![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() And it houses a nearly full-sized spare tyre. That said, the CX-30 takes a reasonable amount of cargo, and with the rear seats flipped down it easily swallowed a mountain bike and luggage for two on a weekend trip. Where you lose space in the CX-30 is the 295 l boot which is a lot smaller than the CX-5’s 442 l. With its streamlined shape and narrow LED headlamps this handsome compact SUV draws the gaze, and fears that the curvy roof could cramp one’s style prove unfounded: the rear seat is spacious enough for two tall adults, both in leg room and roof height. Where to spend your hard-earned R469k in Mazdaville comes down to a choice between more space or swoopier styling, and as attractive as the CX-5 is, it looks almost fuddy-duddy in comparison to the new CX-30’s sleek, coupé-like lines. The subject of this test, the entry-level Mazda CX-30 2.0 Active model sells for R469,000 while the larger CX-5 2.0 Active is priced just a snip higher at R469,100 - both cars having the same engine and similar spec levels. Size-wise the car’s 4,395mm length slots it neatly between the 4,275mm CX-3 and the 4,550mm CX-5, but the CX-30 is priced almost identically to the larger CX-5. Mazda’s filled it with the CX-30, and yes, it’s a little confusing in terms of where it fits into the hierarchy. Thought there was no gap for an SUV between Mazda’s CX-3 and CX-5? Guess again. ![]() As sitting higher in a car seems to be an irresistible attraction to ever more buyers, SUVs have proliferated almost as fast as cryptocurrencies, offering consumers a bewilderingly diverse automotive choice.Ĭarmakers are capitalising on the demand by wedging new products into ever new niches, whether they exist or not. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |