Trunk comparison: Mazda Mazda CX-5 vs Skoda Kamiq

Key Differences

The Mazda CX‑5 has a cargo space length that is 6.7 in (≈11%) longer with the seats folded down and a cargo space length that is 8.7 in (≈30%) longer with the first row of seats upright than the Škoda Kamiq.

In contrast, the trunk depth (distance from loading edge to trunk floor) is 4.3 in (≈220%) greater in the Škoda.

Other differences under 10%: the Kamiq’s trunk opening is +2 in (6%) higher, the Mazda’s loading edge is +2.4 in (9%) higher above the road, the narrowest width in the trunk is +2.4 in (6%) greater in the Mazda, and the opening width is +1.6 in (4%) greater in the Mazda.

Impact on Usability

Mazda CX‑5 — Advantages: The significantly longer cargo space (both with folded and upright seats) makes the CX‑5 better suited for long items like furniture parts, skis, or boards and allows more flexible loading of longer cargo.

The slightly greater width at the narrowest point and the marginally wider opening make it easier to stow wider items. Disadvantage: the Mazda’s loading edge is somewhat higher above the road, requiring a bit more effort when handling heavy items.

Škoda Kamiq — Advantages: The considerably greater trunk depth means more volume in a "compartment" below the loading edge; this is beneficial when items need to be placed deeper or stacked (more usable volume with a compact footprint). The slightly higher trunk opening helps when loading tall items.

Disadvantages: the shorter cargo length limits transporting long items; the lower floor position can make loading and unloading heavy or bulky goods less practical because they lie deeper relative to the loading edge and may need to be lifted or set down more often.

Conclusion: For longer cargo and more flexible cargo space use, the Mazda CX‑5 is clearly advantageous. For more usable volume in depth with a compact footprint, the Škoda Kamiq offers strengths that pay off especially with stackable or taller, not too long items.