Mazda CX-3 vs Changan Hunter Diesel

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
Changan Hunter Diesel in South Africa

Changan Hunter Diesel

4WD AT CE Diesel 6-Speed Automatic Current
ZAR 569,900 ex-showroom
⚡ 110 kW 🔧 350 Nm ⛽ 10.99 km/l
+ Add a 3rd car

Decision summary

Mazda CX-3 vs Changan Hunter Diesel: the short answer

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

CX-3 starts ZAR 9,900 cheaper CX-3 from ZAR 440,000 · Hunter Diesel from ZAR 449,900

Five key differences

Exact selected derivatives
Specification CX-3 Hunter Diesel
Maximum Power CX-3115 kW @ 6000 rpm Hunter Diesel110 kW
Maximum Torque CX-3206 Nm @ 2800 rpm Hunter Diesel350 Nm
Engine Size CX-31998 cc Hunter Diesel2000 cc
Combined Fuel Economy CX-315.9 km/l Hunter Diesel10.99 km/l
Ground Clearance CX-3155 mm Hunter Diesel226 mm

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

What Each Car Gets Right (and Wrong)

CX-3

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

Hunter Diesel

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

Which One's Right for You?

CX-3

  • Buyers prioritising the lower published fuel or energy use

Hunter Diesel

  • Buyers prioritising the stronger published powertrain figures
  • 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 Hunter Diesel
Model Introduced Year 2015 2025
Generation Current first-generation DK-series Mazda CX-3 Current South African Hunter double-cab diesel generation with one 2WD manual and one 4WD automatic derivative.
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. No South African facelift has been announced for the current Hunter Diesel range.
Facelift Launched Since 2015 Not Applicable
Facelift Version Ending Current Not Applicable
Body Style SUV Double-cab pickup
Model Year 2026 2026
Production Status Active active
Segment Compact crossover Double-cab bakkie
Tare Mass Kg 1270 kg -
Vehicle Type SUV Light commercial vehicle
Spec CX-3 Hunter Diesel
Length 4275 mm 5330 mm
Width 1765 mm 1930 mm
Height 1542 mm 1875 mm
Wheelbase 2570 mm 3180 mm
Ground Clearance (Default) 155 mm 226 mm
Fuel Tank Capacity 48 l 80 l
Boot/Cargo Space 230 l Not Officially Disclosed
Kerb Weight 1270 kg 2060 kg
Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) 1735 kg 3080 kg
Payload Capacity 465 kg Not Officially Disclosed
Towing Capacity 850 kg Not Officially Disclosed
Seating Capacity 5 seats 5 seats
Doors 5 doors 4 doors
Minimum Turning Radius 5.7 m 13 m
Front Legroom 1058 mm Not Officially Disclosed
Rear Legroom 888 mm Not Officially Disclosed
Ground Clearance (With Full Seating Load) - Not Officially Disclosed
Number of Rows - 2 rows
Front Headroom - Not Officially Disclosed
Rear Headroom - Not Officially Disclosed

In depth: how these cars differ

This CX-3 and Hunter Diesel 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 Hunter Diesel 62.

Efficiency index: CX-3 61 vs Hunter Diesel 45.

Safety-equipment index: CX-3 84 vs Hunter Diesel 88.

Practicality index: CX-3 48 vs Hunter Diesel 75.

Ownership-cover index: CX-3 not separately scored vs Hunter Diesel 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

Hunter Diesel leads by 9 points

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

Evidence leader 69 /100
Lead 9 points
Data 61% source coverage
69
#1 Evidence leader

Hunter Diesel

61% source coverage 2 strong categories
Best at Safety 88 Check Efficiency 45
Performance 62
Efficiency 45
Safety 88
Practicality 75
Leads by 9 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 Hunter Diesel +15 Efficiency CX-3 +16 Safety Hunter Diesel +4 Practicality Hunter Diesel +27

Close catalogue match. Buyer priorities should decide the outcome.

Why this score View full breakdown
Evidence-index leader

Hunter Diesel

Performance 62/100
Efficiency 45/100
Safety 88/100
Practicality 75/100

CX-3

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

What the evidence means

Evidence index Changan Hunter Diesel leads the specification evidence index with 69 pts vs 60 pts for CX-3

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

CX-3 vs Hunter Diesel 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.