New Mazda CX-3 & Renault Captur vs Seat Arona
Having been trounced by the Seat Arona, Mazda and Renault have revised their CX-3 and Captur small SUV offerings...
Space and practicality
Front space, rear space, seating flexibility, boot
When it comes to front leg and head room, the differences are small enough that they aren’t really worth pointing out. What is important is that you won’t feel remotely cramped in any of our contenders, even if you’re well over six feet tall.
However, you wouldn’t choose the CX-3 if you’re tall and had to sit in the back of one of these cars on a long journey. It’s the tightest for both rear leg and head room, to the point that you’ll probably find your knees wedged against the back of the seat in front. The Arona provides the most room for your head, although the Captur’s sliding rear seats are handy, because they allow you to prioritise rear leg room or boot space depending on the situation. Slide the seats all the way back and it actually edges the Arona for rear leg room.
Even in that configuration, the Captur’s boot can swallow the most carry-on suitcases – six – below its parcel shelf, compared with the five we managed to slot easily into the Arona and, with less room to spare, the CX-3. If you need extra luggage space, you can fold down the rear seats in all three cars, and each comes with a height-adjustable boot floor as standard. With these set in their highest positions, there’s barely a lip at any of the boot entrances nor step in the floor of the extended load areas when the seats are folded down.
The CX-3 has the smallest boot, but it still managed to swallow five carry-on suitcases. It’s also worst for rear head and leg room; six-footers will fit but won’t have space to stretch out
Boot 350-1260 litres Suitcases 5
The fact you can slide the Captur’s rear seats back and forth allows you to prioritise boot space or rear leg room, depending on your needs. Even with them back, it can take one more case than its rivals
Boot 377-1235 litres Suitcases 6