CS
CarSorted
HomeComparisonsMazda CX-80 vs Chery Tiggo 9 Super Hybrid
Spec Battle Updated 20 April 2026 5 min read

Mazda CX-80 vs Chery Tiggo 9 Super Hybrid

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.

SpecMazdaChery
Price (RRP)$64,490$59,990
Range (WLTP)170km
Battery34 kWh
Power209kW315kW
0-100 km/h9s7.9s
Fuel Economy7.1 L/100km1.4 L/100km
Boot Space550L620L
Towing2,000kg2,000kg
Warranty5yr / 999.999k km7yr / 999.999k km
ANCAP Safety5 Stars5 Stars

Price Breakdown

The Mazda CX-80 starts from $64,490 before on-road costs, while the Chery Tiggo 9 Super Hybrid opens at $59,990. That makes the Chery Tiggo 9 Super Hybrid the more affordable entry point by $4,500.

Once you factor in stamp duty, registration, CTP insurance, and dealer delivery, expect to add roughly 8-12% on top of the RRP depending on your state. That puts estimated driveaway prices in the ballpark of $70,939 and $65,989 respectively.

Over 5 years, the running costs favour the Chery Tiggo 9 Super Hybrid by roughly $8,125 in fuel alone.

Safety Rundown

Both the Mazda CX-80 and Chery Tiggo 9 Super Hybrid hold a 5-star ANCAP safety rating. Adult occupant protection scored 92% for the Mazda CX-80 and 82% for the Chery Tiggo 9 Super Hybrid.

Where the two diverge is in active safety technology. The Chery Tiggo 9 Super Hybrid packs more ADAS features with 8 out of 10 key systems fitted, compared to 6 in the Mazda CX-80.

Both include the essentials: autonomous emergency braking, lane keep assist, adaptive cruise control, a reversing camera. Airbag count is 6 in the Mazda CX-80 and 10 in the Chery Tiggo 9 Super Hybrid. The Chery Tiggo 9 Super Hybrid adds a 360-degree camera that the Mazda CX-80 misses.

Feature Showdown

The Mazda CX-80 features a 10.3-inch touchscreen, while the Chery Tiggo 9 Super Hybrid gets a 15.6-inch display and 10.3-inch instruments. Apple CarPlay and Android Auto are standard across both.

The Chery Tiggo 9 Super Hybrid counters with wireless charging, panoramic roof, heated front seats, ventilated seats and Sony audio that the Mazda CX-80 does not offer. Which feature set matters more depends on your daily routine and priorities.

Drivetrain

The Mazda CX-80 uses a Petrol producing 209kW and 450Nm of torque, sent through a automatic to a AWD layout. It covers the 0-100km/h sprint in 9 seconds.

The Chery Tiggo 9 Super Hybrid responds with a Plug-in Hybrid making 315kW and 580Nm, paired to a auto driving all four wheels. It gets to 100km/h in 7.9 seconds.

The Chery Tiggo 9 Super Hybrid has the clear power advantage at 315kW vs 209kW. In the real-world sprint, the Chery Tiggo 9 Super Hybrid is 1.1s quicker. For most buyers, the way each car feels day-to-day matters more than outright acceleration.

Space & Comfort

The Mazda CX-80 measures 4,990mm long on a 3,120mm wheelbase, 190mm longer than the Chery Tiggo 9 Super Hybrid at 4,800mm (2,750mm wheelbase). The longer wheelbase on the Mazda CX-80 generally means more rear legroom.

Boot space is 550L in the Mazda CX-80 and 620L in the Chery Tiggo 9 Super Hybrid, giving the Chery Tiggo 9 Super Hybrid a 70L advantage.

For towing, the Chery Tiggo 9 Super Hybrid leads with a 2,000kg braked capacity vs 2,000kg. That 0kg difference matters if you regularly hitch up.

Turning Circle

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

11.8m to 11.8m

Mazda CX-80 G40e Pure
11.8mTighter
Best
Chery Tiggo 9 Super Hybrid Ultimate AWD
11.8m
Best
Mazda CX-80
11.8m · Average

Based on 11.8m turning circle:

  • U-turn on standard street (7m+ wide)
  • Standard parking bay
  • Tight carparks
  • Narrow laneways
Chery Tiggo 9 Super Hybrid
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

True Cost to Own

Based on 15,000km of annual driving, fuel costs roughly $2,024/year for the Mazda CX-80 and $399/year for the Chery Tiggo 9 Super Hybrid. That is a $1,625 annual difference in favour of the Chery Tiggo 9 Super Hybrid.

Estimated annual total: $2,024 (Mazda CX-80) vs $399 (Chery Tiggo 9 Super Hybrid). The Chery Tiggo 9 Super Hybrid saves you roughly $1,625 per year in total ownership costs. Use our Fuel Cost Calculator to estimate based on your driving.

Warranty: 5 years / 999,999km (Mazda CX-80) vs 7 years / 999,999km (Chery Tiggo 9 Super Hybrid). The Chery Tiggo 9 Super Hybrid has longer coverage. Capped-price servicing: —7yr (Chery Tiggo 9 Super Hybrid).

Who Should Buy Which?

Buy the Mazda CX-80 if: You or prefer Mazda's approach to design and ownership experience.

Buy the Chery Tiggo 9 Super Hybrid if: You want the lower entry price, prioritise performance, need more boot space, want lower running costs, value a longer warranty, or prefer Chery's approach to design and ownership experience.

The Verdict

The Chery Tiggo 9 Super Hybrid takes 6 of 6 key spec categories and comes in at a lower price. The Chery Tiggo 9 Super Hybrid will save you roughly $1,625 a year in fuel. If boot space matters, the Chery Tiggo 9 Super Hybrid has a clear edge. The Chery Tiggo 9 Super Hybrid adds peace of mind with a longer 7-year warranty. The best pick depends on what you value most. Explore the full specs for each model below.

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.

Published by CarSorted Editorial Team · 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