Mazda CX-30 vs JAC X200 Single 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-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
JAC X200 Single Cab in South Africa

JAC X200 Single Cab

X200 2.8L TDI 80 kW 1.5-tonne Single-cab Diesel 5-Speed Manual Current
ZAR 347,739 ex-showroom
⚡ 80 kW 🔧 240 Nm ⛽ 12.5 km/l
+ Add a 3rd car

Decision summary

Mazda CX-30 vs JAC X200 Single Cab: the short answer

CX-30 and X200 Single Cab are close on the comparable published fields, so buyer priorities should decide.

X200 Single Cab starts ZAR 235,539 cheaper CX-30 from ZAR 539,800 · X200 Single Cab from ZAR 304,261

Five key differences

Exact selected derivatives
Specification CX-30 X200 Single Cab
Maximum Power CX-30121 kW @ 6000 rpm X200 Single Cab80 kW @ 3600 rpm
Maximum Torque CX-30213 Nm @ 4000 rpm X200 Single Cab240 Nm @ 1800-2000 rpm
Engine Size CX-301998 cc X200 Single Cab2771 cc
Combined Fuel Economy CX-3015.2 km/l X200 Single Cab12.5 km/l
Ground Clearance CX-30175 mm X200 Single Cab170 mm

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

What Each Car Gets Right (and Wrong)

Specification evidence leader

CX-30

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

X200 Single Cab

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

Which One's Right for You?

CX-30

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

X200 Single Cab

  • Buyers prioritising the stronger published space and capacity figures

Full Specs, Side by Side

Spec CX-30 X200 Single Cab
Model Introduced Year 2021 2026
Generation First-generation DM-series Mazda CX-30 using seventh-generation Mazda architecture Current South African X200 Single Cab range verified on 7 September 2026
Facelift History South African editions received a focused technology and equipment update in 2024, including the 10.25-inch display and revised connectivity. No later South African facelift was identified in the current official model and brochure material
Facelift Launched Since 2021 Not Applicable
Facelift Version Ending Current Not Applicable
Body Style SUV Forward-cab single cab
Model Year 2026 2026
Production Status Active active
Segment Compact crossover Forward-cab light commercial vehicle
Tare Mass Kg 1340 kg -
Vehicle Type SUV Light commercial vehicle
Spec CX-30 X200 Single Cab
Length 4395 mm Not Officially Disclosed
Width 1795 mm Not Officially Disclosed
Height 1540 mm Not Officially Disclosed
Wheelbase 2655 mm Not Officially Disclosed
Ground Clearance (Default) 175 mm 170 mm
Fuel Tank Capacity 51 l 65 l
Boot/Cargo Space 295 l Not Officially Disclosed
Kerb Weight 1340 kg 1760 kg
Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) 1937 kg 3260 kg
Payload Capacity 597 kg 1500 kg
Towing Capacity 1200 kg 1250 kg
Seating Capacity 5 seats 3 seats
Doors 5 doors Not Officially Disclosed
Minimum Turning Radius 5.7 m 5.75 m
Front Legroom 1058 mm Not Officially Disclosed
Rear Legroom 921 mm Not Applicable
Ground Clearance (With Full Seating Load) - Not Officially Disclosed
Number of Rows - 1 rows
Front Headroom - Not Officially Disclosed
Rear Headroom - Not Applicable

In depth: how these cars differ

This CX-30 and X200 Single 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-30 49 vs X200 Single Cab 44.

Efficiency index: CX-30 59 vs X200 Single Cab 54.

Safety-equipment index: CX-30 96 vs X200 Single Cab 88.

Practicality index: CX-30 55 vs X200 Single Cab 57.

Ownership-cover index: CX-30 not separately scored vs X200 Single 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

CX-30 leads by 4 points

CX-30 and X200 Single Cab are close on the comparable published fields, so buyer priorities should decide.

Evidence leader 65 /100
Lead 4 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 4 points
61
#2

X200 Single Cab

52% source coverage 1 strong categories
Best at Safety 88 Check Performance 44
Performance 44
Efficiency 54
Safety 88
Practicality 57
Performance 24% Safety 22% Practicality 22% Efficiency 17% Ownership 15%
Category leaders What moves the verdict
Performance CX-30 +5 Efficiency CX-30 +5 Safety CX-30 +8 Practicality X200 Single Cab +2

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

X200 Single Cab

Performance 44/100
Efficiency 54/100
Safety 88/100
Practicality 57/100

What the evidence means

Evidence index Mazda CX-30 leads the specification evidence index with 65 pts vs 61 pts for X200 Single Cab

In Hagalu's specification evidence index, CX-30 leads. However, X200 Single Cab may suit buyers prioritising different confirmed fields. Ultimately, the right choice depends on your driving priorities in South Africa.

CX-30 vs X200 Single 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.