Mazda CX-30 Volkswagen T-Roc

Two cars on the same rows. The figures are all here, with their sources, so you can read them yourself and decide what matters.

Comparison table

16 of these rows differ. They sit at the top. Figures come straight from the makers, indicative. A bullet (•) marks a differing row.
Mazda CX-30 Volkswagen T-Roc
Model years (differs) 2019-now 2017-now
From (indicative) (differs) € 31,490 € 31,990
Status Available Available
Fuel Petrol Petrol
RatingsRating figures: higher is better (scale 0-100). What each category measures is explained on the methodology page.
Reliability (differs) 80/100 73/100
Efficiency (differs) 62/100 68/100
Practicality (differs) 70/100 75/100
Value retention (differs) 68/100 n/a
Sustainability (environmental impact) 40/100 40/100
Specifications
Body style (differs) SUV Crossover
Power (hp) (differs) 122 116
0–100 km/h (s) (differs) 10.6 10.8
Top speed (km/h) (differs) 186 189
Length (mm) (differs) 4395 4236
Width (mm) (differs) 1795 1819
Height (mm) (differs) 1540 1573
Kerb weight (kg) (differs) 1395 1304
Max. towing weight, braked (kg) (differs) 1200 1500
Boot (l) (differs) 430 445
Seats 5 5
Doors 5 5
Consumption WLTP (l/100km) 6.2 6.2

OEM datasheets + RDW + ADAC (see methodology); rating and reference dates are listed per figure

Show sources and reference dates per rating
  • Mazda CX-30 · Reliability: ADAC breakdown statistics 2025 (segment, Mazda platform since 2019) + aggregated owner reviews + RDW recall data · reference date 2026-05-18
  • Mazda CX-30 · Efficiency: Owner-reported l/100km vs WLTP 6.2 (public forums); naturally aspirated engine pushes up motorway consumption · reference date 2026-05-18
  • Mazda CX-30 · Practicality: Boot 430 l + 1,200 kg braked towing weight (B-SUV comparison, manufacturer figure) · reference date 2026-05-18
  • Mazda CX-30 · Value retention: Residual-value indication from valuation guides, B-SUV segment (historical average) · reference date 2026-05-18
  • Mazda CX-30 · Sustainability (environmental impact): WLTP consumption manufacturer figure petrol + exhaust emissions (Euro 6d standard on current models), reference date 2026-05-21 · reference date 2026-05-21
  • Volkswagen T-Roc · Reliability: ADAC breakdown statistics 2025 (compact SUV) + aggregated owner reviews + RDW recall data · reference date 2026-05-18
  • Volkswagen T-Roc · Efficiency: Owner-reported real-world l/100km vs WLTP (public forums) · reference date 2026-05-18
  • Volkswagen T-Roc · Practicality: Boot volume + seat height + editorial segment comparison · reference date 2026-05-18
  • Volkswagen T-Roc · Value retention: Insufficient stable residual-value data for this model year in NL/DE · reference date 2026-05-18
  • Volkswagen T-Roc · Sustainability (environmental impact): WLTP consumption manufacturer figure petrol + exhaust emissions (Euro-6d standard on current models), reference date 2026-05-21 · reference date 2026-05-21

Who they are

A short write-up on each car, one paragraph apiece. We describe them on their own terms rather than picking a winner.

Profile · e-Skyactiv-G 2.0 M Hybrid (DM, modeljaar 2024)

Mazda CX-30

Compact SUV between the Mazda2 and CX-5, on Mazda's Skyactiv-Vehicle Architecture. The 2.0 e-Skyactiv-G with 24V mild-hybrid delivers 122 hp and returns WLTP 6.2 l/100km. Strong points are the finish and the Mazda reliability reputation; weak point the motorway consumption.

Profile · facelift (2022-2024)

Volkswagen T-Roc

Compact crossover on the MQB-A0 platform, facelifted in 2022 and since then unchanged in production. Entry is the 1.0 TSI with 116 hp; 445 litre boot, braked towing weight 1,500 kg. WLTP consumption 6.2 l/100km (manufacturer figure, not measured by us). Indicative starting price; consult the official configurator for a current figure.

Continue

+ Compare with another model

Both cars are already filled in — just add a third to compare.

No tax or financial advice. Every figure shows its source and reference date. Always compare with an independent adviser and the official source. Source: OEM datasheets + RDW + ADAC (see methodology); rating and reference dates are listed per figure.