Suzuki Vitara vs Mazda CX-3

Start by getting the comparison honest, because the two brands quote differently. Suzuki advertises the Vitara GLX Turbo at $36,350 drive-away, with rego, stamp duty and CTP included. Mazda advertises the CX-3 G20 Pure at $27,800 recommended retail before on-road costs, which lands somewhere near $30,800 registered in most states.

So the real gap is about $5,550, not the $10,690 you get from comparing a drive-away figure with a list price. Still a meaningful amount of money in this segment, but roughly half what it looks like on paper.

Running costs narrow it further. The Vitara uses 5.8L/100km against 6.3 for the CX-3. At 15,000km a year and $2.00 a litre that is roughly $1,740 a year for the Vitara and $1,890 for the CX-3, a saving of about $150 a year or $750 over five years. Add the Suzuki's shorter warranty back the other way and the ownership picture is closer than the sticker suggests.

Insurance tends to be slightly cheaper on the CX-3 thanks to its lower purchase price. Servicing costs are comparable, though Mazda's capped-price servicing program gives you better cost certainty. The Vitara's three-year warranty means you may face out-of-pocket repair costs in years four and five where the CX-3 is still fully covered. Factor that in and the real-world ownership cost difference is even wider than the sticker price suggests.

For buyers stretching their budget, the CX-3 still means lower finance repayments and stamp duty. Drive-away you are looking at roughly $30,800 for the CX-3 against the Vitara's quoted $36,350. That difference is real, it is just not the five-figure chasm the list prices suggest.

Neither of these cars has a current ANCAP rating on record, so we will not put a star count on either one. If a published rating is a hard requirement, this pair is not where to find it. On equipment both list autonomous emergency braking, lane keep assist and adaptive cruise control as standard, which are the essentials that matter day to day.

The CX-3 gets Mazda's i-Activsense suite, which includes blind spot monitoring and rear cross-traffic alert. Mazda tends to be generous with safety kit even on entry-level variants, and the G20 Pure is no exception. You also get a reversing camera and front and rear parking sensors.

The Vitara GLX Turbo, being the top-spec variant, comes well loaded too. You get a 360-degree camera system, which is genuinely useful for tight car parks, plus all the expected active safety gear. The Vitara also benefits from a relatively light kerb weight of 1,125kg, which generally helps with stopping distances.

On equipment neither has a meaningful edge. On documented crash performance we simply do not have a result for either. Check our ANCAP safety ratings guide for what a rating actually covers, and why the absence of one is not the same as a bad one.

As the top-spec model, the Vitara GLX Turbo punches above its weight on features. You get a panoramic sunroof, leather-accented seats, heated front seats, a 9-inch touchscreen with wireless Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, and that 360-degree camera. It feels properly kitted out for a car at this price.

The CX-3 G20 Pure is the entry point of the range, so expectations need managing. You still get a 7-inch touchscreen, wired Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, air conditioning and a reversing camera. It is not bare-bones, but it is clearly a step down from the Vitara's equipment list, and the gap that buys is about $5,550 registered rather than $11,000.

Interior quality is where Mazda traditionally shines, and even the G20 Pure has that premium Mazda feel. The materials, the switchgear, the way everything fits together. It punches well above its price point. The Vitara's cabin is functional and well laid out, but it does not quite have that same tactile quality.

Both cars get a decent infotainment setup for their respective price points. If wireless connectivity and a sunroof matter to you, the Vitara delivers. If you would rather pocket the savings and live with wired CarPlay, the CX-3 is perfectly liveable day to day.

Here is where it gets interesting. The Vitara runs a 1.4-litre turbocharged four-cylinder making 95kW and 220Nm. The CX-3 uses a naturally aspirated 2.0-litre four-cylinder producing 110kW and 195Nm. On paper, the CX-3 has more outright power, but the Vitara has more torque, and that torque arrives much lower in the rev range thanks to the turbo.

Turbo engines make their torque lower in the rev range, so the Vitara has more pull available at everyday speeds while the CX-3 needs more revs to reach its peak, which is typical of naturally aspirated engines. Neither is fast: the claimed 0-100 figures are 10.2 seconds for the Vitara and 10.9 for the CX-3.

Both use six-speed automatic transmissions and front-wheel drive. The Vitara weighs significantly less at 1,125kg versus 1,294kg for the CX-3. That 169kg difference is meaningful. It helps the Vitara feel lighter on its feet despite the lower power figure, and it contributes to the better fuel economy number.

The fuel economy advantage is real. At 5.8L/100km, the Vitara is genuinely frugal for a small SUV. The CX-3 at 6.3L is perfectly acceptable but cannot match it. If you do a lot of highway driving, the Vitara's turbo engine is particularly efficient at cruising speeds. For more on fuel efficiency in this segment, check our most fuel-efficient SUVs guide.

Boot space goes to the Vitara, and by a lot more than we previously said: 362 litres against 264. That is 98 litres, which in this class is the difference between fitting the pram and the shopping or choosing one. The CX-3's 264-litre boot is one of the smallest in the small-SUV segment and is its biggest practical weakness.

Rear seat space is adequate in both but not generous. These are small SUVs, after all. Taller passengers will feel the squeeze in either car on longer trips. The Vitara has a slight edge in headroom thanks to its slightly taller roofline, while the CX-3 has marginally more rear legroom. Neither is a standout for rear-seat comfort.

Up front, both cars are comfortable for daily driving. The Vitara's driving position is slightly higher, giving you that SUV vantage point that many buyers want. The CX-3 sits a touch lower and feels more car-like to drive, which some people actually prefer.

Towing is a meaningful differentiator. The Vitara can pull 1,200kg braked, which covers small camper trailers, jet skis, and box trailers loaded up for a tip run. The CX-3 tops out at 1,000kg, which is still useful but limits your options. If towing matters even occasionally, have a read of our towing capacity guide to understand what those numbers mean in practice.

The warranty difference is significant and should not be overlooked. The CX-3 gets Mazda's five-year, unlimited-kilometre warranty. The Vitara gets three years and 100,000 kilometres. That is a two-year gap in coverage, and it matters. Modern cars are reliable, but when something does go wrong, repair bills can be steep. The CX-3 gives you peace of mind for longer.

Resale value is another factor worth considering. Mazda consistently holds its value well in the Australian market. The CX-3 benefits from strong brand recognition and a loyal buyer base. Suzuki has improved its resale numbers in recent years, but the Vitara still depreciates faster in percentage terms. After five years, you are likely to recover a higher proportion of your purchase price with the CX-3.

Servicing costs are comparable. Both brands offer capped-price servicing, so you know what you are up for at each interval. Suzuki services tend to be slightly cheaper per visit, but the difference is marginal.

Parts availability is worth a mention too. Mazda is one of the top-selling brands in Australia, which means parts are everywhere and independent mechanics know these cars inside out. Suzuki is smaller in market share, so parts can occasionally take a bit longer to source, though it is rarely a genuine problem in metro areas. If you are in regional Australia, Mazda's broader dealer network could be an advantage.