Holden Equinox v Mazda CX-5 2018 Comparison

For Holden, keeping its aged Captiva alive and kicking in the mid-size SUV segment where much younger and fitter rivals abound has been a bit of a struggle.

Battling against the segment-reigning Mazda CX-5, the resurgent Nissan X-Trail and Honda CR-V, plus a formidable list of match-fit rivals that includes Toyota RAV4, Hyundai Tucson, Kia Sportage, Subaru Forester and Volkswagen Tiguan, the bravely struggling but tiring Captiva was way past its prime.

Its replacement, the US-designed Equinox, comes here with significant Australian developmental input and is a different story altogether.

Among mid-size SUVs, where does the Equinox fit?

Although it’s roughly the same size as the ousted Captiva, the Mexican-built Equinox somehow looks bigger, maybe because its proportions are more satisfactorily balanced through having a slightly lower roofline (1697 against 1727mm) and essentially the same width (1843 against 1849mm). It is shorter than the Captiva by a mere 21mm yet, at 2725mm, has an 18mm longer wheelbase, meaning reduced overhangs.

On top of that, the Equinox picks up two new turbo-petrol engines: A base 127kW/275Nm 1.5-litre and, from LT upwards, a way more powerful 188kW/353Nm 2.0-litre – the former driving through a six-speed automatic transmission and the latter, a nine-speeder. Whichever engine, AWD doesn’t become available until LTZ level, where it adds $4300 to the price.

What does all this mean when the new Holden is thrown into the mid-size SUV mix?

To get a clear idea, we are here taking a look at how the top-spec Equinox LTZ-V compares with the best that the segment-leading, Japanese-built CX-5 Mazda has to offer: the Akera-spec model which we elected to test, in the interests of fuel-diet equivalence, in petrol form rather than the pricier diesel.

<a href="https://motoring.pxcrush.net/motoring/general/editorial/180406_mazda_cx-5_05-o4uz.jpg"><img class="alignnone size-csn-inline-image wp-image-241385" src="https://motoring.pxcrush.net/motoring/general/editorial/180406_mazda_cx-5_05-o4uz.jpg?height=427&width=640&aspect=fitWithin" alt="" width="640" height="427"></a>

Road tripping

At this point the Equinox shows a clear lead: Fielding its beefier turbo engine the LTZ-V is already a big step ahead of the CX-5 Akera’s 140kW/252Nm 2.5-litre aspirated petrol engine – although there is a price to pay in both fuel economy and exhaust emissions.

The Holden (heavier, at 1735kg tare compared with the Mazda’s 1670kg) claims 8.4L/100km and 196g/km against the Mazda’s 7.4L/100km and 175g/km. As expected, the differences were reflected during our comparison, where the Mazda sat happily around 8.5L/100km and the Equinox struggled to get below 10.0L/100km.

And the Holden asks for a 95 RON diet where the Mazda is happy with regular unleaded, or an E10 ethanol mix (if you can find an outlet). Fuel tank sizes are essentially the same: 59 litres for the Equinox and 58 litres for the Mazda.

There was a bit of an about-face when the two were judged on overall road behaviour though: Not to say we were unimpressed with the Holden’s Australia-friendly suspension tune, but the Mazda had a clear edge in terms of its overall ride-handling balance. It softened-out the bumps better and, in the composed, quiet way it handled a wide spectrum of road challenges from undulating bitumen, to rough, poorly-maintained surfaces, to smooth, open freeways, felt more at one with the driver.

Opinions on the quality of the Holden’s steering were mixed: Some believed it felt a bit more artificial than the CX-5, while others noted there was a nice crispness to initial driver inputs that compared favourably against the Mazda’s tendency towards slower reactions.

But coupled with what we thought was really a more-than-satisfactory ride/handling compromise, was the Holden’s authoritative power supply.

Add the benefits of the nine-speed auto and you get a mid-size SUV that performs with enthusiasm, even when fully loaded. Sit five passengers in the six-speed auto CX-5, and the extra weight has the aspirated powerplant beginning to show signs of a struggle.

The Equinox is a bit better at towing too, rated at 2000kg for a braked trailer against the Mazda’s 1800kg. However, in 19-inch-wheel, AWD LTZ-V form, it has a 12.7m turning circle which is way more than the 11.0m Mazda.

The Equinox is not short on safety technology. Like the CX-5, it comes with lane-departure warning, lane-keep assist, blind-spot monitoring and rear cross-traffic alert – but it misses out on the adaptive cruise control we’re coming to expect even at less hi-falutin levels of the market.

Equally, the autonomous emergency braking system (AEB) is low-speed only where the Mazda system functions at high and low speeds, and in reverse. The CX-5 does miss out on the Holden’s self-parking capability though.

Both Mazda and Holden come with standard, self-dipping LED headlights; although the CX-5’s sophisticated “adaptive” system, which regulates the LEDs to suit prevailing circumstances, we tended to prefer the Equinox’s simpler on-off system because of its excellent high-beam penetration.

<a href="https://motoring.pxcrush.net/motoring/general/editorial/180406_holden_equinox_ltz-v_10-oac6.jpg"><img class="alignnone size-csn-inline-image wp-image-241456" src="https://motoring.pxcrush.net/motoring/general/editorial/180406_holden_equinox_ltz-v_10-oac6.jpg?height=427&width=640&aspect=fitWithin" alt="" width="640" height="427"></a>

Innermost secrets

Initially there didn’t seem to be much difference when it came to comparing accommodation and load-carrying. Particularly in the boot where we struggled to believe Holden’s load-capacity claims. A minimum of 846 litres and a maximum of 1798 litres with all seats folded sounded and looked a bit unlikely.

As we found though, it’s the Holden SUV’s compact space-saver that makes the difference. Remove the false floor above the spare wheel and there’s a big space that can be used to either enlarge the boot or conceal valuables. Suddenly the official claims sound quite feasible.

The loading height is lower than the CX-5 too and, handily for packing-unpacking, there’s no lip between the boot floor and the tailgate sill – while the power tailgate can be adjusted so it opens to higher, or lower positions to allow easy reach for all customers.

We didn’t like the way the 60:40 rear seats folded: They didn’t form as flat a surface as the CX-5 and the right-side backrest slammed down almost violently when activated by the lever in the boot. By comparison, the Mazda’s 40:20:40 set-up remote-folded with a gentle, refined grace.

The Mazda’s maturity was also evident in the use of better-quality vinyl throughout, and carpet-lined sides in the boot. The Holden’s cargo area was trimmed in cheap-looking, easily-scratched plastics which, even on the very-young test car, were already showing permanent scuff marks.

Space-wise, the Equinox takes the lead though: It eclipses the Mazda when measured from the tailgate to the front-seat backrests, approaching what you might expect of a size-larger SUV. The back seat is a stretchier place to be than the admittedly-generous Mazda, helped by the measurably wider door openings that enable much-easier entry and exit. The only downer is the headroom gobbled up by the Holden’s full-length moon roof. The CX-5, with its almost-diminutive sunroof, doesn’t intrude at all on your headspace.

Rear-seat passengers will find the stadium-style seating and lower window lines give the Equinox an airier feeling too – the latter also appealing to drivers of less than basketball-pro measurements. But while rear-seat foot space is enhanced by the lack of a transmission tunnel, the driver for some reason is not provided with a left footrest.

The seats? Well, we found that while there’s really not a lot of difference between the two – power adjustment, with two memory settings on the driver’s sides is standard on both and internal cabin widths are virtually the same – the Mazda’s were a bit better-shaped and supportive.

<a href="https://motoring.pxcrush.net/motoring/general/editorial/180406_mazda_cx-5_12.jpg"><img class="alignnone size-csn-inline-image wp-image-241468" src="https://motoring.pxcrush.net/motoring/general/editorial/180406_mazda_cx-5_12.jpg?height=427&width=640&aspect=fitWithin" alt="" width="640" height="427"></a>

The Equinox scores, and picks up demerits, with its dash design.

While it all looks contemporary and flowing, with a much larger centre screen than the CX-5, plus a cordless phone charger sitting at the forward end of the centre console (although not all mobiles are acceptable) there’s some disparity in the trim materials. Hard-touch and soft-touch surfaces clash to give inconsistent tactility and – a personal fixation – the Equinox is touch-screen controlled.

The frumpier-looking Mazda uses a safer system with an iDrive-style knob on the centre console that allows the driver a more tactile, and way more preferable, approach to switching between functions that eliminates inaccurate stabbing at a constantly-jumping, attention-diverting touchscreen.

<a href="https://motoring.pxcrush.net/motoring/general/editorial/180406_mazda_cx-5_11.jpg"><img class="alignnone size-csn-inline-image wp-image-241467" src="https://motoring.pxcrush.net/motoring/general/editorial/180406_mazda_cx-5_11.jpg?height=427&width=640&aspect=fitWithin" alt="" width="640" height="427"></a>

So, who wins?

Although the verdict became less and less obvious the more time we spent with the new Holden Equinox and the now-aging Mazda CX-5, in the end it was the latter’s maturity, sense of refinement, tangible quality and overall capabilities that won the day.

To build a mid-size SUV that still manages to do everything exceptionally well in a red-hot market segment where the competition is playing a constant game of leap-frog, is testimony to how good the Mazda CX-5 was when it was introduced in 2012.

The Holden Equinox might not have taken the lead in this comparison test, but these are early days. The already-excellent packaging and the further refinement that will surely come as it settles into the market will see a promising SUV making an even more significant mark. It’s an impressive effort and we look forward to seeing it in upcoming comparisons with other mid-size SUV contenders.

<a href="https://motoring.pxcrush.net/motoring/general/editorial/180406_cx-5_vs_equinox_03-lo2z.jpg"><img class="alignnone size-csn-inline-image wp-image-241375" src="https://motoring.pxcrush.net/motoring/general/editorial/180406_cx-5_vs_equinox_03-lo2z.jpg?height=427&width=640&aspect=fitWithin" alt="" width="640" height="427"></a>

How much does the Holden Equinox LTZ-V cost?

2018 Holden Equinox LTZ-V pricing and specifications:
Price: $46,290 (plus on-road costs)
Engine: 2’0-litre four-cylinder turbo-petrol
Output: 188kW/353Nm
Transmission: Nine-speed automatic
Fuel: 8.4L/100km (ADR Combined), 9.8L/100km (as tested)
CO2: 196g/km (ADR Combined)
Safety Rating: Five-star ANCAP

How much does the Mazda CX-5 Akera cost?

2018 Mazda CX-5 Akera pricing and specifications:
Price: $46,990 (plus on-road costs)
Engine: 2.5-litre four-cylinder petrol
Output: 140kW/251Nm
Transmission: Six-speed automatic
Fuel: 7.5L/100km (ADR Combined), 8.6L/100km (as tested)
CO2: 175g/km (ADR Combined)
Safety Rating: Five-star ANCAP

Related reading:
>> Holden Equinox: Local Launch Review
>> Holden Equinox: Local Pricing
>> Mazda CX-5 Series II: Local Launch Review
>> Mazda CX-5 Series II: Local Pricing