CS
CarSorted
HomeComparisonsOmoda 5 vs Mazda CX-30
Spec Battle Updated 20 April 2026 5 min read

Omoda 5 vs Mazda CX-30

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.

SpecOmodaMazda
Price (RRP)$27,990$29,990
Fuel typePetrolPetrol
Power108kW114kW
0-100 km/h10.5s10.9s
Fuel Economy6.9 L/100km6.3 L/100km
Boot Space358L317L
Towing1,500kg1,200kg
Warranty7yr / Unlimited5yr / Unlimited
ANCAP Safety5 StarsNo data

Track the Omoda 5 & Mazda CX-30

Get price-drop alerts on these models plus our free weekly new-car rundown. Unsubscribe anytime.

Price Breakdown

The Omoda 5 starts from $27,990 before on-road costs, while the Mazda CX-30 opens at $29,990. That makes the Omoda 5 the more affordable entry point by $2,000.

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 $30,789 and $32,989 respectively.

Over 5 years, the running costs are nearly identical since both have similar efficiency.

Safety Rundown

ANCAP safety ratings have not been published for both models yet. We will update this section when crash test results are available.

Feature Showdown

The Omoda 5 features a 10.3-inch touchscreen paired with a 10.3-inch digital dash, while the Mazda CX-30 gets a 8.8-inch display and 7-inch instruments. Apple CarPlay and Android Auto are standard across both.

Interior trim differs: the Omoda 5 gets synthetic leather upholstery while the Mazda CX-30 offers cloth.

Drivetrain

The Omoda 5 uses a Petrol producing 108kW and 210Nm of torque, sent through a cvt to a FWD layout. It covers the 0-100km/h sprint in 10.5 seconds.

The Mazda CX-30 responds with a Petrol making 114kW and 200Nm, paired to a automatic driving the front wheels. It gets to 100km/h in 10.9 seconds.

The Mazda CX-30 has the clear power advantage at 114kW vs 108kW. In the real-world sprint, the Omoda 5 is 0.4s quicker. For most buyers, the way each car feels day-to-day matters more than outright acceleration.

Space & Comfort

The Omoda 5 measures 4,307mm long on a 2,610mm wheelbase, 88mm shorter than the Mazda CX-30 at 4,395mm (2,655mm wheelbase). The longer wheelbase on the Mazda CX-30 generally means more rear legroom.

Boot space is 358L in the Omoda 5 and 317L in the Mazda CX-30, giving the Omoda 5 a 41L advantage.

For towing, the Omoda 5 leads with a 1,500kg braked capacity vs 1,200kg. That 300kg difference matters if you regularly hitch up.

Turning Circle

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

10.6m to 10.6m

TightestOmoda 5 FXTightest turn at 10.6m, easiest U-turns and carparks
Omoda 5 FX
10.6mTighter
Best
Mazda CX-30 G20 Pure
10.6m
Best
Omoda 5 FX
10.6m · Good

Based on 10.6m turning circle:

  • U-turn on standard street (7m+ wide)
  • Standard parking bay
  • Tight carparks
  • Narrow laneways
Mazda CX-30 G20 Pure
10.6m · Good

Based on 10.6m 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
Compare U-turns side by side

Turning Circle · U-turn compare

kerb-to-kerb, 2 cars
Tap to add/remove
TightestOmoda 5Tightest turn at 10.6m, needs the least road to swing around
Omoda 5Tightest10.6 m
Good△ 3-point
Mazda CX-3010.6 m
Good△ 3-point
Scrub the turn

0 of 2 clear a 7.0 m street in one sweep

Green cars complete the U-turn; amber need a 3-point turn. Drag the slider to test tighter streets.

Under 10 m · Excellent 10–11 m · Good 11–12 m · Average Over 12 m · Large

Standard widths: AU local streets ~5.5–7 m; main roads ~9–12 m.

True Cost to Own

Based on 15,000km of annual driving, fuel costs roughly $1,967/year for the Omoda 5 and $1,796/year for the Mazda CX-30. That is a $171 annual difference in favour of the Mazda CX-30.

Estimated annual total: $1,967 (Omoda 5) vs $1,796 (Mazda CX-30). The Mazda CX-30 saves you roughly $171 per year in total ownership costs. Use our Fuel Cost Calculator to estimate based on your driving.

Warranty: 7 years / 999,999km (Omoda 5) vs 5 years / 999,999km (Mazda CX-30). The Omoda 5 has longer coverage. Capped-price servicing: 7yr (Omoda 5)—.

Who Should Buy Which?

Buy the Omoda 5 if: You want the lower entry price, need more boot space, value a longer warranty, need stronger towing, or prefer Omoda's approach to design and ownership experience.

Buy the Mazda CX-30 if: You prioritise performance, want lower running costs, or prefer Mazda's approach to design and ownership experience.

The Verdict

The Omoda 5 takes 5 of 7 key spec categories and comes in at a lower price. The Mazda CX-30 will save you roughly $171 a year in fuel. If boot space matters, the Omoda 5 has a clear edge. The Omoda 5 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.

Common questions

Which is cheapest, Omoda 5 and Mazda CX-30?

The Omoda 5 is the cheapest at $27,990 before on-road costs. That undercuts the Mazda CX-30 by $2,000.

Which is the most fuel-efficient?

The Mazda CX-30 uses the least fuel at 6.3L/100km on the combined cycle.

Which is safest?

They are evenly matched — Omoda 5 all hold a 5-star ANCAP rating. Compare the active-safety features above to separate them.

Which has the most boot space?

The Omoda 5 has the largest boot at 358L.

Which can tow the most?

The Omoda 5 has the highest braked towing capacity at 1,500kg.

Which has the best warranty?

The Omoda 5 has the longest warranty at 7 years / Unlimited.

Which is the most powerful?

The Mazda CX-30 makes the most power at 114kW. The Omoda 5 is quickest to 100km/h in 10.5s.

Free alerts

Track the cars you're comparing

Get price-drop and spec-change alerts on the models in this comparison, plus our weekly new-car rundown of launches, deals and reviews.

  • Price-drop alerts on these models
  • Spec-change alerts
  • Weekly new-car rundown

No spam, unsubscribe anytime. By subscribing you agree to receive marketing emails.

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.

Auto-generated from CarSorted's specification data · 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 · Best mid-size SUVs