BMW X1 (2014) vs. Mazda CX-3 (2017) Specs

vs.

◆

2014 BMW X1 and 2017 Mazda CX-3 Specifications

2014 BMW X1 Seat Room and Comfort: Pros
Year	Comment
2013	BMW makes great sport seats, with support in the right places and power-adjustable side bolsters. This said, those in the X1 Sport Line feel less cushy, and so less overtly comfortable, than I recall from other BMWs. The Evoque's front buckets lack adjustable side bolsters, but feel more luxurious. While the BMW wins on support, the Land Rover wins on comfort. Another tie. Update: when I later had an Evoque for a week its seats felt less comfortable than they had during the dealer test drive. So I'm revising this rating in favor of the BMW. see full BMW X1 review

2014 BMW X1 Seat Room and Comfort: Cons
Year	Comment
	The BMW X1's interior dimensions also closely resemble those of the previous-generation 3-Series. Up front, there's a little less space to stretch out than in the X3. But abundant headroom. About half of the X1's additional height is over one's head--you sit only a couple inches higher than in the 3-Series. This additional airspace also distinguishes the X1 from the allroad. Rear seat room could be more of an issue. As in the old 3 and the new allroad, a couple of average-sized adults will fit behind a couple more with perhaps an inch or two of clearance for their knees, while a third would be a squeeze. The seat back reclines, but the seat cushion is too low to provide good thigh support. The Evoque is similarly a less-than-ideal choice for four-plus adults taking a long trip. see full BMW X1 review

None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2014 BMW X1.

2017 Mazda CX-3 Seat Room and Comfort: Pros
Year	Comment
2016	The CX-3's driving position is very good, more car-like even than the HR-V's. The view forward is open. The view rearward, not so much, as the racy styling yields rear windows that are quite a bit smaller than the front ones. To help compensate, the outside mirrors are large plus blind sport warning is standard on the Touring and Grand Touring. The CX-3's driver seat is very comfortable and provides good lateral support in turns. The cloth center pocket is cushy without being mushy. Unlike in the HR-V and some others, the headrest does not jut uncomfortably far forward. But the lumbar bulge is not adjustable. As is, it fit my back well, but many people will wish for more of a bulge. The HR-V's also non-adjustable lumbar bulge was too pronounced for my taste. The JUKE's seats are comfortable, but for effective side bolsters (and then some) you must step up to the NISMO. Worth noting for those of you who get your coffee to go: the cup holders are located beneath the armrest (optional on the Sport, standard on the others). If you want to use them, then you can't use the armrest. see full Mazda CX-3 review

2017 Mazda CX-3 Seat Room and Comfort: Cons
Year	Comment
	For people who have no interest in a manual transmission (the great majority), the Mazda CX-3's largest shortcoming is a rear seat that is tight even by small car standards. Sitting behind my 5-9 self, my knees pressed lightly against the front seat backs. I wasn't uncomfortable, but felt a little closed-in. A shame, as rear headroom is relatively plentiful and the rear seat is otherwise very comfortable. The HR-V provides about four inches more rear legroom, a big difference. According to their specs, the JUKE has three inches less rear legroom than the Mazda. In reality, though, I had perhaps an inch more rear knee room, but less rear headroom. The Nissan's rear seat might be slightly more adult-friendly than the Mazda's, but neither is a good choice if people taller than me will be sitting in both rows. see full Mazda CX-3 review

None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2017 Mazda CX-3.

See TrueDelta's information for all SUVs

See TrueDelta's information for all BMW models.