Mazda CX-3 vs GWM Tank 300

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
GWM Tank 300 in South Africa

GWM Tank 300

2.0T Hi4-T Hybrid Plug-in Hybrid 8-Speed Automatic Current
ZAR 849,900 ex-showroom
⚡ 240 kW 🔧 750 Nm ⛽ 35.7 km/l
+ Add a 3rd car

Decision summary

Mazda CX-3 vs GWM Tank 300: the short answer

Tank 300 has a large lead in Hagalu's source-backed catalogue index over CX-3.

CX-3 starts ZAR 259,900 cheaper CX-3 from ZAR 440,000 · Tank 300 from ZAR 699,900

Five key differences

Exact selected derivatives
Specification CX-3 Tank 300
Maximum Power CX-3115 kW @ 6000 rpm Tank 300240 kW @ 5500 rpm
Maximum Torque CX-3206 Nm @ 2800 rpm Tank 300750 Nm
Engine Size CX-31998 cc Tank 3001999 cc
Combined Fuel Economy CX-315.9 km/l Tank 30035.7 km/l
Ground Clearance CX-3155 mm Tank 300224 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

Tank 300

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

Tank 300

  • 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 Tank 300
Model Introduced Year 2015 2024
Generation Current first-generation DK-series Mazda CX-3 First generation, launched globally in 2021 and brought to South Africa in 2024. The Tank brand is positioned as GWM's premium off-road sub-brand alongside Haval (SUVs) and Ora (electric).
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. First-generation Tank 300 launched in South Africa in 2024. No significant facelift to date; software updates have refined the differential locking activation logic and refined the hybrid system on the Hi4-T variant.
Facelift Launched Since 2015 2024
Facelift Version Ending Current Current
Body Style SUV SUV
Model Year 2026 2026
Production Status Active published
Segment Compact crossover SUV
Tare Mass Kg 1270 kg 2050 kg
Vehicle Type SUV SUV
Color Note - Crystal White, Hamilton Black, Mars Red, Atlantic Blue, Adventure Olive Green and Sand Dune Beige. The Adventure Olive Green is exclusive to Off-Road and Hi4-T Hybrid trims.
Dealer Stock Note - Flagship grade in the South Africa lineup
Spec CX-3 Tank 300
Length 4275 mm 4638 mm
Width 1765 mm 1926 mm
Height 1542 mm 1850 mm
Wheelbase 2570 mm 2750 mm
Ground Clearance (Default) 155 mm 224 mm
Fuel Tank Capacity 48 l 65 l
Boot/Cargo Space 230 l 490 l
Kerb Weight 1270 kg 2050 kg
Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) 1735 kg 2200 kg
Payload Capacity 465 kg -
Towing Capacity 850 kg 2500 kg
Seating Capacity 5 seats 5 seats
Doors 5 doors 5 doors
Minimum Turning Radius 5.7 m 12.4 m
Front Legroom 1058 mm 1050 mm
Rear Legroom 888 mm 890 mm
Front Headroom - 990 mm
Rear Headroom - 960 mm

In depth: how these cars differ

This CX-3 and Tank 300 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 Tank 300 98.

Efficiency index: CX-3 61 vs Tank 300 97.

Safety-equipment index: CX-3 84 vs Tank 300 100.

Practicality index: CX-3 48 vs Tank 300 76.

Ownership-cover index: CX-3 not separately scored vs Tank 300 65.

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

Tank 300 leads by 28 points

Tank 300 has a large lead in Hagalu's source-backed catalogue index over CX-3.

Evidence leader 88 /100
Lead 28 points
Data 96% source coverage
88
#1 Evidence leader

Tank 300

96% source coverage 4 strong categories
Best at Safety 100 Check Ownership 65
Performance 98
Efficiency 97
Safety 100
Practicality 76
Ownership 65
Leads by 28 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 Tank 300 +51 Efficiency Tank 300 +36 Safety Tank 300 +16 Practicality Tank 300 +28

Large difference in the source-backed catalogue index.

Why this score View full breakdown
Evidence-index leader

Tank 300

Performance 98/100
Efficiency 97/100
Safety 100/100
Practicality 76/100
Ownership 65/100

CX-3

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

What the evidence means

Evidence index GWM Tank 300 leads the specification evidence index with 88 pts vs 60 pts for CX-3

In Hagalu's specification evidence index, Tank 300 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 Tank 300 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.