Mazda CX-30 vs Nissan Qashqai

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.

Includes a historical vehicle

Current, upcoming and historical vehicles can be compared side by side. Historical records keep their verified specifications, while price labels show last-listed context rather than current new-car availability.

Nissan Qashqai Discontinued model
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
Nissan Qashqai in South Africa

Nissan Qashqai

1.3 Tekna CVT Petrol CVT Discontinued model
ZAR 545,000 last listed
Discontinued model Verified historical specifications remain visible for owner and used-car comparisons.
⚡ 110 kW 🔧 270 Nm ⛽ 17 km/l
＋ Add a 3rd car

Decision summary

Mazda CX-30 vs Nissan Qashqai: the short answer

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

Recorded price context CX-30: current from ZAR 539,800 · Qashqai: last listed from ZAR 495,000

Five key differences

Exact selected derivatives
Specification CX-30 Qashqai
Maximum Power CX-30121 kW @ 6000 rpm Qashqai110 kW
Maximum Torque CX-30213 Nm @ 4000 rpm Qashqai270 Nm
Engine Size CX-301998 cc Qashqai1332 cc
Combined Fuel Economy CX-3015.2 km/l Qashqai17 km/l
Ground Clearance CX-30175 mm Qashqai180 mm

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

Evidence for Nissan Qashqai 1.3 Tekna CVT

Source type: Hagalu catalogue record

What Each Car Gets Right (and Wrong)

Specification evidence leader

CX-30

Strengths
  • Stronger listed safety equipment
Weak Spots
  • Less powerful engine setup
  • Lower fuel efficiency
  • Lower published practicality figures
Best suited to: General Use

Qashqai

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

Which One's Right for You?

CX-30

  • Buyers prioritising the more complete listed safety equipment

Qashqai

  • Buyers prioritising the stronger published powertrain figures
  • Buyers prioritising the lower published fuel or energy use
  • Buyers prioritising the stronger published space and capacity figures

Full Specs, Side by Side

Archived cars use verified historical spec records. Rows remain comparable; unavailable historical values are shown plainly rather than estimated.

Spec CX-30 Qashqai
Model Introduced Year 2021 2007
Generation First-generation DM-series Mazda CX-30 using seventh-generation Mazda architecture Not confirmed
Facelift History South African editions received a focused technology and equipment update in 2024, including the 10.25-inch display and revised connectivity. Latest generation redesign improved styling and tech
Facelift Launched Since 2021 Not confirmed
Facelift Version Ending Current Not confirmed
Body Style SUV Not confirmed
Model Year 2026 Not confirmed
Production Status Active Not confirmed
Segment Compact crossover Not confirmed
Tare Mass Kg 1340 kg 1450 kg
Vehicle Type SUV Not confirmed
Spec CX-30 Qashqai
Length 4395 mm 4425 mm
Width 1795 mm 1835 mm
Height 1540 mm 1625 mm
Wheelbase 2655 mm 2665 mm
Ground Clearance (Default) 175 mm 180 mm
Fuel Tank Capacity 51 l 55 l
Boot/Cargo Space 295 l 504 l
Kerb Weight 1340 kg 1450 kg
Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) 1937 kg 1980 kg
Payload Capacity 597 kg Not confirmed
Towing Capacity 1200 kg 1800 kg
Seating Capacity 5 seats 5 seats
Doors 5 doors Not confirmed
Minimum Turning Radius 5.7 m Not confirmed
Front Legroom 1058 mm Not confirmed
Rear Legroom 921 mm Not confirmed

In depth: how these cars differ

This CX-30 and Qashqai 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 Qashqai 53.

Efficiency index: CX-30 59 vs Qashqai 65.

Safety-equipment index: CX-30 96 vs Qashqai 87.

Practicality index: CX-30 55 vs Qashqai 68.

Ownership-cover index: CX-30 not separately scored vs Qashqai 42.

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

CX-30 leads by 1 points

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

Evidence leader 65 /100
Lead 1 points
Data 78% source coverage
65
#1 Evidence leader

CX-30

78% source coverage 1 strong categories
Best at Safety 96 Check Performance 49
Performance 49
Efficiency 59
Safety 96
Practicality 55
Leads by 1 points
64
#2

Qashqai

87% source coverage 1 strong categories
Best at Safety 87 Check Ownership 42
Performance 53
Efficiency 65
Safety 87
Practicality 68
Ownership 42
Performance 24% Safety 22% Practicality 22% Efficiency 17% Ownership 15%
Category leaders What moves the verdict
Performance Qashqai +4 Efficiency Qashqai +6 Safety CX-30 +9 Practicality Qashqai +13

Close catalogue match. Buyer priorities should decide the outcome.

Why this score View full breakdown
Evidence-index leader

CX-30

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

Qashqai

Performance 53/100
Efficiency 65/100
Safety 87/100
Practicality 68/100
Ownership 42/100

What the evidence means

Evidence index Mazda CX-30 leads the specification evidence index with 65 pts vs 64 pts for Qashqai

In Hagalu's specification evidence index, CX-30 leads. However, Qashqai 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
Captur
Captur
CX-30 vs Captur →
CX-30
CX-30
VS
T1
T1
CX-30 vs T1 →
CX-30
CX-30
VS
J7
J7
CX-30 vs J7 →
CX-30
CX-30
VS
V23
V23
CX-30 vs V23 →
CX-30
CX-30
VS
B30
B30
CX-30 vs B30 →
CX-30
CX-30
VS
Taigo
Taigo
CX-30 vs Taigo →
Qashqai
QashqaiDiscontinued
VS
Captur
Captur
Qashqai vs Captur →
Qashqai
QashqaiDiscontinued
VS
T1
T1
Qashqai vs T1 →

CX-30 vs Qashqai 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.