Mazda CX-60 vs Ford Tourneo Custom

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-60 in South Africa

Mazda CX-60

2.5 Individual Edition Auto AWD Petrol 8-Speed Automatic Current
ZAR 902,000 ex-showroom
⚡ 141 kW 🔧 261 Nm ⛽ 13.0 km/l
VS
Ford Tourneo Custom in South Africa

Ford Tourneo Custom

2.0L SWB Titanium X 8AT Diesel 8-Speed Automatic Current
ZAR 1,278,500 ex-showroom
⚡ 125 kW 🔧 390 Nm ⛽ 13.5 km/l
＋ Add a 3rd car

Decision summary

Mazda CX-60 vs Ford Tourneo Custom: the short answer

CX-60 and Tourneo Custom are close on the comparable published fields, so buyer priorities should decide.

CX-60 starts ZAR 285,300 cheaper CX-60 from ZAR 790,200 · Tourneo Custom from ZAR 1,075,500

Five key differences

Exact selected derivatives
Specification CX-60 Tourneo Custom
Maximum Power CX-60141 kW @ 6000 rpm Tourneo Custom125 kW
Maximum Torque CX-60261 Nm @ 3000 rpm Tourneo Custom390 Nm
Engine Size CX-602488 cc Tourneo Custom1996 cc
Combined Fuel Economy CX-6013.0 km/l Tourneo Custom13.5 km/l
Ground Clearance CX-60178.8 mm Tourneo Custom130 mm

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

Independent editorial assessment

Hagalu editorial ratings

When a variant is selected, its rating out of five applies only to that exact derivative; a model-range review is not inherited. Editorial ratings are separate from the Specification Evidence Index out of 100 and are not customer ratings.

Mazda CX-60

2.5 Individual Edition Auto AWD

Hagalu editorial rating Not yet rated

No complete editorial rating is published for this exact variant. This is not a zero score.

How Hagalu rates cars

Ford Tourneo Custom

2.0L SWB Titanium X 8AT

Hagalu editorial rating
4.2/5

Desk research · Exact variant

Hagalu Editorial Team ·

Editorial assessment, not a customer rating. Not road-tested for this review.

Read the review and score breakdown

Not yet rated means a complete review is not published; it does not mean the vehicle scored zero. Read the rating methodology.

What Each Car Gets Right (and Wrong)

CX-60

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

Tourneo Custom

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-60

  • Buyers prioritising the more complete listed safety equipment

Tourneo Custom

  • 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-60 Tourneo Custom
Model Introduced Year 2023 Current local generation year not confirmed
Generation First-generation KH-series Mazda CX-60 on Mazda's Large Product architecture Current South African Tourneo Custom listing; generation notes should be kept tied to the local model year and confirmed derivative data.
Facelift History Mazda introduced the CX-60 locally in 2023, added the six-cylinder Takumi in 2024 and revised suspension and drivetrain calibration for the 2025 update. Model-year updates can affect trim, wheels, screens, safety equipment and colours. Use the latest South African price list when checking a specific vehicle.
Facelift Launched Since 2023 Original current-generation version
Facelift Version Ending Current Current
Body Style SUV MPV
Model Year 2026 2026
Production Status Active active
Segment Premium mid-size SUV Passenger van
Tare Mass Kg 1470 kg Kerb not published; GVM 3200 kg
Vehicle Type SUV MPV
Color Note - Colour availability changes by model year, production batch and dealer stock, check the current colour selector before ordering.
Dealer Stock Note - Flagship grade in the South Africa lineup
Wheelbase Type - Short wheelbase
Spec CX-60 Tourneo Custom
Length 4745 mm 5050 mm
Width 1890 mm 2032 mm
Height 1687.5 mm 1979 mm
Wheelbase 2870 mm 3100 mm
Ground Clearance (Default) 178.8 mm 130 mm
Fuel Tank Capacity 58 l 50 l
Boot/Cargo Space 477 l 482 l
Kerb Weight 1470 kg 1559 kg
Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) 2342 kg 3200 kg
Payload Capacity 872 kg 454 kg
Towing Capacity 1500 kg 2500 kg
Seating Capacity 5 seats 8 seats
Doors 5 doors 5 doors
Minimum Turning Radius 5.85 m 5.6 m
Front Legroom 1058 mm 1048 mm
Rear Legroom 990 mm 890 mm
Ground Clearance (With Full Seating Load) - 125 mm
Number of Rows - 3 rows
Front Headroom - 996 mm
Rear Headroom - 957 mm

In depth: how these cars differ

This CX-60 and Tourneo Custom 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-60 59 vs Tourneo Custom 66.

Efficiency index: CX-60 51 vs Tourneo Custom 57.

Safety-equipment index: CX-60 98 vs Tourneo Custom 93.

Practicality index: CX-60 68 vs Tourneo Custom 70.

Ownership-cover index: CX-60 not separately scored vs Tourneo Custom 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

Tourneo Custom leads by 2 points

CX-60 and Tourneo Custom are close on the comparable published fields, so buyer priorities should decide.

Evidence leader 72 /100
Lead 2 points
Data 71% source coverage
72
#1 Evidence leader

Tourneo Custom

71% source coverage 2 strong categories
Best at Safety 93 Check Efficiency 57
Performance 66
Efficiency 57
Safety 93
Practicality 70
Leads by 2 points
70
#2

CX-60

81% source coverage 1 strong categories
Best at Safety 98 Check Efficiency 51
Performance 59
Efficiency 51
Safety 98
Practicality 68
Performance 24% Safety 22% Practicality 22% Efficiency 17% Ownership 15%
Category leaders What moves the verdict
Performance Tourneo Custom +7 Efficiency Tourneo Custom +6 Safety CX-60 +5 Practicality Tourneo Custom +2

Close catalogue match. Buyer priorities should decide the outcome.

Why this score View full breakdown
Evidence-index leader

Tourneo Custom

Performance 66/100
Efficiency 57/100
Safety 93/100
Practicality 70/100

CX-60

Performance 59/100
Efficiency 51/100
Safety 98/100
Practicality 68/100

What the evidence means

Evidence index Ford Tourneo Custom leads the specification evidence index with 72 pts vs 70 pts for CX-60

In Hagalu's specification evidence index, Tourneo Custom leads. However, CX-60 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-60
CX-60
VS
UX
UX
CX-60 vs UX →
CX-60
CX-60
VS
GLA
GLA
CX-60 vs GLA →
CX-60
CX-60
VS
D90
D90
CX-60 vs D90 →
CX-60
CX-60
VS
Staria
Staria
CX-60 vs Staria →
CX-60
CX-60
VS
Trafic Passenger
Trafic Passenger
CX-60 vs Trafic Passenger →
CX-60
CX-60
VS
Land Cruiser Prado
Land Cruiser Prado
CX-60 vs Land Cruiser Prado →
Tourneo Custom
Tourneo Custom
VS
UX
UX
Tourneo Custom vs UX →
Tourneo Custom
Tourneo Custom
VS
GLA
GLA
Tourneo Custom vs GLA →

CX-60 vs Tourneo Custom 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.