2016 Mazda CX-3
As crossover utilities shrink ever smaller, they’re looking less like a blend of family car and a SUV, and more like pumped five-door hatchbacks with available all-wheel drive. Case in point, this Mazda CX-3. It’s a good looking subcompact ute. But, in its quest for popular style, is utility no longer its strongest point?
To their credit, Mazda calls the 2016 CX-3 their ultimate “urban escape vehicle”. A combination of small car attributes necessary for city-dwellers; like a Mazda3 hatchback; with enough crossover elements for weekend adventures and all-weather security.
Going up against the likes of Honda HR-V, Fiat 500X, Jeep Renegade, and Chevrolet Trax; four subcompact utes that weren’t even available here a year ago, gives you an idea of how rapidly this segment is expanding.
Built on a new SKYACTIV chassis to be shared with the next Mazda2, the CX-3 is tidy indeed. Every interior dimension is less than the Mazda3. And while outside it is certainly taller, ground clearance is the same at 6.1-inches.
Of course you can’t get all-wheel-drive in the Mazda3.
Now whether all-4 or just the front-2 wheels are in play, power comes from the MX-5’s SKYACTIV-G 2.0-liter I4. Here putting out 146-horsepower and 146 lb-ft. of torque, with a 6-speed automatic transmission your only option.
One thing is clear, and that is that the CX-3 is easily the most stylish of the new breed of cute utes. It looks long, low, lean, and much more muscular than bigger brother CX-5.
In the front, the face is familiar Mazda territory, but they seem to be pushing the boundaries of the grille ever farther. And the slanted rear roof, with tight hind quarters, doesn’t help much with convincing us that this is a crossover and not a hatchback.
At our test track, there was a snappy throttle and eagerness at launch, but the CX-3 runs out of steam fairly quickly; taking us 8.6-seconds to hit 60. To be fair, that’s on par with the Jeep Renegade we tested. And, the CX-3 gives you all it’s got down the strip sounding good while doing it.
Shifts are prompt and positive, and there was even a touch of torque steer as we worked our way to a 16.7-second ¼-mile at 83 miles-per-hour.
Throughout handling exercises, there was certainly a fun, sporty Mazda-style character. But, while still far from a sports car, there’s a nice balance and steering response is quick, putting most other tiny trucksters to shame.
We were expecting a little more from the brakes however, than a 133-foot stopping average from 60 and an overall soft feel.
Fittingly, the interior is driver-oriented, with an almost premium feel to materials and surfaces that again put it above most rivals. The control layout looks simple enough, yet still managed to befuddle some of our staffers.
Ergonomics are also not great for full-size adults; plus we found console space minimal and cup holders difficult to access easily. Moreover, it can be at times a very noisy environment.
Continuing our list of gripes, cargo space is minimal, just 10.1 cubic-ft. behind the rear seats if there’s a Bose subwoofer in place; that’s ½ the space of a Mazda3 hatchback. Folding the seats expands the space, getting the numbers closer to the Mazda3’s at 44.5 cubic-ft.
The load floor is also very high. It might not have been as noticeable had we not had an HR-V in at the same time which has a much lower load floor and double the amount of rear cargo space.
Government Fuel Economy Ratings for an all-wheel-drive CX-3 are 27-City, 32-Highway, and 29-Combined, which we almost reached at 28.8 miles-per-gallon of Regular. So the Energy Impact Score is much better than average, with oil consumption at 11.4-barrels yearly and CO2 emissions of 5.0-tons.
Pricing starts at $20,840; and since we’re doing so much comparing here, a Mazda3 starts about a grand lower, though top Grand Touring trims are priced very similar.
In the end, we know why Mazda commissioned the CX-3. Everything crossover is selling like mad while traditional car sales continue to sag. Still, when it comes to actual utility, a well done compact five-door hatchback, like a Mazda3, Ford Focus, or the new Honda Civic, beats the CX-3, and all other tiny utes, in everything except traction.
But, if you gotta hang with the crowd, then the 2016 Mazda CX-3 is one fun, city size utility, that’s rarin’ to go.
Specifications
- Engine: 2.0 liter
- Horsepower: 146
- Torque: 146 lb-ft.
- 0-60 mph: 8.6 seconds
- 1/4 mile: 16.7 seconds @ 83 mph
- EPA: 27 mpg city/ 32 mpg highway
- Energy Impact: 11.4 barrels of oil/yr
- CO2 Emissions: 5.0 tons/yr
2025 Nissan Kicks
More Kicks To Kick Around In
Nissan began kicking around the idea of replacing their subcompact Juke with a much more modern crossover ute more than a decade ago. But it wasn’t until 2018 that the Kicks finally stepped onto our shores. Turned out it was a smart move, one that Nissan hopes to build upon with this all-new second generation kicks. So, let’s see if it kicks up more good things for Nissan.
SUVs, “small” utility vehicles in this case, remain the hottest wheels going, with carmakers putting a herculean effort into making them as appealing as possible to as wide of an audience as possible. That brings us to this 2025 Nissan Kicks.
What started out in 2018 as a more mainstream replacement for Nissan’s funky, entry-level ute Juke, has now evolved into a fine-looking SUV with impressive substance. While even the first Kicks looked way better than the Juke ever could, this one doubles down with some upscale Murano flavor, though the wide stance and exaggerated rear fenders do pay homage to the Juke. The unique patterns and textures around the lower body are designed to resemble high-end sneakers or “kicks”. Top SR makes the most of it with available 19-inch wheels, black accents, and full LED lighting.
This second gen is now bigger in every dimension, just under an inch taller, an inch and a half wider, and almost 3 inches longer; and even ground clearance gets a nice boost to a healthy 8.4 inches. There’s a new engine, too, staying naturally aspirated, but growing from 1.6 liters to 2.0 liters, and gaining 19 horsepower to 141. Torque gains are more impressive from 114 to 140 lb-ft. Bigger news is that all-wheel-drive is now available, as the original was front-drive only. And while we’re talking about that first gen, don’t get confused, as there is also a 2025 Nissan Kicks Play, which is actually a budget carryover of that first-gen Kicks.
Kicking off our track time, there’s a nice hit of initial spirit off the line, but then power delivery settles down and you take a slow CVT crawl down the track. It took us 10.7 seconds to hit 60 mph, a full second slower than the 2018 original. But it does seem to pick up the pace a bit further on, ending the quarter-mile at 18-flat and 78 mph. Engine noise is expectedly elevated, and even though there are simulated shifts happening in the CVT, it doesn’t really help the pace. Drive modes include Normal, Eco, Sport, and Snow, which comes only with all-wheel drive.
There was substantial grip and good balance, steering was light and it provided a respectable amount of feedback.
Now, it was a completely different experience on our handling course. Here, the Kicks kicked it up a nice notch for its class. There was substantial grip and good balance, steering was light and it provided a respectable amount of feedback. The suspension was firm and willing, with very little body roll and no notable understeer or oversteer. Overall, a quite pleasant cone trip.
All-wheel-drive models come with a suspension upgrade, replacing the rear’s simple twist beam setup with a multi-link arrangement, and adding a thicker stabilizer bar to the independent strut front. It was also quite commendable in braking with consistent, straight stops from 60 of only 106 feet.
Bigger dimensions allow for a nice upward movement in space inside the Kicks’ five-seat cabin. Plus, a tech upgrade has definitely taken place with all but base S trim getting wireless phone charging and a new 12.3-inch touchscreen. Top SR adds a 12.3-inch gauge display; and comes with a leather-wrapped steering wheel, simulated-leather trimmed seats, and surround-view camera. Nissan spreads the supportive Zero Gravity seats to both rows, so even back seat dwellers get well above average comfort for this price point. AWD hardware and suspension does necessitate a higher cargo floor and a bit less cargo capacity, 23.9 cu.-ft. instead of 29.2; max is 50.1 with seatbacks folded.
Government Fuel Economy Ratings with all-wheel-drive are 27 city, 34 highway, and 30 combined. Our average was right on at 30.4 mpg of regular. While the new Kicks is certainly better to look at, it remains exceptionally affordable, beginning at $23,220; top SR starts at $27,570. All-wheel drive is available with all trims for $1,500.
The original Nissan Kicks existed almost totally as a value leader. And while the value proposition of the 2025 Nissan Kicks remains very high, it has upped its own ante to be a far more interesting and appealing small SUV to see, to drive, and to be driven in. We think Nissan put this one straight through the uprights!
Specifications
As Tested
- Engine: NA 2.0-liter I-4
- Transmission: CVT
- Horsepower: 141
- Torque: 140 lb-ft.
- EPA: 27 City | 34 Highway | 30 Combined
- 0-60 mph: 10.7 seconds
- 1/4 Mile: 18.0 seconds at 78 mph
- Braking, 60-0 (avg.): 106 feet
- MW Fuel Economy: 30.4 mpg