Compare performance (141 HP vs 150 HP), boot space and price (30,000 £ vs 26,400 £ ) at a glance. Find out which car is the better choice for you – Mazda CX-5 or VW T-Roc?
All details on performance, efficiency, range and trunk space can be found in the technical comparison below – including user reviews for both models.
In the fiercely competitive world of SUVs, the Mazda CX-5 and the VW T-Roc constantly vie for the spotlight, each bringing its own unique blend of design, performance, and innovation. As consumers demand more from their vehicles, these two contenders make a compelling case. Let's dive into the details that set them apart and define their appeal.
Both the Mazda CX-5 and VW T-Roc are designed to impress. The CX-5, with a body length of 4575 mm, width of 1845 mm, and height of 1680 mm, commands a strong presence on the road. Its aesthetic is characterized by sleek lines and a bolder silhouette.
The T-Roc, slightly more compact, measures up at 4236 mm to 4271 mm in length, with a width ranging from 1811 mm to 1819 mm and a height of 1527 mm to 1584 mm. This makes it a more agile companion for urban settings, yet it doesn't skimp on the dashing charm VW is known for.
The Mazda CX-5 offers a range of petrol MHEV and diesel engines, boasting power outputs between 150 and 194 HP, distributed via either manual or automatic transmissions. Its acceleration from 0 to 100 km/h varies between 9.2 to 11.1 seconds, reflecting diverse performance options tailored to different driving styles.
On the other hand, the VW T-Roc offers petrol and diesel engines with power spread from 115 to 300 HP. Notably, it includes the high-performance 300 HP variant. The T-Roc caters to performance enthusiasts with a striking acceleration of 6.8 seconds to a blistering 4.9 seconds for 0 to 100 km/h, and a top speed reaching 250 km/h.
Efficiency is key, with the CX-5 showing fuel consumption ranging from 5.6 to 7.6 L/100 km, while emitting CO2 between 146 and 173 g/km. The T-Roc competes closely, with fuel consumption between 4.7 and 8.5 L/100 km, and CO2 emissions spanning 125 to 194 g/km.
For families and adventurers alike, space is a crucial factor. The CX-5 presents itself with a trunk capacity of 510 to 522 liters, ensuring ample room for weekend getaways or daily errands. Its seating capacity comfortably accommodates five, making it an ideal choice for family ventures.
The T-Roc, offering seating for four to five and a trunk size varying from 284 to 445 liters, is slightly more limited in storage yet perfect for those who value a compact yet capable SUV.
When it comes to technical innovations, both vehicles are well-equipped. The Mazda CX-5 is a testament to sleek integration of safety and entertainment tech, emphasizing a driver-centric cockpit. The VW T-Roc, known for its tech-savvy interior, incorporates the latest in connectivity and digital instrumentation, ensuring drivers are always in control and informed.
The Mazda CX-5 and VW T-Roc both have their strengths and cater to slightly different market niches. Whether it's the rugged, spacious integrity of the CX-5 or the sporty, dynamic appeal of the T-Roc, both SUVs stand out in their versatility and innovation. The choice ultimately depends on your lifestyle needs and driving preferences. As SUVs continue to captivate a global audience, these models are proof that great things indeed come in stylish, powerful packages.
When it comes to price and running costs, the biggest differences usually appear. This is often where you see which car fits your budget better in the long run.
VW T-Roc is moderately cheaper – starting at 26,400 £ , while the Mazda CX-5 costs 30,000 £ . That’s a price difference of around 3,553 £.
Fuel consumption also shows a difference: the VW T-Roc uses 5.5 L/100km and is noticeably more efficient than the Mazda CX-5 with 7 L/100km. The difference is about 1.5 L/100km.
Power, torque and acceleration say a lot about how a car feels on the road. This is where you see which model delivers more driving dynamics.
When it comes to engine power, the VW T-Roc offers marginally more power – delivering 150 HP compared to 141 HP. That’s roughly 9 HP more horsepower.
When accelerating from 0 to 100 km/h, the VW T-Roc is somewhat quicker – completing the sprint in 8.9 s, while the Mazda CX-5 takes 10.5 s. That’s about 1.6 s quicker.
There’s also a difference in torque: the VW T-Roc delivers only slightly more torque with 250 Nm compared to 238 Nm. That’s about 12 Nm more.
Whether family car or daily driver – which one offers more room, flexibility and comfort?
Both vehicles offer seating for 5 people.
In terms of curb weight, VW T-Roc is a bit lighter – 1,465 kg compared to 1,629 kg. The difference is around 164 kg.
Looking at boot space, the VW T-Roc offers marginally more boot space – 475 L compared to 466 L. That’s a difference of about 9 L.
When it comes to payload, the Mazda CX-5 carries slightly more – 601 kg compared to 515 kg. That’s a difference of about 86 kg.
The VW T-Roc comes out clearly ahead in the objective data comparison.
This result only shows which model scores more points on paper – not which of the two cars feels right for you.
The Mazda CX-5 blends sporty handling with a refined, premium interior, making everyday driving feel engaging and comfortable. It pairs stylish design and thoughtful cabin materials with user-friendly tech to deliver a well-rounded compact SUV that suits drivers who want more driver involvement without sacrificing practicality.
details
The Volkswagen T‑Roc is a stylish, well-proportioned crossover that blends hatchback agility with SUV presence. It delivers a comfortable cabin, user-friendly tech and a composed ride, making it a sensible choice for buyers who want practicality with a bit of character.
details
Costs and Consumption |
|
|---|---|
|
Price
30,000 - 39,500 £
|
Price
26,400 - 38,600 £
|
|
Consumption L/100km
7 - 7.5 L/100km
|
Consumption L/100km
5.5 - 6.3 L/100km
|
|
Consumption kWh/100km
-
|
Consumption kWh/100km
-
|
|
Electric Range
-
|
Electric Range
-
|
|
Battery Capacity
-
|
Battery Capacity
-
|
|
co2
157 - 169 g/km
|
co2
126 - 143 g/km
|
|
Fuel tank capacity
-
|
Fuel tank capacity
-
|
Dimensions and Body |
|
|---|---|
|
Body Type
SUV
|
Body Type
SUV
|
|
Seats
5
|
Seats
4 - 5
|
|
Doors
-
|
Doors
-
|
|
Curb weight
1,629 - 1,671 kg
|
Curb weight
1,465 - 1,539 kg
|
|
Trunk capacity
466 L
|
Trunk capacity
284 - 475 L
|
|
Length
-
|
Length
-
|
|
Width
1,860 mm
|
Width
1,811 - 1,828 mm
|
|
Height
-
|
Height
-
|
|
Max trunk capacity
-
|
Max trunk capacity
-
|
|
Payload
566 - 601 kg
|
Payload
368 - 515 kg
|
Engine and Performance |
|
|---|---|
|
Engine Type
Petrol MHEV
|
Engine Type
Petrol, Petrol MHEV
|
|
Transmission
Automatic
|
Transmission
Manuel, Automatic
|
|
Transmission Detail
Automatic Gearbox
|
Transmission Detail
Manual Gearbox, Dual-Clutch Automatic
|
|
Drive Type
Front-Wheel Drive, All-Wheel Drive
|
Drive Type
Front-Wheel Drive
|
|
Power HP
141 HP
|
Power HP
115 - 150 HP
|
|
Acceleration 0-100km/h
10.5 - 10.9 s
|
Acceleration 0-100km/h
8.9 - 12.3 s
|
|
Max Speed
-
|
Max Speed
-
|
|
Torque
238 Nm
|
Torque
200 - 250 Nm
|
|
Number of Cylinders
4
|
Number of Cylinders
3 - 4
|
|
Power kW
104 kW
|
Power kW
85 - 110 kW
|
|
Engine capacity
2,488 cm3
|
Engine capacity
999 - 1,498 cm3
|
General |
|
|---|---|
|
Model Year
2025
|
Model Year
2,024 - 2,025
|
|
CO2 Efficiency Class
F
|
CO2 Efficiency Class
E, D
|
|
Brand
Mazda
|
Brand
VW
|
Deutschland
France
Nederland
Great Britain
Sverige
Danmark
Suomi
Italia
Polska
Česko
España