2019 Kia Rio vs Mazda 2

What's the difference?

The Rio is a well-designed and spacious hatch with excellent multimedia and a classy cabin.

It’s a shame the S and the Sport, with their dated engine and expensive automatic options, can’t live up to the otherwise fantastic road manners on offer.

That leaves the GT-Line as our pick of the range. With its fun-packed drivetrain and expanded active safety offering, it’s hard to look past as the Rio of choice.

My advice is this: If you love the Mazda2 aesthetically, which is totally understandable, spend the extra money on a Maxx.

The Neo might have the Mazda hallmarks - a decent engine, good handling, killer looks and standard safety gear - but it's the extra multimedia and better-quality trim in the Maxx that make it more sense for your dollar.

If you're aiming for under $20,000, also consider a Suzuki Swift GL Navi, which can be optioned with better safety or a Hyundai Accent, which has a bigger boot.

Design is a strong point for the Rio. This generation of car has been imbued with strong Germanic style courtesy of Kia’s skilful design boss.

The boxy shape and well-defined lines make any variant in the range look ready to take on the Volkswagen Polo, and the plastic detail finishes are largely tastefully executed. But it’s a shame about the dorky hubcap-clad steel wheels in the base car.

Inside, the Rio’s cabin is easily one of the best in the segment. It has a primo-looking dash with tasteful patterns and colours. The 7.0-inch touchscreen taking pride of place in the dash lends a modern feel to the unit, and the steering wheel could easily be borrowed from the far more expensive Stinger sedan.

A simple dial cluster and low-seating make the cockpit a reasonably nice place to be in any variant. But as good as it looks, the interior is hard materials galore, so don’t expect stellar comfort for your elbows or knees on long drives.

Manuals make the lack of knee room obvious, as taller folks can be susceptible to bashing their knee on the steering column during clutch operation.

The seats are executed in a tasteful pattern and are reasonably comfortable, but offer hardly any side support, even in the GT-Line.

Other than the GT-Line’s carbon-look touches and bespoke seat trim, there is little difference between the interior design of each variant.

The Rio still easily possesses a better looking and more ergonomic cabin than the Swift, Yaris and Jazz.

What draws most people to the Mazda2 in the first place is its great looks. Mazda don't patronize entry-level buyers with a sub-par econobox that doesn't reflect the rest of its range. It shares all the 'Kodo' design language that has become so prevalent on Australia's roads.

That consists of a tastefully executed exterior, with a sophisticated grille, classy chrome touches and strategically placed smatterings of black plastic. Around the side, there's the brand's signature swooping lines, making for a sporty silhouette, toward a slick and resolved rear end. Few cars in this segment or price point can compete. Too bad about those steel wheels.

Inside, the design is just as good, but it's the materials which unfortunately take a dive. Good stuff includes the multi-textured surfaces, with tastefully applied contrast surfaces of chrome and carbon texture.

The dot-matrix multimedia control panel is a bit of a sore spot and is hardly ergonomic to reach across and use.

There's great switchgear, with a tasteful but simple dash cluster. The wheel is one of the better ones in this class in terms of its look, but the acrylic finish is truly nasty. The same goes for the functional but sub-par touchpoints across the doors and rear seats. A centre-console box for resting your elbow on is a $479.35 option.

One personal gripe, which I've heard from other folks in the office as well as private Mazda2 owners, is the odd placement of the wing-mirrors. They're too close to the driver and seem to give a narrow angle of view, leading to a significant blind spot.

The Rio’s square dimensions lend it a spacious interior, although it is surprisingly bested in this class on boot space by several competitors.

Arm-flailing space and headroom is great for all occupants, but rear passengers get perhaps better legroom than even the driver.

There are well-sized bottle holders in each door, as well as two small ones for front occupants in front of the console box.

Speaking of which, it’s impressive this little car gets a console box at all, because the Jazz and Yaris are left without, while in the Mazda2 it’s a $495 option.

There’s also a decently sized trench in front of the gearknob which houses the USB, AUX and 12v ports. The Rio doesn’t get rear air vents, but it does have a USB power outlet in the back.

Boot space is a decent 325 litres VDA which sounds and looks good, but is bested in this segment by the Honda Jazz (354L), Suzuki Baleno (355L) and Hyundai Accent (370L).

It maxes out at 980L with the rear seats flat, which is almost double the equivalent room in a Suzuki Swift.

The simple fact is, there are far more practical options in this segment. The Mazda2 has a small boot, zero amenities for rear-seat passengers, and limited on-board space.

Front passengers are treated to bottle holders in the doors, a conveniently phone-sized trench under the connectivity ports, a wallet-sized trench next to the analog handbrake and... well that's about it. The seat grants a nice low seating position, but is a bit flimsy, even for this segment.

Back-seat passengers get... not much. The seats have decent contouring to them, but there's only just enough leg and headroom for someone my size (182cm tall). There are no cupholders, no air vents and only a strange square trench atop the transmission tunnel for your loose objects.

Boot space is a rather limited 250-litres in the hatch. It's much smaller than competitors like the Kia Rio and Hyundai Accent, while landing on-par with its arch-nemesis Suzuki Swift.

If you're in love with the 2 and want a larger storage space, you can do so by choosing the sedan at no extra cost. Doing so will grant 440L of space.

The Mazda2 Neo is incredibly cheap.

Not only is it the cheapest Mazda on sale, but it's also one of the cheapest mainstream cars in this class. Arriving at $17,320 (MSRP) for the auto as tested here it seems to be a pretty good value proposition, no matter which way you cut it.

Only, Thera are a few rather glaring issues. The first is the Neo's media screen. It doesn't have one.

You get this lovely, clearly tacked-on, single-line dot-matrix display, controlled through some clumsy buttons and a single dial.

Obviously, it comes with rudimentary connectivity (forget fancy stuff like Apple CarPlay) and is so difficult to use I actually couldn't figure out how to change the clock when daylight saving ticked over.

You won't get alloy wheels, LED lights, automatic high beams, automatic anything (like folding mirrors or headlamps) or leather-bound anything. The idea is you'll immediately notice a difference jumping into a $20,080 automatic Maxx, with its media screen and much better materials.

Thankfully, the Neo does come with some important quality-of-life items that are missing on some competitors, like cruise control and auto-off lights.

You also get city-speed auto emergency braking, which is an important value add at this price. More on that in the safety section.

There are two engines and four transmissions in the Rio Range. But only one combination is likely to put a smile on your face.

The S and Sport are only available with a 1.4-litre four-cylinder non-turbo petrol engine which produces 74kW/133Nm. That sounds competitive on paper, but in real life it fails to deliver.

Both cars come with the same six-speed manual, but the S can be optioned with an ancient four-speed auto at a $2100 premium. This is an antiquated transmission and not good value.

The Sport is available with a six-speed auto at a $3000 premium. It’s a much better transmission and improves the drive experience, but it's expensive for an auto and cannot make up for the engine’s failings.

Up the top of the range is the much more impressive 1.0-litre three-cylinder turbo in the GT-Line.

The GT-Line is not available with a manual and can only be had with a seven-speed dual-clutch transmission, a first for Kia in Australia.

The engine produces 88kW/172Nm but can make use of its peak torque in a much wider band than the 1.4. Combined with the slick-shifting dual clutch it's a much better combination.

Powering the Mazda2 is just one engine, a 1.5-litre non-turbo four cylinder, although the Neo is the only one in the range with the lower-compression de-specified version. It produces 79kW/139Nm.

These power figures are on-par with much of the competition, but in reality (and perhaps as a sad testament to many of the cars in this segment) it feels relatively good.

Part of this is thanks to the six-speed automatic transmission, which is better than a CVT or four-speed auto.

The 1.4-litre manual variants of the S and Sport have a claimed/combined fuel usage figure of 5.6L/100km. The S’ four-speed auto has a claimed figure of 6.2L/100km and the Sport’s six-speed has a figure of 6.0L/100km.

Meanwhile, the three-cylinder turbo offering in the GT-Line with the seven-speed auto has the best claimed figure of the lot, at 5.4L/100km.

In my test of the S and Sport I found a more realistic figure to expect from the 1.4-litre to be between 7.5 and 9.0L/100km. This is generally worse than fuel figures we’ve experienced in cars like the Suzuki Swift and Mazda2.

My test of the GT-Line produced an 8.9L/100km figure, but I was having a lot of fun.

All Rios have 45-litre tanks and drink base-grade 91RON unleaded petrol.

Mazda's claimed combined fuel usage figure for the Neo hatch is 7.2L/100km,and I recorded around 7.6L/100km over a week of testing. That's not far off the claimed figure, but it's a high number to begin with, many larger, turbocharged engines in heavier cars will produce better, or even lower figures.

The 2 drinks standard 91 RON unleaded fuel and has a 44-litre tank.

The Rio has some excellent, and some not-so-excellent driving characteristics.

It’s frustrating, really, because all Rios have a nice wide footprint, solid steering and excellent suspension tuned here in Australia.

The downside is the drivetrains in most variants can’t live up to the promise laid out by the rest of the experience.

The outdated 1.4-litre feels breathless until torque starts to arrive somewhere around 4000rpm. In manual versions, this means you’ll be shuffling gears with annoying frequency to try and keep the power up. In the four-speed auto S you’re left with no choice but to be stuck without power, then suddenly too much power, while the six speed in the Sport helps to smooth this out a little.

All 1.4-litre variants feel slow off the line no matter what you do. Overtaking is a chore.

The new 1.0-litre three-cylinder unit in the GT-Line is a different story altogether. It’s an enthusiastic little engine with a wide power band. It does have a small amount of lag to contend with, but it sounds gruff and has a heap more character than most engines in this class.

It’s not quite on the same level as the Suzuki Swift Sport, but performance-wise, it's a rung above competitors from other brands.

The Mazda2's more traditional engine and transmission, combined with its small footprint and lightweight body, give it a spritely and agile feel on the road.

For better or worse, it's very mechanical, you still feel each gear change, and you're fairly connected to the road.

It beats most competitor set-ups in terms of feel and real-world power application, and has fast, accurate steering, making it easy to dart down alleyways, and park in tight spots in congested cities.

It does so in decent comfort, but this is one noisy little car. Road noise and engine roar (from as little as 2500rpm) reach the cabin easily, and its lightweight bodywork gives it a bit of a tinny feeling.

The 2 is fun to drive, thanks to a low seating position and a suspension setup lets you feel closer to the road than something like a Kia Rio or Toyota Yaris, but the stiffness of the ride can also cause it to become unsettled over bumps.

As a driver's car, it's one of the better ones in this segment, alongside the Suzuki Swift. You're left with few options, though – given the Yaris, Rio and Accent are all more comfortable, but feel rather lethargic in comparison.

It's really up to personal taste whether you prefer refinement over fun, as you'll have to spend much more to get both.

One big drawcard of the Mazda2 is its inclusion of city-speed auto emergency braking (AEB) across the range, even here in the Neo.

Few competitors bother to pack this one key active safety item into their kit.

Regular safety refinements on the 2 include six airbags and the standard suite of electronic stability controls. There are two ISOFIX child seat mounting points on the rear outer seats. Sorry, long-range drivers, a space-saver spare resides under the boot floor.

All variants of the 2 carry a maximum five-star ANCAP safety rating since 2015.

The Mazda2 is facing increasingly stiff competition on this front from the Suzuki Swift, which now comes with a suite of active safety items on the GL Navi with safety pack ($18,990). For only $1670 more than the Neo, you'll get freeway-speed AEB, active cruise control, lane-departure warning (LDW), and lane-keep assist. Not bad.

One of the Rio’s strong points has always been Kia’s fantastic seven-year unlimited kilometre warranty. It far outstrips the now-standard five-year warranties offered by other brands.

While other brands are upping the pace, the Rio still has the best warranty in this class.

The same can’t be said for ownership costs, sadly. The Rio only needs to be serviced once a year or every 15,000km, and costs an average of $390.71 per year for 1.4-litre variants, or a significantly more expensive $484.57 per year for the GT-Line.

Mazda offers a five-year, unlimited-kilometre warranty across its range, which is on par for most manufacturers. The Kia Rio leads this segment with its seven-year, unlimited kilometre promise.

Mazda matches its five-year warranty with five years of capped price servicing. Service intervals occur at 10,000km or 12 months, whichever occurs first. The program has a not-unreasonable average yearly cost of $305.60 and has reasonably priced extras like brake fluid and cabin air filters.