How to choose between Mazda 3 Axela and CX-30?

[CharlieRose]

In terms of price, the Mazda 3 is slightly cheaper. For potential owners who are not sensitive to power, the 1.5L version would be more economical. Due to its styling design, the Mazda 3 has slightly insufficient rear seating space, so those with rear seat requirements should consider carefully.

[DeHazel]

I've always driven sports cars, and the Mazda3 (Axela) feels even more exhilarating to me—powerful acceleration, precise handling, and rock-solid stability in corners like it's glued to the road, plus it's super fuel-efficient for city commutes. In comparison, the CX-30 is an SUV with a higher seating position and wider visibility, but its steering feels a bit softer, making it better suited for rain or snow conditions, though slightly less impressive on long trips. Both share the same reliable engine, with real-world fuel consumption around 6-7L/100km for the Mazda3 and about 7-8L for the CX-30—it depends on whether you prioritize spirited driving or comfort and peace of mind. My advice: don’t just focus on specs; really stomp on the gas during a test drive to experience that 'Jinba Ittai' (horse-and-rider-as-one) magic. Personally, I’d pick the Mazda3 for aggressive mountain runs, but the CX-30 is the more versatile choice for everyday ease and stress-free driving.