Hyundai Tucson v Mazda CX-5 2015 Comparison

Had the ix35 competed in the medium SUV segment, it would have had a fight on its hands. The popular category plays home to some of the biggest-selling SUVs in the Australian new-car market, including the Nissan X-TRAIL (10,552 sales), Toyota RAV4 (10,705) and the subject of our comparison, the Mazda CX-5 (14,712).

Winner: Mazda.

In that respect – and now in terms of physical size, too – the new Hyundai Tucson (launched in July 2015) is now a closer rival than it's ever been. The Tucson's engine range offers very similar output figures across its two petrol / one diesel line-up. There are four grades to choose from, and pricing and equipment offerings are lineball.

If history accounts for anything, the Mazda stands in good stead.

Winner: Mazda.

But the Hyundai doesn't quite lose the numbers game when it comes to practicality. The Tucson offers considerably more luggage space, its 488-litre boot trouncing the CX-5's 403 litres. Flip the 60:40 split-fold seats down in either, however, and the Mazda claws back ground, offering 1560 litres against the Hyundai's 1478. The Hyundai has a full-size matching alloy wheel under the boot floor where the Mazda gets a space saver.

Inside the cabin, we found the CX-5 offered slightly more rear-seat headroom, but was otherwise nearly identical where shoulder and legroom were concerned. The CX-5's back seats also felt more cosseting than the Tucson's, though the backrest is quite upright. Conversely, the Tucson's larger door aperture certainly made getting in and out easier.

Up front, it was even closer. The CX-5's seats still felt a little cushier, but both SUVs offered similar levels of seat support. The Tucson provides electronically-adjustable lumbar support as a bit of a sweetener, but to be truthful it didn't make much difference.

Both the Mazda and Hyundai feature tilt and reach adjustment for the steering column, and the usual level of (manual) seat adjustment. They were each considerate in terms of driver ergonomics and visibility – though we note that little kids may find the view out of the backseat's windows easier from the CX-5.

The CX-5 range kicks off from $27,190 (plus on-road costs) for the manual Maxx, adding $2000 for the six-speed auto as tested. The Tucson, on the other hand, begins a little dearer at $27,990 for the manual Active. A six-speed auto will add $2500 to the bargain.

At this end of the spectrum both the CX-5 and Tucson are front-wheel drive only. Our test model adds a little more equipment in the form of the Active X grade, and is priced accordingly from $32,990 (again plus ORCs). You might say that's unfair, but when you consider the additions over the CX-5 Maxx include little more than 18-inch alloy wheels, 'leather' upholstery, foglights and reversing sensors, there's really not a lot in it.

Besides, the fundamentals remain the same. And if you strip it back – focussing on like for like basics such as packaging, dynamics and performance – there's very little the added equipment is going to do to sway the argument. If you think it does, it's probably best you consider the entry-grade Tucson Active.

Metallic paint costs $595 across the board on the Tucson but is included as a no-cost option on all CX-5 colours bar Soul Red.

The Hyundai Tucson range spans $27,990 to $45,490 while the Mazda CX-5 starts at $27,190 and tops-out at $50,610. All prices are exclusive of on-road costs, delivery fees and whichever accessories they rope you into at the dealership.

Winner: Hyundai (just).

When it comes to after-sales support it's the Hyundai that has an ace up its sleeve. The Tucson arrives with a five-year / unlimited kilometre warranty against the CX-5's three-year / unlimited distance offering, and also includes 10 years (!) of roadside assistance against the Mazda's 'user pays' deal ($68.10 p.a.).

But, there's a catch… The Hyundai must be serviced at the Hyundai dealership in line with the lifetime capped-price servicing scheme that's included as part of the deal. It's a no-brainer, really. Though we should point out that the Mazda also offers capped-price servicing for up to 16 years or 160,000km, whichever comes first.

Both the Hyundai and the Mazda must visit the dealership annually, though the Tucson can go further between visits. Hyundai say you can drive up to 15,000km between check-ups where Mazda stipulates a 10,000km service interval.

We touched on fuel economy earlier, but emphasise that real-world testing saw the Tucson average 10.3L/100km against the CX-5's 9.1. The differences saw the Hyundai adhere more closely to its 'claimed' figure, but only just.

In wet conditions it was the CX-5 that held a straight-line performance lead over the Tucson. The 0-60km/h run saw took the Mazda 5.1 seconds against the Hyundai's 5.3. The margin grew in the dash to 100km/h with the Japanese model managing a one-second lead over the South Korean [Ed: yes, we know some Tucsons are built in the Czech Republic] at 11.2 seconds. Though we note that tyre choice may have handicapped the Tucson, with a little wheel-spin ruining the day.

Tyre selection also did no favours for the Tucson's braking performance. In spite of offering terrific pedal modulation, and an anti-lock and stability control combination that initially felt cleaner than the Mazda, the Hyundai took a whopping 18.8m to come to a stop from 60km/h, a full two metres more than the CX-5. For reference, the Hyundai is fitted with 225/55-series Kumho Cruger tyres on 18-inch alloy wheels where the Mazda wears 225/65-series Yokohama Geolander boots on 17-inch steel rims.

Both the Hyundai and the Mazda ride on a strut (front) / multi-link (rear) suspension arrangement. Each is stopped by four-wheel disc brakes, and each is equipped with the expected electronic driver aids. The CX-5 has a slightly smaller fuel tank (56 litres versus 62) but a larger turning circle (11.1m v 10.6). It's also greener, emitting 148g/km of CO2 against the Hyundai's 185.

In the end, we reckon the greener, faster Mazda takes the cake.

Winner: Mazda.

On road the closeness of abilities are tighter than a hipster's jeans. There are differences, sure. But on balance the split is very hard to decide.

The CX-5's transmission felt better in manual mode, being quicker of operation and devoted to holding gear on upshift. The Hyundai was no slouch, though, and left to its own devices made better decisions about when to hold 'em, and when to swap 'em.

Steering feel went the other way. Both electric systems offered levels of assistance appropriate to vehicle speed, but it was the CX-5 that felt more natural. The Tucson was too quick to return the wheel to centre when cornering, and on the freeway (at centre) was more susceptible to following camber. Both pointed quite accurately, but the CX-5 certainly communicates its intentions to the driver far more readily.

Get stuck into a few corners – and we did – you find the CX-5 has more natural grip than the Tucson. As we mentioned earlier a lot of this could come down to tyre choice, but in the teeming conditions encountered on test it was the Mazda that proved harder to rattle.

Speaking of rattle, we noticed a little kick-back through the steering column of the Hyundai in hard cornering. The Tucson was also quick to spin-up its inside wheel when driving out of bends, and was occasionally prone to a little torque steer. Fortunately, the Tucson's stability control stepped in and out unobtrusively.

On the ride side of the equation it was too close to call. Both SUVs were terrific at sorting everything from the smallest ripple to the largest crater. It's a difference that struck us as a little odd considering the variation in wheel size and tyre profile, but one that (arguably) shows the investment in localised suspension tuning made by Hyundai Australia has paid off.

The Tucson was also much quieter when cruising along the same stretch of road at 80km/h – Hyundai's new mid-sizer measuring 74db(A) against the CX-5's 76.

Winner: Mazda (just).

We're not going to list all the bells and whistles of each, but will say that each offers cruise control, Bluetooth telephony and audio streaming, manual air-conditioning, a trip computer and electric folding mirrors.

The Hyundai adds hill-descent control (we're not sure why considering it's a two-wheel drive), digital speedometer and electric lumbar support, while the Mazda scores idle-stop, two USB ports (the Hyundai has one) and a clever retractable cargo cover in the boot.

Disappointingly, neither have HVAC ventilation outlets to the rear seat, but the Hyundai does score a rear-seat centre armrest with cupholders.

Again, it looks rather line-ball. But we have to say we each found the Hyundai's infotainment system easier to use. The CX-5 wins points for its Audi-esque rotary dial on the centre console – which is ergonomically easier than reaching for a touchscreen. That said, the Hyundai's system – with Apple CarPlay as standard – is more user-friendly with far less 'drilling-down' between menus required to achieve the same result.

We also found the audio system's sound quality was fractionally better in the Tucson, as were crystal-clear Bluetooth phone calls and easy to use voice commands.

Both the CX-5 and the Tucson offer a reversing camera as standard, though the Active X grade Hyundai adds reversing beepers as well.

Winner: Hyundai.

OK, no one really cares about sales figures, so we can probably strike that one from the list. Pricing too is largely redundant. Both cars are so close that it's the value of each vehicle that is more important anyway. Which means we're still tied three-all.

My colleague Nadine Armstrong and I spent hours debating a winner. What one car had in dynamics and involvement, the other had in user-friendliness and space. And what that car had in after-sales support and value, the other had in performance and efficiency.

Nadine thought the Tucson offered a slightly better ride, more responsive driveline (in the real world, not against the clock) and more generous after-sales package. But Nadine found the CX-5's fit and finish, more detailed grade offerings and fuel economy hard to ignore.

For me, the arguments are much the same. I found the Hyundai's value equation very hard to ignore. I also appreciated the extra room in the boot and backseat a big win for family buyers, and loved the fact it was both quieter and easier to park.

Still, the Mazda's handling, straight-line acceleration and braking performance are a definite bonus – especially as it's cheaper to fuel. In essence, each car has its strengths and weaknesses that are likely to see it attract a slightly different buyer.

In the end, we decided that we really needed to focus on the wants and needs of the buyer in this segment – and we're sure that most couldn't care less about dynamics, handling and the finer points of steering.

With that in mind it's the Hyundai that gets the gong – though we should add with a very big mark against its fuel efficiency. Yes, it's a heavier car and no, it doesn't have idle-stop. But it's roomier, easier to live with and a quieter package that will be cheaper to own in the longer term.

And we think that makes it a better deal for families chasing the best bang for their buck.