system. It won’t bring the car to a full stop, though, and is not adjustable as per many rivals’ paddle-shifter-actuated systems. Maybe a suggestion for the next-gen model.

Underneath is a Renault/Nissan/Mitsubishi Alliance platform, complete with struts up front and a multi-link rear suspension set-up, imbuing the X-Trail with a solid, dynamic European flavour. The steering is light yet nicely weighted, for a sense of connection and balance.

It isn’t quite as agile through fast corners as, say, a Mazda equivalent might be, as the e-Power is a bit too top-heavy to be considered sporty and athletic, but there’s control and grip for days. No doubt the Ti-L’s 20-inch Michelin Primacy tyres help here. And, at highway speeds in teeming rain, the AWD grip feels reassuring.

Speaking of big wheels, the ride is surprisingly okay. Firm but never unyielding or crashy over bumps, the electrified Nissan is comfortable enough. The Ti e-Power’s smaller 19-inch rubber reveals a more supple and isolated ride experience, and without any dynamic degradation, so that’s what we’d choose. And they’d be less prone to occasional tyre drone to boot.

Finally, there’s the X-Trail’s overall suitability to Australian roads from an ADAS point of view. Working away in the background, the Ti-L’s driver-assist tech does not bombard you with unsolicited buzzes or sudden jolts of the wheel. Once, the auto emergency braking (AEB) did gently activate at speed through a heavily-trafficked curve, and the lane-departure light regularly blinks discreetly away, but never to a bothersome, distracting degree. And meanwhile, some Chinese companies question the need for Australian road tuning. Fail.

Overall, then, the latest X-Trail e-Power remains enjoyable and even enriching vehicle to live with, being both a mainstream family car and grand touring SUV. In this context, the sub-$60K pricing seems like a bargain. This Nissan deserves to sell better.

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 Mazda CX-3 is technically unrated by ANCAP, though only because its original maximum five-star rating expired after seven years. While this means it easily passes many of ANCAP’s main criteria for safety (and strict Australian Design Rules - ADRs - to be able to be sold here), the CX-3 is missing some recent, more complex safety features.

Not everything is standard across the line-up, either. The Evolve misses out on adaptive headlights, a surround-view parking camera and traffic sign recognition. The base Pure variant also misses out on a front parking sensor.

Fortunately, there are plenty of other key features like seven airbags, dual-front and front-side plus curtain airbags spanning the sides. The CX-3 also has ABS and emergency braking with forward pedestrian detection and rear cross-traffic alert.

There’s lane departure warning, forward obstruction warning, blind-spot monitoring and a driver attention alert for those times you might miss something or - hopefully not often - are distracted.

All these systems are programmed well to minimise interference while driving, making the CX-3 refreshingly trusting of the driver to actually do the job of driving.

At the time of publishing, Nissan offers a 10-year, 300,000km conditional warranty if you choose to service your car at an authorised Nissan dealer. That's up from the brand’s regular five-year, unlimited kilometres and it leads the industry now.

Nissan has also extended X-Trail service intervals from 10,000km to 15,000km annually, while offering capped-price servicing as well as roadside assistance for the first five years.

The first five annual services cost $399 each, then are $565, $392, $562, $470 and $725 for years six to 10, respectively.

Finally, as of January this year, there were 177 Nissan dealer outlets throughout Australia.

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.