Mazda CX-3 vs Ford EcoSport

A proper head-to-head in South Africa — we cover price, performance, petrol economy, safety and what it'll actually cost you to own each one long term.

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.

Ford EcoSport Discontinued model
Mazda CX-3 in South Africa

Mazda CX-3

2.0 Individual Auto FWD Petrol 6-Speed Automatic Current
ZAR 551,600 ex-showroom
⚡ 115 kW 🔧 206 Nm ⛽ 15.9 km/l
VS
Ford EcoSport in South Africa

Ford EcoSport

1.0 EcoBoost Titanium Automatic Petrol 6-Speed Automatic Discontinued model
ZAR 395,000 last listed
Discontinued model Verified historical specifications remain visible for owner and used-car comparisons.
⚡ 92 kW 🔧 170 Nm ⛽ 17.2 km/l
Add a 3rd car

At a Glance — Who Wins What

Performance CX-3
Fuel Economy EcoSport
🛡 Safety EcoSport
📦 Practicality EcoSport
🔑 Ownership Not enough comparable data
Recorded price context CX-3: current from ZAR 440,000 · EcoSport: last listed from ZAR 310,000

Key Specs Side by Side

The specs that matter most — highlighted where one car leads.

Spec CX-3 EcoSport
Maximum Power 115 kW @ 6000 rpm 92 kW
Maximum Torque 206 Nm @ 2800 rpm 170 Nm
Engine Size 1998 cc 998 cc
Combined Fuel Economy 15.9 km/l 17.2 km/l
Ground Clearance 155 mm 200 mm
Boot / Load Bay 230 l 352 l
Airbags 6 6
Kerb Weight 1270 kg 1290 kg
Seating Capacity 5 seats 5 seats
Warranty 5 Years/Unlimited km 4

= leads in this spec

Archived vehicles remain available for comparison. Verified specs stay visible; historical fields that were not source-confirmed are marked Not confirmed instead of being guessed.

The Bottom Line

CX-3 and EcoSport are close on the comparable published fields, so buyer priorities should decide.

Where They Actually Differ

Performance CX-3 +7 pts
Efficiency EcoSport +4 pts
Safety EcoSport +2 pts
Practicality EcoSport +10 pts

What Each Car Gets Right (and Wrong)

CX-3

Strengths
  • More powerful engine output
Weak Spots
  • Lower fuel efficiency
  • Fewer listed safety features
  • Lower published practicality figures
Best suited to: Published Performance
Catalogue-index leader

EcoSport

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

Which One's Right for You?

CX-3

  • Buyers prioritising the stronger published powertrain figures

EcoSport

  • Buyers prioritising the lower published fuel or energy use
  • Buyers prioritising the more complete listed safety equipment
  • Buyers prioritising the stronger published space and capacity figures

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 CX-3 EcoSport
Model Introduced Year 2015 2013
Generation Current first-generation DK-series Mazda CX-3 Single generation on Ford B2E platform. Produced in India for global markets. SA received the facelift model with improved interior quality and revised safety kit.
Facelift History The CX-3 has received successive equipment and design updates since its 2015 debut; Carbon and Individual now sit together at the top of the South African range. Facelift in 2017 — revised front fascia and SYNC 3 infotainment introduced
Facelift Launched Since 2015 2017
Facelift Version Ending Current Not confirmed
Body Style SUV Not confirmed
Model Year 2026 Not confirmed
Production Status Active Not confirmed
Segment Compact crossover Not confirmed
Tare Mass Kg 1270 kg 1290 kg
Vehicle Type SUV Not confirmed
Spec CX-3 EcoSport
Length 4275 mm 4325 mm
Width 1765 mm 1765 mm
Height 1542 mm 1653 mm
Wheelbase 2570 mm 2519 mm
Ground Clearance (Default) 155 mm 200 mm
Fuel Tank Capacity 48 l 52 l
Boot/Cargo Space 230 l 352 l
Kerb Weight 1270 kg 1290 kg
Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) 1735 kg 1740 kg
Payload Capacity 465 kg Not confirmed
Towing Capacity 850 kg 950 kg
Seating Capacity 5 seats 5 seats
Doors 5 doors Not confirmed
Minimum Turning Radius 5.7 m Not confirmed
Front Legroom 1058 mm Not confirmed
Rear Legroom 888 mm Not confirmed

Source-backed Catalogue Index

A transparent specification index shown only when every vehicle clears the minimum comparable-data threshold.

Weighted / 100
Catalogue-index readout

EcoSport leads by 1 points

CX-3 and EcoSport are close on the comparable published fields, so buyer priorities should decide.

Index leader 61 /100
Lead 1 points
Data 83% source coverage
61
#1 Index leader

EcoSport

83% source coverage 1 strong categories
Best at Safety 86 Check Performance 40
Performance 40
Efficiency 65
Safety 86
Practicality 58
Ownership 55
Leads by 1 points
60
#2

CX-3

71% source coverage 1 strong categories
Best at Safety 84 Check Performance 47
Performance 47
Efficiency 61
Safety 84
Practicality 48
Performance 24% Safety 22% Practicality 22% Efficiency 17% Ownership 15%
Category leaders What moves the verdict
Performance CX-3 +7 Efficiency EcoSport +4 Safety EcoSport +2 Practicality EcoSport +10

Close catalogue match. Buyer priorities should decide the outcome.

Why this score View full breakdown
Catalogue-index leader

EcoSport

Performance 40/100
Efficiency 65/100
Safety 86/100
Practicality 58/100
Ownership 55/100

CX-3

Performance 47/100
Efficiency 61/100
Safety 84/100
Practicality 48/100

How to Read This Comparison

🏆 Ford EcoSport leads the catalogue index with 61 pts vs 60 pts for CX-3

In Hagalu's source-backed catalogue index, EcoSport leads. However, CX-3 may suit buyers prioritising different confirmed fields. Ultimately, the right choice depends on your driving priorities in South Africa.

Buyers Also Looked At These

Other comparisons that people in the same boat tend to check out.

Questions Buyers Usually Ask

There is no universal winner. Use the comparison table to match the exact South African derivatives 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.

Hagalu does not publish a guaranteed resale winner. Depreciation depends on age, mileage, condition, derivative, colour, supply and demand. Compare several current used-market listings and obtain trade-in valuations for equivalent examples before relying on a resale estimate.

Check the exact derivatives for drive type, ground clearance, tyres, approach and departure angles, wading depth and low-range gearing where officially disclosed. SUV styling or all-wheel drive alone does not prove that a vehicle is suitable for demanding off-road use.

Calculate each exact derivative using your monthly distance and a current fuel or electricity price, then add finance, insurance, scheduled service, tyres and licence costs. Hagalu does not claim a fixed monthly saving without those buyer-specific inputs.

It is worth more only when the exact price difference buys equipment, space, performance or ownership cover that matters to you. Compare like-for-like lifecycle states and derivatives; a current offer and a historical last-listed price are not directly equivalent.

In Depth — Breaking It All Down

This CX-3 and EcoSport comparison uses the exact South African derivatives selected above. The catalogue index covers performance, efficiency, safety equipment, practicality and ownership cover only where comparable source-backed fields are present.

Performance index: CX-3 47 vs EcoSport 40.

Efficiency index: CX-3 61 vs EcoSport 65.

Safety-equipment index: CX-3 84 vs EcoSport 86.

Practicality index: CX-3 48 vs EcoSport 58.

Ownership-cover index: CX-3 not separately scored vs EcoSport 55.

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.