Land Rover Defender 110 vs Mazda CX-60

Price and cost per week

Safety Rundown

ANCAP lists the Land Rover Defender 110 at 5 stars (2020) and the Mazda CX-60 at 5 stars (2022). ANCAP tested these in different years (2020 vs 2022). Its criteria get stricter about every three years, so the stars are not like for like. Adult occupant protection scored 85% for the Land Rover Defender 110 and 91% for the Mazda CX-60, under different test years.

Where the two diverge is in active safety technology. We can confirm 7 of 10 key ADAS systems on the Mazda CX-60, against 6 on the Land Rover Defender 110.

Both include the essentials: autonomous emergency braking, lane keep assist, adaptive cruise control, a reversing camera. Airbag count is 6 in the Land Rover Defender 110 and 7 in the Mazda CX-60.

Recalls on our record

A recall covers the builds its notice lists, not every car of a model. Check your VIN at vehiclerecalls.gov.au.

Feature Showdown

The Land Rover Defender 110 features a 11.4-inch touchscreen paired with a 12.3-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 Land Rover Defender 110 stands out with wireless charging, heated front seats, ventilated seats and power tailgate — features our data doesn't list for the Mazda CX-60. The Mazda CX-60 counters with head-up display. Which feature set matters more depends on your daily routine and priorities.

Interior trim differs: the Land Rover Defender 110 gets leather upholstery while the Mazda CX-60 offers cloth. Climate control is 3-zone in the Land Rover Defender 110 and 2-zone in the Mazda CX-60.

Drivetrain

The Land Rover Defender 110 uses a 3.0 i6 Diesel Mild Hybrid producing 183kW and 570Nm of torque, sent through a 8-speed automatic to a AWD layout. It covers the 0-100km/h sprint in 8.3 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 Land Rover Defender 110 has the clear power advantage at 183kW vs 138kW. In the 0-100 sprint (manufacturer-claimed), the Mazda CX-60 is 0.9s quicker. For most buyers, the way each car feels day-to-day matters more than outright acceleration.

Space & Comfort

The Land Rover Defender 110 measures 4,758mm long on a 3,022mm wheelbase, 18mm longer than the Mazda CX-60 at 4,740mm (2,870mm wheelbase). The longer wheelbase on the Land Rover Defender 110 generally means more rear legroom.

For towing, the Land Rover Defender 110 leads with a 3,500kg braked capacity vs 1,800kg. That 1,700kg difference matters if you regularly hitch up.

Neither U-turns in one sweep on a 7 m local street (both need a three-point turn); the Mazda CX-60's turning circle is 2.0 m tighter, 10.8 m against 12.8 m kerb to kerb. The street estimate is indicative, worked from the published turning circles.

Cost to own

At 15,000 km a year, fuel for the Land Rover Defender 110 costs about $2,309 a year (8.1 L/100km) and fuel for the Mazda CX-60 about $2,138 a year (7.5 L/100km), at $1.90 a litre and 32c a kWh. That is $171 a year less for the Mazda CX-60.

Warranty: 5 years / Unlimited (Land Rover Defender 110) and 5 years / Unlimited (Mazda CX-60). Capped-price servicing: 5 years (Land Rover Defender 110), no data (Mazda CX-60).

Where each one leads

The Land Rover Defender 110: more power (183kW against 138kW) and the higher braked towing limit (3,500kg against 1,800kg).

The Mazda CX-60: the lower starting price ($45,640 against $100,900) and lower fuel or energy costs on our assumptions ($2,138 a year against $2,309).

The Verdict

Mazda CX-60 scores higher, 75 vs 70

The Mazda CX-60 scores 75 to the Land Rover Defender 110's 70 on the CarSorted Score, and leads 3 of the 5 spec rows that separate them, at the lower price. The biggest gaps: value (Mazda CX-60 ahead by 20 points), reliability (Mazda CX-60 ahead by 14 points), technology (Land Rover Defender 110 ahead by 13 points). At 15,000 km a year, fuel for the Mazda CX-60 costs about $171 less (7.5 L/100km against 8.1 L/100km, at $1.90 a litre).

Common questions