Mazda CX-5 vs Nissan Patrol

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 Patrol Discontinued model
Mazda CX-5 in South Africa

Mazda CX-5

2.0 Carbon Edition Auto FWD Petrol 6-Speed Automatic Current
ZAR 688,400 ex-showroom
⚡ 121 kW 🔧 213 Nm ⛽ 14.5 km/l
VS
Nissan Patrol in South Africa

Nissan Patrol

5.6 V8 Platinum 4x4 7AT Petrol 7-Speed Automatic Discontinued model
ZAR 1,949,900 last listed
Discontinued model Verified historical specifications remain visible for owner and used-car comparisons.
⚡ 298 kW 🔧 560 Nm ⛽ 9.0 km/l
＋ Add a 3rd car

Decision summary

Mazda CX-5 vs Nissan Patrol: the short answer

Patrol holds a noticeable catalogue-index lead over CX-5.

Recorded price context CX-5: current from ZAR 570,500 · Patrol: last listed from ZAR 1,579,900

Five key differences

Exact selected derivatives
Specification CX-5 Patrol
Maximum Power CX-5121 kW @ 6000 rpm Patrol298 kW
Maximum Torque CX-5213 Nm @ 4000 rpm Patrol560 Nm
Engine Size CX-51998 cc Patrol5552 cc
Combined Fuel Economy CX-514.5 km/l Patrol9.0 km/l
Ground Clearance CX-5200 mm Patrol272 mm

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

Evidence for Nissan Patrol 5.6 V8 Platinum 4x4 7AT

Source type: Hagalu catalogue record

What Each Car Gets Right (and Wrong)

CX-5

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

Patrol

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

Which One's Right for You?

CX-5

  • Buyers prioritising the lower published fuel or energy use

Patrol

  • Buyers prioritising the stronger published powertrain figures
  • Buyers prioritising the more complete listed safety equipment
  • 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-5 Patrol
Model Introduced Year 2017 2013
Generation Second-generation KF-series Mazda CX-5, current outgoing South African range Not confirmed
Facelift History The second generation arrived in 2017 and received a substantial update from 2021. An all-new replacement is scheduled to reach South Africa on 1 August 2026, while this current range remains on sale. 2019 mid-cycle facelift with revised front fascia and updated technology
Facelift Launched Since 2017 2019
Facelift Version Ending Current Not confirmed
Body Style SUV Not confirmed
Model Year 2026 Not confirmed
Production Status Active Not confirmed
Segment Mid-size family SUV Not confirmed
Tare Mass Kg 1575 kg 2660 kg
Vehicle Type SUV Not confirmed
Spec CX-5 Patrol
Length 4575 mm 5165 mm
Width 1845 mm 1995 mm
Height 1680 mm 1940 mm
Wheelbase 2700 mm 2850 mm
Ground Clearance (Default) 200 mm 272 mm
Fuel Tank Capacity 56 l 140 l
Boot/Cargo Space 438 l 490 l
Kerb Weight 1575 kg 2660 kg
Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) 2065 kg 3560 kg
Payload Capacity 490 kg Not confirmed
Towing Capacity 1000 kg 3500 kg
Seating Capacity 5 seats 8 seats
Doors 5 doors Not confirmed
Minimum Turning Radius 5.95 m 6.2 m
Front Legroom 1041 mm Not confirmed
Rear Legroom 1007 mm Not confirmed

In depth: how these cars differ

This CX-5 and Patrol 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-5 48 vs Patrol 97.

Efficiency index: CX-5 56 vs Patrol 37.

Safety-equipment index: CX-5 88 vs Patrol 98.

Practicality index: CX-5 61 vs Patrol 91.

Ownership-cover index: CX-5 not separately scored vs Patrol 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

Patrol leads by 21 points

Patrol holds a noticeable catalogue-index lead over CX-5.

Evidence leader 84 /100
Lead 21 points
Data 78% source coverage
84
#1 Evidence leader

Patrol

78% source coverage 3 strong categories
Best at Safety 98 Check Efficiency 37
Performance 97
Efficiency 37
Safety 98
Practicality 91
Leads by 21 points
63
#2

CX-5

78% source coverage 1 strong categories
Best at Safety 88 Check Performance 48
Performance 48
Efficiency 56
Safety 88
Practicality 61
Performance 24% Safety 22% Practicality 22% Efficiency 17% Ownership 15%
Category leaders What moves the verdict
Performance Patrol +49 Efficiency CX-5 +19 Safety Patrol +10 Practicality Patrol +30

Moderate difference in the source-backed catalogue index.

Why this score View full breakdown
Evidence-index leader

Patrol

Performance 97/100
Efficiency 37/100
Safety 98/100
Practicality 91/100

CX-5

Performance 48/100
Efficiency 56/100
Safety 88/100
Practicality 61/100

What the evidence means

Evidence index Nissan Patrol leads the specification evidence index with 84 pts vs 63 pts for CX-5

In Hagalu's specification evidence index, Patrol leads. However, CX-5 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-5
CX-5
VS
NX
NX
CX-5 vs NX →
CX-5
CX-5
VS
X3
X3
CX-5 vs X3 →
CX-5
CX-5
VS
ATTO 8
ATTO 8
CX-5 vs ATTO 8 →
CX-5
CX-5
VS
GLC
GLC
CX-5 vs GLC →
CX-5
CX-5
VS
SEALION 7
SEALION 7
CX-5 vs SEALION 7 →
CX-5
CX-5
VS
Tank 500
Tank 500
CX-5 vs Tank 500 →
Patrol
PatrolDiscontinued
VS
NX
NX
Patrol vs NX →
Patrol
PatrolDiscontinued
VS
X3
X3
Patrol vs X3 →

CX-5 vs Patrol 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.