Volvo C40 vs Mazda CX-70

What's the difference?

The C40 becomes a compelling option in the electrified small SUV space, offering a premium look and feel, great range and tech inclusions at the price, as well as awesome on-road dynamics.

Its main downsides are the rear seat, which is compromised by its platform and design-led roofline, and the overwhelming power and added traction of the dual-motor makes the single motor less attractive on the value front.

Still, regardless of variant chosen, the C40 looks to offer a stand-out balance of price, range, and performance, against its traditional rivals and newcomers alike.

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.

Volvo has become a brand with a distinctive and consistent design language which embodies the kind of beautiful minimalism normally associated with Scandinavian brands.

I have always liked how Volvo says more with less design elements, with only gentle touches of chrome or gloss black, and a lack of over-the-top sporty pieces avoiding the temptation to over-sell the sporty potential of the brand’s range.

The C40 takes the small SUV formula, well established by its XC40 relation, and gets a bit weird and experimental. It’s slightly lower and has a more coupe-styled rear, with a strongly raked rear window giving it a sportier and more aggressive look than the rest of Volvo’s SUV range.

The styling is sold by an angular spoiler piece running atop the boot, and the rear light clusters have gone all minimalist, constructed of individual pieces rather than a single transparent housing, and they give a nod to the C30 hatchback which this car is the spiritual successor to, by name and nature.

The interior offers up no surprises, sticking to the formula Volvo has established across all of its current models. An effortlessly premium space with, again, a minimalistic dash dominated by the portrait touchscreen, the C40’s premium nature is confirmed by its finely patterned inlays, simple chrome pieces, and abundance of soft-touch surfaces.

The big upright vent fittings with clever rhomboid patterns on their adjustment dials are always a highlight piece of modern Volvos, and the pattern work is continued on the central volume adjust dial and even on the little rotating pieces of the light and wiper stalks. Clever.

Even the software is paired back on the multimedia suite and digital dashboard, with easy to use shortcuts and simple menus which suit the car.

Volvo might turn off some buyers with the more unconventional shape of the C40. But for those looking for a more traditional SUV it also offers the XC40 in the same two variants, and the Polestar 2 caters to those not looking for an SUV at all.

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.

The C40 is essentially a XC40 with a cropped down roofline, and there are some obvious downsides which this new shape brings.

The front seat throws no surprises, though, offering plenty of room for two adults with a welcome level of adjustability for the seat and wheel. The seats could be more comfortable, though, with a notable lack of padding in the base compared to some luxury (or even non-luxury) rivals. 

I’m a fan of the fabric trim which comes on both grades, bucking the trend of needing to have leather or leather-like trim for a car to feel ‘premium’.

The ample window space up front, including the massive glass roof helps the C40’s cabin feel spacious, but the view out the rear with its aggressive design is all but a very limited letterbox aspect, particularly if the rear seat headrests are in the upright position. 

While some controls are exclusively via touch interface, there is a physical volume dial, and shortcut buttons for the defogger functions. 

Temperature is controlled by touch, however, and the detail settings have some smaller toggle adjustments. Tricky to jab at when you’re on the move.

The digital dash is refreshingly simple, but minimally adjustable, with the choice of either a nifty navigation screen, a blank screen, or trip details being the only options.

Cabin storage is good but not stellar. There are bottle holders and big pockets in the doors, a set of two cupholders in the centre (beats the Polestar 2’s single cupholder), a small tray with a wireless charger under the multimedia screen, and a smallish console armrest box.

The rear seat is where the real problem exists. Unlike the XC40, the C40’s cropped roofline means my head was hard up against the roof (I’m 182cm tall). 

I did have decent knee room behind my own seating position, however the seat comfort in the back still isn’t as good as some rivals. 

The middle position is also compromised, thanks to the raised centre floor piece the C40’s platform needs to facilitate all-wheel drive in its combustion relations.

A bottle holder appears in each door pocket, and in a rare inclusion, there are heated outboard rear seats, adjustable air vents, and USB-C charging ports.

The boot has a quoted capacity of 413 litres with the rear seats up. The floor is comparatively high suggesting a smallish space when loaded with luggage cases, for instance. Stay tuned for a follow-up review so we can see how well it holds our three-piece demo set.

The floor itself has an adjustable, pop-up divider and multiple luggage hooks, making it quite versatile, and there is a cavity beneath which can hold your charging cables as well as the inflator kit in place of a spare wheel.

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.

Great news here, the C40 can be chosen with two powerful layouts, either a front-wheel drive 170kW/330Nm set-up, or a dual-motor all-wheel drive arrangement, able to make use of nearly double the power at 300kW/660Nm. The dual-motor is capable of sprinting from 0-100km/h in just 4.7 seconds.

The front-drive is backed by a 69kWh battery allowing it a 434km range, while the dual motor ups the battery size to 78kWh to allow a 420km driving range.

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.

Surprisingly, energy consumption is quite high for both C40 variants. The single motor is the more efficient of the two, consuming 16.8kWh/100km on the more lenient ADR testing schedule, while the dual motor officially consumes 22.2kWh/100km to the same standard. I saw around 23kWh/100km overall in my short test of the dual-motor variant.

Energy consumption could be better for both, as I have achieved more consistently impressive results particularly from Hyundai and Kia electric cars.

Where the C40 is more impressive though is its charging specs, which are exactly where they need to be for a car this size. On a rapid DC charger, the C40 can charge at a rate of 150kW meaning a 10 - 80 percent charge in 40 minutes for the dual motor, or 32 minutes for the single motor.

On the slower AC standard, the C40 charges at a rate of 11kW. Expect a 10 - 80 percent charge time of around five or six hours on this standard. 

The C40 uses a European-standard Type 2 CCS charging port, although it misses out on the handy two-way charging feature offered by some rivals.

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.

If you’ve driven any kind of XC40 or even a Polestar 2 before, the C40 will offer no surprises. It’s pretty much exactly the same from behind the wheel with a few subtle tweaks.

This is a very good thing. The C40 is quiet, easy to drive, and its electric motor and regen system offer a smooth single-pedal experience.

It is also alarmingly, overwhelmingly, rapid. While its massive set of batteries under the floor make it feel heavy off the line in stop-start traffic, sticking your boot into the accelerator will remove any doubt, particularly in the dual-motor variant, that this Volvo means business.

The dual-motor also has an incredible torque-vectoring system, making it extremely difficult to elicit so much as a squeak from its tyres. It also feels as though torque is distributed quite evenly between its two driven axles, making it feel neither prone to over- or understeer.

This has the effect of making the C40 feel somewhat indestructible in the corners, with absurd levels of grip. 

The same feeling is present in top-spec versions of the Polestar 2, only the feeling of ever-present weight is more noticeable in the higher-riding C40, which can make it unsettling to take corners at the kinds of speeds it is capable of.

The steering tune is interesting. Volvo offers two software-controlled modes, either heavy or standard, and the standard mode is heavy enough. 

Despite its electrical assistance, the wheel does continue to offer some organic feedback, making the C40 a pleasure to steer on countryside roads.

The ride is also surprisingly good, despite massive wheel options. I was impressed how easily the C40 handled most bumps and undulations, communicating little to the cabin. 

The ride can approach its limits with such big wheels and the weight of its batteries, generally these are communicated via unsettling thuds from underneath the car. Regular undulations at higher speeds also had the C40 bouncing around a little.

On the whole, though, the cabin is kept relatively insulated and serene, adding an element of total confidence, similar to that offered by Teslas, whilst offering better ride quality with a softer edge. At higher speed, at least on the 20-inch wheels, road noise does pick up, however.

In terms of electric driving, there is a single adjustable setting for regen. The car either offers a full single pedal mode with maximum regenerative braking to bring the car to a halt with the motor alone, or a ‘standard’ mode which tones the regen down and offers it blended in via the brake pedal. 

Single pedal mode is more efficient. I suggest you stick to it if you want to make the most of this car’s efficiency.

I was surprised to have so few complaints about the C40’s drive experience. This is a balanced and capable EV which is yet another example of how even vehicles which use combustion platforms are improved out of sight by full electrification.

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.

The C40 is covered by Volvo’s five year and unlimited kilometre warranty, with a separate eight-year, 160,000km warranty for the battery. There is also eight years of roadside assistance attached.

It is pleasing to see the service intervals for the C40 are long, as they should be for an electric car with so few moving parts, set at two years or 30,000km. 

The first 24 month service is free of charge, and Volvo tells us service pricing after this period will average out to around $100 a year ($200 per visit).

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.