Should you buy a Mazda3 or CX-3? If you’re tossing up between these two in Reservoir right now, scrolling through dealer websites and getting more confused by the minute, I reckon you’re asking the wrong question. See, I’ve spent the last five years helping mates around Preston and Bundoora make this exact decision, and here’s what nobody tells you—the answer’s got bugger all to do with specs and everything to do with your actual life.
Should You Buy a Mazda3 or CX-3? The Honest Answer from Someone Who's Driven Both
Last month, my cousin Sarah bought a CX-3 because the salesman in Kingsbury convinced her she “needed” the extra height. Three weeks later, she’s complaining about fuel costs and the cramped back seat. Meanwhile, my mate Dave’s been running a Mazda3 hatch around Thomastown for four years, loves it, never even considered the CX-3. Why? Because he actually thought about how he drives, not what looks good in the driveway.
Why This Comparison Matters (And Why Dealers Get It Wrong)
Here’s the thing—dealerships in Mill Park, Northcote, and Thornbury will push you toward whichever model gives them a better margin that month. They’re not thinking about your 45-minute commute or whether your mom’s dodgy knees mean she actually needs that higher seating position. I am, because I’ve seen too many people buy the wrong car and regret it.
The Mazda3 and CX-3 share the same basic guts—similar engines, the same infotainment, and comparable safety gear. But they drive completely differently, cost different amounts to run, and suit totally different people. When you’re deciding whether you should buy a Mazda3 or CX-3, you’re really choosing between two distinct lifestyles, not just two cars.
The Real-World Driving Experience (Not the Brochure Nonsense)
I’ve driven both around Essendon’s tight streets, down the freeway to Heidelberg, and through South Yarra’s congested traffic. The differences become obvious real quick.
The Mazda3 Feels Like a Proper Car
The Mazda3, whether sedan or hatch, sits low and handles like Mazda actually cares about driving dynamics. Chuck it into roundabouts around Epping and Richmond, and it just grips and goes. The steering’s sharp, the body roll’s minimal, and you feel planted at 110 on the freeway.
On rough roads—and let’s be honest, Melbourne’s roads around Mernda and Doreen are shocking—the Mazda3’s lower profile means you feel more bumps. Not deal-breaker bad, but you notice them. The trade-off? It corners flat, doesn’t lean in turns, and genuinely feels sporty even in base spec.
Back seat space is proper. Three adults fit without touching shoulders. The boot in the hatch is massive—450 liters that swallows Bunnings runs, airport luggage, Ikea flat-packs, whatever. The sedan boot is smaller at 444 liters but still decent.
The CX-3 Drives Like... Well, a Tall Mazda3
The CX-3 sits higher, which sounds great until you actually drive it. That extra height creates body roll in corners. Not dangerous, just less confidence-inspiring. Around South Morang’s winding roads, you’re more aware of the CX-3’s height than you’d like.
The higher seating position? Brilliant for visibility. You see over traffic, parking is easier because you can see the bonnet, and getting in and out is genuinely easier if you’ve got knee or back issues. My 68-year-old dad test drove both around Reservoir and Preston—the CX-3 won purely on entry/exit comfort.
But here’s the kicker nobody mentions—back seat space is shocking. Two adults fit fine. Three? You’re all mates by the end of the trip because you’re basically touching. Tall people behind tall drivers? Forget it. And the boot’s only 350 liters. That’s 100 liters less than the Mazda3 hatch, which matters more than you’d think on airport runs or weekend trips.
Fuel Economy—The Numbers Dealers Don't Emphasize
Should you buy a Mazda3 or CX-3 based on fuel economy? Yeah, actually, this matters.
Real-world driving around Bundoora, Kingsbury, and Thomastown (mix of suburban and some freeway):
- Mazda3 2.0L: 6.0-6.5 L/100 km consistently
- CX-3 2.0L: 6.5-7.2L/100km, sometimes worse in city traffic
That extra height and weight costs you at the bowser. Over a year doing 15,000 km, you’re looking at maybe $200-$300 more for the CX-3. Not massive, but worth knowing.
The Mazda3 with the 2.5L engine? Still gets around 6.5-7.0 L/100 km and drives way better. If you’re going for the CX-3, the 2.0L feels gutless, and you constantly wish you had more power. The Mazda3 2.0L feels adequate because the car’s lighter and more aerodynamic.
Running Costs Nobody Tells You About
Insurance on both is similar—neither’s a theft target, and parts are cheap and common as muck around Mill Park and Northcote. Young drivers still get slugged, but Mazda ownership doesn’t hurt like European brands do.
Servicing? Identical service schedule, same workshop costs, same parts compatibility. Whether you’re servicing in Thornbury or Essendon, you’ll pay roughly the same for either.
Where the CX-3 costs more: tires. Those chunkier tires for the “SUV” image wear faster and cost more to replace. Over 100,000 km, you’ll probably spend an extra $400-$600 on rubber for the CX-3.
The Practicality Reality Check
Here’s where most people get it wrong when considering whether you should buy a Mazda3 or CX-3.
Who Actually Needs the CX-3:
I’ve watched people around Heidelberg and South Yarra buy CX-3s and genuinely love them.
- Older drivers who struggle with low cars (proper reason)
- People who genuinely do light off-roading or gravel roads regularly (rare)
- Drivers who prefer the commanding driving position for confidence
- Singles or couples without kids who value visibility over space
- People who think they need an “SUV” but live in suburbs (questionable reason)
That last one’s most common. Sarah, my cousin? She bought into SUV marketing. Doesn’t off-road, doesn’t need the height, and complains about fuel and space. Classic case.
Who Should Buy the Mazda3 Instead:
Most people around Epping, Richmond, and Mernda actually need the Mazda3:
- Families with kids (that back seat space matters)
- Anyone who regularly carries passengers
- People who do Bunnings runs, Costco shops, airport trips
- Drivers who enjoy actually driving, not just commuting
- Anyone wanting better value and running costs
The Mazda3 is just more car for similar money. More space, better driving dynamics, lower running costs, and a proper back seat.
The Price Trap Dealers Won't Mention
New pricing’s close—maybe $2000-$3000 separates them depending on spec. But used? It’s a completely different story around Doreen and South Morang.
CX-3s hold value slightly better because “SUV” is trendy. But they’re also less used because fewer people bought them. Mazda3s are everywhere, which means:
- More choice when buying used
- Better negotiating position
- Easier to find the exact spec you want
- Slightly lower prices for equivalent age/kms
Three-year-old examples in Reservoir and Preston:
- Mazda3 Evolve: $18,000-$23,000
- CX-3 Maxx Sport: $19,000-$25,000
Not a huge difference, but the Mazda3 usually offers more features for the same money because they sold more volume and dealers are keen to shift them.
When You're Actually Test Driving
Don’t just drive around the block in Kingsbury. Proper test drives reveal everything:
For the Mazda3:
- Take it on rough roads—feel how the suspension copes
- Test the boot—bring actual stuff you’d carry
- Sit in the back yourself—experience that space
- Drive it spiritedly through some corners—enjoy how it handles
For the CX-3:
- Getting in and out multiple times—is that height genuinely easier?
- Put someone tall in the back behind a tall driver—check that space reality
- Load the boot with realistic stuff—experience that 100L shortfall
- Drive it back-to-back with the Mazda3—notice the handling difference
Most people deciding whether you should buy a Mazda3 or CX-3 never do proper comparison drives. They test one, then the other, on different days, in different conditions. Of course you can’t decide properly.
The Honest Verdict from Real-World Experience
Right, straight talk after five years watching people around Thomastown, Mill Park, Northcote, and Thornbury make this choice:
Buy the CX-3 if:
- You’re older or have mobility issues and that higher seating genuinely helps
- You’re a couple without kids and value visibility over space
- You do genuine light off-roading or gravel roads regularly
- You’ve test-driven both properly and genuinely prefer how the CX-3 feels
- You’ve sat in the back seat and the space works for your needs
Buy the Mazda3 if:
- You’ve got kids or regularly carry passengers (that back seat matters)
- You actually use your boot for life stuff—shopping, luggage, furniture
- You enjoy driving and want better handling and response
- You prefer spending less on fuel and tyres over time
- You want more car for similar money
For most people reading this in Essendon, Heidelberg, South Yarra, Epping, Richmond, Mernda, Doreen, or South Morang, the Mazda3 is the smarter choice. It’s just more practical, drives better, costs less to run, and offers more space.
The CX-3 is brilliant for the right person—I’m not bagging it. But too many people buy it because “SUV” sounds good, not because it actually suits their life better.
What I'd Do (And Why It Matters)
Me? I’d buy the Mazda3 hatch with the 2.5L engine in Evolve spec. Better power, all the important tech, beautiful handling, proper space, and reasonable running costs. That’s what I recommended to Dave four years ago around Bundoora, and he’s still happy.
Sarah’s stuck with her CX-3 for now, but when the lease ends, she’s admitted she’s going Mazda3. Live and learn.
When you’re figuring out whether you should buy a Mazda3 or CX-3, ignore the marketing. Think about your actual drives, your actual passengers, and your actual stuff. Test both properly. Sit in the back of both. Load the boots. Drive them back-to-back on roads you know around Reservoir, Preston, or wherever you live.
The answer becomes pretty obvious pretty quick when you stop listening to salespeople and start listening to what the cars are actually telling you.
Conclusion
Should you buy a Mazda3 or CX-3? After helping dozens of people around Kingsbury, Bundoora, and Melbourne’s northern suburbs make this exact decision, here’s what I’ve learned—most people asking this question need the Mazda3 but think they want the CX-3.
The Mazda3 offers more space, better driving dynamics, lower running costs, and genuinely more car for similar money. It’s the practical choice that makes sense for families, regular passengers, and anyone who values space and driving enjoyment over sitting a bit higher.
The CX-3 works brilliantly for older drivers who benefit from the higher seating, couples without kids who prioritize visibility, and people who genuinely prefer the commanding driving position after proper test drives. It’s not a worse car—it’s just right for fewer people than Mazda’s marketing suggests.
Stop overthinking specs and SUV versus car labels. Test drive both around Thomastown, Mill Park, Northcote, Thornbury, Essendon, Heidelberg, South Yarra, Epping, Richmond, Mernda, Doreen, or South Morang. Sit in both back seats. Load both boots with your actual stuff. Drive them on your actual commute.
The right answer for you becomes obvious when you focus on your real needs instead of marketing hype. That’s worth more than any brochure or dealer pitch can tell you.
