Chery Tiggo 7 Super Hybrid vs Mazda CX-80
A detailed look at how two of Australia's most popular SUVs compare on price, running costs, safety, and everyday livability.
Specifications and pricing correct at time of publishing. Prices are RRP before on-road costs unless stated otherwise. Always confirm with the manufacturer or dealer before purchasing.
Price Breakdown
The Chery Tiggo 7 Super Hybrid starts from $34,990 before on-road costs, while the Mazda CX-80 opens at $64,490. That makes the Chery Tiggo 7 Super Hybrid the more affordable entry point by $29,500.
Once you factor in stamp duty, registration, CTP insurance, and dealer delivery, expect to add roughly 8-12% on top of the RRP depending on your state. That puts estimated driveaway prices in the ballpark of $38,489 and $70,939 respectively.
The Chery Tiggo 7 Super Hybrid qualifies for FBT exemption as an electric vehicle, which can dramatically reduce the effective cost for novated lease buyers. The Mazda CX-80, as a petrol model, does not qualify.
Over 5 years, the running costs favour the Chery Tiggo 7 Super Hybrid by roughly $9,785 in fuel alone.
Safety Rundown
Both the Chery Tiggo 7 Super Hybrid and Mazda CX-80 hold a 5-star ANCAP safety rating. Adult occupant protection scored 82% for the Chery Tiggo 7 Super Hybrid and 92% for the Mazda CX-80.
Where the two diverge is in active safety technology. Both models are evenly matched with 6 out of 10 key ADAS systems.
Both include the essentials: autonomous emergency braking, lane keep assist, adaptive cruise control, a reversing camera. Airbag count is 6 in the Chery Tiggo 7 Super Hybrid and 6 in the Mazda CX-80.
Feature Showdown
The Chery Tiggo 7 Super Hybrid features a 12.3-inch touchscreen paired with a 12.3-inch digital dash, while the Mazda CX-80 gets a 10.3-inch display. Apple CarPlay and Android Auto are standard across both.
The Mazda CX-80 counters with power tailgate that the Chery Tiggo 7 Super Hybrid does not offer. Which feature set matters more depends on your daily routine and priorities.
Drivetrain
The Chery Tiggo 7 Super Hybrid uses a Petrol I4 Turbo + PHEV producing 105kW and 215Nm of torque, sent through a 1-speed dedicated hybrid transmission (dht) to a FWD layout. It covers the 0-100km/h sprint in 9.5 seconds.
The Mazda CX-80 responds with a Petrol making 209kW and 450Nm, paired to a automatic driving all four wheels. It gets to 100km/h in 9 seconds.
The Mazda CX-80 has the clear power advantage at 209kW vs 105kW. In the real-world sprint, the Mazda CX-80 is 0.5s quicker. For most buyers, the way each car feels day-to-day matters more than outright acceleration.
Space & Comfort
The Chery Tiggo 7 Super Hybrid measures 4,535mm long on a 2,653mm wheelbase, 455mm shorter than the Mazda CX-80 at 4,990mm (3,120mm wheelbase). The longer wheelbase on the Mazda CX-80 generally means more rear legroom.
Boot space is 475L in the Chery Tiggo 7 Super Hybrid and 550L in the Mazda CX-80, giving the Mazda CX-80 a 75L advantage. The Mazda CX-80 seats 7 vs 5.
0Turning Circle
Kerb-to-kerb diameter. Smaller turns easier in tight carparks and U-turns.
11.2m to 11.8m
Based on 11.2m turning circle:
- U-turn on standard street (7m+ wide)
- Standard parking bay
- Tight carparks
- Narrow laneways
Based on 11.8m turning circle:
- U-turn on standard street (7m+ wide)
- Standard parking bay
- Tight carparks
- Narrow laneways
Turning circle ratings
True Cost to Own
Based on 15,000km of annual driving, fuel costs roughly $67/year for the Chery Tiggo 7 Super Hybrid and $2,024/year for the Mazda CX-80. That is a $1,957 annual difference in favour of the Chery Tiggo 7 Super Hybrid.
Estimated annual total: $67 (Chery Tiggo 7 Super Hybrid) vs $2,024 (Mazda CX-80). The Chery Tiggo 7 Super Hybrid saves you roughly $1,957 per year in total ownership costs. Use our Fuel Cost Calculator to estimate based on your driving.
Warranty: 7 years (Chery Tiggo 7 Super Hybrid) vs 5 years / 999,999km (Mazda CX-80). The Chery Tiggo 7 Super Hybrid has longer coverage.
Who Should Buy Which?
Buy the Chery Tiggo 7 Super Hybrid if: You want the lower entry price, want lower running costs, value a longer warranty, or prefer Chery's approach to design and ownership experience.
Buy the Mazda CX-80 if: You prioritise performance, need more boot space, or prefer Mazda's approach to design and ownership experience.
The Verdict
The Mazda CX-80 takes 4 of 7 key spec categories. The Chery Tiggo 7 Super Hybrid will save you roughly $1,957 a year in fuel. If boot space matters, the Mazda CX-80 has a clear edge. The Chery Tiggo 7 Super Hybrid adds peace of mind with a longer 7-year warranty. The best pick depends on what you value most. Explore the full specs for each model below.
Common questions
Which is cheapest, Chery Tiggo 7 Super Hybrid and Mazda CX-80?
The Chery Tiggo 7 Super Hybrid is the cheapest at $34,990 before on-road costs. That undercuts the Mazda CX-80 by $29,500.
Which is the most fuel-efficient?
The Chery Tiggo 7 Super Hybrid uses the least fuel at 1.4L/100km on the combined cycle.
Which is safest?
They are evenly matched — Chery Tiggo 7 Super Hybrid and Mazda CX-80 all hold a 5-star ANCAP rating. Compare the active-safety features above to separate them.
Which has the most boot space?
The Mazda CX-80 has the largest boot at 550L.
Which can tow the most?
The Mazda CX-80 has the highest braked towing capacity at 2,000kg.
Which has the best warranty?
The Chery Tiggo 7 Super Hybrid has the longest warranty at 7 years.
Which is the most powerful?
The Mazda CX-80 makes the most power at 209kW. The Mazda CX-80 is quickest to 100km/h in 9s.
Disclaimer: All information in this comparison was believed to be correct at the time of publishing (20 April 2026). Prices are manufacturer recommended retail prices (RRP) and may vary by state, dealer, and options. Driveaway costs include estimated on-road costs for Victoria. Fuel economy figures are WLTP/ADR combined cycle. Specifications can change without notice. Always verify with the manufacturer before making a purchase decision. CarSorted does not accept payment for recommendations.
Auto-generated from CarSorted's specification data · 20 April 2026
Comments (0)
Sign in to join the conversation
No comments yet. Be the first!
