Trunk comparison: Mazda Mazda CX-60 vs Durchschnitt SUV

Key Differences

Significantly larger cargo space with upright front seats in the Mazda CX‑60: The CX‑60 offers 5.1 in more usable cargo space (+15%) with upright front seats compared to the average SUV.

Significantly shallower trunk depth in the Mazda CX‑60: The trunk depth (distance from loading edge → trunk floor) is 2 in greater in the average SUV, which corresponds to +400% compared to the CX‑60.

Other smaller deviations (under 10%): the CX‑60 has a 4.7 in longer loading floor (+7%) with folded seats, a 1.2 in wider trunk opening (+3%), and 0.4 in more width at the narrowest point (+1%). The trunk opening and loading edge of the average SUV are each about 0.4 in higher (+1%).

Impact on Usability

Due to the 15% longer loading floor with upright front seats, the CX‑60 is better suited to transport longer items (e.g., skis, slats, long boxes) without having to adjust the front seats or fold them down. The 1.2 in wider opening additionally supports loading wider items.

The significantly shallower trunk depth of the CX‑60 (compared to the average SUV) has two practical effects: On one hand, the trunk floor sits closer to the loading edge, making it easier to slide in and lift heavy loads and making loading more ergonomic.

On the other hand, this shallower depth reduces usable volume vertically or spatially—taller or bulkier cargo is less easy to stack or can only be accommodated with folded seats.

The average SUV offers more space for tall or bulky cargo due to the greater depth but can create a larger edge when lifting items inside due to the deeper floor, which can make loading heavy items more difficult.

Conclusion: If you frequently transport long, flat items or value easy handling when loading and unloading, the Mazda CX‑60 is advantageous.

If you regularly need to carry tall or very bulky cargo, a typical average SUV offers more storage space due to the greater depth, albeit at the cost of somewhat less favorable loading ergonomics.