Skoda Kamiq Monte Carlo
Crossover · Gasoline
vs
Mazda MX-30 PHEV
Crossover · Electric · AWD
Skoda Kamiq Monte Carlo
Car A
Skoda Kamiq Monte Carlo
The Skoda Kamiq Monte Carlo balances city-friendly ease with family practicality, pairing efficient running (combined consumption 5.5) with a usable 400-liter trunk. It is good value in its segment if you prioritize efficiency and everyday comfort over premium flair or track-ready performance.
5 seatsCrossoverGasoline5-star safety150 hp
Mazda MX-30 PHEV
Car B
Mazda MX-30 PHEV
A city-focused plug-in with AWD, the Mazda MX-30 PHEV delivers efficient-for-its-class running and everyday usability at a good value in its segment. Just note the modest acceleration and missing safety/reliability data.
5 seatsCrossoverElectric1.5 L/100kmAWDElectric
Why compared better on fuelcomparison picksame body typesame seatssame usage profilesimilar price

Usage fit

Family 58 / 37
City 68 / 72
Budget / value 52 / 53
Road trip 39 / 29
Performance 26 / 29
Cargo 29 / 27
Practical 40 / 42
Premium 17 / 16
Winter 28 / 22

Scores out of 100. Blue = Skoda Kamiq Monte Carlo · Orange = Mazda MX-30 PHEV

Specs side-by-side

Spec Skoda Kamiq Monte Carlo Mazda MX-30 PHEV
Values are representative — confirm for your market and trim.

Pros & cons

Skoda Kamiq Monte Carlo

  • Efficient for its class at 5.5 combined consumption.
  • Quick enough for daily traffic with 0–100 km/h in 8.5 s and 150 hp.
  • Practical five-seat layout and 400-liter trunk for small-family duties.
  • Strong safety standing in segment signals.

Mazda MX-30 PHEV

  • Very low official combined consumption (1.5) if you charge regularly
  • AWD adds traction for varied road conditions
  • Practical 5-seat layout with a 366 L trunk for daily tasks
  • Priced at 33,900, it’s good value in its segment

Verdict

Pick Skoda Kamiq Monte Carlo if…
Lower entry price
Skoda Kamiq Monte Carlo starts lower, making it the stronger value pick if budget is a priority.
Pick Mazda MX-30 PHEV if…
All-wheel drive
Mazda MX-30 PHEV's AWD adds real-world confidence in wet, icy, or mixed-weather conditions.

Related comparisons