Mazda CX-70 vs Toyota C-HR

Price and cost per week

Safety Rundown

ANCAP's published ratings include no record for the Mazda CX-70. 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-70 features a 12.3-inch touchscreen paired with a 12.3-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-70 stands out with head-up display, wireless charging, panoramic roof, heated front seats, power tailgate and Bose audio — features our data doesn't list for the Toyota C-HR. Which feature set matters more depends on your daily routine and priorities.

Interior trim differs: the Mazda CX-70 gets leather upholstery while the Toyota C-HR offers cloth. Climate control is 3-zone in the Mazda CX-70 and 2-zone in the Toyota C-HR.

Drivetrain

The Mazda CX-70 uses a Petrol producing 254kW and 500Nm of torque, sent through a automatic to a AWD layout. It covers the 0-100km/h sprint in 6.8 seconds.

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-70 has the clear power advantage at 254kW vs 103kW. In the 0-100 sprint (manufacturer-claimed), the Mazda CX-70 is 3.4s quicker. For most buyers, the way each car feels day-to-day matters more than outright acceleration.

Space & Comfort

The Mazda CX-70 measures 5,120mm long on a 3,120mm wheelbase, 758mm longer than the Toyota C-HR at 4,362mm (2,640mm wheelbase). The longer wheelbase on the Mazda CX-70 generally means more rear legroom.

Boot space is 598L in the Mazda CX-70 and 388L in the Toyota C-HR, giving the Mazda CX-70 a 210L advantage.

For towing, the Mazda CX-70 leads with a 2,500kg braked capacity vs 725kg. That 1,775kg 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 1.4 m tighter, 10.4 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-70 costs about $2,309 a year (8.1 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 $1,169 a year less for the Toyota C-HR.

Warranty: 5 years / Unlimited (Mazda CX-70) and 5 years / Unlimited (Toyota C-HR).

Where each one leads

The Mazda CX-70: more power (254kW against 103kW), the bigger boot with the seats up (598L against 388L) and the higher braked towing limit (2,500kg against 725kg).

The Toyota C-HR: the lower starting price ($46,940 against $73,020) and lower fuel or energy costs on our assumptions ($1,140 a year against $2,309).

The Verdict

Toyota C-HR scores higher, 80 vs 72

The Toyota C-HR scores 80 to the Mazda CX-70's 72 on the CarSorted Score, and leads 2 of the 6 spec rows that separate them, at the lower price. The biggest gaps: fuel economy (Toyota C-HR ahead by 37 points), performance (Mazda CX-70 ahead by 37 points), safety (Toyota C-HR ahead by 25 points). At 15,000 km a year, fuel for the Toyota C-HR costs about $1,169 less (4 L/100km against 8.1 L/100km, at $1.90 a litre). Boot space with the seats up: 598L in the Mazda CX-70, 388L in the Toyota C-HR.

Common questions