2024 Toyota 4Runner vs 2024 Mazda CX-5

The 2024 Mazda CX-5 retained much of its design from when the second-generation model first appeared in 2017. Its look, reflecting traditional Mazda aesthetics, aged gracefully, keeping it modern and appealing. The test vehicle came in the new Carbon Turbo trim adorned in Zircon Sand paint, a fresh color for 2024 along with Platinum Quartz. It featured exclusive Terracotta leather seats with black artificial suede inserts and a black headliner. The gloss-black exterior detailing further enhanced the Zircon Sand's appeal, making the crossover's exterior strikingly sophisticated. Mazda also made changes like improving fuel economy, removing a 19-inch wheel design, and adding wireless charging plus wireless Apple CarPlay and Android Auto to several trims.

Meanwhile, the 2024 Toyota 4Runner retained its boxy and rugged design that many might find classic yet outdated. The 4Runner’s shape originated from its 2010 redesign, and although it received minor refreshes over the years, it significantly lagged behind contemporary design standards. Our reviewed TRD Pro model flaunted underbody skid plates, all-terrain tires, and a tubular roof rack, cementing its tough off-road persona. However, despite the aggressive look, the 4Runner’s old-school interior, analog instruments, and outdated infotainment system clearly needed a modernization to meet current expectations.

The Mazda CX-5 Carbon Turbo offered a turbocharged 2.5-liter four-cylinder engine delivering 256 horsepower at 5,000 rpm and 320 lb-ft of torque at 2,500 rpm when using premium gas, or 227 hp and 310 lb-ft with regular gas. Despite the torque, the vehicle wasn’t immediately responsive, requiring a gradual press on the accelerator to make the most of its power. The EPA rated its fuel efficiency at 24 mpg combined, though observed efficiency was lower at 22.9 mpg. The vehicle featured standard AWD, a re-tuned suspension for a smoother ride, and enhancements like G-Vectoring Control Plus technology that improved cornering and reduced body roll. With its refined driving dynamics and quiet cabin on highways, the CX-5 suited both city driving and occasional off-road adventures.

The 2024 Toyota 4Runner housed a 4.0-liter V6 engine providing 270 horsepower and 278 lb-ft of torque. Its five-speed automatic transmission and four-wheel-drive TRD Pro trim made the vehicle capable off-road, but less so for everyday driving where acceleration felt sluggish. The suspension was tuned for off-road articulation but compromised on-road stability, with noticeable body roll and rear-end squat under hard acceleration. The engine noise, compounded by a loud sport exhaust, and the unsettling nosedive under braking, detracted from the 4Runner’s overall driving experience. The vehicle performed best under off-road conditions where its rugged suspensions and controls came into full use.

Inside the Mazda CX-5, comfort was a priority with standard heated front seats redesigned a few years back to provide support and comfort. The driver’s seat featured six-way power adjustment, and trims above the base S Select employed genuine or artificial leather. Most trims also offered heated steering wheels and rear seats, and ventilated front seats. Despite its compact size for the segment, the CX-5’s interior was plush and sophisticated, resembling luxury-branded vehicles. The cargo space behind the rear seats was 30 cubic feet, expanding to 59.3 cubic feet with the seats folded, which was on the smaller side compared to other compact crossovers.

Contrarily, the Toyota 4Runner’s interior, although practical and easy to use, appeared dated and was heavily lined with hard plastics. The front seats offered ample space, but the rear's elevated bench compromised headroom for taller passengers. The 4Runner’s practicality shone with abundant interior storage and a configurable cargo space. With the seats up, it had 47.2 cubic feet of cargo space, expanding to 89.7 cubic feet when stowed. The optional sliding deck, although reducing capacity, provided convenience for accessing heavy cargo. The distinctive sliding glass rear window was a unique feature, adding a practical aspect to its old-school design.

Mazda maintained a traditional approach towards its infotainment system, emphasizing minimal driver distraction by offering substantial physical controls for various functions. The 10.25-inch display, operable via a console-mounted rotary knob and some touchscreen capabilities for smartphone integration, showed Mazda’s balanced stance between tradition and modernity. Wireless Apple CarPlay and Android Auto were available on higher trims, and Mazda Connected Services offered remote start, a find-my-car feature, and a Wi-Fi hotspot. The Carbon Turbo trim included a 10-speaker Bose sound system, enhancing the premium in-car experience.

Toyota’s approach was more conventional but felt dated. An eight-inch touchscreen with standard Apple CarPlay and Android Auto met basic needs but fell short in usability and modern features. The TRD Pro’s 15-speaker JBL premium audio system struggled to deliver quality sound amidst significant engine and road noise. The technology for off-roading like the Crawl Control and Multi-Terrain Select system, accessible via headliner controls, required familiarization through the owner’s manual for proper use.

Mazda equipped the CX-5 comprehensively with advanced driving assistance systems (ADAS) across all trims, including adaptive cruise control, forward collision warning, automatic emergency braking, blind-spot monitoring, and more. Higher trims added systems for improved lighting, traffic sign recognition, and low-speed adaptive cruise control. The Carbon Turbo test car, although missing some premium features, performed admirably with its standard suite, earning solid marks in handling safety and driver aids.

The Toyota 4Runner provided a full set of safety features, including adaptive cruise control, forward collision warning, and lane departure warning. Higher 4Runner trims included a surround-view camera system, with Limited trims adding front and rear parking sensors. However, the vehicle’s safety alerts tended to be overly sensitive, necessitating user adjustments. NHTSA awarded it four stars overall, with some variance across specific tests, while IIHS results revealed inconsistencies, especially in newer small overlap crash tests.