At Mazda, the proliferation of SUVs results in a more generous offer for customers, but also brings its share of confusion. Since the CX-5 and the CX-50 compete in the same category, customers have set their sights on the less expensive of the two. Consequently, and although the CX-50 is more modern and well designed, sales of this model last year were five times lower than those of the CX-5. This, established since 2013, is available in a range of versions, equipped with the same engines as the CX-50. Fortunately, the enthusiasm will have been stronger in 2024, sales of the CX-50 having almost doubled compared to 2023 for the first nine months of the year. But we are still far from the success of the CX-5.
In addition to its more generous living space, the real distinctions of the CX-50, without equivalent on the CX-5 side, were therefore reduced only to the Meridian version, focused on off-road driving and offering a more adventurous approach. A version which, moreover, is not as convincing as the Wilderness version of the Subaru Outback, which makes it bite the dust.
Photo: Antoine Joubert
That said, things change for 2025 with the addition of a hybrid engine, which is not offered on the CX-5. An ace up its sleeve which will result in a new surge for the CX-50, now equipped to compete with the Ford Escape, Honda CR-V, Hyundai Tucson and Toyota RAV4, which also feature hybrid engines.
Shy distinctions
The hybrid-powered CX-50 is distinguished by a unique wheel design, as well as the addition of a mid-range Kuro variant, which could become the most popular of the three proposals. Because between a GS-L version and a GT which exceeds the psychological threshold of $50,000, the Kuro version is the one which represents the best price/equipment ratio. Opt for a GS-L or Kuro version and you'll benefit from 17-inch wheels, which will further optimize the already exceptional fuel efficiency. However, the GT version benefits from 19-inch rims, certainly prettier and which provide better stability, but at the cost of firmer damping due to the narrowness of the sides.
Photo: Antoine Joubert
Moreover, the changes are symbolic. You'll notice the “Hybrid” emblems housed on the front fenders, but that sums up the aesthetic distinctions compared to other versions. Naturally, the advantages of the CX-50 remain, meaning that we benefit from a rich and extremely well assembled environment, also covered in very noble materials (especially on the GT version). On this account, Mazda is ahead of most of its rivals, including the Subaru Outback with which comparison is inevitable.
More spacious than the CX-5, the CX-50 nevertheless pales in this regard compared to the leaders in the category. The rear seats are generous, but although there is no transmission shaft here, Mazda unsurprisingly retains a passage tunnel limiting comfort for a fifth occupant. Then, in terms of cargo space, the maximum volume is 1,560 liters, while the Toyota RAV4 is 20% more spacious (1,951 liters).
Photo: Antoine Joubert
Toyota under the hood
Under the hood houses a 2.5-liter 4-cylinder engine paired with two electric motors, one of which is located on the rear axle, which allows you to enjoy four-wheel drive. This 219 horsepower engine is borrowed from Toyota, which uses it in particular in the RAV4 Hybrid. A long-time partner with Mazda, which shares the American CX-50 assembly plant (where the Toyota Corolla Cross is also manufactured), Toyota is a strong ally for the Hiroshima firm.
It should be understood that Mazda's vehicle fleet now only includes the CX-70/90 as electrified vehicles, following the abandonment of the MX-30. It is therefore crucial that Mazda reduces its average fuel consumption rating, explaining why the introduction of hybrid technology in a compact SUV is necessary. That said, it will also benefit customers, who are likely to adopt it massively, especially seeing the difference in consumption with the two other mechanical proposals.
Photo: Antoine Joubert
On paper, the CX-50 hybrid would consume 31% less than the base 2.5 liter, and 35% less than the turbocharged engine, when powered with premium gasoline. So, taking into account that a liter of gasoline costs on average $1.75, and calculating an annual trip of 20,000 km, you would save $1,050 each year in fuel. A calculation carried out in comparison with the base engine, since by carrying it out in relation to the turbo engine, and considering an additional cost of $0.25 per liter, the difference compared to the latter would be roughly 1,700 $ annually.
You should know that the hybrid engine option compared to the base engine costs $3,000 (+ taxes), or $500 (+ taxes) compared to the turbo. Needless to say, it's easy to make this extra outlay profitable, especially if you drive a lot. And don't forget the financing or leasing rate (if applicable), which adds a few hundred dollars to the actual price.
Photo: Antoine Joubert
Funny feeling
Audiblely, you will literally get the impression of a Toyota vehicle. With this same high tone when you are driving in electric mode and at low speed, and with this characteristic sound of the brand's 4 cylinders. However, this mechanism nestles under the hood of a vehicle that is more dynamic in driving than the Toyota RAV4. And although we add some 80 kg to it, we don't feel this mass when driving. Obviously, it does not have the same fiery acceleration as the turbo engine, but the instantaneous torque combined with more generous power than with the ordinary 4-cylinder (186 hp) makes it possible to obtain very good driving pleasure. There is in fact only the all-wheel drive, completely separate, which is not as efficient as that of the other versions. That said, for a majority of buyers, it won't make any difference.
The CX-50 is therefore the most fun compact SUV with hybrid engine available. And the good news is that you will easily be able to maintain an average rating below 6 L/100 km, having been able to make a trip from Montreal to Lake Champlain while maintaining a rating of 5.4 L/100 km. 100km. It goes without saying that winter conditions, wind and greater ground resistance will increase this average, in the same way as with a RAV4 or a CR-V.
In conclusion, the consumer is left with a new attractive alternative, hoping that Mazda also chooses to graft this mechanism under the hood of other products of the brand. After all, if the CX-50 shares its platform with the CX-30 and the Mazda3, it's a sign that anything is possible!
