BMW X5 M vs Mazda CX-70

Price and cost per week

Safety Rundown

ANCAP's published record does not give the BMW X5 M a rating. ANCAP's published ratings include no record for the Mazda CX-70. With no pair of ratings to compare, the active-safety features in the spec table above are the fairer comparison.

Recalls on our record

A recall covers the builds its notice lists, not every car of a model. Check your VIN at vehiclerecalls.gov.au.

Feature Showdown

The BMW X5 M features a 14.9-inch touchscreen paired with a 12.3-inch digital dash, while the Mazda CX-70 gets a 12.3-inch display and 12.3-inch instruments. Apple CarPlay and Android Auto are standard across both.

The BMW X5 M stands out with ventilated seats and Harman Kardon audio — features our data doesn't list for the Mazda CX-70. The Mazda CX-70 counters with Bose audio. Which feature set matters more depends on your daily routine and priorities.

Interior trim differs: the BMW X5 M gets merino leather upholstery while the Mazda CX-70 offers leather. Climate control is 4-zone in the BMW X5 M and 3-zone in the Mazda CX-70.

Drivetrain

The BMW X5 M uses a Petrol producing 460kW and 750Nm of torque, sent through a auto to a AWD layout. It covers the 0-100km/h sprint in 3.9 seconds.

The Mazda CX-70 responds with a Petrol making 254kW and 500Nm, paired to a automatic driving all four wheels. It gets to 100km/h in 6.8 seconds.

The BMW X5 M has the clear power advantage at 460kW vs 254kW. In the 0-100 sprint (manufacturer-claimed), the BMW X5 M is 2.9s quicker. For most buyers, the way each car feels day-to-day matters more than outright acceleration.

Space & Comfort

The BMW X5 M measures 4,948mm long on a 2,972mm wheelbase, 172mm shorter than the Mazda CX-70 at 5,120mm (3,120mm wheelbase). The longer wheelbase on the Mazda CX-70 generally means more rear legroom.

Boot space is 650L in the BMW X5 M and 598L in the Mazda CX-70, giving the BMW X5 M a 52L advantage.

For towing, the BMW X5 M leads with a 2,700kg braked capacity vs 2,500kg. That 200kg difference matters if you regularly hitch up.

Neither U-turns in one sweep on a 7 m local street (both need a three-point turn); the Mazda CX-70's turning circle is 0.9 m tighter, 11.8 m against 12.7 m kerb to kerb. The street estimate is indicative, worked from the published turning circles.

Cost to own

At 15,000 km a year, fuel for the BMW X5 M costs about $3,563 a year (12.5 L/100km) and fuel for the Mazda CX-70 about $2,309 a year (8.1 L/100km), at $1.90 a litre and 32c a kWh. That is $1,254 a year less for the Mazda CX-70.

Warranty: 5 years / Unlimited (BMW X5 M) and 5 years / Unlimited (Mazda CX-70).

Where each one leads

The BMW X5 M: more power (460kW against 254kW), the bigger boot with the seats up (650L against 598L) and the higher braked towing limit (2,700kg against 2,500kg).

The Mazda CX-70: the lower starting price ($73,020 against $247,800) and lower fuel or energy costs on our assumptions ($2,309 a year against $3,563).

The Verdict

Mazda CX-70 scores higher, 72 vs 59

The Mazda CX-70 scores 72 to the BMW X5 M's 59 on the CarSorted Score, and leads 2 of the 6 spec rows that separate them, at the lower price. The biggest gaps: fuel economy (Mazda CX-70 ahead by 40 points), value (Mazda CX-70 ahead by 35 points), performance (BMW X5 M ahead by 32 points). At 15,000 km a year, fuel for the Mazda CX-70 costs about $1,254 less (8.1 L/100km against 12.5 L/100km, at $1.90 a litre). Boot space with the seats up: 650L in the BMW X5 M, 598L in the Mazda CX-70.

Common questions