GWM Haval H6GT vs Mazda CX-60
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.
Data checked: specs 31 Aug 2026, price 8 Sep 2026
Driver assistance, as the maker lists it
Swipe across. Tap a feature to see what it does and each car's source.
StandardOptional: printed price, +pack or NCO (no-cost)No, not offeredNo dataCounts beside each car use the same colours; ? is no option data.
From each manufacturer's Australian equipment list. No data means that car's document does not say. The drawings are our own illustrations of how each kind of system works.
$44,990RRP
- with the Mazda CX-60's standard kit: $44,990 (nothing to add)
$45,640RRP
- no option data for this car
Printed option prices only. A pack is counted once and makes the figure a floor when it carries no printed price. Nothing is inferred from the other car.
Track the GWM Haval H6GT & Mazda CX-60
Get price-drop alerts on these models plus our free weekly new-car rundown. Unsubscribe anytime.
Price Breakdown
The GWM Haval H6GT starts from $44,990 before on-road costs, while the Mazda CX-60 opens at $45,640. That makes the GWM Haval H6GT the more affordable entry point by $650.
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 $49,489 and $50,204 respectively.
Over 5 years, the running costs favour the Mazda CX-60 by roughly $1,280 in fuel alone.
Safety Rundown
ANCAP safety ratings have not been published for both models yet. We will update this section when crash test results are available.
Recalls on our record
GWM Haval H6GT
None open on our record
Mazda CX-60
- REC-006174 · published 14 Nov 2024Due to a software issue, the Powertrain Control Module (PCM) and Battery Energy Control Module (BECM) may impact the hybrid battery assist function.Year range on the notice: 2023 - 2024
- REC-006173 · published 14 Nov 2024Due to a software issue, the Powertrain Control Module (PCM) and Battery Energy Control Module (BECM) may impact the hybrid battery assist function.Year range on the notice: 2023 - 2024
- REC-006172 · published 14 Nov 2024Due to software improper programming of the Dash Electronic Supply Unit (Dash-ESU), when the hybrid system is powered on multiple warning messages may display in the instrument cluster:Year range on the notice: 2023 - 2024
- 2 more on the model page.
A recall covers the builds its notice lists, not every car of a model. Check your VIN at vehiclerecalls.gov.au.
Feature Showdown
The GWM Haval H6GT features a 12.3-inch touchscreen paired with a 10.3-inch digital dash, while the Mazda CX-60 gets a 10.3-inch display and 7-inch instruments. Apple CarPlay and Android Auto are standard across both.
The GWM Haval H6GT stands out with wireless Apple CarPlay/Android Auto, head-up display, wireless charging, heated front seats and power tailgate — features our data doesn't list for the Mazda CX-60. The Mazda CX-60 counters with Apple CarPlay. Which feature set matters more depends on your daily routine and priorities.
Interior trim differs: the GWM Haval H6GT gets synthetic leather upholstery while the Mazda CX-60 offers cloth.
Drivetrain
The GWM Haval H6GT uses a Petrol producing 150kW and 320Nm of torque, sent through a auto to a AWD layout. It covers the 0-100km/h sprint in 8.5 seconds.
The Mazda CX-60 responds with a Petrol making 138kW and 250Nm, paired to a automatic driving the rear wheels. It gets to 100km/h in 7.4 seconds.
The GWM Haval H6GT has the clear power advantage at 150kW vs 138kW. In the 0-100 sprint (manufacturer-claimed), the Mazda CX-60 is 1.1s quicker. For most buyers, the way each car feels day-to-day matters more than outright acceleration.
Space & Comfort
The GWM Haval H6GT measures 4,727mm long on a 2,738mm wheelbase, 13mm shorter than the Mazda CX-60 at 4,740mm (2,870mm wheelbase). The longer wheelbase on the Mazda CX-60 generally means more rear legroom.
Boot space is 392L in the GWM Haval H6GT and 570L in the Mazda CX-60, giving the Mazda CX-60 a 178L advantage.
For towing, the GWM Haval H6GT leads with a 2,000kg braked capacity vs 1,800kg. That 200kg difference matters if you regularly hitch up.
Turning Circle
Kerb-to-kerb diameter. Smaller turns easier in tight carparks and U-turns.
10.8m to 12.0m
Based on 12.0m turning circle:
- U-turn on standard street (7m+ wide)
- Standard parking bay
- Tight carparks
- Narrow laneways
Based on 10.8m turning circle:
- U-turn on standard street (7m+ wide)
- Standard parking bay
- Tight carparks
- Narrow laneways
Turning circle ratings
Compare U-turns side by side
Turning Circle · U-turn compare
kerb-to-kerb, 2 cars0 of 2 clear a 7.0 m street in one sweep
Green cars complete the U-turn; amber need a 3-point turn. Drag the slider to test tighter streets.
Standard widths: AU local streets ~5.5–7 m; main roads ~9–12 m.
True Cost to Own
Based on 15,000km of annual driving, fuel costs roughly $2,394/year for the GWM Haval H6GT and $2,138/year for the Mazda CX-60. That is a $256 annual difference in favour of the Mazda CX-60.
Warranty: 7 years / 999,999km (GWM Haval H6GT) vs 5 years / 999,999km (Mazda CX-60). The GWM Haval H6GT has longer coverage.
Who Should Buy Which?
Buy the GWM Haval H6GT if: You want the lower entry price, prioritise performance, value a longer warranty, need stronger towing, or prefer GWM's approach to design and ownership experience.
Buy the Mazda CX-60 if: You need more boot space, want lower running costs, or prefer Mazda's approach to design and ownership experience.
The Verdict
Mazda CX-60: Top CarSorted Score, 76 vs 68, but the GWM Haval H6GT is $650 cheaper
The Mazda CX-60 comes out ahead on the CarSorted Score (76 vs 68), taking 3 of 7 key spec rows below. The deciding gaps: safety (Mazda CX-60 ahead by 27), fuel economy (Mazda CX-60 ahead by 8), performance (Mazda CX-60 ahead by 8). The Mazda CX-60 will save you roughly $256 a year in fuel. If boot space matters, the Mazda CX-60 has a clear edge. The GWM Haval H6GT 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, GWM Haval H6GT and Mazda CX-60?
The GWM Haval H6GT is the cheapest at $44,990 before on-road costs. That undercuts the Mazda CX-60 by $650.
Which is the most fuel-efficient?
The Mazda CX-60 uses the least fuel at 7.5L/100km on the combined cycle.
What are the ANCAP safety ratings?
Mazda CX-60 holds a 5-star ANCAP rating. We have no published ANCAP rating for GWM Haval H6GT, so there is nothing to compare on crash performance. Compare the active-safety features above instead.
Which has the most boot space?
The Mazda CX-60 has the largest boot at 570L with the seats up.
Which can tow the most?
The GWM Haval H6GT has the highest braked towing capacity at 2,000kg.
Which has the best warranty?
The GWM Haval H6GT has the longest warranty at 7 years / Unlimited.
Which is the most powerful?
The GWM Haval H6GT makes the most power at 150kW. The Mazda CX-60 is quickest to 100km/h in 7.4s.
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!
