SUV Comparison: 2025 Volvo XC60 T8 vs Mazda CX-70 PHEV | Reviews

Two plug-in crossovers duke it out for mastery of brand identity

About 15 years after the technology debuted, the consensus seems to be that we call the plug-in hybrid (PHEV) version of a car the “fev.” The usefulness of PHEVs is often hotly debated, especially by pure battery-electric enthusiasts, as you arguably have all the maintenance of a combustion engine and limited electric range. In reality, PHEVs are more like hybrid-plus, providing the fuel-saving capability of a hybrid along with a short pure electric range for the morning commute. No need to hunt for fast chargers, just plug it into a regular wall socket and let it charge overnight.

While the Volvo XC60 and the Mazda CX-70 might not be priced and sized quite close enough to be commonly cross-shopped, it’s worth looking to see if Mazda’s managed to repeat Volvos upscale move here. Let’s unplug them from the wall and hop in for a drive.

What powers the plug-in hybrids?

Both of these cars have similar drivetrains, featuring four-cylinder engines paired with electric motors and a lithium-ion battery pack. In the XC60, the combustion engine is a 2.0L turbocharged four-cylinder, the lithium-ion battery pack holds 18.8 kWh worth of charge, and the transmission is an eight-speed automatic. Total power output is a very healthy 455 hp with 523 lb-ft of torque, making this innocuous-looking Volvo crossover something of a Crouching Sweden Hidden Viking type of machine.

In contrast, the PHEV system in the CX-70 is not a performance booster, but the more efficient option. Here, the four-cylinder engine is not turbocharged, and displaces 2.5L. The battery pack is only slightly smaller than the Volvo’s, at 17.8 kWh, but without the aid of forced induction for the combustion engine, total power is down to 323 hp and 369 lb-ft of torque.

The CX-70 is no slouch, however. We’ll touch more on the handling and driving experience in a bit, but it’s perfectly quick enough for such a large vehicle. Accelerating to highway speeds takes a little over a second more than the XC60, and the gasoline engine can be a little noisy when taxed, but it doesn’t feel like much of a performance downgrade versus the inline-six option. However, the shifting is not entirely polished.

How fuel efficient are these PHEVs?

Officially, the CX-70’s fuel consumption is rated at 9.9 L/100 km in the city, and 8.7 L/100 km on the highway. The Volvo XC60 rates 8.5 L/100 km across the board. More power yet less fuel usage? Let’s take a look at the main reason for this situation.

Tipping the scales at 2,146 kg, the XC60 is no lightweight. However, the CX-70 outweighs it by almost 200 additional kilograms. Because it is so close to the larger CX-90 in design, the CX-70 has the fuel-efficiency of a three-row crossover, rather than a two-row. It’d be interesting to see how much thriftier this engine setup would be in the likes of the smaller CX-50.

2025 Volvo XC60 PHEV charging port
2025 Volvo XC60 PHEVPhoto by Brendan McAleer

As it stands, the Volvo sips just that much less fuel, and has a greater battery-only range of 58 kilometres as compared to the Mazda’s max of 42 km. In practice, however, plugging in regularly resulted in the CX-70 returning impressively close to its highway mileage in mixed use. That’s excellent for a larger crossover.

Practicality of the Mazda CX-70 vs Volvo XC60

Here the CX-70 wins back any points lost in efficiency because its cargo space can only be described as cavernous. With a total of 1,122L behind the second row, it offers more than double the amount of space than the XC60 does (468L). In fact, that’s almost as much room as the XC60 provides with its rear seats folded down.

2025 Mazda CX-70 PHEV front cabin
2025 Mazda CX-70 PHEVPhoto by Brendan McAleer

Comfort and Convenience

Volvo should receive some sort of award, up to and including the Nobel kind, for its heated steering wheel. First, it’s heated all around the rim, a hot water bottle for your hands on a cold winter day. Second, it’s powerful, radiating warmth like a plate you’ve just taken out of the oven. Last, and perhaps most importantly, you don’t have to turn it on every time – it stays on.

This feature doesn’t seem like the biggest deal, but it gives the XC60 some character. This kind of everyday convenience is the sort of thing that makes people say, “Oh, I like Volvos because they always do that.” By contrast, the CX-70 only heats your hands at the 3-and-9 position, because it is a company run by engineers and that is the correct way to hold a steering wheel. It’s also not quite as hot, and you have to switch it on every time. Sometimes, it’s the little things.

Beyond this, you cannot fault Mazda for creating an interior here that feels nearly as upscale as the Volvo’s. The CX-70 is a bit more businesslike than the XC60’s wood trim and crystal gearshift, but the quality is very good and everything feels nice to the touch. The XC60 has slightly nicer seats, but then Volvo seats have always been the ones that not even Mercedes-Benz could outdo.

2025 Volvo XC60 PHEV steering wheel
2025 Volvo XC60 PHEVPhoto by Brendan McAleer

How is the ride and handling?

Mazda usually offers a more fun-to-drive experience than you’d expect in a practical car, and so it is with the CX-70. It never really sheds the feeling of its size or weight, but the chassis is competent and it rides well, especially considering the 21” wheels. The turning circle is also surprisingly excellent.

Technology in the Mazda vs Volvo

Mazda’s take on infotainment is a bit unusual, in that it’s trying to buck the trend where everything is based around touchscreens. Instead, in the CX-70, you get a rotary controller that handles things in much the same manner as BMW’s old iDrive system.

2025 Mazda CX-70 PHEV
2025 Mazda CX-70 PHEVPhoto by Brendan McAleer

Thing is, a brief test-drive of this technology might frustrate you, but the more time you spend with it, the more you think that Mazda’s engineers might be right. Even when using Apple CarPlay (or Android Auto), the rotary controller becomes nearly as no-look usable as the volume knob that’s also located between the seats. It won’t please everyone, but it actually works. Also, you don’t get those smeary finger marks on the screen.

Volvo’s set up is based around Google software, and has some nicely chunky buttons to back everything up. The standard menus have a bit of a learning curve if you don’t want to use CarPlay or Android Auto, but if you do, then it’s just the standard touchscreen interface you’re used to.

The Volvo’s premium audio system is by Bowers & Wilkins and it is very good. It does also cost an additional $3,750, par for the luxury brand segment, but I’m not sure it’s actually any better than the CX-70’s standard 12-speaker Bose stereo. Audiophiles will hear the difference, the rest of us won’t.

Safety Features

A large part of Volvo’s identity has long been about safety, but the truth is that many brands have caught up in terms of both passive and active safety measures. The XC60 rates a top safety pick from the IIHS, but so too does the CX-70.

Both vehicles have collision mitigation and blind spot monitoring. The Mazda also has a cross-traffic alert (albeit one that’s a bit on the overly sensitive side). A 360-degree camera with sensors might not seem an obvious safety enhancement, but it does make parking safer and both vehicles have one.

2025 Volvo XC60 PHEV
2025 Volvo XC60 PHEVPhoto by Brendan McAleer

Final Thoughts

On its own merits, the CX-70 is an unusual vehicle. It functions perfectly well, but its capabilities are less impressive than they are in the nearly identical CX-90. Having three rows of seating, even if you only use the back seats in a pinch, is handy enough that you can overlook a hefty feel and a little more thirst at the pump.

The XC60, on the other hand, shows Mazda how you do brand identity. It is quick without being showy, has an interior built around comfort, and has many thoughtful touches that will win fans and keep them. It feels distinct from other brands, in a good way.

The CX-70 is a perfectly competent crossover PHEV, but there’s little to recommend it over the more-useful CX-90. It does the job of holding its own as a more upscale experience than you’d expect from a mainstream brand, but I’d like to see a Mazda PHEV in a nimbler package, the better to showcase what the company is all about.

Sign up for our newsletter Blind-Spot Monitor and follow our social channels on X, Tiktok and LinkedIn to stay up to date on the latest automotive news, reviews, car culture, and vehicle shopping advice.

Related Posts


This will close in 0 seconds