2020 Hyundai Kona vs Mazda CX-3

What's the difference?

If there was one small SUV that needed improvement, then that’s the old Hyundai Kona. And job well done. The Highlander is now a well-equipped, economical, easy to drive, safe and dynamically capable example of its crossover breed.

But is it class leading? No, far from it. Are there still issues? Urban streetscape and rough-road ride comfort remains poor, there isn’t as much space or versatility as the Highlander’s hefty $38,000 price tag suggests and the styling is starting to tired, especially inside.

So, the latest Kona goes from a segment straggler to a solid mid-field contender. If you like what you see and can see past the failings, then by all means… enjoy. It's finally the small SUV Hyundai should have launched back in 2017.

The Mazda CX-3 Maxx Sport is an excellent choice for an urban car because it’s small size makes it easy to park and maneuver in tight spaces. It’s fun to drive, with an engine that’s got plenty of oomph for around town or even on the open road, and its safety tech is excellent for the city. But you’ll have to make a few compromises. The CX-3’s boot is small, the rear seats have limited legroom, and you might find it will use more fuel than you’d expect from a little car.

So, as a daily driver and as an urban car the CX-3 Maxx Sport scores well.

Is the Mazda CX-3 Maxx Sport the best car for the city, or is there better? Tell us what you think in the comments.

If nothing else, the Kona is a showy piece of kit. So, how altered is new over old? More than the facelift title might suggest.

Gone is the old nose’s triple-layered lighting and grille treatments dominated by a hexagonal grille and large H-oval, for a sleeker if also fussy twin-grille design, but still with a trio of completely contrasting all-LED clusters, giving the 2021version a somewhat perma-smile look that some people prefer but others may find gormless.

Polished alloy wheels and a reshaped rear bumper complete the visual changes outside, while the Highlander grade boasts the aforementioned digital instrumentation, big 10.25-inch touchscreen and higher-quality interior trimmings.

Size-wise, the Kona still seems a little squeezy for its pricing and positioning, feeling not that much bigger than the boxy but roomy Venue, yet quite a lot littler than the larger new Tucson. It remains a fairly tightly packaged small SUV, and in some eyes, lacks the style-driven appeal of more coupe-like crossovers such as the CX-30 and C-HR.

The Mazda CX-3’s name could trick you into thinking it was the same size as a Mazda3 hatch, but it’s a lot smaller and really the SUV version of the tiny Mazda2 and shares that car’s platform.

It’s longer than the Mazda2 and being an SUV you sit higher and have more ground clearance, as well.

The dimensions show the CX-3 to be 4275mm long, 1765mm wide and 1535mm tall.  

That makes it easy to park, but it could be too small for you inside. You can read about the practicality below.

Mazda knows how to make a good-looking car regardless of its size and the little CX-3 has a similar face with the long nose and broad grille, along with the flowing lines and curves of the rest of the Mazda family.

You can pick a Maxx Sport from the higher grades because it doesn’t get small garnishes such the silver trim along the side skirts in the STouring, and it has smaller 16-inch alloy wheels, but at least it doesn’t have hub caps like base grade.

The black plastic side skirts might not have silver linings, but they’re chunky enough to stop other car doors from dinging your doors, and those wheel guards are made of the same stuff. So, if you nudge a wall it’s not going to be an expensive-to-fix metal-on-concrete scrape or start to rust if you leave it.

It’s just hard-wearing, rubbery plastic and so is the front lip, which often bumps into gutters. That dodgem car style of protection is great for the city.

Mazda is probably the best of the affordable brands at making an interior look and feel premium. Even though there are fabric seats, they don’t feel cheap and neither does anything else in there, from the air vents to the steering wheel, it’s a stylish cabin with a great fit and finish.

The Kona isn’t as spacious as you might expect of an SUV based on the i30. It’s not bad, but the Seltos seems to have it licked dimensionally, feeling way roomier. Indeed, a HR-V, too, seems larger, lighter and airier inside.

But in Highlander guise at least, the little luxury touches and improvements to the quality of materials fitted do make for a more-convincing (and certainly better equipped) crossover.

You might not be a fan of the $275 beige perforated leather seats and matching lower-dash and door-card contrasts upgrade (that have a supernatural ability to attract dirt and grime), but it looks premium, with a head-up display (albeit on an old-fashioned plastic screen that rises from behind the binnacle), leather-clad wheel, electrically-adjustable vented and heated front seats, toasty rear outboard seats and large touchscreen.

But while the MY21 changes have brought the modish electronic instrument display, it only changes in colour and not in design or layout of the dials, meaning the whole set-up seems a bit half-baked compared to, say, a Peugeot or VW equivalent. In fact, the whole dash is now looking old and derivative, betraying the Kona’s advancing age. In default white ‘normal’ mode, the speedo and tacho combo are reminiscent of the 2002 Corolla’s.

Never mind. The Highlander’s squishy front seats are really quite comfy, with plenty of support (including lumbar) over longer distances, backed up with the aforementioned powered adjustability (including for height) on both sides, for added luxury appeal. Most rivals – hello Toyota – seem to forget about providing the latter functionality for the front passenger on higher series grades.

There are no complaints about the Kona’s driving position, either. A fine relationship exists between the operator and nicely-grippy steering wheel, that also adjusts of course for both reach and height to provide an unencumbered view of those not-so-new looking dials. Ventilation is first class, there’s sufficient storage for most small items (including a larger bottle in the door pockets), and once you familiarise yourself with the various scattered buttons around the console, they’re in easy reach. Nothing at all intimidating here.

Rear-seat entry is surprisingly good, and there’s ample space for two 178cm-tall people sat behind a same-sized driver and passenger. The backrest is fixed but well placed, while the cushion is sufficiently comfy over short distances.

If you’re game a third person can just fit in between but it will be tight and hair or scalp will scrape the Kona’s ceiling. There’s plenty of storage, a single USB outlet, overhead grab handles, reading lights, a centre armrest with cupholders and one map pocket.

But the boot remains shallow and small for the size of the Kona even though there are improvements to be gleaned here, with a high floor over a space-saver spare reducing normal capacity to just 374 litres (it was 13L less pre-facelift). There isn’t much in the way of versatility either, beyond the prerequisite split/folding rear backrest. Doing this ups the load area availability to 1156L. Nothing slides or removes, unlike a Skoda Karoq's divided trio of rear seats.

All-up, then, the Highlander’s interior is compact, extremely well-screwed together, and of acceptable quality, without a squeak or rattle to be heard. It’s also quieter than before, but there’s no denying that it’s beginning to seem old and dated now, despite the changes brought in by the facelift.

Speaking of which, let’s look underneath the bonnet.

Okay, I reckon the editor of CarsGuide enjoys seeing me test little cars because I’m built like Big Bird and I’m kind of the worst case scenario test for cabin space, you know – if I fit into it, then pretty much anyone will.

Well, even though I’m 1.9m (6'3") tall, with a 2.0m wingspan,  and the CX-3 is only just over 1.7m wide it doesn’t feel like I’m sitting in one of those rides outside a shopping centre when I’m driving. Nope, up front the space is good, with plenty of elbow-, leg-, and headroom.

It’s the back seats which are tight. I can’t sit behind my driving position. And to prove it’s not just because I have 110cm long legs (yes, I measured them), my wife had to move her front passenger seat all the way forward to accommodate my five-year-old son in his car seat behind her.

Okay, he’s pretty lanky, too. But trust me, the CX-3 is much better suited to somebody who’s not going to have people in the back all the time.

If you’re thinking about using the CX-3 as an Uber or a ride share car you’ll be unlikely to get many five-star ratings from your cramped clients.

They’ll also have to leave their luggage at home because the boot is tiny at 264 litres. I tried to fit the CarsGuide pram in, but I almost had to tie a red rag to it because it was hanging out the back - take a look at the images.

On the bright side, the CX-3 is a hatch and that means you can fold those rear seats down, take out the cargo cover and you’ve got way more cargo capacity.

Still we managed to fit our week’s shopping in there and it was just big enough to get our scooters in for trips to the park.

Cabin storage is good, though, with four cupholders (two in the rear and two up front), decent-sized bottle holders in the doors, a map pocket on the back of the front passenger seat and a hidey hole in front of the shifter.

The centre console storage area has a clever design that lets you change the space inside, although, because it’s not fully covered I was a bit hesitant to leave valuables in there. Living in the city, cars are broken into if you leave a $2 coin in plain view.

Back seat passengers will feel like they’ve been forgotten again, with the lack of air vents there, and they won’t find a USB port either (the only USB port is in the front).

Urban folks like me who want wireless charging will be disappointed. The USB ports aren’t the new Type C ones either, and that meant I had to hunt around for an old cable to plug in my iPhone 11.

There are five grades in the Mazda CX-3 range and the Maxx Sport sits a rung above the entry-point into that line-up with a list price of $24,650. That’s for the front-wheel drive version with an automatic transmission, so if you want all-wheel drive you’ll pay another $4K.

If your CX-3 is going to spend the vast majority of its time performing urban duties, the front-wheel drive version (as tested) is the way to go. 

The Maxx Sport doesn’t sit very high in the range, but don’t worry, it has plenty of features. Besides, by stepping up to higher grade you’ll start paying quite a lot of money for pretty much the same car and get stuff you really don’t need.

If you’re going to spend $5K more, you may as well buy the larger CX-30 SUV and get more car for your money.

Coming standard are auto headlights, rain sensing wipers, a leather steering wheel and gear knob, climate control, sat nav, Bluetooth connectivity, a 7.0-inch touch screen, a digital radio, a six-speaker stereo and fabric seats. There’s also some great advanced safety tech you can read about below.

Apple CarPlay and Android Auto are missing here, but you can expect them to be added to the CX-3 in late 2020.

If you’re looking for a model comparison, also check out the Honda HR-V VTi and the Hyundai Kona Go, for about the same money.

The 1999cc 2.0-litre Nu Smartstream features twin cams, 16 valves, dual continuously variable valve timing and a new Atkinson cycle combustion process and two-step variable induction system, to dramatically improve fuel efficiency. More on that a little later.

A maximum of 110kW of power at 6200rpm and 180Nm of torque at 4500rpm is delivered to the front wheels via a CVT, while the latter’s sequential ‘manual’ mode offers what Hyundai calls eight “virtual” gears, accessible with a push forward to go up and a pull of the lever back to go down. We wouldn't bother.

Weighing in at a hefty 1383kg (kerb), the Highlander’s power-to-weight ratio is 79.5kW per tonne.

Why CVT? For a claimed 14 per cent drop in fuel consumption compared to before.

There’s only one engine in the Mazda CX-3 range – the 2.0-litre four-cylinder petrol and it makes 110kW/195Nm.

Some bigger cars have engines which make less grunt and the larger Mazda3 has the same 2.0-litre, so for a small car the CX-3 has more than enough mumbo.

The transmission is a six-speed auto, a real automatic, not a CVT or a DSG, so there’s no roll-back on hills and good acceleration without any drone.

The engine/transmission combo in the CX-3 is a great one. The only issue is, you’ll have to shovel it more fuel than you think. Read about that below.

The old Kona 2.0L FWD was not a very economical engine, so the move to the new combustion process and CVT promised advances. And, for once, the end result did not let us down.

Hyundai claims a combined average of 6.2 litres per 100km – or 8.3L/100km around town and a frankly-outstanding 5.0L/100km in the extra-urban route – for a carbon dioxide emissions average of 148 grams per kilometre. Fitted with a 50L fuel tank, this means a theoretical 800km-plus range between top-ups.

We managed an entirely reasonable 7.4L/100km at the pump. That was a mix of air-con-on two-person inner-city high-density traffic commuting, open-road cruising and some very spirited performance testing. Not bad at all.

This Kona will run on 91 RON standard unleaded as well as a 94 RON E10 ethanol mixture.

Mazda says if you were to stick to just urban driving the front-wheel drive CX-3  should use 7.7L/100km. That’s pretty thirsty for a little car and in my own testing, just driving around town, the trip computer was always hovering around the mid-sevens.

Over a combination of open and urban roads Mazda says fuel economy is better at 6.3L/100km. I did a 25km stint on the motorway after a week of urban driving and that dropped the average fuel consumption from the mid-sevens to 6.0L/100km.

That’s much better.

Unlike the previous, bouncy Kona, our Series II Highlander is smoother, quieter and more civilised, but still quite punchy. It’s like driving the old version but with ear muffs on. We wonder how much of that is down to the better-quality tyres, since the Australian road tuning that Hyundai undertook in 2017 carries over. There are no changes to the MacPherson strut front and torsion beam rear suspension set-up, as far as we can ascertain.

Additionally, you might think that swapping out a six-speed torque-converter auto for a CVT might detract from the driving experience enjoyment. But, surprisingly, no. The latter works especially well with the 2.0L engine. Acceleration from standstill is instant and smooth – if still a bit on the loud side – with speed building up strongly as required. The old boomy exhaust is gone, though you’d never mistake the sound the Smartstream emits for, say, a Honda VTEC unit.

That local Aussie tune continues to pay dividends whether you’re happy to potter about town, schlepp to and from work on a boring old motorway or power up a mountain road.  From a steering and handling point of view, it’s difficult to fault the Highlander on Continental PremiumContact6 235/45R18 rubber. Even on damp roads, it corners faithfully, holds it line as requested and isn’t prone to rack rattle or bump-steer. This is progress, folks. The old Kona was a groaner in such conditions.

Plus, there’s a reassuring feeling of control and feedback from the way the Hyundai corners so confidently, making it a good choice if you’re a keen driver. If you're in the mood, the Kona will grow a set of horns and come out to play.

And while the ride is still too firm around town, it’s nowhere near as punishing, or as jittery, as before. The whole chassis set-up is more in keeping with the Highlander’s upmarket positioning. We’re not saying it’s the last word in refinement or quietness – take a spin in a C-HR or Peugeot 3008 if you want to experience real suspension suppleness – but the revamped Kona is definitely improved.

Coarse highways still send an ever-present drone through to the cabin, though, and like we said, bumps and potholes are still very definitely felt.

Back in the urban jungle, the Kona’s compact dimensions, light steering, big mirrors and helpfully large camera screen make parking this a doddle. It’s easy to place, a cinch for manoeuvrability and responsive enough to throttle requests for zipping into traffic gaps.

Overall, then, big steps forward for Hyundai's small SUV, though the class best like the CX-30 can still rest easy.

People will honk at you. The wing mirrors will take getting used to. There are no front parking sensors and the reversing camera picture isn’t great. But apart from those things, the CX-3 Maxx Sport is great to drive in the city.

Great because the engine is gruntier than it needs to be, and the transmission is smooth in slow traffic, the combination delivering good acceleration when you need to move quickly.

Then there’s the dynamics. The CX-3 is nimble and has good body control, and nobody in my family complained about the ride comfort (and they do, if it’s not good).

Steering is excellent. You’ll feel connected, and the turning circle isn’t bad at 10.6m. Finally, the car's small size makes it easy to park, dodge and weave in the concrete jungle I call home.

Now about the honking. The CX-3 is a little car and it’s odd how other motorists treat small car drivers.

The last time somebody honked at me in the big off-roader I was testing was… never. As for the CX-3, the last time was 10 minutes ago, out the front of my house, while stationery. I kid you not.

The good news is, you’re in an SUV and not something as small as a Mazda2. So, not only does that give you a slightly elevated ride height, but there’s still somebody smaller that you can honk at.

The wing mirrors are a Mazda thing. You’ll notice when you use them that the reflection seems magnified, like Hubble Space telescope magnified. I’m not a fan, but it’s not unsafe and I became more used to it over the week.

The lack of front parking sensors isn’t a biggie with a car this small, but the CX-3 does have quite a long beak and I it was hard sometimes to tell where it ended when parking.

And last, the reversing camera. The picture isn’t great, and I found it almost useless. Luckily, parking sensors are better for maneuvering into a space. Plus, there’s AEB that works while reversing and rear cross traffic alert.

Seriously if you actually reverse into something in the CX-3, you’ve probably achieved the impossible.

The Mazda CX-3 scored the maximum five-star ANCAP rating when it was tested in 2015.

Even the Maxx Sport grade comes equipped with great advanced safety tech. There’s AEB which works forwards at speeds between four-80km/h and in reverse at two-eight km/h car park speeds, blind spot warning, reversing camera, rear parking sensors and rear cross traffic alert.

For child seats there are three top tether points and two ISOFIX points across the second row. 

A space saver spare wheel is under the boot floor.

Hyundai offers a five-year/unlimited kilometre warranty as well as 12 months of roadside assistance, with scheduled servicing at every 12-month or 15,000km intervals.

Published online, the prices for the N-Line service is $319 for each of the first five annual services, then rises to $380 (year six), $305 (year seven), $370 (year eight), $320 (year eight), $365 (year nine) and $660 (year 10). Accurate at the time of publishing, prices vary after that – between $275 and $380 – right up to the 51-year/510,000km service mark!

The CX-3 is covered by Mazda’s five-year/unlimited kilometre warranty.  

Servicing is recommended annually or every 10,000km with the first service capped at $330, then $390, then back to $330, alternating like that all the way through to the fifth.