2024 Mazda CX-90 vs 2024 Volvo XC90

The 2024 Mazda CX-90 presented a bold step forward for the Japanese automaker, positioning itself closer to luxury brands like Acura, Infiniti, and Lexus. Its exterior design borrowed elegance from smaller models like the CX-30 and CX-5, but with a more imposing presence due to its larger size. The SUV's big grille, wide-set front end, and large wheels, ranging from 18 to 21 inches, demanded attention. Inside, the top-tier trims offered a luxurious experience with brown suede upholstery, wood inlays, and matte black plastic, rivaling even the BMW X5 in terms of interior quality.

In contrast, the 2024 Volvo XC90 maintained its reputation for understated luxury with a focus on practicality, safety, and sustainability. The exterior featured a subdued and earthy paint palette, with chrome and polished metal accents. Inside, the XC90's design was somewhat dated but rich in materials, especially in the Ultimate trim. Options included wool-blend upholstery or ventilated Nappa leather, complemented by an Orrefors crystal shift knob and natural wood trim. Volvo allowed for more customization in terms of paint, wheels, and upholstery, catering to discerning customers.

The 2024 Mazda CX-90 introduced two new powertrains, including a plug-in hybrid (PHEV) option and a turbocharged inline six-cylinder engine with a mild-hybrid system. The upgraded 3.3-litre inline-6 turbo engine delivered 340 horsepower and 369 lb-ft of torque with premium fuel. All models featured all-wheel drive and an eight-speed automatic transmission. The CX-90 offered three driving modes: Normal, Sport, and Off-Road, with Sport mode enhancing the driving experience with a thrilling exhaust note. The PHEV variant combined a 2.5-litre engine with a 17.8-kWh battery, producing 323 horsepower and 369 lb-ft of torque, offering a 42-kilometre electric range.

The 2024 Volvo XC90 Recharge T8 combined an 18.8-kWh battery and a 107-kW electric motor with a supercharged and turbocharged 2.0-litre engine, producing 455 horsepower and 523 lb-ft of torque. It offered a 53-kilometre electric-only range and averaged 8.9 L/100 km in hybrid mode. The XC90 featured multiple driving modes, including Pure, Power, and Hybrid, with a five-second acceleration to 100 km/h in Power mode. Despite its power, the XC90 prioritized luxury over performance, with a firm ride and less engaging handling compared to the CX-90.

The Mazda CX-90 offered various seating configurations, accommodating up to eight passengers. Cargo space varied, with up to 2,129 litres available in models with a two-seater third row. The interior featured clever storage solutions, comfortable seats, and a panoramic sunroof, though it fell short in capacity compared to some competitors.

The Volvo XC90 provided seating for seven or six with optional captain’s chairs. Interior features included power-adjustable heated seats, a four-zone climate control system, and a panoramic glass roof. Cargo capacity reached up to 2,426 litres with the second-row seats folded. The XC90's interior was comfortable, though the climate control struggled in hot conditions.

Mazda's CX-90 focused on reducing distractions with a non-touchscreen infotainment system controlled by a rotary knob and hard buttons. While the system aimed to enhance safety, it proved frustrating to use. However, personalization software and standard Android Auto and Apple CarPlay (wireless in higher trims) offered some relief.

Volvo's XC90 featured a 9-inch touchscreen with Google Built-in technology, including Google Maps, Google Play, and Google Assistant. Apple CarPlay and SiriusXM were standard, with optional premium sound systems. The infotainment system was intuitive, though the digital instrumentation panel could be confusing.

The Mazda CX-90 came standard with i-Activsense, a suite of advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) including blind-spot monitoring and adaptive cruise control. While crash-test ratings were unavailable, the CX-90 was expected to perform well based on its predecessor's accolades.

Volvo's XC90 was synonymous with safety, earning high crash-test ratings. However, its ADAS features were not as innovative as competitors, lacking a hands-free driving system. Pilot Assist, combining adaptive cruise control and lane-centring, had limitations, particularly on curves and rural roads.