Mazda CX-3 vs BMW iX

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
BMW iX in South Africa

BMW iX

xDrive45 Sport Electric Single-Speed Reduction Gear Current
ZAR 2,249,000 ex-showroom
⚡ 300 kW 🔧 700 Nm
＋ Add a 3rd car

Decision summary

Mazda CX-3 vs BMW iX: the short answer

iX has a large lead in Hagalu's source-backed catalogue index over CX-3.

CX-3 starts ZAR 1,809,000 cheaper CX-3 from ZAR 440,000 · iX from ZAR 2,249,000

Five key differences

Exact selected derivatives
Specification CX-3 iX
Maximum Power CX-3115 kW @ 6000 rpm iX300 kW
Maximum Torque CX-3206 Nm @ 2800 rpm iX700 Nm
Engine Size CX-31998 cc iXNot Applicable
Combined Fuel Economy CX-315.9 km/l iXNot Applicable
Ground Clearance CX-3155 mm iX190 mm

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

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

iX

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

iX

  • 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 iX
Model Introduced Year 2015 2021
Generation Current first-generation DK-series Mazda CX-3 Large five-door battery-electric SUV with dual-motor all-wheel drive.
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 BMW iX range in updated xDrive45 and xDrive60 South African Sport specification.
Facelift Launched Since 2015 Original current-generation version
Facelift Version Ending Current Current
Body Style SUV SUV
Model Year 2026 2026
Production Status Active active
Segment Compact crossover Premium SUV
Tare Mass Kg 1270 kg -
Vehicle Type SUV Car
Spec CX-3 iX
Length 4275 mm 4965 mm
Width 1765 mm 1970 mm
Height 1542 mm 1695 mm
Wheelbase 2570 mm 3000 mm
Ground Clearance (Default) 155 mm 190 mm
Fuel Tank Capacity 48 l 0 l
Boot/Cargo Space 230 l 500 l
Kerb Weight 1270 kg 2525 kg
Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) 1735 kg 3100 kg
Payload Capacity 465 kg 650 kg
Towing Capacity 850 kg 2500 kg
Seating Capacity 5 seats 5 seats
Doors 5 doors 5 doors
Minimum Turning Radius 5.7 m 5.8 m
Front Legroom 1058 mm 1045 mm
Rear Legroom 888 mm 920 mm
Ground Clearance (With Full Seating Load) - 170 mm
Number of Rows - 2 rows
Front Headroom - 1009 mm
Rear Headroom - 991 mm

In depth: how these cars differ

This CX-3 and iX 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 iX 100.

Efficiency index: CX-3 61 vs iX 90.

Safety-equipment index: CX-3 84 vs iX 92.

Practicality index: CX-3 48 vs iX 72.

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

iX leads by 29 points

iX has a large lead in Hagalu's source-backed catalogue index over CX-3.

Evidence leader 89 /100
Lead 29 points
Data 69% source coverage
89
#1 Evidence leader

iX

69% source coverage 4 strong categories
Best at Performance 100 Check Practicality 72
Performance 100
Efficiency 90
Safety 92
Practicality 72
Leads by 29 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 iX +53 Efficiency iX +29 Safety iX +8 Practicality iX +24

Large difference in the source-backed catalogue index.

Why this score View full breakdown
Evidence-index leader

iX

Performance 100/100
Efficiency 90/100
Safety 92/100
Practicality 72/100

CX-3

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

What the evidence means

Evidence index BMW iX leads the specification evidence index with 89 pts vs 60 pts for CX-3

In Hagalu's specification evidence index, iX 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
iX2
iX2
CX-3 vs iX2 →
CX-3
CX-3
VS
GLC Coupé
GLC Coupé
CX-3 vs GLC Coupé →
CX-3
CX-3
VS
Santa Fe Hybrid
Santa Fe Hybrid
CX-3 vs Santa Fe Hybrid →
CX-3
CX-3
VS
iX1
iX1
CX-3 vs iX1 →
CX-3
CX-3
VS
X4
X4
CX-3 vs X4 →
CX-3
CX-3
VS
Touareg
Touareg
CX-3 vs Touareg →
iX
iX
VS
iX2
iX2
iX vs iX2 →
iX
iX
VS
GLC Coupé
GLC Coupé
iX vs GLC Coupé →

CX-3 vs iX 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.