Mazda CX-60 vs Toyota LandCruiser 300

Price and cost per week

Safety Rundown

Both the Mazda CX-60 and Toyota LandCruiser 300 hold a 5-star ANCAP safety rating, tested 2022. Adult occupant protection scored 91% for the Mazda CX-60 and 89% for the Toyota LandCruiser 300.

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 Toyota LandCruiser 300.

Both include the essentials: autonomous emergency braking, lane keep assist, adaptive cruise control, a reversing camera. Airbag count is 7 in the Mazda CX-60 and 10 in the Toyota LandCruiser 300.

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-60 features a 10.3-inch touchscreen paired with a 7-inch digital dash, while the Toyota LandCruiser 300 gets a 8-inch display and 7-inch instruments. Apple CarPlay and Android Auto are standard across both.

The Mazda CX-60 stands out with head-up display — features our data doesn't list for the Toyota LandCruiser 300. Which feature set matters more depends on your daily routine and priorities.

Drivetrain

The Mazda CX-60 uses a Petrol producing 138kW and 250Nm of torque, sent through a automatic to a RWD layout. It covers the 0-100km/h sprint in 7.4 seconds.

The Toyota LandCruiser 300 responds with a Diesel Twin-Turbo V6 making 227kW and 700Nm, paired to a automatic driving all four wheels. It gets to 100km/h in 8.6 seconds.

The Toyota LandCruiser 300 has the clear power advantage at 227kW vs 138kW. In the 0-100 sprint (manufacturer-claimed), the Mazda CX-60 is 1.2s quicker. For most buyers, the way each car feels day-to-day matters more than outright acceleration.

Space & Comfort

The Mazda CX-60 measures 4,740mm long on a 2,870mm wheelbase, 240mm shorter than the Toyota LandCruiser 300 at 4,980mm (2,850mm wheelbase). The longer wheelbase on the Mazda CX-60 generally means more rear legroom.

Boot space is 570L in the Mazda CX-60 and 700L in the Toyota LandCruiser 300, giving the Toyota LandCruiser 300 a 130L advantage.

For towing, the Toyota LandCruiser 300 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 1.0 m tighter, 10.8 m against 11.8 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 Mazda CX-60 costs about $2,138 a year (7.5 L/100km) and fuel for the Toyota LandCruiser 300 about $2,537 a year (8.9 L/100km), at $1.90 a litre and 32c a kWh. That is $399 a year less for the Mazda CX-60.

Warranty: 5 years / Unlimited (Mazda CX-60) and 5 years / Unlimited (Toyota LandCruiser 300).

Where each one leads

The Mazda CX-60: the lower starting price ($45,640 against $97,990) and lower fuel or energy costs on our assumptions ($2,138 a year against $2,537).

The Toyota LandCruiser 300: more power (227kW against 138kW), the bigger boot with the seats up (700L against 570L) and the higher braked towing limit (3,500kg against 1,800kg).

The Verdict

Toyota LandCruiser 300 scores higher, 76 vs 75

The Toyota LandCruiser 300 scores 76 to the Mazda CX-60's 75 on the CarSorted Score, and leads 3 of the 6 spec rows that separate them. The biggest gaps: practicality (Toyota LandCruiser 300 ahead by 26 points), value (Mazda CX-60 ahead by 20 points), performance (Toyota LandCruiser 300 ahead by 14 points). At 15,000 km a year, fuel for the Mazda CX-60 costs about $399 less (7.5 L/100km against 8.9 L/100km, at $1.90 a litre). Boot space with the seats up: 570L in the Mazda CX-60, 700L in the Toyota LandCruiser 300.

Common questions