Luxury compact SUV review - compare Mazda CX-30 G25 Astina, Audi Q3 35 TFSI and Volvo XC40 T4 Momentum

For this test, we'll be dividing our ride experience into two parts: first, my thoughts, and second, comments from our guest reviewer, Peter Parnusis. Peter won the competition with CarsGuide's Tools on Shed's podcast, in which he joined us to test these three SUVs. And given some of his ideas, we might have to bring him back!

Peter was the perfect candidate for this test because he's thinking about downsizing his Calais to a small SUV like one of these. He told us he was thinking about the Mazda CX-30, wasn't sure about the XC40, and wasn't considering the Audi Q3.

Off-road testing has not been done as these models are all front wheel drive (2WD) - instead we have focused mainly on urban and suburban environments where this type of vehicle typically spends most of its time.

Ground clearance didn't matter much, though Mazda sits significantly lower (175mm ground clearance) and Audi sits slightly higher (191mm) while the XC40 is in curb jump territory (211mm).

If turning circle diameter is important to you – you may be a city dweller or someone who needs a lot of U-turns or reverse parking – Mazda may be your best bet: it has a comparatively compact 10.6m turning radius compared to Volvo at 11.4m and Audi , which, it would seem, has a too large turning radius of 11.8 m.

Here we go!

Audi Q3 35 TFSI

The new Audi Q3 is an SUV that looks much more mature than the previous generation, with a more advanced and comfortable driving experience for everyone in the cabin than its competitors in this test.

Its ride was well balanced both around town and on the open road where it felt really balanced in corners and the driver was rewarded with steering that provided good feel and straightness while the action was never too heavy or too easy. The driving wasn't necessarily exciting, but it was very predictable, grippy and enjoyable, with no unexpected surprises.

Riding the Q3 was enjoyable both in town and on the open road.

Its engine may be low in power and torque in this company, judging by the power of the engine, but it never felt too underdeveloped - even with four adults on board, it was adequate in its acceleration, although there was a slight lag when turning on and off. throttle.

The dual-clutch automatic might not be to everyone's tastes, but we found the six-speed transmission to perform much better than other Audis we've driven before, with little hesitation at low speeds. He shifted quickly between gears and deftly held gears when he needed to rely on engine torque rather than upshifting for fuel economy. There was a very small fine to pay based on our fuel figures, but it's so small that we wouldn't consider it a deal breaker.

The Q3's ease of use, combined with a very pleasant driving style, stunning refinement and top-notch comfort, meant that Audi was our testers' choice when it came to overall driving pleasure and comfort.

In the city, he stood out for his composure, although a little stiff on the rear axle on very sharp bumps. While it was excellent on the highway, slamming into the high-speed groove with the utmost ease – being tuned for the Autobahn is to be commended for that.

Our guest tester Peter agreed that the Audi had the fewest flaws - its biggest flaw was the overly narrow steering wheel, which he admitted was a "nitpick".

He said he found the seats very comfortable, the interior room was huge, and he liked that the doors had a good weight and closed with a soothing thump. He praised the multimedia and instrument panels, which complemented the excellent interior space, which was both well-equipped and luxurious.

Peter said he thought the Q3 ran very well and found the engine to be responsive when the turbo kicks in.

“Overall, I think the Audi Q3 is the best option with the fewest compromises. In fact, when looking for a new car, I didn't look to Audi (or BMW/Mercedes, for that matter) because of the ridiculous three-year warranty - but actually driving changed my mind. I'm seriously considering it," he said.

Mazda CX-30 G25 Astina

Ultimately, this test was all about trying to figure out if the Mazda CX30 lives up to the standards of other cars in terms of luxury, performance, sophistication - and frankly, it just didn't.

This is partly due to the suspension setup, which is much stiffer than the competition, and as a result, you feel a lot more small bumps in the road surface - bumps that have not been noticed on others. Now, maybe you don't care. If ride comfort isn't even factored into your equations when it comes to a new car - and there's a good chance you may have already owned a Mazda and that's why you're considering this car - then you might find the ride perfectly acceptable. . But for us - in this luxury compact SUV test - it wasn't enough.

Mazda's suspension was much stiffer than the competition.

The positive side of its stiff suspension setup is cornering because it feels quite punchy in corners. It's really fun, the steering is excellent in this situation because it offers the driver road feedback unmatched by its competitors. However, it had the worst brake pedal feel and progression, feeling both woody and spongy.

In addition, the rumble at start-up, the smoothness of the idle, and the overall level of chassis vibration and crunching couldn't be compared to the rest.

The 2.5-liter engine is big for a car of this size, but it doesn't have the same level of smoothness and power as the other turbocharged cars in this test. But it feels quicker and more nimble due to a tuned chassis and a good-revving engine, and while the transmission tends to upshift in normal driving, switching to Sport mode gives it a little more freedom to explore the rev range. If sportiness is your epitome of luxury, the CX-30 will impress you. But if you view it the way we do, with the refinement, comfort, quietness and luxury you expect from a compact SUV in this price range, the CX-30 just doesn't quite fit.

Another little annoyance is the driver's side mirror, which is not convex and makes it very difficult to see what's behind you on the driver's side. Also, the mirrors are quite large, so if you're coming out of an intersection, it might be difficult to see you because the windows are also quite small.

Peter's thoughts on the CX-30 were both in the back seat and in driving style.

“Mazda had terrible rear legroom and headroom, which is very important in an SUV. And the infotainment screen is fine, but it's a bit small and not touch sensitive."

The CX-30 feels fast and agile due to its tuned chassis and revving engine.

However, as Peter readily pointed out, the CX-30 was the only one with a head-up display that worked great, and having the exact same HUD on every CX-30 in the lineup is a big plus. for this.

He felt that the fit and finish were excellent, the dashboard was clean and well presented, and most importantly, "it drove like a Mazda".

“I had a 2011 Mazda 6 and felt the same way driving that car. Very impressive. However, the brakes just didn't work."

Volvo XC40 T4 Momentum

The Volvo XC40 felt like the softest and most passenger-oriented of the trio, with its suspension geared more towards comfort and ride than bump control. The suspension isn't as tacky when you change direction, with a bit more offset and body lean, but in day-to-day riding, city, speed bumps, back alleys, it was supple and comfortable.

The suspension of the Volvo XC40 is more focused on comfort and smoothness than on overcoming bumps.

It felt taller and heavier than its rivals in this test (both are true), but it had direct, light steering that got quicker in its responses the faster you went. At lower speeds, it's easy to predict if its response will be a bit vague, while at higher speeds it will tick the box for those who like to lean the steering wheel into corners.

The engine in the XC40 was spicy, especially in dynamic driving mode. It was the only car of the trio to offer multiple driving modes, including an off-road mode. Our test was strictly paved, and the engine and transmission performed well, with enough power to avoid problems in all situations.

Compared to the Mazda, the Volvo engine was much more advanced and demanding when needed. The automatic transmission behaved well at low speeds and never made mistakes at higher speeds.

The engine in the XC40 was spicy, especially in dynamic driving mode.

However, the gear selector requires more effort than necessary and, as mentioned earlier, it can be very annoying when you're shifting between drive and reverse, meaning parking and city maneuvering can be frustrating.

The overall quietness and level of sophistication of the Volvo was excellent. It did feel like a luxury to the driver and other passengers for the most part, while it didn't offer the excitement of the CX-30 or the level of balance and control around corners from Audi.

Guest columnist Peter had similar concerns about the switch, calling it "finicky" and something that "makes life a lot harder than it needs to be".

Peter also found the back seat to be very hard and uncomfortable to the point that a long drive would be "undesirable". But he said he thought the interior space was excellent and the instrumentation and infotainment systems were "really good with sharp and crisp graphics."

When it came to driving, he thought the brakes were too grippy and hard to work smoothly. But this is the only complaint about Volvo's driving style.