Mazda CX-30 vs Toyota C-HR

Price and cost per week

Safety Rundown

ANCAP's published record does not give the Mazda CX-30 a rating. With no pair of ratings to compare, the active-safety features in the spec table above are the fairer comparison.

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 Mazda CX-30 features a 8.8-inch touchscreen paired with a 7-inch digital dash, while the Toyota C-HR gets a 12.3-inch display and 7-inch instruments. Apple CarPlay and Android Auto are standard across both.

The Mazda CX-30 stands out with Apple CarPlay and head-up display — features our data doesn't list for the Toyota C-HR. The Toyota C-HR counters with wireless Apple CarPlay/Android Auto. Which feature set matters more depends on your daily routine and priorities.

Drivetrain

The Mazda CX-30 uses a Petrol producing 114kW and 200Nm of torque, sent through a automatic to a FWD layout.

The Toyota C-HR responds with a Petrol making 103kW and 142Nm, paired to a automatic driving the front wheels. It gets to 100km/h in 10.2 seconds.

The Mazda CX-30 has the clear power advantage at 114kW vs 103kW. For most buyers, the way each car feels day-to-day matters more than outright acceleration.

Space & Comfort

The Mazda CX-30 measures 4,395mm long on a 2,655mm wheelbase, 33mm longer than the Toyota C-HR at 4,362mm (2,640mm wheelbase). The longer wheelbase on the Mazda CX-30 generally means more rear legroom.

Boot space is 317L in the Mazda CX-30 and 388L in the Toyota C-HR, giving the Toyota C-HR a 71L advantage.

For towing, the Mazda CX-30 leads with a 1,200kg braked capacity vs 725kg. That 475kg 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 Toyota C-HR's turning circle is 0.2 m tighter, 10.4 m against 10.6 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 Mazda CX-30 costs about $1,796 a year (6.3 L/100km) and fuel for the Toyota C-HR about $1,140 a year (4 L/100km), at $1.90 a litre and 32c a kWh. That is $656 a year less for the Toyota C-HR.

Warranty: 5 years / Unlimited (Mazda CX-30) and 5 years / Unlimited (Toyota C-HR).

Where each one leads

The Mazda CX-30: the lower starting price ($34,760 against $46,940), more power (114kW against 103kW) and the higher braked towing limit (1,200kg against 725kg).

The Toyota C-HR: the bigger boot with the seats up (388L against 317L) and lower fuel or energy costs on our assumptions ($1,140 a year against $1,796).

The Verdict

Toyota C-HR scores higher, 80 vs 66

The Toyota C-HR scores 80 to the Mazda CX-30's 66 on the CarSorted Score, and leads 2 of the 5 spec rows that separate them. The biggest gaps: technology (Toyota C-HR ahead by 40 points), safety (Toyota C-HR ahead by 37 points), fuel economy (Toyota C-HR ahead by 21 points). At 15,000 km a year, fuel for the Toyota C-HR costs about $656 less (4 L/100km against 6.3 L/100km, at $1.90 a litre). Boot space with the seats up: 317L in the Mazda CX-30, 388L in the Toyota C-HR.

Common questions