Toyota Prado vs Mazda CX-70

What's the difference?

While no doubt the hybrid would appeal to some buyers, given the limits in towing capacity and higher fuel consumption, the extra performance doesn’t really make the i-Force Max a compelling proposition for the LandCruiser/Prado. Australian buyers have made it abundantly clear they’re happy with the Prado already on sale, so it’s hard to see the hybrid having too much success here alongside the diesel engine.

For mine, the CX-70 is the pick of Mazda's premium SUV range, and if you can survive without a third row of seats, it's significantly cheaper than its CX-90 twin, too.

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

The Prado and LandCruiser largely look the same, but the 1958 we drove did have a few standout elements from a design perspective.

The most obvious are the retro round headlights of the 1958, which are meant to hark back to the original FJ Cruiser. The retro theme is helped by the round light framing the large rectangular mesh grille with ‘TOYOTA’ in big, bold letters.

Personally, I really like the round lights and think it’s a shame the Australian-bound Prado misses out, purely for the aesthetics.

Inside the cabin also feels like a throwback in time, but not to the 1950s, rather the late ‘80s and early ‘90s with the grey cloth trim. It’s a brave decision from Toyota to ditch a more modern look and feel, but, again, I really like it. It feels hard-wearing and suits the nature of the Land Cruiser in the US market, where it has to woo buyers away from Bronco and Wrangler.

One design choice of note is the US-spec version has ‘LandCruiser’ embossed on the dashboard ahead of the passenger, something else we miss out on here with our Prado.

Yes, the Mazda premium SUV range can look a little same-same, but Mazda insists there are critical differences.

That said, if you can immediately spot the difference between the CX-70 and CX-90 without taking a peek inside, you're doing better than me, given it is the same exact dimensions as Mazda's three-row flagship.

Sure, Mazda talks about things like this design being a “passion pursuer” that serves up "dignified performance” – all of which sounds utterly ridiculous – but the less marketing-speak version is that it looks like a shapely large SUV that ditches the boxy dimensions of a proper 4WD for a more sleek and swooping profile.

Inside, it's a plush and premium-feeling space, with lovely cabin materials, plenty of tech, and plenty of space.

As the entry-grade variant in the US range, the LandCruiser 1958 is more utilitarian than pampering. That translates to a cabin that has plenty of usability, just like the Australian-delivered LandCruiser Prados we’re used to.

There’s nothing overtly different about the US-spec model, with good space and small item storage in the front and decent room in the second row.

The multimedia system is the same as the one used here too, which speaks to Toyota’s strength for consistency of product around the world. It means anyone driving a Toyota - whether it’s in Australia, the US or elsewhere - has a sense of familiarity immediately.

It also helps that Toyota has stuck with a large amount of physical buttons and switchgear (I counted nearly 50) in addition to the touchscreen. While other brands look to cut controls to save money at the expense of usability, Toyota is sticking with what people know and enjoy.

However, the US version of the Prado has the same riser box inside the boot, which limits its cargo capacity in the same way as it has done here. It's still a reasonable size, but the riser does eat into space and compromises practicality.

The CX-70 measures a substantial 5120mm long, 1994mm wide, and 1745mm tall, and it rides on a 3120mm wheelbase.

It will tow 2.5 tonnes no matter which engine you choose, and the expansive boot will swallow between 589 litres and 2015 litres, depending on how you configure the backseat.

All of that space translates to a hugely airy backseat experience, with the second row able to be fixed in a position that either prioritises leg room or boot space.

With the former, you've got tons of space in the second row. I'm 175cm, and my knee and leg room was ample, with only the intrusive tunnel that runs down the middle-centre of the cabin eating into leg room for the middle passenger.

There are also air vents and temp controls, twin USB charge ports, seat heating in the window seats and swathes of very nice materials.

The boot is massive, too. I can't even reach the back of the rear seats when I lean into it, and Mazda says it will swallow smaller surfboard or SUPs without needing to resort to roof racks.

Under-floor storage adds a bit more security for precious items, too.

We'll drill down on this a little more in the practicality section, but it's important to note here that the CX-70 is the same size as the CX-90 – both are 5120mm long, 1994mm wide and 1745mm high — which means the only real difference between the two models is the third row of seats in the CX-90.

And, as it turns out, that's a very expensive pair of chairs. The CX-70 starts with the GT trim at $75,970 before on-road costs for the petrol or $77,970 for the diesel, and then climbs to the Azami trim, which is $82,970 or $84,970.

The CX-90, though, is $82,577 or $85,785 for the GT, or $91,461 or $93,030 for the Azami.

That makes the CX-90's third row at least a $6600 option, but as much as an $8000 upgrade. Mazda has made moves to address this, with a drive-away "plate clearance" that closes that gap, but we suspect those offers will become permanent fixtures to make the jump from 70 to 90 less ferocious.

Anyway, Mazda has thrown just about everything they've got at the CX-70. The GT kicks off with plenty of high-end gear, including 21-inch black alloy wheels, adaptive LED headlights, a panoramic sunroof and a handsfree powered tailgate.

Inside, there are twin 12.3-inch screens with Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, a 12-speaker Bose stereo, leather seats that are heated front and rear, three-zone climate control and a heated steering wheel.

The Azami then adds things like ambient lighting, black Nappa leather seats, which are now ventilated in the front, footwell lighting, body-coloured wheel arches and lower cladding and body-coloured door handles.

This is the heart of our review, the unavailable hybrid engine, the so-called 'i-Force Max' hybrid powertrain. This is because the US market has never embraced diesel engines, which are so beloved by Prado owners in Australia, so in the search for greater efficiency, Toyota USA is leaning on hybrid technology.

The set-up in the LandCruiser combines a 2.4-litre four-cylinder turbocharged petrol engine with an electric motor in the bell housing between the engine and eight-speed automatic transmission. The combined output of this petrol-electric hybrid is 243kW of power and 630Nm of torque, which is significantly more than the 150kW/500Nm offered by the 2.8-litre turbo diesel offered in Australia.

The catch is, despite the additional power and torque, the LandCruiser is only rated to tow slightly more than 2700kg compared to the 3500kg towing capacity offered by our diesel Prado.

You can have one of two engines in the CX-70, with the cheapest being a 3.3-litre, six-cylinder turbo-petrol, producing 254kW and 500Nm. There's also a 3.3-litre, six-cylinder turbo-diesel, making 187kW and 550Nm. Both are equipped with a 48-volt mild hybrid system to marginally reduce fuel use.

All models are AWD, and pair with an eight-speed automatic transmission.

Obviously one of the biggest reasons for offering/choosing a hybrid engine is fuel efficiency and on that front the LandCruiser runs into the classic problem of big car, small engine. The official combined urban/highway fuel economy figure for the hybrid is 10.2L/100km, which is well behind the official claim for the diesel-powered Prado of just 7.6L/100km.

Drilling in deeper, the LandCruiser hybrid can drop as low as 9.4L/100km on the highway but rises to 10.6L/100km in a purely urban environment, which is typically the opposite to how hybrids excel.

The other major difference between the LandCruiser and our Prado is the size of the fuel tank. The US model only gets a 67-litre tank compared to the 110L offered in Australian models. That, naturally, has a major impact on range, with the LandCruiser hybrid only able to go a theoretical 656km on a single tank, compared to nearly 1300km for the Prado diesel.

Petrol-powered cars will sip 8.1L/100km on the combined cycle, while the diesel drops that to 5.4 litres.

Both models get a 74-litre tank, meaning a theoretical driving range of around 900kms in the petrol, and almost 1400kms in the diesel.

While it may be a hybrid, the LandCruiser is no urban ‘show pony’ and Toyota USA is adamant that it is tough enough to live up to the reputation of its famous nameplate. It’s built on the same TNGA-F platform as our Prado - as well as the Tundra pick-up and others - so it has the foundations for rugged adventure.

It comes standard with locking centre and rear differentials, rear coil springs, full-time four-wheel drive, a two-speed transfer case, ‘CRAWL Control’, a 2400W AC inverter and standard trailer brake controller, which are all must-haves for anyone planning a serious off-road trip.

While we have little reason to doubt the off-road ability of the LandCruiser, our test drive was limited to the urban jungle of Los Angeles, which allowed us to really focus on the powertrain.

Not surprisingly, given its similarities with other Toyota hybrid set-ups, it felt very familiar, albeit in a very different vehicle than the RAV4 and Camry we’ve driven previously. Despite its big on-paper numbers, there was some noticeable lag on initial acceleration and the engine sounds like a modern four-cylinder - a bit gruff when revved hard.

It certainly has enough performance to pull the LandCruiser along, but it isn’t over-endowed with power and torque. At least not in the way its stats suggest.

For the most part, around town, it did a good job of quietly motivating the big SUV around with a minimum of fuss.

Interestingly, the CX-70 has been tagged as the expected smallest seller of Mazda's premium SUV range, but I reckon it just might be the pick of the bunch.

Every one of the CX-0 models (60, 70, 80 and 90) all get slightly different suspension tunes, and while you can find harsh edges in the other models, the CX-70 feels utterly composed and refined, at least on the smooth-ish roads of our launch test route.

Perhaps most surprising, though, is the CX-70's ability to hold its own on a properly twisting road. We expected lots of weight transfer and the high-pitched sounds of tyres screaming out in pain, but instead found Mazda's massive SUV served up grip, composure, and very little in the way of sea-swell-style body roll.

The two big six-cylinder engines also feel perfectly suited to a vehicle in this space. There's tons of power whenever you need it, and solid levels of refinement in terms of engine noise or diesel rattles.

For mine, the petrol engine is the pick though, feeing just a little smoother than the diesel option. The latter can feel a bit jerky at slower speeds, whether that's the power delivery or the gearbox, and it doesn't seem to happen with the petrol engine.

The biggest caveat, though, is that we haven't driven the CX-70 in its natural environment, the city and suburbs, so while it largely shone on flowing country roads, how it performs on roads like the ones near your place remains a bit of a mystery.

The CX-70 hasn’t been ANCAP tested, but it does arrive with a pretty stacked safety offering, including a 360-degree-view camera, blind-spot monitoring, front and rear cross-traffic alert, and a total of eight airbags, including a knee airbag for the driver.

One big plus for the LandCruiser over the Prado is Toyota USA offers two years of free servicing - a nice bonus.

It does have different warranty coverage for different components though, the overall vehicle warranty covers the first three years, the powertrain is covered for five years but the hybrid components are warranted for 10 years.

Servicing is not particularly cheap in the CX-70, and the service intervals, at least in the diesel, feel a little short, too.

Buy that one, and you’ll be visiting the dealership every 12 months or 10,000kms, and the first five years of ownership will cost you $3298.

Petrol cars require servicing every 12 months or 15,000kms, and five years will set you back $3436.

The CX-70 is also covered by Mazda's five-year, unlimited-kilometre warranty.