CS
CarSorted
HomeComparisonsIsuzu MU-X vs Mazda CX-9
Spec Battle Updated 20 April 2026 5 min read

Isuzu MU-X vs Mazda CX-9

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.

SpecIsuzuMazda
Price (RRP)$43,900TBC
Fuel typeDieselpetrol
Power120kW170kW
0-100 km/h11s
Fuel Economy6.4 L/100km9 L/100km
Boot Space311L230L
Towing3,500kg2,000kg
Warranty6yr / 150k km5yr / Unlimited
ANCAP Safety5 StarsNo data

Track the Isuzu MU-X & Mazda CX-9

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

Price Breakdown

Pricing for one or both models is yet to be confirmed for the Australian market. We will update this comparison when official RRPs are announced.

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

Both come with modern infotainment systems.

The Isuzu MU-X stands out with wireless Apple CarPlay/Android Auto that you will not find on the Mazda CX-9. 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-9 lines up making 170kW and 420Nm, paired to a 6-speed automatic driving all four wheels.

The Mazda CX-9 has the clear power advantage at 170kW vs 120kW. 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, 215mm shorter than the Mazda CX-9 at 5,075mm (2,930mm wheelbase). The longer wheelbase on the Mazda CX-9 generally means more rear legroom.

Boot space is 311L in the Isuzu MU-X and 230L in the Mazda CX-9, giving the Isuzu MU-X a 81L advantage. The Isuzu MU-X seats 7 vs 6.

For towing, the Isuzu MU-X leads with a 3,500kg braked capacity vs 2,000kg. That 1,500kg difference matters if you regularly hitch up.

Turning Circle

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

11.6m to 11.8m

TightestIsuzu MU-X LS-M 2.2L 4x2Tightest turn at 11.6m, easiest U-turns and carparks
Isuzu MU-X LS-M 2.2L 4x2
11.6mTighter
Best
Mazda CX-9 Azami LE AWD (6-seat)
11.8m
Worst
Isuzu MU-X LS-M 2.2L 4x2
11.6m · Average

Based on 11.6m turning circle:

  • U-turn on standard street (7m+ wide)
  • Standard parking bay
  • Tight carparks
  • Narrow laneways
Mazda CX-9 Azami LE AWD (6-seat)
11.8m · Average

Based on 11.8m 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
Compare U-turns side by side

Turning Circle · U-turn compare

kerb-to-kerb, 2 cars
Tap to add/remove
TightestIsuzu MU-XTightest turn at 11.6m, needs the least road to swing around
Isuzu MU-XTightest11.6 m
Average△ 3-point
Mazda CX-911.8 m
Average△ 3-point
Scrub the turn

0 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.

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

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 $2,565/year for the Mazda CX-9. That is a $741 annual difference in favour of the Isuzu MU-X.

Estimated annual total: $1,824 (Isuzu MU-X) vs $2,565 (Mazda CX-9). The Isuzu MU-X saves you roughly $741 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-9). The Isuzu MU-X has longer coverage.

Who Should Buy Which?

Buy the Isuzu MU-X if: You need more boot space, 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-9 if: You prioritise performance, or prefer Mazda's approach to design and ownership experience.

The Verdict

The Isuzu MU-X takes 4 of 5 key spec categories. The Isuzu MU-X will save you roughly $741 a year in fuel. If boot space matters, the Isuzu MU-X 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-9?

The Isuzu MU-X is the cheapest at $43,900 before on-road costs.

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 Isuzu MU-X has the largest boot at 311L.

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-9 makes the most power at 170kW.

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!

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