- With standard equipment
- With safety pack
Find more information in the General Comments section of the assessment
Find more information in the Rating Validity tab of the assessment
-
See More
![]()
92% -
See More
![]()
88% -
See More
![]()
84% -
See More
![]()
79%
- Good
- Adequate
- Marginal
- Weak
- Poor
-
![]()
Mobile Progressive Deformable Barrier![]()
-
![]()
Full Width Rigid Barrier
-
![]()
Side Mobile Barrier
![]()
Side Pole
-
![]()
Far-Side Excursion
Occupant Interaction![]()
Occupant Interaction
Rear Seat
Front Seat
| Rescue Sheet |
Available, ISO compliant
|
|||
| Advanced eCall | Available | |||
| Multi Collision Brake | Available | |||
| Submergence Check | Compliant | |||
- Good
- Adequate
- Marginal
- Weak
- Poor
Passenger
outboard
center
![]()
Fitted to the vehicle as standard![]()
Not fitted to the test vehicle but available as option![]()
Not Available
Not fitted to the test vehicle but available as option
i-Size
![]()
Easy![]()
Difficult![]()
Safety critical![]()
Not allowed-
![]()
Airbag ON
Rearward facing restraint installation not allowed
Difficult
Safety critical
Airbag ON
Isofix
![]()
Easy![]()
Difficult![]()
Safety critical![]()
Not allowed-
![]()
Airbag ON
Rearward facing restraint installation not allowed
![]()
Easy![]()
Difficult![]()
Safety critical![]()
Not allowed-
![]()
Airbag ON
Rearward facing restraint installation not allowed
In both the frontal offset test and the side barrier impact, protection of all critical parts of the body was good for the 6 and 10 year dummy, and the Mazda CX-80 scored maximum points in this part of the assessment. The front passenger airbag is automatically disabled when a rearward-facing child restraint is installed in the front passenger seat. Mazda demonstrated that the system worked robustly, and the system was rewarded. The CX-80 is equipped with an indirect 'child presence detection' system, which issues a warning when it recognises that a child or infant may have been left in the car. All of the child restraint types for which the Mazda CX-80 is designed could be properly installed and accommodated in the car.
- Good
- Adequate
- Marginal
- Weak
- Poor
Pedestrian & Cyclist Head 13.6 Pts
Pelvis 4.5 Pts
Femur 4.5 Pts
Knee & Tibia 9.0 Pts
| System Name | Smart Brake Support | ||
| Type | Auto-Brake with Forward Collision Warning | ||
| Operational From | 2 km/h | ||
| PERFORMANCE | | |||
Protection of the head of a struck pedestrian or cyclist was predominantly good, with a few poor results recorded only on the stiff windscreen pillars. Protection of the pelvis was good at all test locations. Protection was good at all test locations for the pelvis, the femur and for the knee and tibia, and the CX-80 scored maximum points in each of these areas of assessment. The autonomous emergency braking (AEB) system of the Mazda can respond to vulnerable road users as well as to other vehicles. The system’s response both to pedestrians was good, including its reaction to pedestrians to the rear of the car. The system’s performance in tests of its reaction to cyclists was good, including protection against ‘dooring’, where a door is suddenly opened in the path of a cyclist approaching from behind. However, the performance of the AEB system was marginal in tests of its response to motorcyclists.
- Good
- Adequate
- Marginal
- Weak
- Poor
| System Name | Traffic Sign Recognition / Intellgent Speed Assistance |
| Speed Limit Information Function | Camera & Map, subsigns supported |
| Speed Control Function | Intelligent Speed Limiter not default ON (accurate to 5km/h) |
| Applies To | Front and rear seats, including third row | ||
| Warning | Driver Seat | Front Passenger(s) | Rear Passenger(s) |
| Visual | |
|
|
| Audible | |
|
|
| Occupant Detection |  |
|
|
|
|||
| System Name | Driver Monitoring |
| Type | Direct eye monitoring |
| Operational From | 5 km/h |
| Fatigue | Drowsiness and Microsleep |
| Distraction | Long Distraction |
| System Name | Lane-keep Assist System |
| Type | LKA and ELK |
| Operational From | 45 km/h |
| Performance | |
| Emergency Lane Keeping | |
| Lane Keep Assist | |
| Human Machine Interface | |
| System Name | Smart Brake Support | |||
| Type | Autonomous emergency braking and forward collision warning | |||
| Operational From | 4 km/h | |||
| Sensor Used | camera and radar | |||
Overall, the performance of the autonomous emergency braking (AEB) system was good in tests of its reaction to other vehicles, with impacts being avoided in most tests. A seatbelt reminder system is fitted as standard to the front and rear seats. The car has a direct driver status monitoring system as standard, detecting driver fatigue and some types of distraction. The lane support system gently corrects the vehicle’s path if it is drifting out of lane and also intervenes in some more critical situations. The speed assistance system identifies the local speed limit. The driver can choose to allow the limiter to be set automatically by the system.
- Specifications
- Safety Equipment
- Videos
- Rating Validity
Specifications
Tested Model MAZDA CX-80 2.5 PHEV, LHD
Body Type - 5 door SUV
Year Of Publication 2024
Kerb Weight 2206kg
VIN From Which Rating Applies - all Mazda CX-80s
Class Large SUV
Safety Equipment
Note: Other equipment may be available on the vehicle but was not considered in the test year.
![]()
Fitted to the vehicle as standard![]()
Fitted to the vehicle as part of the safety pack![]()
Not fitted to the test vehicle but available as option or as part of the safety pack![]()
Not available![]()
Not applicable
Fitted to the vehicle as part of the safety packVideos
Rating Validity
Variants of Model Range
| Body Type | Engine | Model Name/Code | Drivetrain | Rating Applies | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LHD | RHD | ||||
| 5 door SUV | 2.5L PHEV * | CX-80 | 4 x 4 |  |
|
| 5 door SUV | 3.3L DE | CX-80 | 4 x 4 | |
|
* Tested variant
Find more information in the General Comments section of the assessment
Share
The passenger compartment of the Mazda CX-80 remained stable in the frontal offset test. Dummy readings indicated good protection of the knees and femurs of the driver and front passenger. Mazda demonstrated that a similar level of protection would be provided to occupants of different sizes and to those sitting in different positions. Protection was good for all critical parts of the body of the front passenger dummy. Analysis of the deceleration of the impact trolley during the test, and analysis of the deformable barrier after the test, revealed that the Mazda CX-80 would be a benign impact partner in a frontal collision. In the full-width rigid barrier test, protection of the rear passenger’s chest was rated as adequate but, otherwise, all critical parts of the body were well protected for both occupants. In both the side barrier test and the more severe side pole impact, protection was good for all critical body areas and the CX-80 scored full points in this part of the assessment. Control of excursion (the extent to which a body is thrown to the other side of the vehicle when it is hit from the far side) was found to be adequate. The Mazda CX-80 has a countermeasure to mitigate against occupant-to-occupant injuries in such impacts. The airbag performed well in Euro NCAP’s tests with dummy readings indicating good protection for both the driver and passenger. Tests on the front seats and head restraints demonstrated good protection against whiplash injuries in the event of a rear-end collision. A geometric analysis of the rear seats also indicated good whiplash protection. The car has an advanced eCall system which alerts the emergency services in the event of a crash, and a system to prevent secondary impacts after the car has been in a collision. Mazda demonstrated that the doors and windows would be openable to allow occupants to escape in the event of vehicle submergence.