Skoda Kodiaq 2.0 TDI DSG
Suv · Diesel
vs
Mazda CX-80
Suv · Gasoline
Skoda Kodiaq 2.0 TDI DSG
Car A
Skoda Kodiaq 2.0 TDI DSG
The Skoda Kodiaq 2.0 TDI DSG puts space and efficiency first, making it a strong fit for large families and long trips. Its seven seats, 835 liters of cargo space, and 5.8 L/100km economy outweigh its modest performance.
7 seatsSuvDiesel5-star safety5.8 L/100km
Mazda CX-80
Car B
Mazda CX-80
The Mazda CX-80 targets large families with seven seats, everyday practicality, and running costs that are efficient for its class. It balances space and performance while offering good value in its segment.
7 seatsSuvGasoline200 hp
Why compared cross branddifferent powertrainsame body typesame seatssimilar price

Usage fit

Family 92 / 52
City 38 / 33
Budget / value 63 / 45
Road trip 70 / 42
Performance 29 / 27
Cargo 60 / 41
Practical 67 / 44
Premium 31 / 24
Winter 40 / 28

Scores out of 100. Blue = Skoda Kodiaq 2.0 TDI DSG · Orange = Mazda CX-80

Specs side-by-side

Spec Skoda Kodiaq 2.0 TDI DSG Mazda CX-80
Values are representative — confirm for your market and trim.

Pros & cons

Skoda Kodiaq 2.0 TDI DSG

  • Seven seats with an 835-liter boot handle big family loads and luggage
  • 5.8 L/100km combined consumption is efficient for its class on long journeys
  • 340 Nm torque and DSG automatic make low-effort progress when fully loaded
  • At about 35,000, it offers good value in its segment for a spacious seven-seater

Mazda CX-80

  • Seven-seat flexibility suits large families
  • 510 L cargo space supports errands and trips
  • Efficient for its class at 8.5 L/100 km
  • 200 hp and 7.5 s 0–100 km/h aid confident merging

Verdict

Pick Skoda Kodiaq 2.0 TDI DSG if…
Best fuel economy
Skoda Kodiaq 2.0 TDI DSG uses 5.8 L/100km vs 8.5 — a meaningful saving if you cover high mileage.
Pick Mazda CX-80 if…
More power
Mazda CX-80 puts out 200 hp vs 150 — meaningfully quicker and more confident on motorways.

Related comparisons