Mazda CX-5 vs Kia Sportage used test

SUVs can live hard lives, thanks to their traditionally heavy use and long-distance mileage. They’re often equipped with four-wheel drive, and are usually powered by diesel, too, which can combine to raise questions over any vehicle’s future costs and reliability. When purchasing second-hand, buyers are advised to look out for models with a proven track record of reliability and satisfaction, and our two contenders here fit the bill perfectly.

Both our Mazda CX-5 2.2 Skyactiv-D and Kia Sportage 1.7 CRDi 3 are two-wheel drives. This helps make things easier and cheaper. Their respective diesel-engine capacities differ by half a litre, and naturally you have to work the Kia’s smaller unit hard to access its full 114bhp and 192lb ft of torque. Also naturally, it becomes noisier and rougher as you do so, while the manual gearbox feels rather notchy and frustrating. The upside is that it seems more powerful than it actually is thanks to very good reserves of low-down muscle.

If you’re looking for a more relaxing drive, both on A-roads and when cruising, you’ll find it in the Mazda. The CX-5 boasts 148bhp and 280lb ft of torque, a sound transmission, more feedback from the steering and better-controlled handling.

Inside these family-friendly, load-lugging vehicles, the Mazda has the bigger, taller, wider and lower boot. A standard-fit panoramic sunroof gives the Kia’s cabin an airier feel, but impedes on overall headroom. Neither does the Sportage feel as high quality as its rival here, despite being a facelifted model. Still, its 4.3in infotainment screen works better and more intuitively than the CX-5’s larger 5.8in device.

Broadly corresponding depreciation levels mean the similar used prices for these two cars as are comparable as were their new prices. Yet a seven-year warranty is the Kia’s trump car; a large chunk of this will still remain on a car of this age. The Sportage does cost £145 a year to tax, however, compared with the Mazda’s £30 bill. This reflects the former’s heavier fuel use, at a claimed 52.3mpg compared with CX-5’s 61.4mpg.