Mazda CX-3 vs Hyundai Tucson

A proper head-to-head in South Africa — we cover price, performance, petrol economy, safety and what it'll actually cost you to own each one long term.

Mazda CX-3 in South Africa

Mazda CX-3

2.0 Individual Auto FWD Petrol Automatic
ZAR 551,600 ex-showroom
⚡ 115 kW 🔧 206 Nm ⛽ 15.9 km/l
VS
Hyundai Tucson in South Africa

Hyundai Tucson

2.0D AT Executive AWD Diesel Automatic
ZAR 764,900 ex-showroom
⚡ 137 kW 🔧 416 Nm ⛽ 13.9 km/l
Add a 3rd car

At a Glance — Who Wins What

Performance Tucson
Fuel Economy CX-3
🛡 Safety Tucson
📦 Practicality Tucson
🔑 Ownership Tucson
CX-3 starts ZAR 568900 cheaper CX-3 from ZAR 440,000 · Tucson from ZAR 568,900

Key Specs Side by Side

The specs that matter most — highlighted where one car leads.

Spec CX-3 Tucson
Engine Power 115 kW 137 kW
Torque 206 Nm 416 Nm
Engine Size 1998 cc 1995 cc
Claimed Mileage 15.9 km/l 13.9 km/l
Ground Clearance 155 mm 181 mm
Boot / Load Bay 230 l 540 l
Airbags 6 6
Kerb Weight 1270 kg 1720 kg
Seating Capacity 5 5
Warranty 5 Years/Unlimited km 5

= leads in this spec

The Bottom Line

Tucson holds a noticeable edge over CX-3, especially in key ownership areas.

Where They Actually Differ

Performance Tucson +22 pts
Efficiency CX-3 +5 pts
Safety Tucson +31 pts
Practicality Tucson +25 pts
Ownership Tucson +18 pts

What Each Car Gets Right (and Wrong)

CX-3

Strengths
  • Better fuel efficiency
Weak Spots
  • Less powerful engine setup
  • Less comprehensive safety features
  • Less practical in daily usage
  • Shorter warranty coverage
Best suited to: Fuel Efficiency
🏆 Overall Winner

Tucson

Strengths
  • More powerful engine output
  • Stronger safety package
  • More practical for daily use
  • Better long-term ownership value
Weak Spots
  • Lower fuel efficiency
Best suited to: Highway Driving Family Usage

Which One's Right for You?

CX-3

  • Buyers looking for better fuel efficiency

Tucson

  • Drivers who prioritise strong highway performance and overtaking power
  • Families prioritising stronger safety equipment
  • Large families needing more practicality and usability
  • Long-term owners valuing warranty and ownership peace of mind

Full Specs, Side by Side

Spec CX-3 Tucson
Model Introduced Year 2015 2004
Generation Current first-generation DK-series Mazda CX-3 Fourth generation Tucson on Hyundai's i-GMP platform; distinctive parametric design language makes it one of the more striking mid-size SUVs in SA
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. Fourth generation launched in SA in 2021; major step change in styling, interior quality, and technology over the third-gen car
Facelift Launched Since 2015 2021
Facelift Version Ending Current Current
Body Style SUV SUV
Model Year 2026 2026
Production Status Active published
Segment Compact crossover SUV
Vehicle Type SUV SUV
Dealer Stock Note - Executive grade in the South Africa lineup
Color Note - White, Black, Silver, Blue, Grey, Green
Drivetrain Note - Drive layout derived from the official derivative naming: 2.0D AT Executive AWD
Spec CX-3 Tucson
Ground Clearance 155 mm 181 mm
Wheelbase 2570 mm 2755 mm
Length 4275 mm 4630 mm
Width 1765 mm 1865 mm
Height 1542 mm 1665 mm
Kerb Weight 1270 kg 1720 kg
Gross Vehicle Weight 1735 kg 2110 kg
Seating Capacity 5 5
Boot Space 230 l 540 l
Towing Capacity 850 kg -
Turning Radius 5.7 m 5.4 m
Load Bed Length 230 l 540 l
Load Bed Width - -
Front Legroom 1058 mm -
Rear Legroom 888 mm -
Front Shoulder Room 1360 mm -
Rear Shoulder Room 1281 mm -
Boot Space Seats Folded 1140 l 1799 l
Number of Doors 5 5
Max Payload 465 kg -
Boot Volume 230 l 540 l
Doors 5 5
Seats 5 5
Fuel Tank Capacity 48 l 54 l
Gross Vehicle Mass Kg 1735 kg 2110 kg
Ground Clearance Max 155 mm 181 mm
Ground Clearance Min 155 mm 181 mm
Ground Clearance Mm 155 mm 181 mm
Height Mm 1542 mm 1665 mm
Length Mm 4275 mm 4630 mm
Loadbox Length Mm 230 l 540 l
Loadbox Width Mm - -
Payload Kg 465 kg -
Cargo Volume 230 l 540 l
Tare Mass Kg 1270 kg 1720 kg
Turning Circle 5.7 m 5.4 m
Turning Circle M 5.7 m 5.4 m
Width Mm 1765 mm 1865 mm
Boot Space Seats Folded 1140 l 1799 l
Rear Track Width - -
Front Headroom - -
Rear Headroom - -
Front Track Width - -

Overall Verdict Score

Decision-grade view of the winner, score gap and category strengths.

Weighted / 100
Verdict readout

Tucson leads by 19 points

Tucson holds a noticeable edge over CX-3, especially in key ownership areas.

Winner 72 /100
Lead 19 points
Data 91% confidence
72
#1 Winner

Tucson

91% data confidence 2 strong categories
Best at Safety 92 Check Efficiency 56
Performance 69
Efficiency 56
Safety 92
Practicality 73
Ownership 65
Leads by 19 points
53
#2

CX-3

90% data confidence 0 strong categories
Best at Efficiency 61 Check Performance 47
Performance 47
Efficiency 61
Safety 61
Practicality 48
Ownership 47
Performance 24% Safety 22% Practicality 22% Efficiency 17% Ownership 15%
Category leaders What moves the verdict
Performance Tucson +22 Efficiency CX-3 +5 Safety Tucson +31 Practicality Tucson +25 Ownership Tucson +18

Moderate difference between the models.

Why this score View full breakdown
Overall Winner

Tucson

Performance 69/100
Efficiency 56/100
Safety 92/100
Practicality 73/100
Ownership 65/100

CX-3

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

So, Which One Should You Buy?

🏆 Hyundai Tucson wins with 72 pts vs 53 pts for CX-3

In structured scoring, Tucson emerges as the stronger overall package. However, CX-3 may appeal to buyers prioritising different factors. Ultimately, the right choice depends on your driving priorities in South Africa.

Buyers Also Looked At These

Other comparisons that people in the same boat tend to check out.

Questions Buyers Usually Ask

On our scoring the Tucson edges ahead overall. That said, the right choice depends on what you actually use the car for — the breakdown above shows exactly where each one wins and loses.

Efficiency scores: CX-3 61 vs Tucson 56. In the real world, diesel variants of either car will beat the claimed figure on long highways and fall short in Joburg traffic.

Safety scores: CX-3 61, Tucson 92. Check each model page for NCAP ratings and which trim levels include AEB and blind-spot monitoring — those features aren't always standard.

Long-term ownership scores: CX-3 47, Tucson 65. Service intervals, parts availability in SA, and whether a service plan is bundled all factor in — check the individual variant specs for that detail.

Practicality scores: CX-3 48, Tucson 73. This covers boot space, seat flexibility, and day-to-day usability — not just interior dimensions on paper.

Performance scores: CX-3 47, Tucson 69. This looks at real-world pace — 0–100 kph, highway flexibility, and how either car feels when you actually need to overtake on an N-road.

Resale varies with colour, spec, and market timing, but Japanese brands — and Toyota specifically — have a strong track record in SA. Check current used prices for both on AutoTrader to see the real gap right now.

Ground clearance and 4WD availability are what matter most here. Scroll to the spec table above to compare both side by side — if either model offers a 4WD variant, that's the version worth comparing.

Fuel, insurance, and service costs are the big three. Diesel variants of both models typically save R800–R1,500/month in fuel at current SA pump prices. The Tucson edges the overall ownership score, but check whether either variant includes a service plan — that changes the monthly maths significantly.

The Tucson scores better overall, but neither car is a bad buy here. It comes down to what features matter to you — check the full spec table above to see exactly what you gain and lose at each price point.

In Depth — Breaking It All Down

The comparison between CX-3 and Tucson in South Africa evaluates performance, efficiency, safety, practicality and long-term ownership value.

Performance: CX-3 scores 47 vs 69.

Efficiency: CX-3 scores 61 vs 56.

Safety: CX-3 scores 61 vs 92.

Practicality: CX-3 scores 48 vs 73.

Ownership: CX-3 scores 47 vs 65.

Final structured scoring gives Tucson the advantage in this comparison.