Mazda CX-30 vs Mahindra Scorpio-N

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-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
Mahindra Scorpio-N in South Africa

Mahindra Scorpio-N

Z8L 4x4 AT Adventure Diesel 6-Speed Automatic Current
ZAR 699,999 ex-showroom
⚡ 129 kW 🔧 400 Nm ⛽ 14.5 km/l
＋ Add a 3rd car

Decision summary

Mazda CX-30 vs Mahindra Scorpio-N: the short answer

Scorpio-N has a modest catalogue-index lead, while CX-30 remains close.

Scorpio-N starts ZAR 49,801 cheaper CX-30 from ZAR 539,800 · Scorpio-N from ZAR 489,999

Five key differences

Exact selected derivatives
Specification CX-30 Scorpio-N
Maximum Power CX-30121 kW @ 6000 rpm Scorpio-N128.6 kW @ 3500 rpm
Maximum Torque CX-30213 Nm @ 4000 rpm Scorpio-N400 Nm
Engine Size CX-301998 cc Scorpio-N2184 cc
Combined Fuel Economy CX-3015.2 km/l Scorpio-N14.5 km/l
Ground Clearance CX-30175 mm Scorpio-N187 mm

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

What Each Car Gets Right (and Wrong)

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
Specification evidence leader

Scorpio-N

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

Scorpio-N

  • 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

Spec CX-30 Scorpio-N
Model Introduced Year 2021 Not Available
Generation First-generation DM-series Mazda CX-30 using seventh-generation Mazda architecture Current local listing
Facelift History South African editions received a focused technology and equipment update in 2024, including the 10.25-inch display and revised connectivity. Not listed by current South African source page.
Facelift Launched Since 2021 Original current-generation version
Facelift Version Ending Current Current
Body Style SUV SUV
Model Year 2026 Current
Production Status Active Active
Segment Compact crossover SUV
Tare Mass Kg 1340 kg 1825-2070 kg
Vehicle Type SUV SUV
Spec CX-30 Scorpio-N
Length 4395 mm 4662 mm
Width 1795 mm 1918 mm
Height 1540 mm 1905 mm
Wheelbase 2655 mm 2750 mm
Ground Clearance (Default) 175 mm 187 mm
Fuel Tank Capacity 51 l 57 l
Boot/Cargo Space 295 l 460 l
Kerb Weight 1340 kg -
Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) 1937 kg -
Payload Capacity 597 kg -
Towing Capacity 1200 kg -
Seating Capacity 5 seats 7 seats
Doors 5 doors -
Minimum Turning Radius 5.7 m -
Front Legroom 1058 mm -
Rear Legroom 921 mm -

In depth: how these cars differ

This CX-30 and Scorpio-N comparison uses the exact South African derivatives selected above. 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 Scorpio-N 69.

Efficiency index: CX-30 59 vs Scorpio-N 60.

Safety-equipment index: CX-30 96 vs Scorpio-N 90.

Practicality index: CX-30 55 vs Scorpio-N 78.

Ownership-cover index: CX-30 not separately scored vs Scorpio-N 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

Scorpio-N leads by 10 points

Scorpio-N has a modest catalogue-index lead, while CX-30 remains close.

Evidence leader 75 /100
Lead 10 points
Data 54% source coverage
75
#1 Evidence leader

Scorpio-N

54% source coverage 2 strong categories
Best at Safety 90 Check Efficiency 60
Performance 69
Efficiency 60
Safety 90
Practicality 78
Leads by 10 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 Scorpio-N +20 Efficiency Scorpio-N +1 Safety CX-30 +6 Practicality Scorpio-N +23

Moderate difference in the source-backed catalogue index.

Why this score View full breakdown
Evidence-index leader

Scorpio-N

Performance 69/100
Efficiency 60/100
Safety 90/100
Practicality 78/100

CX-30

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

What the evidence means

Evidence index Mahindra Scorpio-N leads the specification evidence index with 75 pts vs 65 pts for CX-30

In Hagalu's specification evidence index, Scorpio-N 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 African models and comparable body styles.

CX-30
CX-30
VS
T1
T1
CX-30 vs T1 →
CX-30
CX-30
VS
Taigo
Taigo
CX-30 vs Taigo →
CX-30
CX-30
VS
Captur
Captur
CX-30 vs Captur →
CX-30
CX-30
VS
SEALION 5 DM-i
SEALION 5 DM-i
CX-30 vs SEALION 5 DM-i →
CX-30
CX-30
VS
J7
J7
CX-30 vs J7 →
CX-30
CX-30
VS
ALCAZAR
ALCAZAR
CX-30 vs ALCAZAR →
Scorpio-N
Scorpio-N
VS
T1
T1
Scorpio-N vs T1 →
Scorpio-N
Scorpio-N
VS
Taigo
Taigo
Scorpio-N vs Taigo →

CX-30 vs Scorpio-N questions

There is no universal winner. Use the comparison table to match the exact South African derivatives 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.