Trunk comparison: Jeep Compass vs Mazda Mazda CX-5
Key Differences and Impact on Usability
The Mazda CX‑5 offers a longer cargo floor with the first row of seats upright than the Jeep Compass:
. This makes the Mazda significantly better suited for long items that need to be transported without folding down the rear seatback (e.g., long boxes, skis, or bulky furniture parts). With the seats folded down, however, the difference is small (+2 in / 3%), so with the trunk fully expanded, both models are practically comparable. The Jeep Compass stands out with a greater trunk depth:
(measured from the loading edge to the trunk floor). This significantly deeper cargo well increases usable volume and allows for higher stacking of luggage below the loading edge, but is less advantageous for very flat or long items because of the increased "recess." Additionally, the opening height is higher on the Jeep (+2.4 in / 8%), which makes loading very tall items easier; the loading edge itself is practically at the same height (+0.4 in / 1%), so the effort required for loading hardly varies. Other differences: The narrowest width in the trunk is +3.1 in (8%) larger on the Mazda, and the width of the trunk opening is +1.2 in (3%) larger on the Mazda — this makes the Mazda somewhat more flexible when loading wider items, but the advantage remains moderate. Conclusion: Those who frequently transport long items without folding seats benefit from the Mazda CX‑5. Those who rely more on maximum volume, stackable cargo, and a deeper cargo well are better off with the Jeep Compass. Smaller differences in opening width and loading edge height only slightly affect everyday usability.