What's the difference?
Now that the original Mitsubishi ASX is finally gone, the oldest small SUVs still on sale in Australia today are the Mazda CX-3 and Suzuki Vitara.
Both released in 2015, their longevity is due to a combination of good design, strong engineering, sound driving dynamics and an undefinable charm.
Given their high number of rotations around the sun, it’s also surprising that neither has received a major facelift in all this time. Clearly, their creators got it largely right early on.
Until now. The Vitara steps up with the Series III makeover, ushering in a fresh nose, larger central touchscreen and a hybrid tech upgrade for the (now-sole) turbo powertrain, among other more-minor changes.
Are these enough to keep the venerable Vitara from vulnerability?
Mazda has updated one of its most popular, but rather old models.
Yes, the Mazda CX-3 is still around after more than a decade since its reveal, and it remains almost at the tippy-top of Mazda’s local sales charts.
With the brand having shifted 8221 CX-3s in the first half of 2025, it seems the light updates and modest price rise haven’t scared away any potential customers.
We’ve grabbed a CX-3 Evolve, the second-up of four available variants, to see if the popular light SUV still stacks up, or if you’re better off taking your money elsewhere.
In car years, 11 is ancient.
Back when it was first released, this-generation Vitara’s competitive pricing, progressive yet pretty design, pleasant interior packaging, sporty dynamics and general driving ease helped establish the emerging small SUV segment into the powerhouse it is today.
In some ways, today’s Turbo Hybrid still impresses, especially with its punchy performance, promising economy and no-nonsense packaging. Objectively, it is still a decent proposition, with few actual vices.
But the 2026 Vitara’s high pricing, embarrassingly outdated interior, underwhelming specification and noisy ride leave it feeling too expensive, too old and too exposed against newer and more-sophisticated rivals.
Even the brightest stars eventually need to retire.
Note: CarsGuide attended this event as a guest of the manufacturer, with travel and meals provided.
‘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.
While the albeit-cheeky Mazda CX-3 clearly looks like a product of last decade, the Vitara’s boxy, broad-stance proportions were prescient, pointing to the upright shapes that prevail today. In other words, the good-looking design has aged remarkably well.
Changes to the headlights, a reshaped bumper, a revised grille, restyled wheels and paint colours are the only ways you can differentiate new from old, ignoring the Hybrid badge out back.
We wonder whether Suzuki should have tried harder visually updating the Vitara?
Measuring in at nearly 4.2 metres long, 1.8m wide and 1.6m high, the square-rigged styling hides the smallness of the Vitara, yet also seems to liberate more space inside than you might expect, aided by deep side windows.
Conversely, Suzuki’s decision to retain the old Vitara dashboard – including much of the same instrumentation – roots it into the middle of last decade. This is very disappointing.
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 practical shape, ease of access and spacious, airy cabin were reasons to buy the Vitara way back when, and remain relevant today.
But, stepping inside and taking a look around transports you to another time, like hearing Let it Happen by Tame Impala.
In the press release, Suzuki states: “Physical control switches remain a key focus, ensuring ease of use while driving, a touchpoint of Suzuki’s practical design philosophy.” Changing nothing in nearly a dozen years in production to save money seems more like the company’s key focus here. Even the steering wheel is precisely the same.
As we said earlier, nothing changed inside other than some minor trim, save for the new multimedia system that looks cheap and aftermarket compared to Suzuki’s earlier, distinctive and colourful quadrant layout. We welcome the inclusion of a digital speedometer, however.
Broad if flat front seats do the job, ahead of a workable driving position that helps provide good all-round vision as well as an easy reach to the multitude of buttons and switches placed around. The plastics have already proven to be long-lasting, while there is sufficient storage to be found. The climate control is effective, too.
The rear seat environment is spacious and pleasant enough, but lacks amenities like USB-C ports, cupholders and central air vents.
Further back, the load area is relatively large and simple to use. Cargo capacity varies from an unremarkable 362 litres to 642L (VDA – to the window height) or 1119L (to the ceiling), with the 60/40 rear backrests dropped providing extra versatility.
Thankfully, a space-saver spare wheel is included.
Overall, then, the Vitara’s cabin is roomy and user-friendly for a small SUV, but it also appears hopelessly out of date. That Suzuki also had the unrelated e-Vitara electric vehicle at the launch event just served to underline that fact.
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.
From $39,990 (all prices are drive-away unless stated otherwise), 2026’s cheapest Vitara, the Turbo Hybrid 2WD, seems provocatively expensive for an 11-year-old generation. And the all-wheel drive (AWD) model dubbed 'AllGrip' is a heady $46,000. Oof.
This puts the base Vitara’s price well above Chinese hybrid equivalents like the Haval Jolion HEV and MG ZS Hybrid+, about on a par with popular small-SUV hybrids including the Honda HR-V, Hyundai Kona and Toyota Corolla Cross, and in company with lower-spec petrol-powered iterations of the Honda CR-V, Hyundai Tucson, Kia Seltos, Kia Sportage, Mazda CX-30, Mitsubishi ASX, Mitsubishi Outlander, Nissan X-Trail, Renault Duster, Subaru Crosstrek, Skoda Kamiq, Volkswagen T-Cross and VW T-Roc.
Facing a lion’s den of fierce rivals is putting things mildly. The Vitara’s value struggles to stack up.
But consider this.
Back in 2015, the base Vitara cost $23K, drive-away – or $31.4K in 2026 money adjusted for inflation. However, that was for a 1.6-litre petrol manual; the auto added the equivalent of another $2.7K and the optional turbo that came soon after (dubbed 'BoosterJet' – and now standard equipment) cost another $6.8K, coming to $41K.
Huh. Suzuki isn’t being so delusionally greedy, then.
And that’s not taking in the latest model’s unique hybrid tech, extra safety of advanced driver-assist technologies (ADAS) such as autonomous emergency braking (AEB), rear cross-traffic alert (RCTA), lane departure warning and blind-spot monitoring, or Apple CarPlay/Android Auto connectivity, or a host of other extra features that have since been applied to an evolving Vitara over the years. Plus, import costs from Hungary are said to have skyrocketed.
If we compare what the 2026 Turbo Hybrid 2WD costs against the pre-facelift 2024 Turbo 2WD from $36,490, before on-road costs, the price rises aren’t nearly as bad as they seem (though runout ’24-build models are currently being promoted at $34,590, drive-away).
So, what else does your $40K-plus Vitara Turbo Hybrid give you?
Not much compared to most of the competition listed earlier. Climate control, rear privacy glass, LED automatic headlights, cloth upholstery, adaptive cruise control, a 7.0-inch touchscreen, reversing camera, 17-inch alloy wheels and flat paint are bare minimum at this price point.
Metallic paint demands another $745 if the standard white isn’t your bag.
Stretching to the $45,990 AWD adds a panoramic sunroof, 9.0-inch touchscreen, six instead of four speakers, extra driving modes, synthetic leather trim and two extra modish colours – beige or grey-blue that are also available with a two-tone black combo for an extra $1345.
The Vitara is over a decade old, but costs new-model money, lacks features found in rivals costing thousands less and only allows for a five-year warranty when some others offer up to 10.
Obama was US President when this Suzuki launched. The world it finds itself in today seems almost unrecognisable.
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.
If you’re expecting a Toyota-style series-parallel hybrid system here, forget it.
Instead, Suzuki offers a far-simpler, lighter and cheaper alternative that, by and large, does reduce fuel consumption. In other words, this is a mild-hybrid electric vehicle (MHEV) that, unlike others like Mazda’s, you can feel working away.
On paper, things look a bit shaky, since power drops noticeably compared to the previous 1.4-litre, four-cylinder, turbo-petrol BoosterJet engine this unit is based on.
This version makes just under 81kW of power at 4500rpm, instead of 103kW at 5500rpm, in the interests of economy. Torque jumps though, from 220Nm to 235Nm, between a low 2000rpm to 2500rpm.
More importantly, it is coupled to a 48-volt integrated starter motor generator acting as an electric motor, and 48V 8Ah lithium-ion battery, adding an additional 12kW/50Nm to simultaneously boost acceleration and reduce consumption and emissions.
Power is sent to the front wheels via a six-speed torque-converter automatic transmission, while the AWD version also sends drive to the rear axle when slippage is detected.
The whole MHEV system adds just 15kg, and is nestled between the MacPherson strut front axle and torsion beam rear end, for even weight distribution.
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 Vitara Turbo Hybrid 2WD returns a combined average 5.8 litres per 100km, while the AWD version is rated at 5.9L/100km. This translates to between 130 grams and 139g/km of carbon-dioxide emissions, respectively.
The previous 1.4-litre turbo equivalents were 5.9L and 6.2L/100km, so that mild-hybrid tech seems to make some difference. Our box-fresh test car’s trip computer driving around Sydney’s outer suburbs displayed 6.2L/100km.
Filling the 47L fuel tank with the required 95 RON premium-unleaded petrol, expect to average around 810km of range.
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.
Suzuki allowed only a frustratingly limited amount of time for us to drive the Vitara Turbo Hybrid 2WD, over some outer-suburban Sydney back roads, in convoy with a lead car and in heavy traffic, so first impressions are limited.
But, unsurprisingly, it’s all very familiar, after years of testing earlier iterations.
Essentially, acceleration now feels leisurely in 'Eco' and 'Auto' when previously the 1.4L BoosterJet always felt punchy, but it becomes much stronger in 'Sport', suggesting the MHEV’s economy focus is the priority. The latter mode makes the Vitara feel lively and moves things along fairly quickly, but leaving it in Sport mode would defeat the purpose of trying to save fuel.
Meanwhile, the Vitara’s chassis calibration remains on the sporty side, with keen steering response and a decent level of handling agility there for the taking. And even the ride comfort wasn’t too bad, considering that too little suspension travel and too much road noise betray the age of this vehicle’s platform – though that may have also had something to do with us driving this back-to-back with the smoother e-Vitara EV.
Finally, the ADAS tech didn’t seem to interfere at all, though a longer drive may reveal otherwise.
The Vitara still drives okay, then, but its refinement and noise suppression may be issues for some people used to newer SUVs. The bigger problem for us is just how old the driving experience feels sitting inside such a dated cabin. Stale sums it up.
We also had a brief stint around a moderately-demanding off-road 4WD course to test the Turbo Hybrid AWD’s AllGrip set-up. The limited off-road aids – 4WD Lock, hill-descent control, a paltry 175mm ground clearance – helped see it navigate several carefully-chosen sections fairly confidently, but we can’t imagine this being the deal maker or breaker.
Overall, based on our brief time with it, the Vitara Turbo Hybrid remains an easy, competent and even enjoyable small SUV from behind the wheel, but one that feels dated in too many areas, especially at its asking price.
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.
Back in 2015, the Vitara scored a maximum five-star ANCAP crash-test rating, but it hasn’t been tested since and that result expired in December, 2022.
Both models come with the expected level of ADAS tech, including AEB, RCTA, lane departure warning, lane keep assist, blind-spot monitor, traffic sign recognition, auto high beam and adaptive cruise control.
There is no data on the operation parameters of the latest AEB system, but previous models operated from above 30km/h while the RCTA functions from 8.0km/h.
Six airbags (dual front, side and curtain) are also featured, along with two outboard rear-seat ISOFIX points and a trio of top tethers for child seats.
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.
Suzuki offers an industry-average five-year/unlimited kilometre warranty, along with five years of roadside assistance if the vehicle is serviced at an authorised dealer.
Service intervals are every 12 months or 10,000km, while the basic capped-price servicing costs are $329, $429, $339, $539 and $349 annually for the first five years or 100,000km, respectively. That's an average of $397.
At the time of publishing Suzuki listed 90 dealers 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.