Trunk comparison: Audi A4 Avant vs Mazda Mazda CX-5

Key Differences

Both models differ in several dimensions: The Audi A4 Avant offers a loading area that is 5.1 in longer with the seats folded down (≈ +8%) and about 3.5 in more length with the first row of seats upright (≈ +9%). The height of the trunk opening is about 2.4 in greater on the A4 (≈ +8%).

The depth of the cargo area (from loading edge to floor) is the same.

The width at the narrowest point and the opening width are 2.4 in (≈ +6%) and 1.6 in (≈ +4%) larger on the Mazda, respectively. It is noteworthy that the loading edge of the Mazda CX‑5 is 5.1 in or 21% higher above the road than that of the Audi A4 Avant.

What are the usability implications?

The significantly higher loading edge of the CX‑5 increases the effort required when loading and unloading heavy items; frequent use with heavy loads (e.g., shopping crates, building materials, strollers) is noticeably more comfortable in the Audi because its low loading edge reduces lifting.

For people with back problems or frequent transport of heavy loads, the Audi is therefore more practical.

The Audi has the advantage in length and opening height: longer items (e.g., skis, long packages) are more likely to fit in the A4, and the slightly higher opening height makes loading taller cargo easier.

However, the differences in length and height are under 10% and rather moderate — important mainly when maximum loading length is decisive.

The Mazda scores in usable width: the narrowest point and opening width are slightly larger, which improves loading behavior with wide or irregularly shaped items (e.g., flat furniture parts, wide boxes).

If the main requirement is transporting wide but not necessarily long items, the CX‑5 is more practical — although the higher lifting at the loading edge must be taken into account.

Conclusion: For frequent lifting of heavy loads and longer items, the Audi A4 Avant is better suited. For wider, bulky cargo, the Mazda CX‑5 offers somewhat more lateral usability but costs noticeable comfort due to the significantly higher loading edge when loading and unloading.