Trunk comparison: Mazda Mazda CX-60 vs Seat Tarraco

Key Differences

The SEAT Tarraco offers 14% more trunk length with the first row of seats upright than the Mazda CX-60. Additionally, the trunk depth (distance from loading edge to trunk floor) in the Tarraco is 2.4 in or 500% greater than in the Mazda.

All other differences are significantly smaller (e.g., +8% length with seats folded down, +9% opening height, +6% opening width, or +3% interior width) and are therefore not highlighted here.

Impact on Usability

The 14% longer loading length with the first row of seats upright makes the Tarraco more practical when transporting long items without folding seats (e.g., skis, slats, long boxes). The extended cargo area allows more flexible use of the rear seating area together with bulky, longer loads.

The significantly greater depth between the loading edge and trunk floor in the Tarraco increases usable volume and creates more space for tall or stacked cargo. This can be advantageous for crates, shopping trips, or bulky items that require vertical space.

At the same time, a deeper interior often means that heavy items must be lifted slightly higher over the loading edge or set down further down, which can make loading and unloading heavy loads somewhat less convenient. Since the Tarraco’s loading edge is only 0.4 in higher, this effect remains minor.

The Mazda scores slightly with the narrowest interior width (+1.2 in compared to the Tarraco), which can make storing very wide items inside easier. The opening width advantage of the Tarraco (+2.4 in) facilitates maneuvering wide items through the tailgate. Overall, the following applies:

• If you frequently transport long items and want more vertical cargo volume: SEAT Tarraco is more practical.
• If occasional extra interior width at the narrowest point is important or a slightly lower loading edge is preferred: Mazda CX-60 can be advantageous.