Mazda CX-30 vs Toyota Land Cruiser FJ

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-30 in South Africa

Mazda CX-30

2.0 Individual Edition Auto FWD Petrol 6-Speed Automatic Current
ZAR 651,500 ex-showroom
⚡ 121 kW 🔧 213 Nm ⛽ 15.2 km/l
VS
Toyota Land Cruiser FJ in South Africa

Toyota Land Cruiser FJ

2.7 4x4 VX 6AT Petrol 6-Speed Automatic Current
ZAR 761,400 ex-showroom
⚡ 122 kW 🔧 245 Nm ⛽ 9.3 km/l
＋ Add a 3rd car

Decision summary

Mazda CX-30 vs Toyota Land Cruiser FJ: the short answer

CX-30 and Land Cruiser FJ are close on the comparable published fields, so buyer priorities should decide.

CX-30 starts ZAR 174,200 cheaper CX-30 from ZAR 539,800 · Land Cruiser FJ from ZAR 714,000

Five key differences

Exact selected derivatives
Specification CX-30 Land Cruiser FJ
Maximum Power CX-30121 kW @ 6000 rpm Land Cruiser FJ122 kW @ 5200 rpm
Maximum Torque CX-30213 Nm @ 4000 rpm Land Cruiser FJ245 Nm @ 4000 rpm
Engine Size CX-301998 cc Land Cruiser FJ2700 cc
Combined Fuel Economy CX-3015.2 km/l Land Cruiser FJ9.3 km/l
Ground Clearance CX-30175 mm Land Cruiser FJ245 mm

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

What Each Car Gets Right (and Wrong)

CX-30

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

Land Cruiser FJ

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

Which One's Right for You?

CX-30

  • Buyers prioritising the lower published fuel or energy use
  • Buyers prioritising the more complete listed safety equipment

Land Cruiser FJ

  • Buyers prioritising the stronger published powertrain figures
  • Buyers prioritising the stronger published space and capacity figures

Full Specs, Side by Side

Spec CX-30 Land Cruiser FJ
Model Introduced Year 2021 2026
Generation First-generation DM-series Mazda CX-30 using seventh-generation Mazda architecture First-generation compact Land Cruiser FJ introduced in South Africa in 2026
Facelift History South African editions received a focused technology and equipment update in 2024, including the 10.25-inch display and revised connectivity. New South African model line launched in 2026
Facelift Launched Since 2021 New South African model line launched in 2026
Facelift Version Ending Current Current South African 2026 specification
Body Style SUV SUV
Model Year 2026 2026
Production Status Active active
Segment Compact crossover SUV
Tare Mass Kg 1340 kg 1970 kg
Vehicle Type SUV SUV
Spec CX-30 Land Cruiser FJ
Length 4395 mm 4610 mm
Width 1795 mm 1855 mm
Height 1540 mm 1890 mm
Wheelbase 2655 mm 2580 mm
Ground Clearance (Default) 175 mm 245 mm
Fuel Tank Capacity 51 l 63 l
Boot/Cargo Space 295 l 488 l
Kerb Weight 1340 kg 1970 kg
Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) 1937 kg 2500 kg
Payload Capacity 597 kg 530 kg
Towing Capacity 1200 kg 2500 kg
Seating Capacity 5 seats 5 seats
Doors 5 doors 5 doors
Minimum Turning Radius 5.7 m 5.5 m
Front Legroom 1058 mm 1044 mm
Rear Legroom 921 mm 900 mm
Ground Clearance (With Full Seating Load) - 125 mm
Number of Rows - 2 rows
Front Headroom - 994 mm
Rear Headroom - 958 mm

In depth: how these cars differ

This CX-30 and Land Cruiser FJ 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-30 49 vs Land Cruiser FJ 60.

Efficiency index: CX-30 59 vs Land Cruiser FJ 38.

Safety-equipment index: CX-30 96 vs Land Cruiser FJ 94.

Practicality index: CX-30 55 vs Land Cruiser FJ 74.

Ownership-cover index: CX-30 not separately scored vs Land Cruiser FJ 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

Land Cruiser FJ leads by 3 points

CX-30 and Land Cruiser FJ are close on the comparable published fields, so buyer priorities should decide.

Evidence leader 68 /100
Lead 3 points
Data 74% source coverage
68
#1 Evidence leader

Land Cruiser FJ

74% source coverage 2 strong categories
Best at Safety 94 Check Efficiency 38
Performance 60
Efficiency 38
Safety 94
Practicality 74
Leads by 3 points
65
#2

CX-30

78% source coverage 1 strong categories
Best at Safety 96 Check Performance 49
Performance 49
Efficiency 59
Safety 96
Practicality 55
Performance 24% Safety 22% Practicality 22% Efficiency 17% Ownership 15%
Category leaders What moves the verdict
Performance Land Cruiser FJ +11 Efficiency CX-30 +21 Safety CX-30 +2 Practicality Land Cruiser FJ +19

Close catalogue match. Buyer priorities should decide the outcome.

Why this score View full breakdown
Evidence-index leader

Land Cruiser FJ

Performance 60/100
Efficiency 38/100
Safety 94/100
Practicality 74/100

CX-30

Performance 49/100
Efficiency 59/100
Safety 96/100
Practicality 55/100

What the evidence means

Evidence index Toyota Land Cruiser FJ leads the specification evidence index with 68 pts vs 65 pts for CX-30

In Hagalu's specification evidence index, Land Cruiser FJ leads. However, CX-30 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-30
CX-30
VS
03T
03T
CX-30 vs 03T →
CX-30
CX-30
VS
SEALION 6 DM-i
SEALION 6 DM-i
CX-30 vs SEALION 6 DM-i →
CX-30
CX-30
VS
Tiggo 8 Pro Max
Tiggo 8 Pro Max
CX-30 vs Tiggo 8 Pro Max →
CX-30
CX-30
VS
T-Roc
T-Roc
CX-30 vs T-Roc →
CX-30
CX-30
VS
H7
H7
CX-30 vs H7 →
CX-30
CX-30
VS
E5 EM-i
E5 EM-i
CX-30 vs E5 EM-i →
Land Cruiser FJ
Land Cruiser FJ
VS
03T
03T
Land Cruiser FJ vs 03T →
Land Cruiser FJ
Land Cruiser FJ
VS
SEALION 6 DM-i
SEALION 6 DM-i
Land Cruiser FJ vs SEALION 6 DM-i →

CX-30 vs Land Cruiser FJ 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.