Compare the2025 Mazda CX-30VS 2024 Nissan Rogue

Safety
Reliability
Engine
Fuel Economy and Range
Brakes and Stopping
Suspension and Handling
Chassis
Passenger Space
Ergonomics
Economic Advantages
Recommendations

Safety

© 1999 - 2024Advanta-STAR Automotive Research, all rights reserved. This vehicle comparison and all of the content in it are provided only by license from Advanta-STAR Automotive Research Corporation of America (“Advanta-STAR”). If you are not a legally licensed user of this vehicle comparison, it is against federal law to access it, copy it, forward it, or use it in any manner whatsoever. Any unauthorized use of this vehicle comparison is a violation of U.S. and international law and is punishable criminally and civilly. Removal of this watermark/notification without prior written license and approval received from Advanta-STAR is an agreement, understanding, and/or stipulation by the person(s), entities, agents, attorneys, and any other persons involved in the removal of this watermark/notification (including but not limited to Search Optics, LLC and any and all parent entities, sister entities, and subsidiary entities of Search Optics, LLC and/or any other entity, agent, attorney, and persons related in any manner to Search Optics, LLC) to: 1) an agreed upon amount of liquidated monetary damages of a minimum of $1,250,000.00 US Dollars in favor of Advanta-STAR; 2) the jurisdiction and enforcement of any legal claims associated with this matter asserted by Advanta-STAR in the United States Federal District Court in Portand, Oregon; and 3) service of process of any legal claims asserted by Advanta-STAR associated with this matter may be accomplished by First-Class Postage by the United States Postal Service or comparable service. XPYNN-M34HG 2a06:98c0:3600::103 2024/11/23

The CX-30 has standard Whiplash-Reducing Headrests, which use a specially designed headrest to protect the driver and front passenger from whiplash. During a rear-end collision, the Whiplash-Reducing Headrests system moves the headrests forward to prevent neck and spine injuries. The Rogue doesn’t offer a whiplash protection system.

To provide maximum traction and stability on all roads, All-Wheel Drive is standard on the CX-30. But it costs extra on the Rogue.

Both the CX-30 and Rogue have Rear Cross Traffic Alert, but the CX-30 Turbo Premium Plus has Smart Braking Support - Rear Crossing (automatically applies the brakes) to better prevent a collision when backing near traffic. The Rogue’s Rear Cross Traffic Alert doesn’t automatically brake.

Both the CX-30 and the Rogue have standard driver and passenger frontal airbags, front and rear side-impact airbags, driver and front passenger knee airbags, side-impact head airbags, front and rear seatbelt pretensioners, height adjustable front shoulder belts, four-wheel antilock brakes, traction control, electronic stability systems to prevent skidding, crash mitigating brakes, daytime running lights, lane departure warning systems, blind spot warning systems, rearview cameras, rear cross-path warning, driver alert monitors and available around view monitors.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration does 35 MPH front crash tests on new vehicles. In this test, results indicate that the Mazda CX-30 is safer than the Nissan Rogue:

	CX-30	Rogue
OVERALL STARS	5 Stars	4 Stars
	Driver
STARS	5 Stars	4 Stars
HIC	148	261
Neck Injury Risk	26.7%	33%
Neck Stress	216 lbs.	403 lbs.
Neck Compression	18 lbs.	54 lbs.
	Passenger
STARS	5 Stars	4 Stars
HIC	179	319
Chest Compression	.5 inches	.6 inches
Neck Injury Risk	33.5%	37%
Neck Stress	172 lbs.	193 lbs.
Neck Compression	85 lbs.	103 lbs.
Leg Forces (l/r)	380/386 lbs.	481/312 lbs.

New test not comparable to pre-2011 test results. More stars = Better. Lower test results = Better.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration does side impact tests on new vehicles. In this test, which crashes the vehicle into a flat barrier at 38.5 MPH and into a post at 20 MPH, results indicate that the Mazda CX-30 is safer than the Nissan Rogue:

	CX-30	Rogue
	Front Seat
STARS	5 Stars	5 Stars
HIC	73	95
Hip Force	275 lbs.	339 lbs.
	Into Pole
STARS	5 Stars	5 Stars
Max Damage Depth	12 inches	13 inches

New test not comparable to pre-2011 test results. More stars = Better. Lower test results = Better.

Side impacts caused 23% of all road fatalities in 2018, down from 29% in 2003, when the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety introduced its side barrier test. In order to continue improving vehicle safety, the IIHS has started using a more severe side impact test: 37 MPH (up from 31 MPH), with a 4180-pound barrier (up from 3300 pounds). The results of this newly developed test demonstrates that the Mazda CX-30 is safer than the Rogue:

	CX-30	Rogue
Overall Evaluation	GOOD	ACCEPTABLE
Structure	GOOD	GOOD
	Driver Injury Measures
Head/Neck	GOOD	GOOD
Head Injury Criterion	89	290
Head Peak Forces	no contact	81 G’s
Neck Tension	156 lbs.	245 lbs.
Shoulder Deflection	.87 in	.94 in
Shoulder Force	223 lbs.	245 lbs.
Pelvis	GOOD	GOOD
Pelvis Force	759 lbs.	803 lbs.
Head Protection	GOOD	MARGINAL
	Passenger Injury Measures
Head/Neck	GOOD	GOOD
Head Injury Criterion	144	455
Head Peak Forces	no contact	89 G’s
Neck Compression	67 lbs.	402 lbs.
Torso	GOOD	GOOD
Shoulder Deflection	.94 in	1.22 in
Shoulder Force	245 lbs.	379 lbs.
Torso Max Deflection	.71 in	.87 in
Pelvis	GOOD	GOOD
Pelvis Force	379 lbs.	535 lbs.
Head Protection	GOOD	MARGINAL

Instrumented handling tests conducted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and analysis of its dimensions indicate that the CX-30 is 2.4% to 3.2% less likely to roll over than the Rogue.

The Mazda CX-30 has achieved the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety’s (IIHS) highest rating of “Top Safety Pick Plus” for the 2024 model year. This distinction is based on its exceptional performance in IIHS’ rigorous battery of safety tests. Specifically, it earned a “Good” rating in the latest, more stringent moderate overlap front crash test, a “Good” result in the updated side impact test, and a “Good” score in the revised pedestrian crash prevention test. The Rogue was last only a “Top Safety Pick” in 2023 but no longer qualifies.

Reliability

A reliable vehicle saves its owner time, money and trouble. Nobody wants to be stranded or have to be without a vehicle while it’s being repaired. Consumer Reports rates the CX-30’s reliability 22 points higher than the Rogue.

J.D. Power and Associates’ 2024 survey of the owners of three-year-old vehicles provides the long-term dependability statistics that show that Mazda vehicles are more reliable than Nissan vehicles. J.D. Power ranks Mazda above average in long-term dependability. With 5 more problems per 100 vehicles in the first three years of ownership, Nissan is rated below average.

From surveys of all its subscribers, Consumer Reports’ January 2024 Auto Issue reports that Mazda vehicles are more reliable than Nissan vehicles. Consumer Reports ranks Mazda 10 places higher in reliability than Nissan.

Engine

The CX-30’s optional 2.5 turbo 4-cylinder produces 49 more horsepower (250 vs. 201) and 95 lbs.-ft. more torque (320 vs. 225) than the Rogue’s 1.5 turbo 3-cylinder.

As tested in Motor Trend the Mazda CX-30 4 cyl. is faster than the Nissan Rogue:

	CX-30	Rogue
Zero to 60 MPH	7.8 sec	8.4 sec
Quarter Mile	16 sec	16.5 sec
Speed in 1/4 Mile	88.3 MPH	85.8 MPH

Fuel Economy and Range

An engine control system that can shut down some of the engine’s cylinders helps improve the CX-30 (except Turbo)’s fuel efficiency. The Rogue doesn’t offer a system that can shut down part of the engine.

The CX-30 has a standard locking fuel door which locks and unlocks with the power locks. The fuel filler door is not lockable on the Rogue. A locking fuel door helps prevent fuel theft and vandalism, such as sugar in the tank.

Brakes and Stopping

The CX-30 stops shorter than the Rogue:

	CX-30	Rogue
60 to 0 MPH	119 feet	125 feet	Motor Trend

Suspension and Handling

The CX-30 2.5 S Premium handles at .84 G’s, while the Rogue Platinum AWD pulls only .83 G’s of cornering force in a Car and Driver skidpad test.

The CX-30 2.5 S Premium executes Motor Trend’s “Figure Eight” maneuver quicker than the Rogue Platinum AWD (27.4 seconds @ .62 average G’s vs. 27.9 seconds @ .59 average G’s).

For better maneuverability, the CX-30’s turning circle is .6 feet tighter than the Rogue’s (34.8 feet vs. 35.4 feet).

Chassis

The CX-30 is 10 inches shorter than the Rogue, making the CX-30 easier to handle, maneuver and park in tight spaces.

Passenger Space

The CX-30 has .2 inches more front legroom and .5 inches more front hip room than the Rogue.

Ergonomics

The CX-30’s front and rear power windows all open or close fully with one touch of the switches, making it more convenient at drive-up windows and toll booths, or when talking with someone outside the car. The Rogue’s passenger windows don’t open or close automatically.

The CX-30 Select Sport/Preferred/Carbon/Premium’s standard wipers adjust their speed and turn on and off automatically according to the amount of rainfall on the windshield. The Rogue’s intermittent wipers change speed with vehicle speed, but can’t turn on and off or change speed based on changing rainfall.

To help drivers see further while navigating curves, the CX-30 Premium has standard adaptive headlights to illuminate around corners automatically by reading vehicle speed and steering wheel angle. The Rogue doesn’t offer cornering lights.

The CX-30’s optional rear and side view mirrors have an automatic dimming feature. These mirrors can be set to automatically darken quickly when headlights shine on them, keeping following vehicles from blinding or distracting the driver. The Rogue offers an automatic rear view mirror, but its side mirrors don’t dim.

Economic Advantages

Insurance will cost less for the CX-30 owner. The Complete Car Cost Guide estimates that insurance for the CX-30 will cost $725 less than the Rogue over a five-year period.

The CX-30 will cost the buyer less in the long run because of its superior resale value. The IntelliChoice estimates that the CX-30 will retain 54.31% to 55.58% of its original price after five years, while the Rogue only retains 50.66% to 53.67%.

IntelliChoice estimates that five-year ownership costs (depreciation, financing, insurance, fuel, fees, repairs and maintenance) for the Mazda CX-30 will be $1792 to $3114 less than for the Nissan Rogue.

Recommendations

Consumer Reports® recommends both the Mazda CX-30 and the Nissan Rogue, based on reliability, safety and performance.