Toyota Agya vs Mazda Mazda3

A proper head-to-head in South Africa — compare price, performance, fuel economy or electric range, safety and the details that shape long-term ownership.

Includes a historical vehicle

Current, upcoming and historical vehicles can be compared side by side. Historical records keep their verified specifications, while price labels show last-listed context rather than current new-car availability.

Toyota Agya Discontinued model
Toyota Agya in South Africa

Toyota Agya

1.0 XR CVT Petrol CVT Discontinued model
ZAR 229,900 last listed
Discontinued model Verified historical specifications remain visible for owner and used-car comparisons.
⚡ 51 kW 🔧 91 Nm ⛽ 18.0 km/l
VS
Mazda Mazda3 in South Africa

Mazda Mazda3

2.0 Astina Edition Auto FWD Petrol 6-Speed Automatic Current
ZAR 629,700 ex-showroom
⚡ 121 kW 🔧 213 Nm ⛽ 15.9 km/l
+ Add a 3rd car

Decision summary

Toyota Agya vs Mazda Mazda3: the short answer

Mazda3 has a modest catalogue-index lead, while Agya remains close.

Recorded price context Agya: last listed from ZAR 189,900 · Mazda3: current from ZAR 498,300

Five key differences

Exact selected derivatives
Specification Agya Mazda3
Maximum Power Agya51 kW @ 6000 rpm Mazda3121 kW @ 6000 rpm
Maximum Torque Agya91 Nm @ 3600 rpm Mazda3213 Nm @ 4000 rpm
Engine Size Agya998 cc Mazda31998 cc
Combined Fuel Economy Agya18.0 km/l Mazda315.9 km/l
Ground Clearance Agya155 mm Mazda3140 mm

Strongest published figure in that row; no road-test winner is implied.

What Each Car Gets Right (and Wrong)

Agya

Strengths
  • Better fuel efficiency
  • Stronger published practicality figures
Weak Spots
  • Less powerful engine setup
  • Fewer listed safety features
Best suited to: Published Efficiency Published Practicality
Specification evidence leader

Mazda3

Strengths
  • More powerful engine output
  • Stronger listed safety equipment
Weak Spots
  • Lower fuel efficiency
  • Lower published practicality figures
Best suited to: Published Performance

Which One's Right for You?

Agya

  • Buyers prioritising the lower published fuel or energy use
  • Buyers prioritising the stronger published space and capacity figures

Mazda3

  • Buyers prioritising the stronger published powertrain figures
  • Buyers prioritising the more complete listed safety equipment

Full Specs, Side by Side

Archived cars use verified historical spec records. Rows remain comparable; unavailable historical values are shown plainly rather than estimated.

Spec Agya Mazda3
Model Introduced Year 2015 2019
Generation Second generation Agya for South Africa Seventh-generation BP-series Mazda3 hatchback
Facelift History Updated with refreshed styling and features The seventh-generation South African hatchback launched in 2019 and the current range has since been consolidated to Dynamic and Astina editions.
Facelift Launched Since 2021 2019
Facelift Version Ending 2024 Current
Body Style Hatchback Hatchback
Model Year 2021 2026
Production Status discontinued Active
Segment Hatchback C-segment hatchback
Tare Mass Kg 870 kg 1350 kg
Vehicle Type Hatchback Hatchback
Spec Agya Mazda3
Length 3760 mm 4460 mm
Width 1665 mm 1795 mm
Height 1520 mm 1440 mm
Wheelbase 2455 mm 2725 mm
Ground Clearance (Default) 155 mm 140 mm
Ground Clearance (With Full Seating Load) 125 mm -
Fuel Tank Capacity 35 l 51 l
Boot/Cargo Space 235 l 295 l
Kerb Weight 870 kg 1350 kg
Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) 1265 kg 1870 kg
Payload Capacity 395 kg 520 kg
Towing Capacity 1600 kg 1000 kg
Seating Capacity 5 seats 5 seats
Number of Rows 2 rows -
Doors 5 doors 5 doors
Minimum Turning Radius 4.7 m 5.3 m
Front Headroom 983 mm -
Rear Headroom 951 mm -
Front Legroom 1048 mm 1075 mm
Rear Legroom 899 mm 891 mm

In depth: how these cars differ

This Agya and Mazda3 comparison uses the exact derivatives selected above for South Africa. The catalogue index covers performance, efficiency, safety equipment, practicality and ownership cover only where comparable source-backed fields are present.

Performance index: Agya 22 vs Mazda3 50.

Efficiency index: Agya 70 vs Mazda3 61.

Safety-equipment index: Agya 71 vs Mazda3 96.

Practicality index: Agya 51 vs Mazda3 50.

Ownership-cover index: Agya 43 vs Mazda3 not separately scored.

These figures are Hagalu catalogue-comparison indicators, not customer ratings, crash-test scores, resale guarantees or a substitute for a road test. Each page shows its weighted source coverage beside the result.

Specification Evidence Index

A transparent comparison of published catalogue fields. This is not a road-test score, owner rating or editorial review rating, and it appears only when every vehicle clears the same comparable-data threshold.

Evidence / 100
Evidence-index readout

Mazda3 leads by 14 points

Mazda3 has a modest catalogue-index lead, while Agya remains close.

Evidence leader 64 /100
Lead 14 points
Data 77% source coverage
64
#1 Evidence leader

Mazda3

77% source coverage 1 strong categories
Best at Safety 96 Check Performance 50
Performance 50
Efficiency 61
Safety 96
Practicality 50
Leads by 14 points
50
#2

Agya

87% source coverage 2 strong categories
Best at Safety 71 Check Performance 22
Performance 22
Efficiency 70
Safety 71
Practicality 51
Ownership 43
Performance 24% Safety 22% Practicality 22% Efficiency 17% Ownership 15%
Category leaders What moves the verdict
Performance Mazda3 +28 Efficiency Agya +9 Safety Mazda3 +25 Practicality Agya +1

Moderate difference in the source-backed catalogue index.

Why this score View full breakdown
Evidence-index leader

Mazda3

Performance 50/100
Efficiency 61/100
Safety 96/100
Practicality 50/100

Agya

Performance 22/100
Efficiency 70/100
Safety 71/100
Practicality 51/100
Ownership 43/100

What the evidence means

Evidence index Mazda Mazda3 leads the specification evidence index with 64 pts vs 50 pts for Agya

In Hagalu's specification evidence index, Mazda3 leads. However, Agya may suit buyers prioritising different confirmed fields. Ultimately, the right choice depends on your driving priorities in South Africa.

Agya vs Mazda3 questions

There is no universal winner. Use the comparison table to match the models and available derivatives in South Africa on price, safety equipment, space, powertrain and ownership cover. The category indicators summarise published catalogue data; they are not a road test or customer rating.

Compare the published consumption or mileage rows for the exact derivatives using the same unit and test basis. A catalogue figure is useful for like-for-like comparison, but traffic, speed, load, weather and driving style can change actual fuel use.

Compare only equipment explicitly listed for each derivative, including airbags, stability control and driver-assistance systems. Confirm the exact trim with the manufacturer, and treat any independent crash-test result separately because equipment and ratings can differ by market.

A reliable five-year total cannot be calculated from catalogue data alone. Add the exact purchase and finance cost, fuel or electricity, insurance quotes, scheduled servicing, tyres and expected resale value. Check whether the selected derivative includes a service or maintenance plan.

Use the seating, boot or load-space, ISOFIX and safety rows as a first check. Then test the exact cars with your child seats, passengers and typical luggage, because published dimensions do not show every access or comfort difference.

Compare the published power, torque and 0–100 km/h rows when they are available for both exact derivatives. Vehicle weight, gearing and power delivery also matter, so catalogue outputs alone do not establish real-world overtaking or response.