2019 Mazda CX-3 GT AWD Review - Size Small

Matthew Guy
by Matthew Guy

People, pets, and cars all arrive on this planet in different shapes and sizes. Alert readers know this author’s proclivity for Large Machines which bend the macadam with their shocking curb weights and lot-hogging girth. I remain unrepentant.

It was a surprise, then, for the diminutive little roller skate you see here to spin my crank in a positive direction. Yes, it measures several sizes smaller than most other crossovers — smaller, even, than some of its direct competitors.

Like a Jack Russell terrier, what the Mazda CX-3 gives up in size it more than makes up for with excited exuberance. It’s like a Miata with a backpack.

Ok. Maybe that’s a bit of a stretch, as this car-on-stilts will obviously bow to the laws of gravity much more quickly than an MX-5 if you try to whip it through a set of corners with too much élan. Still, it is much more playful than its competitors, which is the point I’m trying to make.

The Mazda lineage is easy to spot, both inside and out. The zoom-zoom company isn’t the largest maker of cars in the world and, lacking the ability to draw upon the bank account of a corporate parent, common parts must be strewn around the interior like sawdust at a lumber convention. This is not wholly a bad thing, for two reasons.

First, flying solo allows Mazda to be more nimble and employ changes to their product without having to first pass the alterations though five hundred different departments. If a snake is discovered at Mazda, they kill it. If a snake is discovered at BigCarCo, they’ll have a meeting and then create a committee to study snakes before deciding to leave the snake alone because its shop steward threatened job action. Mazda is unfettered by such complications.

[Get new and used Mazda CX-3 pricing here!]

It helps that the parts bin from which they are drawing interior bits is filled with well thought out toys. The CX-3 driver faces a set of gauges whose tachometer is front and center with a tidy digital speedometer tucked in its corner. Infotainment is of the iPad-on-the-dash variety, but it works well paired with the rocker/rotary dial that controls the thing.

Knobs like these (no, I’m not describing my TTAC workmates), especially ones which rock and roll, sometimes feel wobbly and cheap as they make pathetic attempts to spin 360-degrees while simultaneously operating on ABXY axes. Not here. The just-inches-away volume dial is fine for passengers, and five redundant buttons provide shortcuts to major functions.

It is remarkable, really, given that the unit must integrate into just about every car and crossover that Mazda makes, not to mention they probably designed the thing on a relative shoestring — at least compared to companies where $100,000 is a rounding error.

This CX-3 is the Canadian-market GT version, bearing the weight of an all-wheel drive system. Its equipment level is equivalent to that of a Grant Touring in the States, a unit which wears a Monroney of $33,140 when shod with power at all four corners. An equivalent American trim trips the financial scales at $29,445. It’s worth noting that you lot south of the border get dinged $145 extra for the Soul Red paint shown here, more if you account for exchange ($595USD vs $450CAD).

The white leather makes the car look much more expensive than it really is, although long-term wear in a family environment might be a challenge. I’ve had to pry melted crayons and gelatinous gummy bears out of the Charger’s seats and thanked FCA for its durable black cloth every time I did so. That wouldn’t fly with this interior.

Every CX-3 being floorplanned on dealer lots today is powered by a Skyactiv-G 2.0 L DOHC 16-valve 4-cylinder engine. This power team is good for 148 horsepower and 146 lb-ft torque, which doesn’t sound like much, but it shoved the CX-3 along the road with an alacrity not found in small-utes from other manufacturers. In a segment where most machines are more morose than a brooding teen or have the personality of wallpaper paste, the Mazda takes its sporty heritage seriously, offering drivers a dose of good cheer along with their commute, proving that driving fun and family hauling need not be mutually exclusive.

Just not too much hauling, though. The CX-3’s cargo area suffers from a fast roofline that gives the rig a sporty shape like that of an athletic shoe but eats into cargo space something fierce. The Subaru Crosstrek, just to name one, does a better job of packaging and delivers more room as a result. Be sure to bring along most of your daily detritus during the test drive to make sure you can live with the 12.4 cubes of cargo space behind the rear seat before you sign the papers.

Addressing my “MX-5 with a backpack” comment above, I do believe the comparison is apt, as most backpacks are designed to simply supplement a person’s carrying capacity by providing space for a minute’s worth of gear, while leaving the wearer free to jump around and have a bit of fun. So, too, does the CX-3.

Long-time Ace of Base readers (thanks, all five of you) know I enjoy and recommend the cheapest version of just about any given model. Guess what? Given all CX-3’s are powered by the same engine and are imbued with the same driving dynamics, I hold fast to that belief here as well. The entry-level CX-3 stickers for several thousand less than this GT but is imbued with the same engine and sprightly manners. All-wheel drive is neither necessary nor desired in any parts of the country. Those who do live in the snow belt would be well advised to buy four good winter tires for their front-drive CX-3. That’s what I do here in the Great White North, a place sodden with bull moose and treacherous driving conditions.

This pint-size tall hatchback proves the hackneyed old saw of good things coming in small packages. Winning over this 6’6” Large Person is no small feat, though those relegated to the CX-3’s second row should have small feet.

I’ll stick to my stretch-em-out Charger, no doubt. But anyone who’s in the market for a crossover rig with Size S on the neck tag would be well served to give this Mazda CX-3 their attention.

[Images: © 2018 Matthew Guy/TTAC]

Matthew Guy
Matthew Guy

Matthew buys, sells, fixes, & races cars. As a human index of auto & auction knowledge, he is fond of making money and offering loud opinions.

More by Matthew Guy

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 55 comments
  • 28-Cars-Later 28-Cars-Later on Oct 09, 2018

    The silhouette image is a metaphor for everything wrong with today.

  • HotPotato HotPotato on Oct 27, 2018

    Over thirty grand for this thing that can accommodate only legless rear passengers and flexible canvas grocery bags, and combines road-hugging weight and a tall center of gravity with the horsepower of a 1999 Ford Focus? Is this what we're reduced to? If I'm going to pay this much dough for this little a car, it better have a tire-melting electric drivetrain.

  • CoastieLenn I would do dirrrrrrty things for a pristine 95-96 Thunderbird SC.
  • Whynotaztec Like any other lease offer it makes sense to compare it to a purchase and see where you end up. The math isn’t all that hard and sometimes a lease can make sense, sometimes it can’t. the tough part with EVs now is where is the residual or trade in value going to be in 3 years?
  • Rick T. "If your driving conditions include near-freezing temps for a few months of the year, seek out a set of all-seasons. But if sunshine is frequent and the spectre of 60F weather strikes fear into the hearts of your neighbourhood, all-seasons could be a great choice." So all-seasons it is, apparently!
  • 1995 SC Should anyone here get a wild hair and buy this I have the 500 dollar tool you need to bleed the rear brakes if you have to crack open the ABS. Given the state you will. I love these cars (obviously) but trust me, as an owner you will be miles ahead to shell out for one that was maintained. But properly sorted these things will devour highway miles and that 4.6 will run forever and should be way less of a diva than my blown 3.8 equipped one. (and forget the NA 3.8...140HP was no match for this car).As an aside, if you drive this you will instantly realize how ergonomically bad modern cars are.These wheels look like the 17's you could get on a Fox Body Cobra R. I've always had it in the back of my mind to get a set in the right bolt pattern so I could upgrade the brakes but I just don't want to mess up the ride. If that was too much to read, from someone intamately familiar with MN-12's, skip this one. The ground effects alone make it worth a pass. They are not esecially easy to work on either.
  • Macca This one definitely brings back memories - my dad was a Ford-guy through the '80s and into the '90s, and my family had two MN12 vehicles, a '93 Thunderbird LX (maroon over gray) purchased for my mom around 1995 and an '89 Cougar LS (white over red velour, digital dash) for my brother's second car acquired a year or so later. The Essex V6's 140 hp was wholly inadequate for the ~3,600 lb car, but the look of the T-Bird seemed fairly exotic at the time in a small Midwest town. This was of course pre-modern internet days and we had no idea of the Essex head gasket woes held in store for both cars.The first to grenade was my bro's Cougar, circa 1997. My dad found a crate 3.8L and a local mechanic replaced it - though the new engine never felt quite right (rough idle). I remember expecting something miraculous from the new engine and then realizing that it was substandard even when new. Shortly thereafter my dad replaced the Thunderbird for my mom and took the Cougar for a new highway commute, giving my brother the Thunderbird. Not long after, the T-Bird's 3.8L V6 also suffered from head gasket failure which spelled its demise again under my brother's ownership. The stately Cougar was sold to a family member and it suffered the same head gasket fate with about 60,000 miles on the new engine.Combine this with multiple first-gen Taurus transmission issues and a lemon '86 Aerostar and my dad's brand loyalty came to an end in the late '90s with his purchase of a fourth-gen Maxima. I saw a mid-90s Thunderbird the other day for the first time in ages and it's still a fairly handsome design. Shame the mechanicals were such a letdown.
Next