Nice Drives: 2025 Mazda CX-70 PHEV Premium Plus vs 2024 Volvo XC60 Recharge

How do Mazda and Volvo’s EVs compare?

By Isaac Bouchard

Sales of pure electric vehicles, while still running at about 10 percent of the new market, are plateauing.

Mazda CX-70 interior

Plugin hybrids are the hot thing now, since their range is not limited to what the battery allows, and sales numbers are growing quickly. PHEVs are generally more efficient—if plugged in daily—and faster than their pure ICE (internal combustion engine) counterparts, too. Right now they still qualify for up to $7,500 in federal rebates and $5,350 from Colorado, though this will all change next year.

The Mazda CX-90 three-row crossover and its near-identical two-row sibling, the CX-70, are two of the best offerings in our market, as they can lease for $200-300 less per month than the turbocharged six-cylinder ICE versions and almost all competitors. The Volvo XC60 (and biggerXC90) have always worked best as plugins, as their small four-cylinder engine pairs better with electric motors and a battery for a smoother, much more effortless driving experience. These two brands now occupy much the same market space, too, though the Swedish one still carries more cache than the Japanese does. Both are premium in how they look and drive how nicely presented their cockpits are.

The Volvo, tested here in “murdered out” Ultimate Black Edition, is a very interesting alternative to the default Euro competition. With its lower ride height and car-like gaps between the fender openings and tires, it looks like it’s been “slammed”. This gives it a fast wagon vibe—true to Volvo’s heritage. The interior has much nicer material quality than recent BMW or Mercedes offerings, and the front seats are still the most comfy and supportive in the business. There’s less real estate in the back, though.

The Mazda is the roomiest midsize, two-row crossover—a legacy of it being the same rig as the CX-90. Its cargo area is simply gargantuan, but cost-cutting is apparent: there are cup holders for the non-existent third row, and there is no longer a ski pass-through for the second-row bench, unlike say the BMW X5. But there is an actual spare tire (many PHEVs don’t carry one), room under the floor for the charging cable and other oddments, and 110 and 9-volt outlets. The design and quality are excellent for the Mazda’s price point, too, matching or exceeding more expensive rivals like the Acura MDX for $10,000 less.

Volvo XC60

The Mazda has a huge display, which operates by touch when paired with an Android or Apple phone, but is quite a reach from the driver’s seat. There is still a rotary controller knob for inputs, so one need not stretch. The Volvo’s portrait-oriented touchscreen is closer and is now powered by Google software (like many car companies). It boots faster than the in-house OS that used to blight the XC60 experience. The Ultimate’s optional $3,200 Bower & Wilkins audio system is amongst the most accurate and pleasing in the industry; the Mazda’s standard Bose is quite decent too, and comes standard.

The Volvo is one fast PHEV, with two electric motors—one for each axle—combined with the turbo for a total of 455 ponies. 0-60 takes only 4.2 seconds, and the Volvo really will go its rated range of 32 miles on electric power only. The XC60 does not ride as well as other premium compact crossovers, however. This has been a bugbear of the underlying platform since its release, and the 21-inch wheels the Black Edition wears exacerbate its dislike for potholes and broken pavement. It grips gamely, though and can carve corners in a clinical but competent manner. Braking is powerful and linear.

The Mazda CX-70 has 323hp and is the most athletic handling Asian crossover of its size, with flat cornering and excellent steering feel. It also rides firmly, though it deals with really rough stuff slightly better than the Volvo. What it does not do is combine a silken ride and rejection of tire roar like the older Mazda CX-9 did. It is nowhere near as fast the as XC60, since its engine is not turbocharged and it is bigger and heavier. But 0-60 in 5.9 seconds is quick for its class and its engine has a pleasantly growly tone under load. Its rated range of 26 miles is hard to get in pure electric mode, but when used as a hybrid, where the battery is charged and depleted daily, it is rated at 56MPGe combined fuel economy—the Volvo’s number is 63MPGe. Real-world 30s MPG is possible in either, quite remarkable.

Mazda CX-70

It will be fascinating to see what happens to PHEV sales if the incoming administration follows through on its plans to eliminate the federal $7,500 subsidy. Colorado’s goes down too. These changes make the business case for a plugin less compelling. The Volvo is still best to drive as a hybrid model since it is faster and more refined. The Mazda though, having a smooth and efficient (29mpg highway) six-cylinder turbo model, might make the better bet if the lease payment benefits of the PHEV go away. Regardless of what happens in the future, these are still two compelling ways to have your cake and munch on it, too.

 

Mazda                                                                         Volvo

EPA Ratings:                            56MPGe/25mpg combined                63MPGe/28mpg combined

0-60mph:                                5.9sec                                                  4.2sec

Price as tested:                       $59,500                                               $76,695

Rating:                                     4 Stars                                                 4 Stars

Here is what they say:            Mazda                                                 Volvo

 


Colorado AvidGolfer Magazine is the state’s leading resource for golf and the lifestyle that surrounds it, publishing eight issues annually and proudly delivering daily content via coloradoavidgolfer.com.

Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram

GET COLORADO GOLF NEWS DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX