Mazda CX-9 VS Honda ZR-V
Mazda CX-9
Likes
- New 10.25-inch display
- Seven-seater's versatility
- Comfortable ride
Dislikes
- Expensive AWD option
- Six-seater's compromises
- Older ANCAP safety rating
Honda ZR-V
Likes
Dislikes
Summary
Mazda CX-9
The second-generation Mazda CX-9 may have been on sale in Australia for nearly five years now, but it remains the second best-selling large SUV using unibody construction (as opposed to old-school, off-road-focused body-on-frame).
That said, it is getting on a bit, so Mazda’s given it an update with a twist for 2021, hoping to inject a little bit more life into its flagship model.
And when we say twist, we mean it. After all, who would’ve thought there’d ever be a six-seat CX-9? Well, we’ve checked it out to see if it’s the version we needed all along. Read on.
Safety rating | |
---|---|
Engine Type | 2.5L turbo |
Fuel Type | Regular Unleaded Petrol |
Fuel Efficiency | 8.4L/100km |
Seating | 7 seats |
Honda ZR-V
The Toyota RAV4 has plenty to answer for.
Firstly, it kicked off the whole mid-sized SUV craze 30 years ago, decimating hatch, sedan, wagon and coupe sales en masse, to change the way people thought about family cars.
Then, in 2019, the company launched the first mainstream hybrid SUV in Australia, opening up the electrification floodgates. Now everybody wants one.
Read more about
Think about that for one moment. Before the RAV4 hybrid, there were none bar expensive Lexuses like the NX and RX. Rav-dical!
Now there are over 15 different choices, with the Nissan X-Trail and Honda ZR-V hybrids being two of the newest on the scene.
We pit these fresh electrified mid-sized SUVs against each other to find out which might be right for you.
Safety rating | — |
---|---|
Engine Type | 2.0L |
Fuel Type | — |
Fuel Efficiency | 5L/100km |
Seating | 5 seats |
Verdict
Mazda CX-98/10
The CX-9 is still a great option for families looking for a large SUV, even if it is starting to show its age as new rivals continue to launch with newer technologies.
That said, the availability of a luxury-focused six-seat configuration (Azami LE AWD) for the first time might be enough to convince some buyers to give it further consideration.
But for others who need the versatility of seven seats, this is still the CX-9 we’ve all come to know and love – but just a little bit better – particularly in its best-selling Azami AWD form.
Honda ZR-V/10
You’re looking at are two of the very best medium-sized SUVs out there. Regardless of price and position. Honestly, either should bring many years of sterling service.
Which one is for you depends on what that service needs to be.
The X-Trail e-Power is the better family-car allrounder, hands down, because of offers way more metal for the money, making it roomier and more practical. It’s also quieter, for some of the time at least.
But the ZR-V is athletic, agile and involving in a way the Nissan could never be. It’s also better equipped at this price point. And despite being from half-a-segment below, it’s still competitively packaged and feels from a class above.
We should be comparing this charming Honda against the Audi Q5 Sportback and BMW X4, it’s that special.
Whichever you choose, Toyota really needs to pull something out of the box with the next-gen RAV4 to beat these two.
Nissan X-Trail Ti e-Power | 8.5/10 |
Honda ZR-V e:HEV LX | 8.6/10 |
Design
Mazda CX-99/10
Given its latest update is relatively minor, the CX-9’s exterior largely looks the same as before, which, depending on your point of view, is a very good thing. As far as we’re concerned, it certainly is.
That said, train-spotters will notice some differences, with the GT SP (new), Azami and Azami LE (new) grades getting a refreshed grille that’s slotted and available in two grade-specific finishes unlike the insert their carryover Sport, Touring and GT siblings still have.
And aside from the GT SP, Azami and Azami LE’s new sets of 20-inch alloy wheels (again in grade-specific finishes), the only other exterior change is the Azami and Azami LE’s larger-diameter chrome exhaust tailpipe extensions. Sporty!
Inside, the CX-9 has more changes in store, headlined by the new ‘floating’ 10.25-inch central display all but the Sport and Touring get (they stick with 7.0- and 9.0-inch units respectively).
The new set-up is powered by Mazda’s latest multimedia system, which is certainly an improvement over its predecessor, and a much needed one at that.
Worth noting, touch is not an input method, with the rotary controller on the centre console the only option, which is actually great for safety, so we’re all for it.
The Azami and Azami LE also get new quilted Nappa leather upholstery, which looks and feels great, and adds to the overall high-quality theme.
Otherwise, it’s pretty much business as usual, which is great because the CX-9 has always had a well-designed interior. Yep, if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.
Honda ZR-V
Before we kick off on design, here are two annoying facts about the Honda.
First off, apparently ZR-V stands for Gen-Z Recreational Vehicle. Trying hard much, Honda?
Or maybe not trying hard enough. In Australia, the ZR-V colour range is pitiful, with just five choices against the Nissan’s dozen.
Please, at least import the 'Aqua Green' and 'Petrol Blue', as offered in Japan. Or better still, inject some actual rainbow variety.
Anyway, rant over.
In almost every important dimension, the Nissan is usefully larger – by an additional 11mm in length (4680mm versus 4568mm), +105mm in height (1725mm v 1620mm) and +50mm in wheelbase (2705mm v 2655mm), while the ZR-V concedes just 1.0mm of ground clearance to the X-Trail’s 187mm.
Oddly, although the latter looks wider (and has more interior space to stretch), they’re actually the same overall width at 1840mm.
Visually, the ZR-V is like an SUV compilation greatest hits mishmash, with a bit of Maserati Grecale meets Ford Escape up front, a profile that whispers Porsche Macan and maybe Mazda CX-5, and a lot of Lexus RX at the rear.
That the designers have managed to make all that meld so well is an achievement in itself.
Meanwhile, the X-Trail’s tastiest angle is the rear-three-quarter, which also reveals the chunky wide stance, nice glass-to-body ratio and clean surfacing.
Up front, though, it’s looking fussy and even a bit dated already. Nissan’s facelifted this look (it’s a three-year old one) in North America, where it’s sold as the Rogue. Check it out. No better really.
And we’re still years away from seeing that happen here, as our models are made in Japan. Like with the ZR-V.
Overall, though, both are fine-looking SUVs, though the Nissan’s styling seems more original.
Nissan X-Trail Ti e-Power | 8/10 |
Honda ZR-V e:HEV LX | 8/10 |
Practicality
Mazda CX-99/10
Being an SUV that’s 5075mm long, 1969mm wide and 1747mm tall, practicality is arguably the most important thing for the CX-9, and with the option of six seats for the first time with the new Azami LE, it’s even more versatile.
All seven-seat grades have a 60/40 split-fold second row that manually slides and reclines the same as before, with only the Sport missing out on one-touch tumble operation, which makes accessing the 50/50 split-fold third row even easier, even if it’s still not graceful.
But the six-seat Azami LE is configured differently, given its second row has two captain’s chairs instead of a bench. That said, it operates in a very similar manner, just with power adjustment.
I still had around eight centimetres of legroom and four of legroom behind my 184cm (6'0") driving position, while the large transmission tunnel that’s a foot-space issue in seven-seat versions... isn’t.
One key difference with the very roomy and comfortable Azami LE is it only has four top-tether child-seat anchorage points, while all other grades have five thanks to their extra seat. Either way, four ISOFIX child-set anchorage points are split across the second and third rows.
Alternatively, the third row can be used by adults on shorter journeys, although they won’t have a lot of space to enjoy. Again, I'm 184cm tall and it’s tight back there, with no headroom or legroom on offer, but children will, of course, fare much better.
The CX-9’s boot is still pretty usable with all three rows in action, with 230L of cargo capacity available, but you can stow the two rear seats to get 810L in total.
And if you want maximum cargo capacity, the middle seats can also be folded, but not in the Azami LE, annoyingly.
Either way, the CX-9 doesn’t have a load lip but does have a flat floor, so loading bulkier items is a cinch, while two bag hooks and four tie-down points are on hand for securing loose items if they can’t fit in the double map pockets on the front seat backrests.
There are two cupholders in the third row, another two in the second row’s fold-down armrest (seven-seater versions) or large centre console (Azami LE), and another two in the first row’s larger centre console, while the front and rear door bins can also take bottles – and other knick-knacks.
All grades get USB ports in the first row, while the Touring and above also have them in the second row, and the GT and above also feature them in the third row. It’d be nice if there was no differentiation, though.
Honda ZR-V
Advantage: X-Trail. Families seeking space in a larger-than-usual mid-sized SUV need look no further.
Before we go on, remember, our photos show the Ti but the base ST-L that matches the ZR-V LX’s price point features an 8.0-inch (rather than 12.3-inch) central screen, more-traditional analogue instrumentation cluster with a 7.0-inch TFT screen, non-leather seat trim and conventional, rather than camera, interior mirror.
Regardless, you’re also likely to notice how large and airy the X-Trail interior is, with easy access to all five seats thanks to very wide-opening doors, revealing an interior offering heaps of legroom, headroom and shoulder room.
Nissan – just like Honda – got its interior right, with most of the important stuff thoughtfully executed – superb build quality, broad yet comfy front seats, ample ventilation, an excellent driving position with good all-around vision and completely logical control and button layout/access.
There's also more storage than you would know what to do with. Big bottle holders in the doors is another boon.
Remember when the X-Trail’s dash used to have chilled/cupholders, a centrally-located analogue instrument binnacle and two storage cubbies on either side, all to give it a rugged and utilitarian 4x4 feel?
That’s all gone now, with our Ti being the most opulent in the series’ 23-year (and four iteration) history.
More high points? Attractive and yet hardy, the long, low instrument panel features premium finishes, backed up by a chunky little steering wheel, an informative and multi-configurable digital instrument cluster, bi-level centre console bisecting the front seats for a cosier feel, and a big central touchscreen that’s simple to figure out and operate.
Out back, the quite flat yet supportive rear seats are remarkable for being slide-able as well as reclinable, while – as with the Honda – occupants are treated to rear air outlets, USB-A and USB-C port access, a centre folding armrest with cupholders and even more bottle storage in the doors.
Plus – predictably – the deep side windows lend a lot of light and vision out, adding yet another dimension of family friendliness. The substantially larger CR-V would have been a better fit for this showdown.
That all said, it’s not as if Honda was sitting on its hands when creating the ZR-V’s interior.
Strangely enough, it’s not as tight inside as its smaller length and wheelbase measurements suggest – especially if you’re a human and not, say, a tumble dryer trying to be shoved in the back. More on that later.
Up front, the ZR-V is typical modern Honda, with a simple – say might even say sparse – dashboard layout that, with plenty of soft-feel surfaces and strip of honeycomb trim, manages to look classy as well as sensible.
The leather front seats are cushy and nicely bolstered, providing an absolutely superb and immersive driving position ahead of elegant and crystal-clear digitalised instrumentation.
Along with the thick-rimmed sports steering wheel with paddle shifters (for regen-braking effort), it feels inclusive in here, like you’re about to drive a low-slung sports sedan. Thin A-pillars provide better-than-usual forward vision, too.
However, over-the-shoulder vision is poor due to the slim side and back glasshouse, and the black trim does make it seem smaller inside than it actually is, while having no factory sunroof availability – even as an option – is an oversight. That would at least shower the cabin with more light.
On the other hand, a high-set digital speed readout renders the absent head-up display almost superfluous, the cupholders, smartphone charger pad and under-console shelf are thoughtfully placed, the climate control is beautifully intuitive to operate and the tactility of the toggle and switchgear controls are right up there with luxury car alternatives.
Likewise, the back-seat area is also inviting, with ample room for even taller adults, proving the ZR-V’s rear isn’t cramped, just cosy due to the well-padded seating and high window line.
And the backrest has a 40/20/40 split, meaning the centre bit can be folded down for additional longer-load-through accessibility from the back. Great for skis or broomsticks.
Note, though, that, unlike in the X-Trail, neither the base nor backrest slide or recline, respectively, it’s dark enough to be a gloomy Smiths album out back, the back doors can’t hold a bottle, there are no overhead grab handles, and what’s with that fiddly roof-mounted centre rear lap/sash seat belt location?
Further back, it’s a no-brainer... on paper.
The X-Trail trumps the ZR-V with 205 litres more cargo capacity at 575L versus 370L. But in reality, both offer a decently-sized opening to help make loading bulky things inside easy.
There are low flat floors with sufficient depth and width for plenty of gear and a few nooks and crannies for additional items.
Keep in mind that neither carry spare wheels. You get a can of goo and an air pump instead. Not good enough for many rural drivers.
And that X-Trail hybrid's boot space is 10L less than the five-seat petrol-only versions, but much bigger than the 465L offered up in the seven-seat variants (also petrol-only). And speaking of internal combustion processes…
Nissan X-Trail Ti e-Power | 9/10 |
Honda ZR-V e:HEV LX | 8/10 |
Price and features
Mazda CX-98/10
The CX-9 has become more expensive, with some grades up a little, while others are up a lot. The range now starts from $45,990, plus on-road costs, and reaches $73,875 (see pricing table below), but there is more standard equipment now.
Either way, two new grades have joined the now-comprehensive CX-9 line-up, bringing the total to six, with the new GT SP slotting in above the mid-range GT but below the previously flagship Azami, which is now bettered by the new Azami LE.
The entry-level Sport and Touring round out the line-up, with each grade coming with front-wheel drive as standard, although all-wheel drive is an expensive $4000 option for all but the Azami that instead asks for a $4435 premium, and the Azami LE which gets it as standard.
Features-wise, the Sport gets dusk-sensing LED headlights, rain-sensing wipers, 18-inch alloy wheels, push-button start, a 7.0-inch central display, satellite navigation, Apple CarPlay and Android Auto support, digital radio, a six-speaker sound system, a head-up display, three-zone climate control and black cloth upholstery.
While the Touring has the same 18-inch alloy wheels, it steps up with keyless entry, a 9.0-inch central display, paddle-shifters (new), power-adjustable front seats with heating, and black leather upholstery.
The GT goes even further with 20-inch alloy wheels, a hands-free power-operated tailgate, a sunroof, the aforementioned 10.25-inch central display (new), a 12-speaker Bose sound system, a wireless smartphone charger (new) and heated outboard middle seats.
As its name suggests, the new GT SP is the sportier version of the GT, adding a unique black finish to its 20-inch alloy wheels and side-mirror caps as well as burgundy leather upholstery and red stitching for just $500 more.
Meanwhile, the Azami has 20-inch alloy wheels with a bright finish (new) as well as adaptive LED headlights, LED daytime running lights, a 7.0-inch multifunction display, a heated steering wheel and 'Pure White' or 'Walnut Brown' quilted Nappa leather upholstery (new).
And finally, the new Azami LE mimics the Azami but replaces its middle bench with two power-adjustable captain’s chairs with heating and cooling plus a dedicated centre console, so six seats in total instead of the usual seven.
Also of note, the CX-9 has a new metallic paintwork option: 'Polymetal Grey', which helps it stand out from the crowd.
For reference, the CX-9’s rivals include the soon-to-be-replaced Toyota Kluger ($44,850 to $68,574) and the recently launched facelifted Hyundai Santa Fe ($43,990 to $61,660) and new-generation Kia Sorento ($45,850 to $63,070).
2021 Mazda CX-9 pricing before on-road costs
Sport FWD | automatic | $45,990 (+$70) |
Sport AWD | automatic | $49,990 (+$70) |
Touring FWD | automatic | $53,490 (+$180) |
Touring AWD | automatic | $57,490 (+$180) |
GT FWD | automatic | $62,990 (+$1270) |
GT AWD | automatic | $66,990 (+$1270) |
GT SP FWD | automatic | $63,490 (NEW) |
GT SP AWD | automatic | $67,490 (NEW) |
Azami FWD | automatic | $66,190 (+$1297) |
Azami AWD | automatic | $70,625 (+$1686) |
Azami LE | automatic | $73,875 (NEW) |
Honda ZR-V
Now, hang on. Wouldn’t it make more sense to simply compare the X-Trail e-Power with the recently-released Honda CR-V e:HEV RS range-topper?
They are, after all, roughly the same size.
And the answer would be yes, except the new CR-V hybrid is $60,000 drive-away, while you can buy a base X-Trail ST-L e-Power from under $55K drive-away… which just happens to be exactly how much the ZR-V e:HEV LX costs.
Do please keep in mind that cheaper versions of both Hondas are in the pipeline for Australia.
So, what are these hybrid mid-sized SUVs like, then?
Released in mid-2023 and based on the excellent Civic hatch, the ZR-V is the new kid on the block. And – starting at $54,900 drive-away – what it lacks in size against the X-Trail is more than made-up for in features.
Now, at this price point, both feature plenty of safety, including Autonomous Emergency Braking (AEB), blind-spot alert, lane-keep assist systems and adaptive cruise control with full stop-go functionality.
Additionally, you’ll find heated front seats, dual-zone climate control, wired Apple CarPlay/Android Auto, privacy glass, 18-inch alloys and a full suite of driver-assist safety systems including emergency braking, adaptive cruise control and surround-view cameras.
But considering the X-Trail ST-L costs the same price as the ZR-V LX, it lacks the latter’s 12-speaker Bose audio upgrade, leather upholstery, heated steering wheel, powered front-passenger seat, heated rear seats, wireless Apple CarPlay, wireless charger, reverse-tilt exterior mirrors, interior air purifier and hands-free powered tailgate with walkaway closing.
For an electric tailgate, leather and smartphone charger, you’ll need to step up to X-Trail Ti e-Power (as tested) from $54,690, before on-road costs, or just under $60K when drive-away costs are factored in, giving the ZR-V LX hybrid a handy $5K start.
However, the Ti does bring its own little exclusive luxuries, like tri-zone climate control, adaptive matrix LED headlights, a panoramic sunroof, exterior-mirror camera view, and 19-inch alloys – though you’ll need to fork out for the range-topping X-Trail Ti-L from $57,160, before on-road costs, (or nearly $63K drive-away to more-fully match most of the ZR-V LX hybrid’s spec.)
Advantage Honda. But, like we said, the Nissan has great big size on its side. And it has two electric motors for all-wheel drive – something the ZR-V has no reply for.
Nissan X-Trail Ti e-Power | 9/10 |
Honda ZR-V e:HEV LX | 9/10 |
Under the bonnet
Mazda CX-97/10
All CX-9 grades are powered by a carryover 2.5-litre turbo-petrol four-cylinder engine, which produces 170kW of power at 5000rpm and 420Nm of torque at 2000rpm.
A six-speed torque-converter automatic transmission is standard, and again, you get the option of front- or all-wheel drive for all grades but one, the AWD-only Azami LE.
If you’re after a diesel-powered seven-seater, Mazda also has the similarly sized CX-8 in its line-up, but it still doesn’t offer a hybrid option in any of its SUVs, even though many rivals are moving in that direction, including the aforementioned Kluger, Santa Fe and Sorento.
Honda ZR-V
One of the biggest differences between these and the Toyota RAV4 hybrid is that these two contestants offer a significantly fuller EV experience.
Why? The Nissan’s petrol engine never powers any of the driven wheels, but instead drives one or both electric motors to make it all-wheel drive (AWD).
The Honda, meanwhile, uses its petrol engine to sometimes drive an electric motor, but mostly powers the front wheels, making it front-wheel drive (or 2WD in SUV marketing-speak).
Still, from behind the wheel, they’re remarkably similar in how they feel and behave, even if they sound completely different on the road.
For starters, both are no slouches, despite relying on a continuously variable transmission (the infamous CVT strikes again!) to drive these hybrid SUVs.
The X-Trail’s 1497cc 1.5-litre turbo triple produces 106kW of power at 4400rpm and 250Nm of torque at 2400rpm on its own, but with help from a power generator, inverter and twin electric motors (making 150kW on the front axle and 100kW on the rear), and its combined power and torque outputs are 157kW and 525Nm, respectively.
The latter happens from zero revs, since the electric motor is always doing the driving.
The ZR-V’s 1993cc 2.0-litre naturally aspirated four, meanwhile, delivers 104kW at 6000rpm and 186Nm at 4500rpm, but combined with the single 135kW motor, makes a combined 135kW and 315Nm.
Now, this might seem like a free kick for the muscular X-Trail, but the power-to-weight ratio difference evens the score more than you might expect: the 1.9-tonne (1903kg) Nissan pumps out 82.6kW/tonne, compared to our 1.6-tonne (1586kg) Honda’s 85.1kW/tonne.
The result? The latter’s 300kg-plus advantage and lower, sleeker shape means that, against our stopwatch, there was very little in it between the two hybrids – 7.1 vs 7.6s in favour of the gutsier Nissan. But it was only about 0.2s for most of that, until the X-Trail’s extra torque finally overcame that extra mass.
That said, during our 70-100km/h overtaking manoeuvre, both needed 2.9s, again highlighting the Honda’s lightness, while braking hard from 100-0km/h the ZR-V stopped three metres shorter at 39.2m. Again, blame the Nissan’s weight.
Keeping all that performance in check in both SUVs, by the way, are MacPherson-style struts up front and a multi-link rear end.
Nissan X-Trail Ti e-Power | 9/10 |
Honda ZR-V e:HEV LX | 9/10 |
Efficiency
Mazda CX-97/10
According to the official combined fuel consumption figures (ADR 81/02), FWD variants of the CX-9 sip 8.4 litres per 100km, which isn’t too bad for a petrol-powered large SUV that weighs just shy of 1900kg. Claimed carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions are 197 grams per km.
And given they weigh a whisker more than two tonnes, AWD versions of the CX-9s drink a slightly higher 9.0L/100km and emit 211g/km.
We covered 188km in the Azami AWD and Azami LE AWD at the CX-9’s launch and recorded 11.5L/100km after primarily driving on country roads and highways.
While that figure is nearly 30 per cent higher than Mazda's claim, it’s not outlandish considering the type of vehicle the CX-9 is. Either way, results will vary.
For reference, AWD variants have a slightly large fuel tank (74L) than their FWD counterparts (72L), but they all take more affordable 91RON petrol at minimum.
Honda ZR-V
Here’s another key difference. Officially, the Honda averages 5.0 litres per 100km while the Nissan should average 6.1L. But in reality…
During our week with both hybrid SUVs that included a lot of inner-urban schlepping as well as spirited driving and repeated performance testing – which tends to sap the fuel – the ZR-V averaged 7.3L/100km versus 8.6 for the X-Trail.
Note that the latter requires the more-expensive 95 RON premium-unleaded brew, too.
For the record, the car’s computer read 6.1 in the Honda and 7.4 in the Nissan, while the official combined average carbon dioxide emissions figures are 114 and 139g/km respectively.
The latter’s 55L tank means it should theoretically achieve around 900km between refills, against its rival’s 1140km from a 57L tank.
And just in case you’re wondering, the X-Trail’s lithium-ion battery is pretty modest at 2.1kWh, but that’s exactly twice as large as the ZR-V’s. Neither require to be plugged in, since - as mentioned earlier - the petrol engines do the charging.
Nissan X-Trail Ti e-Power | 8/10 |
Honda ZR-V e:HEV LX | 9/10 |
Driving
Mazda CX-98/10
As far as large SUVs go, the CX-9 is one of the better ones to drive. It’s certainly not confused; it knows what it needs to do and does it well.
The engine is properly punchy down low, serving up plenty of initial torque, so much so that you rarely need to chase its top-end power. In that way, it’s very diesel-like, despite being petrol. Needless to say, acceleration is surprisingly brisk. Not bad, then!
And the transmission it’s matched to also does its job well. Gear changes are pleasingly smooth, if not quick, while it's receptive to heavy applications of the accelerator, kicking down a ratio or two with little hesitation. Yep, don’t bother with its Sport mode.
The CX-9 also rides pretty well thanks to its independent suspension set-up, which consists of MacPherson-strut front and multi-link rear axles with passive dampers. Indeed, the kids aren’t going to be upset when they’re onboard.
Again, we mainly drove on country roads and highways, but it proved to be comfortable, particularly at high speed. And even during those rare, in-town, low-speed moments, it still impressed, on lower-quality roads or not.
And while the CX-9’s electric power steering is well-weighted, some buyers might be left wishing it was a tad lighter, especially when parking, but that’s more about personal preference than anything else.
What is more universal, though, is the system’s lack of feel. Obviously, we’re not dealing with a sports car here, but a little communication through the wheel wouldn’t go astray, particularly on a twisty road.
Speaking of which, the CX-9 handles its mass pretty confidently around a corner. That said, while it is relatively tied down, it still regularly exhibits a fair degree of body roll to remind you that you’re dealing with a large SUV.
Honda ZR-V
If you were taking either of these mid-sized hybrid SUVs on a short test-drive around urban streets, you might be forgiven for thinking the way they go and feel is almost indistinguishable.
Light, ultra-smooth and responsive all the way.
At lower speeds, both are easy to park, with sufficiently tight turning circles and aided by the surround-view cameras that shouldn’t be an issue for anybody to accurately place. Plus, there’s a decent degree of ride comfort to enjoy as well.
Understandably, for most folk behind the wheel, they’d struggle to them apart, truthfully.
Thankfully, we pride ourselves for going beyond the test drive, and after hundreds of kilometres testing both vigorously, interchanging between the two regularly, their distinct personalities and traits become crystal clear.
Nissan first.
The X-Trail e-Power e-4orce is a formidable machine. It’s also truly an EV in the way it delivers its electric power from the motor only to the wheels. When that small battery is all juiced up, you’d never know this was anything else but.
Off-the-line acceleration is instantaneous, and grin-inducingly strong if you’re not expecting the immediate surge forward that follows, accompanied by that electric whirr as the Nissan punches through the air.
That big motor generates a formidable amount of torque that’s always on tap for effortless momentum and oomph as required. It feels like a much-more expensive machine, and is just as refined to boot.
So, it comes as a surprise at first when that 1.5-litre turbo triple does chime in, breaking the relative mechanical silence with a constant drone. Briefly if not so quietly working in the background at first, it keeps the battery charged up from a certain point, and then just as quickly extinguishes, a bit like the refrigerator in your kitchen does.
And, so, the cycle continues of EV whoosh then white good hum. When you need more muscle – say, when overtaking – the engine kicks in again, but this time at a higher-set rev as it charges the battery with more urge, because it never drives the wheels, remember.
You don’t really feel the 2.0-tonne weight of the Ti e-Power in normal turning or cornering situations, because the steering is eager yet beautifully weighted, making this a sharp handler.
Likewise, with two electric motors shuffling torque to whichever axle needs it, there’s an exceptional level of road holding control, even across the often waterlogged roads that the late-spring weather showered upon. The Nissan is a perfectly safe and controllable long-distance grand tourer.
Muted tyre and road noise (wearing Dunlop Grand Trek 235/55R19 rubber), an effective ‘e-Pedal’ regenerative braking system that helps recharge the battery whilst bringing the car to a near stop, as well as nuanced traction and stability control intervention, are further bonuses that add to the enjoyment of riding and travelling in the Nissan.
However, while the around-town suspension comfort is impressive, larger bumps make themselves felt, as if the X-Trail’s springs have reached the limit of their absorption. Is that all that extra weight talking?
More annoyingly, when cruising along at speed in crosswinds, the steering can become a bit too sensitive, as the driver needs to make constant corrections to remain on the straight and narrow.
As a result, the car feels a little unsettled and nervous due to the slight but noticeable left-right pitching that ensues. One passenger described it as fidgety.
And, like many hybrid vehicles, including most of Toyota’s, the very effective brakes suffer from a wooden and artificial feel, meaning they can be a bit hard to moderate smoothly when applying.
Otherwise, the X-Trail is a pleasant and accomplished vehicle dynamically, and so a good all-around drive.
The ZR-V, however, is in another league.
The driver’s notes tell the story succinctly: “Lovely, smooth, linear and involving steering.” The Honda glides through corners with precision and ease, even at much higher speeds than most would attempt, backed up by plenty of grip and control.
And while there isn’t the AWD surety when conditions are wet, it still always felt planted and secure over our largely-wet test route.
Such dynamic athleticism suggests that ride comfort would be compromised, but on the smaller Bridgestone Alenza Enliten 225/55R18 tyres, the initial suspension firmness is tempered by an underlying suppleness and comfort that highlights a high degree of sophisticated suspension tuning.
The Honda truly is the driver’s hybrid SUV. More so than any other anywhere near its price point that springs to mind.
Because it’s largely a petrol-driven hybrid, rather than an EV with petrol-engine assistance like the Nissan, the ZR-V does not quite have that effortless all-electric torque to rely on, instead feeling more conventional in the way it delivers drive to the front wheels.
The 2.0L four's engagement after a brief all-EV driving period is seamless, by the way, and also typically-Honda in the way that it revs freely, sounding urgent as it delivers its torque consistently, even at low speeds.
Put your foot down more, and the electric assistance comes into play again, providing a decent whack of speed – more so than you might initially expect. And all of this is provided with a refinement and civility you’d expect in a much more premium machine.
Other plus points include yet another subtle traction/ESC tune over gravel tracks, but one with a degree of looseness for a bit of fun if the driver is up for it, paddles that provide some EV regen-braking e-Pedal-style to slow you down, and a nifty drive-mode toggle that can be easily prodded by the driver without distraction. A sign of the enthusiasts who engineered this sporty SUV.
The only fly in the Honda’s driving ointment is noise. Too much road roar over coarse chip surfaces, and excessive wind rush from the large exterior mirrors.
Otherwise, the ZR-V is exceptionally accomplished dynamically for any modern family vehicle, and not just a medium-sized hybrid SUV. Not perfect, but massively impressive and delightful.
Nissan X-Trail Ti e-Power | 8/10 |
Honda ZR-V e:HEV LX | 9/10 |
Safety
Mazda CX-98/10
ANCAP awarded the CX-9 its maximum five-star safety rating in 2016, and despite the test occurring nearly five years ago, its results still stand.
Needless to say, the game has moved on, with the Santa Fe and Sorento recently resetting the standard, while the Kluger is soon to follow suit.
The CX-9 does, however, get front and side airbags as well as curtain airbags that cover all three rows, whereas the Santa Fe and Sorento only cover the first and second rows.
All grades of the CX-9 also get front and rear autonomous emergency braking, lane-keep assist, blind-spot monitoring, rear cross-traffic alert, adaptive cruise control with stop and go functionality, traffic sign recognition, high-beam assist and driver attention alert.
A reversing camera and rear parking sensors are also standard in all grades, but the Touring and above add front parking sensors, while the Azami and Azami LE also get surround-view cameras.
Honda ZR-V
Only the X-Trail has an ANCAP crash test rating, and it’s achieved five stars, based on the smaller Qashqai “partner model”.
While ANCAP has yet to test the ZR-V, Euro NCAP recently awarded the Honda four out of five stars, citing it was “just below the five-star performance thresholds” due to slightly below-par adult side-impact protection where the front occupants’ heads can make contact, as well as safety-assist system anomalies whereby traffic-sign recognition and driver monitoring tech that do not default to ‘on’ or only operate above 45km/h, respectively.
Both models offer lots of driver-assist safety equipment, like Autonomous Emergency Braking (AEB) with pedestrian and cyclist detection, blind-spot alert, lane-keep assist systems, adaptive cruise control with full stop-go function, a driver fatigue monitor, auto high beams, traffic sign recognition, front/rear parking sensors, anti-lock braking system with brake assist, 'Electronic Brake-force Distribution', hill-start assist, stability control and traction control.
However, there are omissions: the Honda misses out on the Nissan’s rear AEB with pedestrian and cyclist calibration, while the Nissan’s seven airbag rating trails the Honda’s 11 – which includes full side airbag protection for outboard rear-seat occupants.
Both vehicles also include ISOFIX child-seat latches fitted to outboard rear seat positions, while a trio of top tethers for straps are included across the rear bench.
Note that Honda’s AEB system is operational from 5.0-180km/h according to Euro NCAP, the lane support systems work between 65-180km/h and the traffic-jam assist tech works between 0-72km/h.
The Nissan’s AEB kicks in from 5.0-130km/h, pedestrian and cyclist AEB from 5.0-80km/h, and the lane support systems work between 60-250km/h.
Nissan X-Trail Ti e-Power | 9/10 |
Honda ZR-V e:HEV LX | 8/10 |
Ownership
Mazda CX-98/10
As with all Mazda models, the CX-9 comes with a five-year/unlimited-kilometre warranty with five years of roadside assistance, both of which are average when compared to Kia’s market-leading seven-year terms with ‘no strings attached’.
Service intervals are 12 months or 10,000km, with the distance on the shorter side, although capped-price servicing is available for the first five visits, costing $2022 in total at the time of the writing, which is very reasonable.
Honda ZR-V
Both Nissan and Honda offer a five-year/unlimited kilometre warranty that also includes roadside assistance.
But the ZR-V goes one better with a no-cost subscription to Honda Connect for remote vehicle operation, location and geo-fencing if required. Clever.
The Honda’s servicing intervals are every 12 months or 10,000km, with capped price servicing pegged at an annual flat fee of $199 for the first five years. That’s under $1000 over that period of time.
Nissan, meanwhile, matches all that, bar the 'Honda Connect' tech, and offers six years of capped-price servicing.
But at the five-year mark, the X-Trail e-Power costs over $1300 more than the ZR-V hybrid.
Nissan X-Trail Ti e-Power | 8/10 |
Honda ZR-V e:HEV LX | 9/10 |