Mazda CX-3 vs Mitsubishi Triton Double Cab

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
Mitsubishi Triton Double Cab in South Africa

Mitsubishi Triton Double Cab

2.4L Bi-Turbo A/T Diesel 6-Speed Automatic Current
ZAR 959,990 ex-showroom
⚡ 150 kW 🔧 470 Nm ⛽ 11.9 km/l
＋ Add a 3rd car

Decision summary

Mazda CX-3 vs Mitsubishi Triton Double Cab: the short answer

Triton Double Cab holds a noticeable catalogue-index lead over CX-3.

CX-3 starts ZAR 199,990 cheaper CX-3 from ZAR 440,000 · Triton Double Cab from ZAR 639,990

Five key differences

Exact selected derivatives
Specification CX-3 Triton Double Cab
Maximum Power CX-3115 kW @ 6000 rpm Triton Double Cab150 kW @ 3500 rpm
Maximum Torque CX-3206 Nm @ 2800 rpm Triton Double Cab470 Nm @ 1500-2750 rpm
Engine Size CX-31998 cc Triton Double Cab2442 cc
Combined Fuel Economy CX-315.9 km/l Triton Double Cab11.9 km/l
Ground Clearance CX-3155 mm Triton Double Cab228 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

Mitsubishi Triton Double Cab

2.4L Bi-Turbo A/T

Hagalu editorial rating
4.3/5

Desk research · Exact variant

Hagalu Editorial Team ·

Editorial assessment, not a customer rating. Not road-tested for this review.

Read the review and score breakdown

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
  • 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

Triton Double Cab

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

Triton Double Cab

  • 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 Triton Double Cab
Model Introduced Year 2015 2024
Generation Current first-generation DK-series Mazda CX-3 Sixth-generation Triton
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. Next-Gen Triton launched in South Africa in November 2024; Bi-Turbo added in 2026.
Facelift Launched Since 2015 Current specification
Facelift Version Ending Current Current
Body Style SUV Double-cab pickup
Model Year 2026 2026
Production Status Active active
Segment Compact crossover One-ton double-cab pickup
Tare Mass Kg 1270 kg -
Vehicle Type SUV Light commercial vehicle
Spec CX-3 Triton Double Cab
Length 4275 mm 5360 mm
Width 1765 mm 1930 mm
Height 1542 mm 1815 mm
Wheelbase 2570 mm 3130 mm
Ground Clearance (Default) 155 mm 228 mm
Fuel Tank Capacity 48 l 75 l
Boot/Cargo Space 230 l 1262 l
Kerb Weight 1270 kg 2035 kg
Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) 1735 kg 3020 kg
Payload Capacity 465 kg 985 kg
Towing Capacity 850 kg 3500 kg
Seating Capacity 5 seats 5 seats
Doors 5 doors 4 doors
Minimum Turning Radius 5.7 m 6.35 m
Front Legroom 1058 mm 1059 mm
Rear Legroom 888 mm 857 mm
Ground Clearance (With Full Seating Load) - 195 mm
Number of Rows - 2 rows
Front Headroom - 1000 mm
Rear Headroom - 972 mm

In depth: how these cars differ

This CX-3 and Triton Double Cab 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 Triton Double Cab 75.

Efficiency index: CX-3 61 vs Triton Double Cab 47.

Safety-equipment index: CX-3 84 vs Triton Double Cab 95.

Practicality index: CX-3 48 vs Triton Double Cab 90.

Ownership-cover index: CX-3 not separately scored vs Triton Double Cab 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

Triton Double Cab leads by 18 points

Triton Double Cab holds a noticeable catalogue-index lead over CX-3.

Evidence leader 78 /100
Lead 18 points
Data 83% source coverage
78
#1 Evidence leader

Triton Double Cab

83% source coverage 3 strong categories
Best at Safety 95 Check Efficiency 47
Performance 75
Efficiency 47
Safety 95
Practicality 90
Leads by 18 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 Triton Double Cab +28 Efficiency CX-3 +14 Safety Triton Double Cab +11 Practicality Triton Double Cab +42

Moderate difference in the source-backed catalogue index.

Why this score View full breakdown
Evidence-index leader

Triton Double Cab

Performance 75/100
Efficiency 47/100
Safety 95/100
Practicality 90/100

CX-3

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

What the evidence means

Evidence index Mitsubishi Triton Double Cab leads the specification evidence index with 78 pts vs 60 pts for CX-3

In Hagalu's specification evidence index, Triton Double Cab 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
C7
C7
CX-3 vs C7 →
CX-3
CX-3
VS
CX-30
CX-30
CX-3 vs CX-30 →
CX-3
CX-3
VS
Eclipse Cross
Eclipse Cross
CX-3 vs Eclipse Cross →
CX-3
CX-3
VS
Territory
Territory
CX-3 vs Territory →
CX-3
CX-3
VS
D-Max Extended Cab
D-Max Extended Cab
CX-3 vs D-Max Extended Cab →
CX-3
CX-3
VS
Harrier
Harrier
CX-3 vs Harrier →
Triton Double Cab
Triton Double Cab
VS
C7
C7
Triton Double Cab vs C7 →
Triton Double Cab
Triton Double Cab
VS
CX-30
CX-30
Triton Double Cab vs CX-30 →

CX-3 vs Triton Double Cab 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.