Toyota C-HR vs Mazda CX-3 vs Hyundai Kona: Which one has the lowest running costs?
Presenting an off-beat alternative to a bunch of rather more pedestrian-looking SUV-crossovers, the Toyota C-HR is proving to be quite a popular choice for those who want a flash of style in a crowded marketplace. But it’s not alone in this field, so we decided to compare its running costs with those of two equally-appealing alternatives.
Can you pre-determine your car’s running costs?
When considering a car’s running costs, it’s important to look at it over the full life-cycle. This allows third or fourth owners of older cars to get a clearer picture of possible future expenses, and it helps first owners to determine at what age their cars may become too expensive to run.
There are certain key points which could give an idea of a car’s general upkeep requirements. This includes the length of the service intervals, the cost of replacement tyres and service- and maintenance parts, and the prices of service parts. It’s likely that running costs will be of lesser importance to new-car buyers, on account of the comprehensive service plans standard on all of them.
For those fortunate buyers, the main concerns would be reduced to depreciation, tyre prices, insurance and fuel thirst. However, the second- and third owners might want to know just how fat their wallets really need to be to own one of these urban warriors.
Let’s meet the contenders
Toyota C-HR (from R 379 100)
We selected a mid-level C-HR with a self-shifting transmission for this comparison (and applied the same rules to the other contenders as well). All C-HRs employ the same 1.2-litre turbocharged 4-cylinder engine, but only the entry-level variants are available with a manual gearbox – the others use a CVT, which isn’t too bad to drive for a transmission of this type. In 1.2T Plus Automatic trim, the C-HR lists at R 423 400, making it least-expensive in this group.
Outputs are rated at 85 kW and 185 Nm, giving a 0 – 100 km/h dash in a claimed 11.1 seconds and a top speed of 185 km/h. The manual version is slightly quicker and about R 12 000 less expensive, so if you don’t mind changing your own gears, better value will be found lower down the model range.
Related: The Toyota C-HR range also offers a high-trim option – read our review of the Luxury-spec variant here.
Mazda CX-3 (from R 329 000)
Seeing as the Nissan Juke has come to the end of its road, the Mazda CX-3 is arguably the C-HR’s closest conceptual competitor: a stylish, car-based crossover which prioritises good looks and front-seat comfort over practicality and rear-seat space. Apart from the top-level “Individual” and “Individual Plus” derivates, which come only with a 6-speed automatic gearbox, all Mazda CX-3s are available in either manual- or automatic formats, and employ the same 2.0-litre naturally-aspirated 4-cylinder engine across the range.
It out-classes the Toyota C-HR and Hyundai Kona 2.0 on power, however: 115 kW and 205 Nm comfortably betters the outputs of both of the others. As a result, it’s the quickest car here, running 0 – 100 km/h in 9.5 seconds on the way to a top speed of 192 km/h, the second-fastest one in this trio.
Related: The Mazda CX-3 received a mild make-over for 2019, and this review tells you everything you need to know about the current model.
Hyundai Kona 2.0 Executive (R 427 900)
The Hyundai Kona line-up only features two derivatives in South Africa: the 1.0T opens the range, but is only available with a manual transmission for a saving of about R 21 000 on the list price. If you want an automatic gearbox, the non-turbo 2.0-litre engine is your only option, and brings a higher power output to go with the self-shifter.
On tap from the engine room is 110 kW and 180 Nm (the second-most power here, but the least torque), giving a claimed 0 – 100 km/h sprint in 10.0 seconds and a top speed of 194 km/h. But, as with the Mazda, the power-sapping highveld air will have a definite effect on real-world performance, and likely hand sprinting honours to the torquier, force-fed Toyota at altitude.
Related: Go on, make yourself more interesting – we review the Hyundai Kona 2.0.
Which one has the lowest running costs?
Purchase price and depreciation
In 1.2T Plus automatic trim, the Toyota C-HR starts out with a slim advantage over the other two. It’s R 3 100 and R 4 500 less expensive than the Mazda (in Individual trim) and Hyundai Kona 2.0 Executive, respectively, so the difference isn’t really all that significant. With that said, a pricetag of over R 400 000 for a small crossover is quite startling, yet also indicative of the general rise in new-car prices.
In terms of resale value, the Toyota C-HR suffers from steeper depreciation than many other Toyotas, retaining only 80.9% of its new-car value after two years (based upon the average current value of 2018-model 1.2T Plus autos in the AutoTrader listings).
In sharp contrast, the 2018-model Mazda CX-3 Individuals listed on AutoTrader managed to retain a full 88.3% of their new-car value, while the only 2018 Hyundai Kona 2.0 Executive in our listings (at the time of writing) only retained 70% of its new-car value. The latter’s sample size is too small to be statistically relevant, but nonetheless appears that the small Hyundai crossover doesn’t perform as well in the depreciation stakes as many other Hyundai models.
Instalment calculator
*Calculated according to the AutoTrader Car Finance Calculator, with a 72-month finance agreement, 10% interest rate, 10% deposit, and no residual value. All prices listed in this article were accurate at the time of writing, but may change without prior notice.
Toyota C-HR 1.2T Plus Auto
List price: R 423 400
Instalment: R 7 059/month
Mazda CX-3 2.0 Individual
List price: R 426 500
Instalment: R 7 111/month
Hyundai Kona 2.0 Executive
List Price: R 427 900
Instalment: R 7 134/month
Fuel efficiency
According to the manufacturers’ claims, the Toyota C-HR uses the least fuel in this group, with an average consumption of 6.4 ℓ/100 km. The Mazda CX-3 supposedly consumes 6.7 ℓ/100 km and the Hyundai Kona 2.0 uses 7.2 ℓ/100 km. Real-world driving should echo this order, although the Toyota will likely come closest to its claimed figure (as proven while under review).
When reviewing the Mazda CX-3, normal use returned mid-7 ℓ/100 km average consumption, while the Hyundai Kona 2.0 gave low-8 ℓ/100 km in similar conditions. Thus, on paper as well as in real life, the Toyota C-HR grabs this category, with the Mazda CX-5 in second place and the Hyundai Kona coming in last place.
Related: Which engines have the best efficiency?
Warranties, maintenance plans, and service intervals
The Hyundai scores some serious points in this department, because it has by far the strongest warranty of this trio: the drivetrain is covered for 7 years or 200 000 km, and the rest of the car has a warranty for 5 years or 150 000 km. The Mazda is next-best in this department, with a warranty that runs for 3 years but with no mileage limit, followed closely by the Toyota’s warranty for 3 years or 100 000 km.
As far as their service plans go, the Toyota’s offering might be the most attractive, with pre-paid servicing for 90 000 km without a time limitation. The Hyundai’s service plan runs for the same mileage but has an age cap of 5 years, and the Mazda offers free servicing for 3 years without any mileage limit.
It follows that the CX-3 will be the logical choice for those who often travel long distances (30 000 km or more per year), while the C-HR’s service plan will be beneficial to drivers who want to keep their cars for longer than 5 years but don’t plan many long-distance road trips. However, the Hyundai’s amazing warranty (and well-balanced service plan) likely offers the best combination for average buyers, especially those who want to keep their car for many years and cover vast distances.
Related: What is usually covered under a manufacturer’s warranty?
Insurance
None of these cars are considered to be high-risk vehicles, although the C-HR’s parts interchangeability with other Toyotas may make it more popular among the long-fingered set. Initially, the Toyota will cost the least to insure (because of its lowest price tag), but the Kona’s steep depreciation will see it cost less in the long term than the Toyota would.
The Mazda’s strong resale (replacement) value will likely count against it in the short term, and its more-expensive accident repair parts will also inflate its insurance premiums over a longer term. This gives the Hyundai another win, with the Toyota and Mazda following closely behind.
Remember that insurance premiums will vary mostly based on the projected mileage to be covered and where the cars are kept and driven, both in the daytime and overnight. Younger drivers, or those with prior accident histories, will experience additional penalties due to their higher collision risk.
Related: Top tips to save on your car insurance.
Tyre replacement
Standard tyre prices play a significant part in any running cost evaluation, but it’s not always a given that smaller tyres will be less expensive – if they’re less commonly used, they might be harder to find and more expensive to replace than larger tyres which are in wider use.
Part of the C-HR’s “Plus” trim line is a set of pretty 18-inch alloy wheels, shod with 225/50R18 tyres. One nationwide tyre retailer doesn’t list any tyres of this size, while another has 9 replacements available. The catch is that these tyres aren’t inexpensive at all, starting at R 2 600 for a mass-market brand and running all the way to R 4 200 for a premium-brand alternative. In other words, a new set of tyres for a C-HR Plus will likely cost somewhere between R 11 000 and R 17 000.
The Mazda CX-3 also rolls on 18-inch tyres, but slightly narrower at 215/50R18 in size. These tyres are even more difficult to find than the Toyota’s, with only one replacement option available between the two national retailers we queried. This is a premium-brand tyre that costs about R 3 100 each, once again leading to expensive tyre replacements – a complete tyre change on a CX-3 Individual can cost upwards of R 12 000, depending on the availability of new rubber.
Hyundai specifies 215/55R17 tyres for the Kona’s slightly smaller wheels, which are far easier to find than for either of the others. The first retailer listed 5 replacement tyres and the other a full 21 replacements – running the whole range from "store-brand" cheapies to premium-priced rubber. Prices vary between R 1 200 and R 4 500 per tyre, but, given the modest performance on offer in the Kona, mass-market but nonetheless brand-name tyres should suffice. At R 1 800 apiece, this means that the Hyundai Kona will be the least-expensive one for which to buy tyres – and by a huge margin, too.
Related: How long is a tyre supposed to last?
Verdict
The only two criteria where the Toyota C-HR Plus notched up small but significant victories over the others were in its purchase price and fuel efficiency. Long-term but short-distance running costs will also go the Toyota’s way, thanks to a service plan which won’t expire for 90 000 km regardless of the car’s age. That applies only to one particular usage case, however, and doesn’t go far enough to offset the C-HR’s sky-high tyre prices for other buyers.
Given Mazda’s smaller footprint in South Africa, combined with higher-than-average spare parts prices, the CX-3 actually fared better than we originally expected. However, as with the Toyota, the Mazda’s service plan redeems it in only one usage case – the other way around, this time: long distances in a short time will see it grab a victory here, but for other users, it comes second in terms of running costs.
The Mazda also suffers from the same sky-high tyre prices as the C-HR, but does a lot better in the depreciation stakes and comes close on fuel economy. It’s probably worth that extra R 52 per month on instalments too, because it’s loaded with more standard convenience kit as well.
All of which leaves the Hyundai Kona as the overall winner in this trio: It costs the most, (likely) depreciates the fastest, and is the thirstiest one here, but its winning warranty, service plan, and vastly less-expensive tyres will make it the first choice of people who plan to really put their cars to work for a long time. Add the likely lower insurance rates to the bargain, and the Kona 2.0 has to take this win.