@ Mazda Motor Corporation
@ Škoda Auto a.s. / Škoda Storyboard
VS

Mazda CX-80 vs Skoda Kodiaq – Which model is better for everyday use?

Two cars, one duel: Mazda CX-80 meets Skoda Kodiaq.
Which one wins in performance, efficiency and value for money? Find out now!

CX-80 @ Mazda Motor Corporation

An In-Depth Comparison: Mazda CX-80 vs. Skoda Kodiaq

The automotive landscape is continuously evolving, with manufacturers pushing the boundaries of technology, performance, and innovation. In the competitive mid-size SUV segment, two contenders are making waves: the Mazda CX-80 and the Skoda Kodiaq. Both vehicles cater to families and adventure seekers alike, offering ample space, advanced features, and a range of powertrains. However, which one takes the lead in this head-to-head comparison? Let’s dive into the details.

Kodiaq @ Škoda Auto a.s. / Škoda Storyboard

Design and Dimensions

With a length of 4995 mm, the Mazda CX-80 is larger than the Skoda Kodiaq, which measures 4758 mm. The width of the CX-80 at 1890 mm slightly surpasses the Kodiaq's 1864 mm, while the height is comparable, with the CX-80 at 1714 mm and the Kodiaq between 1679-1683 mm. This additional size in the CX-80 translates to a more spacious cabin and potentially better cargo capacity. The CX-80 also boasts a modern, sleek design consistent with Mazda's KODO philosophy, while the Kodiaq presents a more practical, angular aesthetic typical of Skoda’s design language.

CX-80 @ Mazda Motor Corporation

Powertrains and Performance

Both SUVs offer a variety of engine options that appeal to different types of drivers. The Mazda CX-80 features two engines: a powerful 327 HP Plug-in Hybrid and a 254 HP Diesel MHEV. For those focused on sustainability, the electric range of up to 60 km is a notable advantage. The CX-80 excels in acceleration, achieving 0-100 km/h in just 6.8 seconds for the hybrid variant, while its maximum speed can reach 195 km/h.

On the other hand, the Skoda Kodiaq's lineup includes a 204 HP Plugin Hybrid, a 193 HP Petrol MHEV, and various petrol and diesel options totaling four engines. The Kodiaq offers impressive flexibility with different power outputs, achieving 0-100 km/h in a respectable 7.8 seconds. However, in terms of performance metrics, the CX-80 takes the edge with higher maximum power and quicker acceleration.

Kodiaq @ Škoda Auto a.s. / Škoda Storyboard

Fuel Efficiency and Emissions

The Mazda CX-80 demonstrates exceptional fuel efficiency, particularly with its plug-in hybrid, consuming just 1.6 L/100km. The diesel variant, while less efficient than its hybrid counterpart, still performs well at 5.7 L/100km. In contrast, the Kodiaq’s fuel consumption varies significantly depending on the engine choice, with the most economical diesel model consuming around 5.3 L/100km. Both vehicles receive a 'B' efficiency class rating, but the CX-80's hybrid evidently stands out as a more eco-friendly option with lower CO2 emissions, registering at 35 g/km compared to Kodiaq's higher emissions range.

CX-80 @ Mazda Motor Corporation

Interior Space and Features

Inside, both SUVs prioritize comfort and versatility. The Mazda CX-80 offers seating for up to seven passengers, making it a great choice for larger families or those needing extra space. However, the Skoda Kodiaq provides exceptional trunk capacity, boasting between 745 to 910 liters, compared to the CX-80's 258 liters. This is a considerable advantage for those who need a generous amount of cargo space for long road trips.

In terms of technology, both models are equipped with the latest infotainment systems. While Mazda's interface is often praised for its user-friendly layout, Skoda offers innovative features like a virtual cockpit, which enhances the driver's experience. Both vehicles also come with a full suite of safety features, including advanced driver assistance systems.

Kodiaq @ Škoda Auto a.s. / Škoda Storyboard

Conclusion: Which One Reigns Supreme?

While both the Mazda CX-80 and Skoda Kodiaq cater to similar markets, their strengths vary significantly. The CX-80 excels in performance and efficiency, making it the choice for those prioritizing driving dynamics and sustainability. On the other hand, the Kodiaq shines with its vast interior space and practicality, appealing particularly to families who need room for both passengers and cargo.

Ultimately, the decision will hinge on individual preferences: whether one leans towards performance and innovation or practicality and spaciousness, both vehicles present fantastic options in the competitive SUV market.

Here’s where it gets real: The technical differences in detail

Costs and Efficiency:

Price and efficiency are key factors when choosing a car – and this is often where the real differences emerge.

Skoda Kodiaq has a noticeable advantage in terms of price – it starts at 36800 £, while the Mazda CX-80 costs 48200 £. That’s a price difference of around 11366 £.

Fuel consumption also shows a difference: Skoda Kodiaq manages with 0.40 L and is therefore clearly more efficient than the Mazda CX-80 with 1.60 L. The difference is about 1.20 L per 100 km.

As for range, the Skoda Kodiaq performs convincingly better – achieving up to 123 km, about 62 km more than the Mazda CX-80.

Engine and Performance:

Under the bonnet, it becomes clear which model is tuned for sportiness and which one takes the lead when you hit the accelerator.

When it comes to engine power, the Mazda CX-80 has a slightly edge – offering 327 HP compared to 265 HP. That’s roughly 62 HP more horsepower.

In acceleration from 0 to 100 km/h, the Skoda Kodiaq is hardly perceptible quicker – completing the sprint in 6.30 s, while the Mazda CX-80 takes 6.80 s. That’s about 0.50 s faster.

In terms of top speed, the Skoda Kodiaq performs hardly perceptible better – reaching 231 km/h, while the Mazda CX-80 tops out at 219 km/h. The difference is around 12 km/h.

There’s also a difference in torque: Mazda CX-80 pulls distinct stronger with 550 Nm compared to 400 Nm. That’s about 150 Nm difference.

Space and Everyday Use:

Whether family car or daily driver – which one offers more room, flexibility and comfort?

Seats: Mazda CX-80 offers clearly perceptible more seating capacity – 7 vs 5.

In curb weight, Skoda Kodiaq is noticeable lighter – 1684 kg compared to 2131 kg. The difference is around 447 kg.

In terms of boot space, the Skoda Kodiaq offers convincingly more room – 910 L compared to 258 L. That’s a difference of about 652 L.

In maximum load capacity, the Skoda Kodiaq performs barely noticeable better – up to 2105 L, which is about 134 L more than the Mazda CX-80.

When it comes to payload, Mazda CX-80 a bit takes the win – 650 kg compared to 545 kg. That’s a difference of about 105 kg.

Who comes out on top?

Overall, the Skoda Kodiaq shows itself to be leaves the rival little chance and secures the title of DriveDuel Champion.
It convinces with the more balanced overall package and proves to be the more versatile choice for everyday use.

from about £36,800
Kodiaq @ Škoda Auto a.s. / Škoda Storyboard

Skoda Kodiaq

  • Engine Type : Plugin Hybrid, Petrol, Petrol MHEV, Diesel
  • Transmission : Automatic
  • Drive Type : Front-Wheel Drive, All-Wheel Drive
  • Power HP : 150 - 265 HP
  • Consumption L/100km : 0.4 - 8.2 L
  • Electric Range : 113 - 123 km
details

Mazda CX-80

The Mazda CX-80 exemplifies a perfect blend of sophisticated design and dynamic performance, making it a standout model in the SUV market. With its sleek lines and contemporary interior, it delivers a sense of luxury typically reserved for higher-end marques. This model also offers impressive handling and a comfortable ride, ensuring an enjoyable driving experience in various conditions.

details
cx-80_meltingcopper_germany_act-5 @ Mazda Motor Corporation
cx-80_meltingcopper_germany_act-10 @ Mazda Motor Corporation
cx-80_homura_germany_int-2 @ Mazda Motor Corporation

Skoda Kodiaq

5 (1)
rate

The Skoda Kodiaq blends sensible practicality with surprising style, so families and weekend adventurers get roomy comfort without looking like a moving van. It feels calm and composed on the road, packs clever storage and user-friendly tech, and manages to deliver a near-premium vibe without the pretension.

details
KODIAQ_ueberarbeitet_2022_112967 @ Škoda Auto a.s. / Škoda Storyboard
KODIAQ_ueberarbeitet_2022_112975 @ Škoda Auto a.s. / Škoda Storyboard
KODIAQ_ueberarbeitet_2022_112969 @ Škoda Auto a.s. / Škoda Storyboard
KODIAQ_45646 @ Škoda Auto a.s. / Škoda Storyboard
KODIAQ_ueberarbeitet_2022_112984 @ Škoda Auto a.s. / Škoda Storyboard

Top Car Comparisons

@ Škoda Auto a.s. / Škoda Storyboard
Skoda Kodiaq
@ Dacia / Renault Group Media
Dacia Bigster
VS
The Skoda Kodiaq is the sensible grown-up: roomy, cleverly packaged and quietly refined for family life, while the Dacia Bigster bangs the value drum — massive interior and tough price tag, but fewer niceties. Choose the Kodiaq for long-term polish and smarter detailing; pick the Bigster if you …
@ CUPRA / SEAT S.A.
CUPRA Terramar
@ Škoda Auto a.s. / Škoda Storyboard
Skoda Kodiaq
VS
The CUPRA Terramar is the sharper, sportier contender with taut handling and a premium design that puts fun at the top of the shopping list. By contrast, the Skoda Kodiaq plays the sensible family card — cavernous interior, clever storage and everyday practicality — making it the smarter buy if you …
Mazda CX-80
Skoda Kodiaq
CX-80 @ Mazda Motor Corporation
Kodiaq @ Škoda Auto a.s. / Škoda Storyboard

Costs and Consumption
Price
48200 - 60200 £
Price
36800 - 49600 £
Consumption L/100km
1.6 - 5.8 L
Consumption L/100km
0.4 - 8.2 L
Consumption kWh/100km
-
Consumption kWh/100km
-
Electric Range
61 km
Electric Range
113 - 123 km
Battery Capacity
-
Battery Capacity
19.70 kWh
co2
35 - 151 g/km
co2
9 - 186 g/km
Fuel tank capacity
70 - 74 L
Fuel tank capacity
45 - 58 L

Dimensions and Body
Body Type
SUV
Body Type
SUV
Seats
7
Seats
5
Doors
5
Doors
5
Curb weight
2131 - 2240 kg
Curb weight
1684 - 1970 kg
Trunk capacity
258 L
Trunk capacity
745 - 910 L
Length
4995 mm
Length
4758 - 4761 mm
Width
1890 mm
Width
1864 mm
Height
1714 mm
Height
1663 - 1683 mm
Max trunk capacity
1971 L
Max trunk capacity
1945 - 2105 L
Payload
649 - 650 kg
Payload
460 - 545 kg

Engine and Performance
Engine Type
Plugin Hybrid, Diesel MHEV
Engine Type
Plugin Hybrid, Petrol, Petrol MHEV, Diesel
Transmission
Automatic
Transmission
Automatic
Transmission Detail
Automatic Gearbox
Transmission Detail
Dual-Clutch Automatic
Drive Type
All-Wheel Drive
Drive Type
Front-Wheel Drive, All-Wheel Drive
Power HP
254 - 327 HP
Power HP
150 - 265 HP
Acceleration 0-100km/h
6.8 - 8.4 s
Acceleration 0-100km/h
6.3 - 9.7 s
Max Speed
195 - 219 km/h
Max Speed
205 - 231 km/h
Torque
500 - 550 Nm
Torque
250 - 400 Nm
Number of Cylinders
4 - 6
Number of Cylinders
4
Power kW
187 - 241 kW
Power kW
110 - 195 kW
Engine capacity
2488 - 3283 cm3
Engine capacity
1498 - 1984 cm3

General
Model Year
2024
Model Year
2024 - 2025
CO2 Efficiency Class
B, E
CO2 Efficiency Class
B, F, G, E
Brand
Mazda
Brand
Skoda

Similar Comparisons

@ Mercedes-Benz Group Media
Mercedes GLB
@ Škoda Auto a.s. / Škoda Storyboard
Skoda Kodiaq
VS
The Mercedes GLB dresses up compact practicality in a premium suit, with crisp tech and city-friendly manners, while the Skoda Kodiaq goes full-on family hauler, offering cavernous space and sensible value. Choose the GLB for style and badge appeal; pick the Kodiaq if you need seats, luggage and a …
@ Škoda Auto a.s. / Škoda Storyboard
Skoda Kodiaq
@ Volkswagen AG / VW Media
VW Touran
VS
In a head-to-head comparison of the Skoda Kodiaq and the VW Touran, both models showcase exceptional versatility but cater to slightly different audiences. The Kodiaq, with its bold SUV design and spacious three-row seating, is perfect for families and adventure seekers, while the Touran offers a …
@ Škoda Auto a.s. / Škoda Storyboard
Skoda Kodiaq
@ Volkswagen AG / VW Media
VW Tayron
VS
The Skoda Kodiaq is the no-nonsense family hauler: cavernous boot, clever storage, and a sensible price that makes sense when you’ve got kids and a budget. The VW Tayron trades some of that practicality for sharper looks, a firmer ride and smarter tech — pick it if you want a touch more polish and …
@ Škoda Auto a.s. / Škoda Storyboard
Skoda Kodiaq
@ Volvo Cars
Volvo XC90
VS
In the realm of family SUVs, the Skoda Kodiaq and Volvo XC90 stand as formidable contenders. The Skoda Kodiaq entices with its impressive practicality, value for money, and versatile seven-seat configuration, making it an appealing choice for budget-conscious families. On the other hand, the Volvo …
@ Hyundai Motor Company
Hyundai Tucson
@ Škoda Auto a.s. / Škoda Storyboard
Skoda Kodiaq
VS
In the competitive realm of mid-sized SUVs, the Hyundai Tucson flaunts its modern design and advanced safety features, making it a compelling choice for tech-savvy drivers. Meanwhile, the Skoda Kodiaq distinguishes itself with generous interior space and a versatile seating arrangement, appealing …
@ Škoda Auto a.s. / Škoda Storyboard
Skoda Kodiaq
@ Toyota Motor Corporation
Toyota RAV4
VS
In the fiercely competitive SUV segment, the Skoda Kodiaq and Toyota RAV4 stand out for their impressive combination of space, comfort, and technology. While the Kodiaq boasts a more versatile interior with configurable seating options, the RAV4 offers a reputation for reliability and superior fuel …
@ Mazda Motor Corporation
Mazda CX-80
@ Volvo Cars
Volvo XC90
VS
In the showdown between the Mazda CX-80 and the Volvo XC90, both vehicles offer a compelling blend of luxury and practicality. While the CX-80 impresses with its sporty handling and sleek design, the XC90 shines with its superior safety features and spacious interior. Ultimately, the choice may …
@ Mazda Motor Corporation
Mazda CX-80
@ Volkswagen AG / VW Media
VW Tayron
VS
In the latest face-off between the Mazda CX-80 and the VW Tayron, drivers will find compelling features that cater to different preferences. The CX-80 boasts a sleek design with a focus on driver engagement and a spacious interior, while the Tayron impresses with its technology and practicality. …
What drive types are available for the Mazda CX-80?

The Mazda CX-80 is offered with All-Wheel Drive.

The prices and data displayed are estimates based on German list prices and may vary by country. This information is not legally binding.