Audi Q3 vs Mazda CX-80
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.
Audi Q3
From $61,600
SUV
4-cylinder inline petrol with turbocharging, MHEV technology and Cylinder on Demand (CoD)
110kW
5.7 L/100km
5★ ANCAP
575L
Mazda CX-80
From $64,490
SUV
Petrol
209kW
8.4 L/100km
5★ ANCAP
258L
Price Breakdown
The Audi Q3 starts from $61,600 before on-road costs, while the Mazda CX-80 opens at $64,490. That makes the Audi Q3 the more affordable entry point by $2,890.
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 $67,760 and $70,939 respectively.
Over 5 years, the running costs favour the Audi Q3 by roughly $3,845 in fuel alone.
Safety Rundown
Both the Audi Q3 and Mazda CX-80 hold a 5-star ANCAP safety rating. Adult occupant protection scored 87% for the Audi Q3 and 92% for the Mazda CX-80.
Where the two diverge is in active safety technology. The Mazda CX-80 packs more ADAS features with 6 out of 10 key systems fitted, compared to 3 in the Audi Q3.
Both include the essentials: autonomous emergency braking, a reversing camera. Airbag count is 6 in the Audi Q3 and 6 in the Mazda CX-80.
Feature Showdown
The Audi Q3 features a 12.8-inch touchscreen, while the Mazda CX-80 gets a 10.3-inch display. Apple CarPlay and Android Auto are standard across both.
The Audi Q3 stands out with Apple CarPlay and ambient lighting that you will not find on the Mazda CX-80. The Mazda CX-80 counters with wireless Apple CarPlay/Android Auto. Which feature set matters more depends on your daily routine and priorities.
Drivetrain
The Audi Q3 uses a 4-cylinder inline petrol with turbocharging, MHEV technology and Cylinder on Demand (CoD) producing 110kW and 250Nm of torque, sent through a 7-speed s tronic to a FWD layout. It covers the 0-100km/h sprint in 9.1 seconds.
The Mazda CX-80 responds with a Petrol making 209kW and 450Nm, paired to a automatic driving all four wheels. It gets to 100km/h in 9 seconds.
The Mazda CX-80 has the clear power advantage at 209kW vs 110kW. In the real-world sprint, the Mazda CX-80 is 0.1s quicker. For most buyers, the way each car feels day-to-day matters more than outright acceleration.
Space & Comfort
The Audi Q3 measures 4,531mm long on a 2,681mm wheelbase, 459mm shorter than the Mazda CX-80 at 4,990mm (3,120mm wheelbase). The longer wheelbase on the Mazda CX-80 generally means more rear legroom.
Boot space is 575L in the Audi Q3 and 258L in the Mazda CX-80, giving the Audi Q3 a 317L advantage. The Mazda CX-80 seats 7 vs 5.
For towing, the Mazda CX-80 leads with a 2,500kg braked capacity vs 1,200kg. That 1,300kg difference matters if you regularly hitch up.
Turning Circle
Kerb-to-kerb diameter. Smaller turns easier in tight carparks and U-turns.
11.6m to 11.7m
Based on 11.7m turning circle:
- U-turn on standard street (7m+ wide)
- Standard parking bay
- Tight carparks
- Narrow laneways
Based on 11.6m turning circle:
- U-turn on standard street (7m+ wide)
- Standard parking bay
- Tight carparks
- Narrow laneways
Turning circle ratings
True Cost to Own
Based on 15,000km of annual driving, fuel costs roughly $1,625/year for the Audi Q3 and $2,394/year for the Mazda CX-80. That is a $769 annual difference in favour of the Audi Q3.
Estimated annual total: $1,625 (Audi Q3) vs $2,394 (Mazda CX-80). The Audi Q3 saves you roughly $769 per year in total ownership costs. Use our Fuel Cost Calculator to estimate based on your driving.
Warranty: 5 years / 999,999km (Audi Q3) vs 5 years / 999,999km (Mazda CX-80). Both match on warranty length.
Who Should Buy Which?
Buy the Audi Q3 if: You want the lower entry price, need more boot space, want lower running costs, or prefer Audi's approach to design and ownership experience.
Buy the Mazda CX-80 if: You prioritise performance, need stronger towing, or prefer Mazda's approach to design and ownership experience.
The Verdict
This is genuinely close. The Audi Q3 and Mazda CX-80 trade blows across the spec sheet, and neither runs away with an outright win. The Audi Q3 will save you roughly $769 a year in fuel. If boot space matters, the Audi Q3 has a clear edge. The best pick depends on what you value most. Explore the full specs for each model below.
Common questions
Which is cheapest, Audi Q3 and Mazda CX-80?
The Audi Q3 is the cheapest at $61,600 before on-road costs. That undercuts the Mazda CX-80 by $2,890.
Which is the most fuel-efficient?
The Audi Q3 uses the least fuel at 5.7L/100km on the combined cycle.
Which is safest?
They are evenly matched — Audi Q3 and Mazda CX-80 all hold a 5-star ANCAP rating. Compare the active-safety features above to separate them.
Which has the most boot space?
The Audi Q3 has the largest boot at 575L.
Which can tow the most?
The Mazda CX-80 has the highest braked towing capacity at 2,500kg.
Which is the most powerful?
The Mazda CX-80 makes the most power at 209kW. The Mazda CX-80 is quickest to 100km/h in 9s.
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!
