Isuzu MU-X vs Mazda CX-5
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.
Track the Isuzu MU-X & Mazda CX-5
Get price-drop alerts on these models plus our free weekly new-car rundown. Unsubscribe anytime.
Price Breakdown
The Isuzu MU-X starts from $43,900 before on-road costs, while the Mazda CX-5 opens at $39,990. That makes the Mazda CX-5 the more affordable entry point by $3,910.
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 $48,290 and $43,989 respectively.
Over 5 years, the running costs favour the Isuzu MU-X by roughly $1,425 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.
Feature Showdown
The Isuzu MU-X features a 8-inch touchscreen paired with a 4.2-inch digital dash, while the Mazda CX-5 gets a 15.6-inch display and 10.3-inch instruments. Apple CarPlay and Android Auto are standard across both.
The Isuzu MU-X stands out with wireless Apple CarPlay/Android Auto that you will not find on the Mazda CX-5. The Mazda CX-5 counters with Apple CarPlay. Which feature set matters more depends on your daily routine and priorities.
Drivetrain
The Isuzu MU-X uses a Diesel producing 120kW and 400Nm of torque, sent through a automatic to a RWD layout. It covers the 0-100km/h sprint in 11 seconds.
The Mazda CX-5 responds with a Petrol making 132kW and 242Nm, paired to a automatic driving all four wheels. It gets to 100km/h in 8.7 seconds.
The Mazda CX-5 has the clear power advantage at 132kW vs 120kW. In the real-world sprint, the Mazda CX-5 is 2.3s quicker. For most buyers, the way each car feels day-to-day matters more than outright acceleration.
Space & Comfort
The Isuzu MU-X measures 4,860mm long on a 2,855mm wheelbase, 170mm longer than the Mazda CX-5 at 4,690mm (2,815mm wheelbase). The longer wheelbase on the Isuzu MU-X generally means more rear legroom.
Boot space is 311L in the Isuzu MU-X and 438L in the Mazda CX-5, giving the Mazda CX-5 a 127L advantage. Fold the rears and you get 2138L vs 1340L. The Isuzu MU-X seats 7 vs 5.
For towing, the Isuzu MU-X leads with a 3,500kg braked capacity vs 1,800kg. That 1,700kg difference matters if you regularly hitch up.
Turning Circle
Kerb-to-kerb diameter. Smaller turns easier in tight carparks and U-turns.
11.2m to 11.6m
Based on 11.6m turning circle:
- U-turn on standard street (7m+ wide)
- Standard parking bay
- Tight carparks
- Narrow laneways
Based on 11.2m 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 $1,824/year for the Isuzu MU-X and $2,109/year for the Mazda CX-5. That is a $285 annual difference in favour of the Isuzu MU-X.
Estimated annual total: $1,824 (Isuzu MU-X) vs $2,109 (Mazda CX-5). The Isuzu MU-X saves you roughly $285 per year in total ownership costs. Use our Fuel Cost Calculator to estimate based on your driving.
Warranty: 6 years / 150,000km (Isuzu MU-X) vs 5 years / 999,999km (Mazda CX-5). The Isuzu MU-X has longer coverage.
Who Should Buy Which?
Buy the Isuzu MU-X if: You want lower running costs, value a longer warranty, need stronger towing, or prefer Isuzu's approach to design and ownership experience.
Buy the Mazda CX-5 if: You want the lower entry price, prioritise performance, need more boot space, or prefer Mazda's approach to design and ownership experience.
The Verdict
The Mazda CX-5 takes 4 of 7 key spec categories and comes in at a lower price. The Isuzu MU-X will save you roughly $285 a year in fuel. If boot space matters, the Mazda CX-5 has a clear edge. The Isuzu MU-X adds peace of mind with a longer 6-year warranty. The best pick depends on what you value most. Explore the full specs for each model below.
Common questions
Which is cheapest, Isuzu MU-X and Mazda CX-5?
The Mazda CX-5 is the cheapest at $39,990 before on-road costs. That undercuts the Isuzu MU-X by $3,910.
Which is the most fuel-efficient?
The Isuzu MU-X uses the least fuel at 6.4L/100km on the combined cycle.
Which is safest?
They are evenly matched — Isuzu MU-X 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-5 has the largest boot at 438L.
Which can tow the most?
The Isuzu MU-X has the highest braked towing capacity at 3,500kg.
Which has the best warranty?
The Isuzu MU-X has the longest warranty at 6 years / 150k km.
Which is the most powerful?
The Mazda CX-5 makes the most power at 132kW. The Mazda CX-5 is quickest to 100km/h in 8.7s.
Track the cars you're comparing
Sign up free for price-drop alerts on the models in this comparison, plus our weekly new-car rundown covering launches, deals and reviews. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.
By subscribing, you agree to receive marketing emails. You can unsubscribe at any time. View our Privacy Policy.
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!
