Skoda Kodiaq 2.0 TSI
Suv · Gasoline
vs
Mazda CX-80
Suv · Gasoline
Skoda Kodiaq 2.0 TSI
Car A
Skoda Kodiaq 2.0 TSI
A seven-seat petrol family car that prioritizes space and efficiency, the Skoda Kodiaq 2.0 TSI balances a very large cargo area with sensible consumption. It suits large families and long trips more than premium or performance seekers.
7 seatsSuvGasoline5-star safety7.3 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 brandsame body typesame powertrainsame seatssimilar price

Usage fit

Family 92 / 52
City 36 / 33
Budget / value 63 / 45
Road trip 70 / 42
Performance 24 / 27
Cargo 60 / 41
Practical 65 / 44
Premium 31 / 24
Winter 40 / 28

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

Specs side-by-side

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

Pros & cons

Skoda Kodiaq 2.0 TSI

  • Seven seats and an 835-litre boot support large-family duties.
  • Efficient for its class with a 7.3 combined consumption figure.
  • Good value in its segment around 33,000.
  • Confident everyday performance (180 hp, 320 Nm, 0–100 in 6.9 s).

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 TSI if…
Best fuel economy
Skoda Kodiaq 2.0 TSI uses 7.3 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 180 — meaningfully quicker and more confident on motorways.

Related comparisons