Who Should Buy the Mazda CX-3 and Renault Arkana?
Two cars, similar price, different personalities. The Mazda CX-3 is for those who want a small, sporty crossover with a reliable engine. It’s for city drivers, young professionals, and couples who want something stylish but practical. The Renault Arkana, on the other hand, is for those who like a bit more space and a higher driving position. It’s perfect for small families or people who want a more relaxed, coupe-SUV style ride.
In my shop, I’ve seen both. CX-3 owners often come in for basic maintenance—oil changes, brake pads, the usual. Arkana owners? Sometimes electrical gremlins. One guy had a dashboard that lit up like a Christmas tree after a year. Not a great sign.
Inside Story: Practicality and Comfort
The Mazda CX-3 is compact. If you’re tall or have a family, you’ll feel the squeeze. Rear legroom? Forget about it. The front seats are comfortable, but the back is only good for kids or short trips. The interior is well-built, though, with quality materials and a clean design. The infotainment system is simple and works well.
The Renault Arkana is roomier. The rear seats are usable, and the higher roofline makes it feel more spacious. However, Renault interiors can feel a bit cheap. Some plastics creak when you press on them. The infotainment screen looks nice but can lag. And don’t get me started on Renault’s user interface—it’s like they designed it to confuse you.
Sound insulation? The CX-3 is decent, but at highway speeds, you’ll hear road noise. The Arkana is quieter, which makes longer trips more comfortable.
Motors: Performance for Real People
The Mazda CX-3 usually comes with a 2.0L naturally aspirated engine (150 hp, 206 Nm). It feels lively, especially in the city. On the highway, it’s fine, but don’t expect sports-car acceleration. Fuel economy? Around 7L/100 km (33 mpg US). With the air conditioning on, you’ll notice a slight drop in power, but nothing dramatic.
The Renault Arkana gets a 1.3L turbo engine (140 hp, 260 Nm). More torque, which helps in city driving. On paper, it should feel faster, but Renault’s automatic gearbox can be slow to respond. Fuel economy? Around 6.5L/100 km (36 mpg US). The turbo helps on highways, but if you push it, fuel consumption jumps.
Bottom line: The CX-3 has a reliable, naturally aspirated engine. The Arkana’s turbo is punchier but might have long-term durability concerns.
Bells and Whistles: Useful Tech, Not Just Gimmicks
The Mazda CX-3 keeps things simple. The infotainment system is responsive, and the controls are easy to use. Apple CarPlay and Android Auto work well. Safety features like blind-spot monitoring and lane departure warning are solid.
The Renault Arkana? More tech, but not always better. The infotainment screen is larger but sometimes slow. Renault’s digital dashboard looks fancy but can glitch. Plus, their safety systems can be overly sensitive—one customer told me his emergency braking activated for no reason in the middle of traffic.
Long-Term Value
Mazda CX-3: Depreciates slowly. People trust Mazda’s reliability. After five years, you’ll still get decent resale value. Maintenance costs are reasonable.
Renault Arkana: Depreciates faster. Renaults tend to lose value quicker. Parts can be expensive, especially for electrical components. If you plan to keep your car for a long time, the Arkana might cost you more.
Pros and Cons
Mazda CX-3:
✔ Reliable engine
✔ Fun to drive
✔ Simple, well-built interior
✔ Good resale value
✖ Small rear seats
✖ Road noise at high speeds
✖ Not the best choice for families
Renault Arkana:
✔ More spacious
✔ Comfortable ride
✔ Good fuel economy
✖ Questionable reliability
✖ Infotainment glitches
✖ Higher depreciation
Maintenance – Real Talk
The Mazda CX-3 is easy to maintain. Oil changes, brake pads, filters—nothing crazy. Parts are affordable.
Renault Arkana? Electronics can be a pain. One customer had a faulty infotainment system that Renault refused to fix under warranty. Also, Renault’s turbo engines can have long-term issues if not well maintained.
Winter? The CX-3 handles well, especially the AWD versions. The Arkana’s higher ground clearance helps in snow, but front-wheel-drive versions can struggle.
Europe’s Opinion
The Mazda CX-3 is popular in cities. Many young professionals and retirees love it for its reliability. The Arkana is newer but has gained traction among families looking for an affordable coupe-SUV.
In my area, I see more Mazdas staying on the road for years. Renaults? A lot end up in used car lots after three or four years.
The Mechanic’s Take
If you want something reliable that will hold value, go for the Mazda CX-3. If you need more space and don’t mind some potential reliability headaches, the Renault Arkana is an option.
Would I buy a CX-3? Yes, if I needed a small, fun, reliable car.
Would I buy an Arkana? Only if I got a great deal and planned to sell it before warranty expires.
