CS
CarSorted
HomeComparisonsCitroen C3 Aircross vs Mazda CX-30
Spec Battle Updated 20 April 2026 5 min read

Citroen C3 Aircross vs Mazda CX-30

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.

Specifications in progress

Citroen C3 Aircross: we're still completing length, width, height, wheelbase and kerb weight, plus 6 others.

A blank cell below means we don't have that figure, not that the car scores badly on it. We leave them empty rather than estimate, so any row where one car is blank isn't a like-for-like comparison yet.

SpecCitroenMazda
Price (RRP)$32,990$29,990
Fuel typePetrolPetrol
Power81kW114kW
Fuel Economy6.6 L/100km6.3 L/100km
Boot Space410L317L
Towing1,200kg
Warranty5yr / Unlimited5yr / Unlimited
ANCAP SafetyNo dataNo data

Track the Citroen C3 Aircross & Mazda CX-30

Get price-drop alerts on these models plus our free weekly new-car rundown. Unsubscribe anytime.

Price Breakdown

The Citroen C3 Aircross starts from $32,990 before on-road costs, while the Mazda CX-30 opens at $29,990. That makes the Mazda CX-30 the more affordable entry point by $3,000.

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 $36,289 and $32,989 respectively.

Over 5 years, the running costs are nearly identical since both have similar efficiency.

Safety Rundown

ANCAP safety ratings have not been published for both models yet. We will update this section when crash test results are available.

Feature Showdown

The Citroen C3 Aircross features a 7-inch touchscreen, while the Mazda CX-30 gets a 8.8-inch display and 7-inch instruments. Apple CarPlay and Android Auto are standard across both.

The Citroen C3 Aircross stands out with head-up display and wireless charging — features our data doesn't list for the Mazda CX-30. Which feature set matters more depends on your daily routine and priorities.

Drivetrain

The Citroen C3 Aircross uses a PureTech turbo petrol with Stop & Start producing 81kW and 205Nm of torque, sent through a eat6 6-speed automatic to the wheels.

The Mazda CX-30 responds with a Petrol making 114kW and 200Nm, paired to a automatic driving the front wheels.

The Mazda CX-30 has the clear power advantage at 114kW vs 81kW. For most buyers, the way each car feels day-to-day matters more than outright acceleration.

Space & Comfort

Boot space is 410L in the Citroen C3 Aircross and 317L in the Mazda CX-30, giving the Citroen C3 Aircross a 93L advantage.

Turning Circle

Kerb-to-kerb diameter. Smaller turns easier in tight carparks and U-turns.

10.6m diameter

Good

Mazda CX-30 G20 Pure
10.6m
Mazda CX-30 G20 Pure
10.6m · Good

Based on 10.6m turning circle:

  • U-turn on standard street (7m+ wide)
  • Standard parking bay
  • Tight carparks
  • Narrow laneways

Turning circle ratings

Under 10m, Excellent
10 to 11m, Good
11 to 12m, Average
Over 12m, Large
Interactive simulator: U-turns, parking & towing

Turning Circle

Kerb-to-kerb diameter. Smaller turns are easier in tight carparks and U-turns.

10.6 m Ø

Good

9.0 m road
Mazda CX-30 Turning circle · Ø 10.6 m Kerb strike
Scrub the turn

Needs a 3-point turn (one reverse)

Needs about 9.3 m to swing round without stopping. Road is 9.0 m.

U-turn on a wide street

≥ 10 m: clears in one

!

U-turn on a standard street

7 m: 3-point turn

Standard parking bay

1.8 m wide: fits with room

Tight carpark aisle

6 m: swings in

Narrow laneway

3.5 m: no room to turn

Turning circle ratings

Under 10 m · Excellent 10–11 m · Good 11–12 m · Average Over 12 m · Large

Standard widths: AU local streets carry ~5.5–7 m of carriageway; main roads ~9–12 m. AS 2890.1 carpark aisles are ~5.8–6.6 m for 90° bays (2.6 m wide × 5.4 m deep).

Road, aisle, swing and off-tracking figures are indicative estimates from the published turning circle. Verify in person before relying on them.

True Cost to Own

Based on 15,000km of annual driving, fuel costs roughly $1,881/year for the Citroen C3 Aircross and $1,796/year for the Mazda CX-30. That is a $85 annual difference in favour of the Mazda CX-30.

Warranty: 5 years (Citroen C3 Aircross) vs 5 years / 999,999km (Mazda CX-30). Both match on warranty length.

Who Should Buy Which?

Buy the Citroen C3 Aircross if: You need more boot space, or prefer Citroen's approach to design and ownership experience.

Buy the Mazda CX-30 if: You want the lower entry price, prioritise performance, want lower running costs, or prefer Mazda's approach to design and ownership experience.

The Verdict

The Mazda CX-30 takes 3 of 4 key spec categories and comes in at a lower price. The Mazda CX-30 will save you roughly $85 a year in fuel. If boot space matters, the Citroen C3 Aircross has a clear edge. The best pick depends on what you value most. Explore the full specs for each model below.

Common questions

Which is cheapest, Citroen C3 Aircross and Mazda CX-30?

The Mazda CX-30 is the cheapest at $29,990 before on-road costs. That undercuts the Citroen C3 Aircross by $3,000.

Which is the most fuel-efficient?

The Mazda CX-30 uses the least fuel at 6.3L/100km on the combined cycle.

What are the ANCAP safety ratings?

None of Citroen C3 Aircross and Mazda CX-30 carry a published ANCAP rating yet, so there is no crash result to compare. Check back as they are tested.

Which has the most boot space?

The Citroen C3 Aircross has the largest boot at 410L.

Which can tow the most?

The Mazda CX-30 has the highest braked towing capacity at 1,200kg.

Which is the most powerful?

The Mazda CX-30 makes the most power at 114kW.

Free newsletter

Stay across the market

Get our weekly new-car rundown of launches, price moves, deals and reviews, straight from the data.

  • Weekly new-car rundown
  • Price cuts and new deals
  • New launches and reviews

No spam, unsubscribe anytime. By subscribing you agree to receive marketing emails.

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!

More head-to-heads

Other matchups worth a look

Same segment, similar money. Tap any pair for the full side-by-side spec sheet.

All comparisons

Images are representative. Actual variant trim, colour and equipment may differ.

Browse all cars · All SUVs · Best mid-size SUVs