Powerful hybrid meets plug-in hybrid to see which three-row family vehicle is best
Hybrids can come in many forms, including mild 48-volt systems (which barely count), full hybrids designed for efficiency or performance, or plug-in hybrids that can travel an extended range solely on electrons. Here, we’ve got a pair of three-row crossovers with different hybrid approaches.
Quick recap of our long-term tester, the 2024 Toyota Grand Highlander Hybrid Max
However, during our months of testing, the only thing to complain about with the Grand Highlander Hybrid Max was its fuel consumption (Renita: Well, that, and the lack of sliding doors). That usage has a trade-off: excellent performance. This family hauler picks up speed, with all 362 ponies working in unison to get this sizeable vehicle to highway speeds and beyond. As long as the traffic holds off, you may never be caught late for school, an appointment or an extracurricular event.
More about the 2024 Mazda CX-90 PHEV GT
With moderate driving habits, the CX-90 is rated for 4.2 L/100 km equivalent. When the battery is depleted it will deliver around 9.4 L/100 km in combined conditions, which isn’t much better than what we see in the Grand Highlander.
How do they drive?
We hit the road with these two crossovers, back to back, to assess how they feel on the road. We’ve become accustomed to the responsiveness of the Toyota powertrain and can’t help but become intoxicated by the three-row’s eagerness to get up to speed. While the Grand Highlander Hybrid Max may not be the most efficient of the lineup, it is satisfying to drive, which can mean a lot to some drivers, but as Renita pointed out, that might not be what’s most important for someone inthe market for a three-row SUV.
The rest of the ride is typical of big crossovers. It can roll in corners but has limited lurching when you hit the brakes.
The CX-90 feels similar on the go, with plenty of power and smooth acceleration. Shoppers will be impressed by the consistency of the all-electric range, as it always hovered around that 40 km mark. Driving in the EV mode was also acceptable, though there were some scenarios when the electric powertrain wasn’t powerful enough to motivate the large SUV, and the gas components had to fire up and help out.
While a PHEV is supposed to deliver the best of electric and combustion motoring, this seemed to emphasize the worst of both worlds. You feel the electric side of things struggle before the gasoline motor rumbled to life to help out. It’s an unrefined experience, and it hurts more as the CX-90 has limited options to manage battery usage or save some of those electrons for when it makes more sense to use it — not necessarily on the highway.
We typically expect Mazda to deliver a more engaging driving feel, and the CX-90 does just enough to let us feel like we’re in control. The steering is a bit heavier, while the suspension and chassis offer reasonable feedback. It feels flatter in corners compared to the Toyota, and the size doesn’t hamper the experience.
Interior space and features
Shoppers aim for three rows when they need seats or space, and these two crossovers offer plenty of both. Both come with seating for seven, though the Grand Highlander is a bit more accommodating in the third row, even for adults, while the CX-90 feels cramped back there.
The second rows are about on par with each other. I found that using an infant seat in the second row of the Mazda required the front seats to be pushed up to an uncomfortable level, further limiting its family-hauling capability.
The Mazda also falls short in cargo space, with just 537 litres of cargo room behind the third row of seats, compared to 586L in the Toyota. Fold those rear seats, and the Mazda still can’t compete, offering 1343L while the Grand Highlander boasts 1,640L. Fold both sets of seats, and the Mazda can haul 2,438L, which isn’t shabby but is still overshadowed by the 2,761L offered by the Toyota, thanks to its boxier shape. For families with toys to tow, the Mazda can ferry 3,500 lbs worth of stuff, while the Toyota one-ups it again with a tow rating of 5,000 lbs.
The seats are comfortable and supportive in the Mazda, though they are a bit less plush overall. The two crossovers also have a different approach to the area between the second-row seats. The Grand Highlander has a little storage area with a rubberized top to stash stuff like phones or toys, while the Mazda has a flimsy flip-up cup holder tray, which seems like it could be destroyed by a child attempting to navigate through the cabin. Renita pointed out that for her, both proved to be a bit pointless and she would’ve preferred an open space for the kids to simply walk-through, instead of climbing over things — especially if you’ve got two car seats strapped into the second-row and can’t move the Captain’s chairs very much.
It’s worth pointing out that the Mazda has an attractive cabin with a good blend of materials and a clean design. Like the Toyota, it has physical buttons and knobs for HVAC settings, though I like the toggle-like interface for temperature settings.
The infotainment system in the Mazda is a bit clumsy to use, requiring you to select items with a rudimentary rotary knob while the Toyota has a more intuitive touchscreen interface. The screen in the Mazda measures 10.25 inches, compared to the 12.3-inch setup in the Grand Highlander. Both vehicles come with Wireless Android Auto and Apple CarPlay, the latter of which is the only way to get touchscreen functionality on the Mazda.
The two crossovers share a lot of features in these higher trims, including a digital gauge cluster, head-up display, heated steering wheel, wireless phone charging, driver monitoring, adaptive cruise control, lane keeping, a 360-degree view camera and parking sensors. The Toyota has a few more goodies including heated and ventilated second-row seats and a rear-mirror display.
Which crossover offers better value?
As tested, less than $1,000 separates the two crossovers in these tested trims, with the Toyota requiring the bigger budget. The Mazda can also be paired with EV incentives to further drop its overall costs. However, while the Toyota costs more, it also seems to offer more. It’s more spacious, can tow more, has more features and has more power.
The Mazda isn’t without its highlights, as it features an emissions-free driving range of 42 km to go with its slick design and high-end interior. It’s also a smidge more engaging to drive. You also don’t need to get a top-range model to get the PHEV, as Mazda offers the same powertrain (and range) for as little as 57,690, or $10,000 less than the model we tested.
Final Thoughts
In the battle of Hybrid Max versus PHEV, we found the Toyota powertrain more refined and impressive. Even if your commute falls within the 40 km offered by the Mazda PHEV, the unrefined powertrain turned us off from recommending it over the Grand Highlander. For Renita, she mentioned that while the Mazda does seem a bit fancier, it’s not necessarily what she’s looking for: “Why would I want to put my dirty kids in something so fancy? Give me rugged and simple and let’s get where we’re going. At least I won’t feel bad when we trudge winter slush into the Toyota.”
Sign up for our newsletter Blind-Spot Monitor and follow our social channels on Instagram ,Facebook and X to stay up to date on the latest automotive news, reviews, car culture, and vehicle shopping advice.