Deutschland
France
Nederland
Great Britain
Sverige
Danmark
Suomi
Italia
Polska
EspañaVS
Mazda CX-60 vs Renault Arkana comparison
Compare performance (327 HP vs 143 HP), boot space and price (43,700 £ vs 28,500 £ ) at a glance. Find out which car is the better choice for you – Mazda CX-60 or Renault Arkana?
Mazda CX-60 vs Renault Arkana: Key differences
Renault Arkana
3.8 (6 Reviews)
Customer feedback generally presents the Arkana as an economical, stylish and practical family crossover that suits everyday needs. Owners often praise its fuel economy, space and safety, while noting it isn’t a sporty coupe; a few reports of serious mechanical issues and costly repairs also appear. Opinions are mixed enough that broader reliability trends aren’t fully clear from the available comments.
All details on performance, efficiency, range and trunk space can be found in the technical comparison below – including user reviews for both models.
CX-60
Costs and Efficiency:
Price and efficiency are often the first things buyers look at. Here it becomes clear which model has the long-term edge – whether at the pump, the plug, or in purchase price.
Renault Arkana is substantially cheaper – starting at 28,500 £ , while the Mazda CX-60 costs 43,700 £ . That’s a price difference of around 15,214 £.
Fuel consumption also shows a difference: the Mazda CX-60 uses 3.8 L/100km and is clearly more efficient than the Renault Arkana with 4.7 L/100km. The difference is about 0.9 L/100km.
Arkana
Engine and Performance:
Power, torque and acceleration are the classic benchmarks for car enthusiasts – and here, some clear differences start to show.
When it comes to engine power, the Mazda CX-60 offers substantially more power – delivering 327 HP compared to 143 HP. That’s roughly 184 HP more horsepower.
When accelerating from 0 to 100 km/h, the Mazda CX-60 is substantially quicker – completing the sprint in 5.8 s, while the Renault Arkana takes 10.8 s. That’s about 5 s quicker.
There’s also a difference in torque: the Mazda CX-60 delivers considerably more torque with 550 Nm compared to 205 Nm. That’s about 345 Nm more.
CX-60
Space and Everyday Use:
Cabin size, boot volume and payload all play a role in everyday practicality. Here, comfort and flexibility make the difference.
Both vehicles offer seating for 5 people.
In terms of curb weight, Renault Arkana is clearly lighter – 1,510 kg compared to 1,890 kg. The difference is around 380 kg.
When it comes to payload, the Mazda CX-60 carries markedly more – 612 kg compared to 451 kg. That’s a difference of about 161 kg.
Who wins the race in the data check?
The Mazda CX-60 stands well ahead of its rival 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.
from £43,700
Mazda CX-60
Mazda CX-60
Renault Arkana
Costs and Consumption
View detailed analysis
View detailed analysis
Engine and Performance
View detailed analysis
View detailed analysis
Dimensions and Body
View detailed analysis
View detailed analysis
Mazda CX-60
The Mazda CX-60 pairs sculpted, understated looks with poised handling and a cabin that punches above its class, making long drives feel unexpectedly civilized. For buyers who want a premium feel without the showroom swagger, it's the sort of car that earns respect quietly — and still manages a wink when you push on.
details
Renault Arkana
The Arkana stands out with its striking coupe-SUV design, blending sporty aesthetics with practicality. Its bold silhouette and high ride height offer a unique presence on the road, attracting attention wherever it goes. Inside, the Arkana combines modern technology with comfort, making it a versatile choice for both city driving and weekend getaways.
details
Mazda CX-60
Renault Arkana
Costs and Consumption |
|
|---|---|
|
Price
43,700 - 57,900 £
|
Price
28,500 - 31,900 £
|
|
Consumption L/100km
3.8 - 5.2 L/100km
|
Consumption L/100km
4.7 L/100km
|
|
Consumption kWh/100km
-
|
Consumption kWh/100km
-
|
|
Electric Range
63 km
|
Electric Range
-
|
|
Battery Capacity
-
|
Battery Capacity
-
|
|
co2
85 - 137 g/km
|
co2
106 g/km
|
|
Fuel tank capacity
-
|
Fuel tank capacity
-
|
Dimensions and Body |
|
|---|---|
|
Body Type
SUV
|
Body Type
SUV
|
|
Seats
5
|
Seats
5
|
|
Doors
-
|
Doors
-
|
|
Curb weight
1,890 - 2,055 kg
|
Curb weight
1,510 kg
|
|
Trunk capacity
570 L
|
Trunk capacity
-
|
|
Length
-
|
Length
-
|
|
Width
1,890 mm
|
Width
1,821 mm
|
|
Height
-
|
Height
-
|
|
Max trunk capacity
-
|
Max trunk capacity
-
|
|
Payload
581 - 612 kg
|
Payload
451 kg
|
Engine and Performance |
|
|---|---|
|
Engine Type
Plugin Hybrid, Diesel MHEV
|
Engine Type
Full Hybrid
|
|
Transmission
Automatic
|
Transmission
Automatic
|
|
Transmission Detail
Automatic Gearbox
|
Transmission Detail
Automatic Gearbox
|
|
Drive Type
All-Wheel Drive, Rear-Wheel Drive
|
Drive Type
Front-Wheel Drive
|
|
Power HP
200 - 327 HP
|
Power HP
143 HP
|
|
Acceleration 0-100km/h
5.8 - 8.4 s
|
Acceleration 0-100km/h
10.8 s
|
|
Max Speed
-
|
Max Speed
-
|
|
Torque
450 - 550 Nm
|
Torque
205 Nm
|
|
Number of Cylinders
4 - 6
|
Number of Cylinders
4
|
|
Power kW
147 - 241 kW
|
Power kW
105 kW
|
|
Engine capacity
2,488 - 3,283 cm3
|
Engine capacity
1,598 cm3
|
General |
|
|---|---|
|
Model Year
2,025
|
Model Year
2,025
|
|
CO2 Efficiency Class
B, D, E
|
CO2 Efficiency Class
C
|
|
Brand
Mazda
|
Brand
Renault
|
DriveDuel uses data analysis and artificial intelligence to evaluate vehicle data and create content. Content is regularly reviewed and improved.
The displayed prices are estimates based on German list prices, adjusted to the respective country’s VAT. Country-specific registration taxes are not included. This information is not legally binding.