The blurred line between an SUV and crossover

Karl asks when is an SUV not an SUV? Well, when it’s a crossover, of course.

Last week, I spent some time behind the wheel of a Mazda CX-3, which, as the Japanese company is proud to point out, is an SUV. Except, it’s really not. At all.

The first indication was how much ground clearance it has. I had to go and see someone, so I climbed up a kerb to park on some grass. Not a huge height, but enough so a regular hatchback would find it difficult. Well, the CX-3 found it difficult too. First was a slight scrape, which was probably just the extended front lip that it features – a lovely addition from the styling department, which makes such a manoeuvre difficult at best. Should I have proceeded after that? Probably not, “but Mazda says this is an SUV” was the thought going through my head. Then came the crunch as the side skirts pushed against the kerb.

Oh dear, we’re not going to get very far – are we? Two choices: push on or back off. I decided the former was the best option as we’d already got to this point. Finally, we made it up and I checked underneath. Thankfully, the damage was limited to a small scrape under the sacrificial plastic front lip and another under the side skirt.

Minor stuff, but if it couldn’t hop a kerb, well then any notion of being able to head onto a dirt track, which is moderately bumpier than a bitumen road, is right out the window.

Classifying these cars is becoming more difficult, especially when an SUV is supposed to have a modicum of off-road ability. Most SUVs these days are coming out in cheaper versions, which remove drive to the rear wheels – completely killing off any idea of heading onto a beach or venturing onto a dirt track. Take the Hyundai Creta, for instance, which sells like hot cakes in the Indian market. It’s doesn’t even offer the option of all-wheel drive, but Hyundai markets the car as the “Perfect SUV.” Or take the Mahindra KUV100, which I see is marketed as the “Young SUV.” Well, it doesn’t even offer any more ground clearance than a small hatchback – so calling it an SUV is a bit of a stretch, wouldn’t you say?

But, back to the CX-3 – which has been lifted slightly, has all-wheel-drive, but only has a smidge more clearance than a normal hatch. Of course, that’s all the licence Mazda needs to call it an SUV. But let’s not get carried away here - it’s not. It’s a crossover, pure and simple. It’s that middle ground between hatch and SUV.

But where it gets even murkier is that it’s dangerously close to another car from the same brand. Let’s say you take away the ride height because it’s of no use anyway. And that all-wheel-drive system is far too slow to react to be of any benefit, so let’s delete that as well. And if that happens, then the 2.0-litre engine isn’t needed any more because you’re saving a heap of weight, so we can replace it with something smaller, something a bit more economical.

And if you lose a couple of interior trim details (such as the red accents inside the air vents) what have you got left? A Mazda2. Yes, the Japanese company’s diminutive hatch has virtually the same interior and drives better. It’s a brilliant machine, and when it’s thousands cheaper, it’s a no brainer.

It’s one of the most underrated cars that Mazda makes, but the Mazda2 – on a pound-for-pound basis – is one of its best. And the best part? It doesn’t claim to be something it’s not.