Mazda CX-5 Touring v Toyota RAV4 GXL eFour 2026 Comparison

OK, let’s address the elephant in the room first. The 2026 Mazda CX-5 and Toyota RAV4 GXL eFour aren’t direct spec rivals.

However, due to the hybrid-only nature of the RAV4s lineup, the models we’ve selected generates as fair of a fight as we can make it for both specification and money. So, both are powered by four-cylinder petrol engines and harness all-wheel drive (AWD) traction.

The Touring represents the middle of the CX-5 range. In essence, it’s a bit posh without the bumped-up price tag for gear you probably don’t need. At $47,490 (all prices are before on-road costs), it’s a chunk cheaper than its competitor, which could prove pivotal.

Unlike the AWD-only CX-5 range, Toyota’s medium SUV comes with the option of front-wheel drive (FWD) and is solely offered with hybrid assistance. If you want hybridisation and a Mazda mid-size SUV, you could consider the CX-60 PHEV or wait until 2027 for the SkyActiv-Z powertrain.

However, we’ve opted for the GXL eFour in this battle. Yes, it’s one rung from the bottom of the range, but it provides the clearest competition with an asking price of $52,340. That means it’s lugged with a $4850 disadvantage from the get-go and will need to rely on its efficiency to claw back brownie points.

In terms of warranty, both have industry-standard five-year/unlimited-kilometre plans, with the RAV4 gaining eight-year/160,000km coverage for its battery pack. Yet, Mazda includes five years of complimentary roadside assistance, while Toyota asks you pay $99 per annum, rising to $139 for the upgraded product.

Both require checkups every 12 months/15,000km (whichever comes first), with the RAV4 clawing back some ground via cheaper servicing. Five years/75,000km is capped at $1625 ($325 average), while the Mazda asks $2203 ($441 average) for the same period.

And unlike some of the emerging Chinese brands, it shouldn’t be hard to find a dealer near you for aftersales support.

It almost takes a well-trained eye to spot the 2026 Mazda CX-5 Touring from its predecessor. This is evolution over revolution, and you can’t blame Mazda for doing so given its success, but it’s in the details of the third generation where the difference is found. The silhouette hides its dimensional growth well.

While the CX-5 has roughly stuck to a formula, the 2026 Toyota RAV4 GXL eFour is unfamiliar to the 1994 original. Gone is the rough-and-tumble persona, with quirk replaced by mass-market crossover appeal.

Unlike the first generation, it’s doubtful we’ll see the current version being used as a paddock basher three decades from now. The sixth-generation RAV4 gains sharper styling elements to keep its exterior aesthetic contemporary.

Like the CX-5, Toyota hasn’t broken from a successful mould.

In terms of spec, both use LED head and tail-lights, but the CX-5 gains a powered tailgate and 19-inch alloys compared to the RAV4’s 18-inch items. Roof rails, auto power-folding mirrors and a shark-fin antenna are common to the duo too.

Both use keyless entry (with push-button start), but the Mazda’s is a proximity-based system.

Inside, the Mazda gains Maztex upholstery with cloth inserts, while the Toyota serves up cloth trim. A powered driver’s seat features in both, but the CX-5 has 10-way adjustment with memory compared to the RAV4's eight. The Toyota also misses out on front-seat and steering wheel heating.

Dual-zone climate control is standard in both, as are rear-seat air vents – they aren’t if you opt for the Pure grade CX-5. A full-size spare is a $300 option in the RAV4, while metallic paint is an additional $795 with Mazda and $675 at Toyota.

Annoying tech now afflicts this duo, so get ready to constantly disarm monitoring tech – well, in one of them at least.

Hats off to the engineers, because the 2026 Mazda CX-5 Touring has all the required monitoring and sign detection required by ANCAP, but it won’t drive you mental. In fact, its active safety tech is so well calibrated that you can leave most of it on. There’s even a handy mute button for the speed alerts.

It’s also just been awarded a five-star ANCAP safety rating, while the 2026 Toyota RAV4 GXL eFour (and the rest of the range) is yet to be tested. Although, it now has an overzealous driver monitoring system that audibly warns you the moment you look away from the road; testing your tolerance for it before you buy is important.

This pair packs all the vital tech, too. Shared between both is autonomous emergency braking (AEB) with pedestrian and cyclist detection, active cruise control with stop/go functionality, lane departure warning with lane keeping, front and rear cross traffic alert, blind spot monitoring and safe exit assist.

Given the family focus, it’s disappointing neither has a 360-degree monitor despite it being offered higher up in the respective food chains. However, parking sensors and a reversing camera feature, as do dual ISOFIX points and a trio of top-tether anchorages.  

The CX-5 Touring is fitted with a head-up display and the GXL isn’t, yet the RAV4 gains an extra airbag with a total of eight. Both are fitted with a front-centre airbag. 

In an Olympic Gold-worthy performance, the 2026 Mazda CX-5 Touring backflips on the brand’s anti-touchscreen stance to be almost button-free, but be careful what you wish for…

Out is the MZD Connect operating system, and with it the old control wheel. San demisting and hazard lights, everything is controlled via the central infotainment display. Thankfully, with a 12.9-inch unit, it isn’t skimping on acreage.

It’s joined by a 10.25-inch digital instrument cluster and a standard head-up display. While the graphics and overall processing power is decent, some of the icons within the infotainment screen are rather small and require purposeful inputs – taking your attention away from the road. There’s also no native sat-nav, something the RAV4 has.

In fact, the 2026 Toyota RAV4 GXL eFour isn’t outdone in the tech stakes thanks to the debut of the Arene digital platform. Yes, the main screen might be ‘only’ 10.5 inches, but it offers a noticeable improvement in processing power on what it replaces with fresh graphics and customisable widgets.

It pairs alongside a 12.3-inch instrument cluster that comes with a few different themes and a full-screen map view.

New for the RAV is inbuilt Spotify and Google-powered voice-assistant functions – something the CX-5 has in other markets, but not Australia. Both can accept over-the-air (OTA) updates and access connected services via a dedicated smartphone app.

Wireless Apple CarPlay and Android Auto is standardised, as is a wireless charge pad, DAB+ digital radio, USB ports and brandless audio.

This is where the greatest difference between the 2026 Mazda CX-5 Touring and Toyota RAV4 GXL eFour is found.

Mazda has long prided itself on forging its own path on powertrains, but that independence can sometimes come at the expense of taking advantage of readily available external resources.

With the Japanese brand currently focused on launching the all-electric 6e and CX-6e, development of its electrically assisted SkyActiv-Z powertrain has taken a back seat until 2027.

Therefore, the CX-5 soldiers on exclusively with the company’s ubiquitous SkyActiv-G 2.5-litre four-cylinder petrol engine – not the 2.5-litre turbo unit offered in the previous generation – with power sent to all four wheels via Mazda’s in-house six-speed automatic transmission.

With Mazda needing to comply with strict Euro6 emissions requirements, the engine's power and torque figures are down to 132kW/242Nm (from 140kW/252Nm), and while the 2.5 endows the Mazda3 with extra pep, it struggles in the heavier CX-5 (1645kg tare).

Initial acceleration is decent, but it trails off quickly thereafter and overtaking pace is more leisurely than you might expect – it needs more torque; the type of muscle the dropped turbo-petrol used to provide, or what electrification would bring. Speaking of…

The 2026 Toyota RAV4 GXL eFour taps into more than two-and-a-half decades of hybrid knowhow, and while the same emissions regulations might have strangled the 105kW/221Nm Atkinson cycle 2.5-litre petrol engine somewhat, its electric assistance recovers the slack against the Mazda.

So, while the combined figure of 143kW is a 20kW downgrade on what came before, the instant nature of the e-motors is a significant help. Those compact, high-output e-motors are new too, with the front unit producing 100kW/208Nm while the rear adds 40kW/121Nm.

The front wheels drive through a ‘six-speed’ electronic continuously variable transmission (e-CVT), while on-demand all-wheel drive is created via the e-motor on the back axle. Current is sourced from a new 1.1kWh lithium-ion (NMC) battery pack, which replaces the old nickel metal hydride unit.

You don’t really notice the downgrade in power too much. It’s only really a highway speeds where the RAV4 feels a little less urgent than before. Still, Toyota’s hybrid drivetrain provides the positive motivation the Mazda lacks.

The only real bugbear with the RAV4’s package remains the e-CVT. While the sound deadening has increased and the transmission has been revised, the latter still perches revs up high under heavy load. Yes, it’s now more muted, but it remains an unpleasant sound.

The more tuneful CX-5 certainly highlights this, and although its six-speed transmission might seem a few ratios short of a modern unit, it’s a competent operator compared to the maligned eight-speed used in Mazda’s bigger SUVs. The sequential shift mode is fun to use too.

As if the performance deficit wasn’t enough, the 2026 Mazda CX-5 Touring is also the thirstier of the pair, and by a significant margin.

As it stands, the CX-5 officially uses 0.1L/100km less than before at 7.4L/100km. However, on paper, that’s already noticeably more than the 2026 Toyota RAV4 GXL eFour's 4.6L/100km. In real-world testing, the gap widens.

Across the same 250km test route, the CX-5 slurped 9.1L/100km, while the RAV4 sipped 5.4L/100km to come relatively close to the manufacturer’s official rating.

That said, on a dedicated highway-only run of about 400km, the Mazda’s 2.5-litre engine still ran at a rate of 7.6L/100km – with its cylinder deactivation tech shutting down two cylinders under light load or coasting.

The only area the CX-5 recovers some ground is the fact its 58-litre tank can be filled with cheaper 91 RON unleaded, while the RAV4’s 55L unit now asks for 95 RON premium fuel.

The RAV4 can cruise silently at slow speeds (or coasting on highways) with a dedicated EV mode before combining with the internal combustion engine seamlessly, but defined parameters need to be met to run on electricity alone. At least you don’t need to plug it in to charge.

Still, it’s impressively efficient and highlights the benefits of Toyota’s series-parallel hybrid.

Interestingly, the brand has made the patents to its tech available to other manufactures. Toyota and Mazda share a formal business and capital alliance, which makes Mazda’s decision to develop its own system odd – and a costly one.

But hey, Mazda could very well do it better with SkyActiv-Z. Watch this space.

If there’s one thing Mazda knows how to do, it’s bringing Zoom Zoom.

Despite growing in size and gaining weight, the 2026 Mazda CX-5 Touring retains pleasing dynamics. This isn’t by chance – with Mazda manipulated the springs, dampers, bump stops and anti-roll bars while creating the new model.

Like the CX-5 it replaces, the Touring drives to a high standard, one most of the cheaper Chinese rivals couldn’t dream of matching. Even on 19-inch wheels, the ride quality is supple and far more absorbing than before, yet it retains tight body control, resisting the urge to roll through corners.

Yes, this is a humble medium SUV, and you won’t go in search of a twisty road, but if you find yourself on one, the CX-5 doesn’t disappoint. The controls are nicely weighted and have a natural feel, with the steering being the biggest proponent of this. Without energy regeneration, the brake pedal is positive and progressive.

So, does the 2026 Toyota RAV4 GXL eFour stand a chance in terms of handling? Well, the big T hasn’t stood idle between generations, adding chassis and suspension upgrades as well as tweaks to the steering and braking package.

It uses Toyota’s TNGA-K platform that has been stiffened for increased rigidity, while the suspension calibration and geometry have been updated alongside revised coil spring sizes and rates. But while there’s no doubting the tangible progression, the RAV4 isn’t as talented as the CX-5.

There are no real issues with the ride quality, and the RAV4 soaks up lumps and bumps well. You also hear those intrusions less than in the CX-5, yet the 1695kg (tare) Toyota isn’t quite as tied down, with slightly more pronounced roll and float through corners. It isn’t as keen to respond to your inputs.

A big reason for this is the steering. It’s less tactile and direct no matter the driving mode, and while the brake pedal has been greatly improved and feels more natural than ever, with regen at play, it still isn’t as progressive as the CX-5’s.

Traction is never in doubt with either on-demand AWD system. Both Mazda’s i-Activ and Toyota’s eFour setups provide plenty of purchase in varied conditions, so there's no need to cancel that family snow or camping trip.

Ultimately, Mazda has performed the illusive ‘have your cake and eat it, too’ handling solution. It’s now more comfortable without losing its ability to entertain; there's a sophistication and cohesion to the way it drives that the Toyota can’t quite match.

On the outside, the 2026 Mazda CX-5 Touring and Toyota RAV4 GXL eFour don’t appear holistically different to their respective forebears – that changes inside.

Jump in the Mazda’s cabin and it’s all about sleek minimalism. It follows the brand’s upmarket push to a certain extent, with clean lines and an emphasis on plush materials. The ambience is more bespoke, and it feels the premium pick.

The CX-5’s cabin conveys more grace, but the RAV4 isn’t totally out of its depth. It’s a marked improvement on the somewhat gimmicky design language, with oversized controls being replaced with classier items. Like the Mazda, you can easily find some scratchy plastics, but there’s been a concerted effort by Toyota to soften the interior.

It’s also the storage hero, with a few more places to store bits and bobs. The central bin’s lid is removeable and doubles as a portable tray table, but the execution could be better when in place. Not to be completely outdone, the Mazda’s lid splits in two for access.

Like the rest of the industry, a move away from physical controls hampers both. It’s a little more noticeable in the Mazda – even with its dedicated climate menu docking to the bottom of the screen.

Toyota does offer tactile temperature buttons, but you’ll need to top the display for fan speed, and while we like the fact you can decline Toyota using your data, it’s annoying having to hit the same decline button every time you start the car.

The CX-5 is bigger than ever. All the 115mm in extra length is generated through the 2815mm wheelbase and increases the rear-seat legroom (and boot), which is something that was sorely needed in the previous generation. Head and shoulder room grow too, with an extra 15 and 20mm in width and height respectively.

In fact, the Mazda has grown so much in size that it now edges out the RAV4 for legroom. Despite the CX-5’s extra length in wheelbase coming mostly from longer rear doors, they open at a much wider angle too, which aids getting car seats in and out of the back. Head and shoulder room are also spacious in the Toyota.

However, it’s frustrating that Mazda has skimped on USB ports in the back – in fact, there’s only two in the entire cabin.

Both models offer rear-seat air vents, which is appreciated, while map pockets, a centre armrest and door bins are common.

Officially, the CX-5’s boot has increased to 43 litres to 466L, but that’s still less than the 580L of cargo capacity in the RAV4, but they both appear comparable by eye as well as our tape measure.

The Mazda gains seat releases in the boot for the 40/20/40-split folding pews, whereas the Toyota offers a 60/40-split, yet the latter gains a dedicated storage area for the parcel shelf when not in use.

It’s clear that legacy manufacturers can no longer rest on their laurels.

Aussies are proving with their wallets that they’re willing to move away from tradition if it means saving dollars. In the same way punters accepted Japanese brands decades ago, Chinese offerings are now making (and saving) a lot of ‘cents’.

However, this is an in-nation battle, and only one brand reigns supreme.

It isn't the Mazda, and that’s a shame, because the Mazda CX-5 Touring is a very good example of what the company does best. It now looks and feels more premium without foregoing its polished driving experience.

It’s just behind the times in terms of its powertrain… for now.

The gurus at Toyota City have mastered the hybrid art, and it’s the main reason the Toyota RAV4 GXL eFour claims the win despite costing more for less kit. The genuine fuel efficiency is hard to ignore.

Essentially, you’ll be spending less time at the bowser with fewer (and cheaper) receipts to counter the initial outlay. The fact the RAV4 also enjoys a pragmatic edge and enviable resale values is a boon for buyers.

The Toyota RAV4 experience doesn’t dazzle quite as much as its sales figures would suggest. However it also doesn’t do too much wrong, and in a competitive medium SUV segment that demands a do-it-all family solution, it edges out Mazda’s CX-5.

2026 Mazda CX-5 Touring at a glance:
Price: $47,490 (plus on-road costs)
Available: Now
Powertrain: 2.5-litre four-cylinder petrol
Output: 132kW/242Nm
Transmission: Six-speed automatic
Fuel: 7.4L/100km (ADR Combined)
CO2: 173g/km (ADR Combined)
Safety rating: Five-star (ANCAP 2025) 

2026 Toyota RAV4 GXL eFour at a glance:
Price: $52,340 (plus on-road costs)
Available: Now
Powertrain: 2.5-litre four-cylinder petrol-electric
Output: 105kW/221Nm (electric motor?– front: 100kW/208Nm?rear: 40kW/121Nm)
Combined output: 143kW (not combined torque figure specified)
Transmission: Continuously variable
Fuel: 4.6L/100km (ADR Combined)
CO2: 105g/km (ADR Combined)
Safety rating: Untested

Join the conversation at our Facebook page
Or email us at editor@carsales.com.au