Mazda CX-3 vs Lexus ES

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.

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
Lexus ES in South Africa

Lexus ES

ES 300h SE Hybrid e-CVT Current
ZAR 1,138,800 ex-showroom
⚡ 160 kW 🔧 221 Nm ⛽ 21.7 km/l
＋ Add a 3rd car

Decision summary

Mazda CX-3 vs Lexus ES: the short answer

ES has a modest catalogue-index lead, while CX-3 remains close.

CX-3 starts ZAR 411,500 cheaper CX-3 from ZAR 440,000 · ES from ZAR 851,500

Five key differences

Exact selected derivatives
Specification CX-3 ES
Maximum Power CX-3115 kW @ 6000 rpm ES160 kW @ 5700 rpm
Maximum Torque CX-3206 Nm @ 2800 rpm ES221 Nm
Engine Size CX-31998 cc ES2500 cc
Combined Fuel Economy CX-315.9 km/l ES21.7 km/l
Ground Clearance CX-3155 mm ES158 mm

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

Independent editorial assessment

Hagalu editorial ratings

When a variant is selected, its rating out of five applies only to that exact derivative; a model-range review is not inherited. Editorial ratings are separate from the Specification Evidence Index out of 100 and are not customer ratings.

Mazda CX-3

2.0 Individual Auto FWD

Hagalu editorial rating Not yet rated

No complete editorial rating is published for this exact variant. This is not a zero score.

How Hagalu rates cars

Lexus ES

ES 300h SE

Hagalu editorial rating Not yet rated

No complete editorial rating is published for this exact variant. This is not a zero score.

How Hagalu rates cars

Not yet rated means a complete review is not published; it does not mean the vehicle scored zero. Read the rating methodology.

What Each Car Gets Right (and Wrong)

CX-3

Strengths
  • Nothing stands out clearly here.
Weak Spots
  • Less powerful engine setup
  • Lower fuel efficiency
  • Fewer listed safety features
  • Lower published practicality figures
Best suited to: General Use
Specification evidence leader

ES

Strengths
  • More powerful engine output
  • Better fuel efficiency
  • Stronger listed safety equipment
  • Stronger published practicality figures
Weak Spots
  • No obvious weak spots to flag.
Best suited to: Published Performance Published Efficiency Published Practicality

Which One's Right for You?

CX-3

  • Buyers who prefer this derivative's confirmed specification mix

ES

  • Buyers prioritising the stronger published powertrain figures
  • 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

Spec CX-3 ES
Model Introduced Year 2015 2021
Generation Current first-generation DK-series Mazda CX-3 Current seventh-generation Lexus ES executive sedan
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. Current South African ES range; the next-generation local range has not yet received final derivative confirmation
Facelift Launched Since 2015 Current South African ES range; the next-generation local range has not yet received final derivative confirmation
Facelift Version Ending Current Current South African specification checked 2026-07-17
Body Style SUV Sedan
Model Year 2026 2026
Production Status Active published
Segment Compact crossover Executive sedan
Tare Mass Kg 1270 kg 1740 kg
Vehicle Type SUV Sedan
Spec CX-3 ES
Length 4275 mm 4975 mm
Width 1765 mm 1865 mm
Height 1542 mm 1445 mm
Wheelbase 2570 mm 2870 mm
Ground Clearance (Default) 155 mm 158 mm
Fuel Tank Capacity 48 l 50 l
Boot/Cargo Space 230 l 454 l
Kerb Weight 1270 kg 1740 kg
Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) 1735 kg 2150 kg
Payload Capacity 465 kg 410 kg
Towing Capacity 850 kg -
Seating Capacity 5 seats 5 seats
Doors 5 doors 4 doors
Minimum Turning Radius 5.7 m 5.9 m
Front Legroom 1058 mm -
Rear Legroom 888 mm -

In depth: how these cars differ

This CX-3 and ES 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: CX-3 47 vs ES 58.

Efficiency index: CX-3 61 vs ES 85.

Safety-equipment index: CX-3 84 vs ES 93.

Practicality index: CX-3 48 vs ES 62.

Ownership-cover index: CX-3 not separately scored vs ES 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

ES leads by 13 points

ES has a modest catalogue-index lead, while CX-3 remains close.

Evidence leader 73 /100
Lead 13 points
Data 68% source coverage
73
#1 Evidence leader

ES

68% source coverage 2 strong categories
Best at Safety 93 Check Performance 58
Performance 58
Efficiency 85
Safety 93
Practicality 62
Leads by 13 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 ES +11 Efficiency ES +24 Safety ES +9 Practicality ES +14

Moderate difference in the source-backed catalogue index.

Why this score View full breakdown
Evidence-index leader

ES

Performance 58/100
Efficiency 85/100
Safety 93/100
Practicality 62/100

CX-3

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

What the evidence means

Evidence index Lexus ES leads the specification evidence index with 73 pts vs 60 pts for CX-3

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

Related comparisons

Continue with closely related South Africa models and comparable body styles.

CX-3
CX-3
VS
T-Roc
T-Roc
CX-3 vs T-Roc →
CX-3
CX-3
VS
H7
H7
CX-3 vs H7 →
CX-3
CX-3
VS
03T
03T
CX-3 vs 03T →
CX-3
CX-3
VS
SEALION 6 DM-i
SEALION 6 DM-i
CX-3 vs SEALION 6 DM-i →
CX-3
CX-3
VS
Sportage
Sportage
CX-3 vs Sportage →
CX-3
CX-3
VS
Tiguan
Tiguan
CX-3 vs Tiguan →
ES
ES
VS
T-Roc
T-Roc
ES vs T-Roc →
ES
ES
VS
H7
H7
ES vs H7 →

CX-3 vs ES 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.