Top Safety Pick +

2025 Mazda CX-70

midsize SUV / 4-door SUV

Crashworthiness

Rating overview
Evaluation criteria	Rating
Small overlap front
Moderate overlap front: original test
Moderate overlap front: updated test
Side: updated test

Crash avoidance & mitigation

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Headlights (varies by trim/option)
Front crash prevention: pedestrian
Standard system

Seat belts & child restraints

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Seat belt reminders
LATCH ease of use	+

Other available safety features

Standard blind spot detection
Standard lane departure warning & prevention
Optional rear automatic braking

Key

Good
Acceptable
Marginal
Poor

Small overlap front

The small overlap front evaluation consists of a driver-side and a passenger-side component. If the results of the two evaluations differ, then the combined small overlap rating is equal to the lower rating.

Driver-side

Rating applies to 2025 models

Tested vehicle: 2024 Mazda CX-90 Turbo Premium 4-door 4wd

The Mazda CX-90 was introduced for the 2024 model year. These ratings also apply to the Mazda CX-70, CX-70 PHEV and CX-90 PHEV (plug-in hybrid variant).

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Overall driver-side evaluation
Structure and safety cage
Driver injury measures
Head/neck
Chest
Hip/thigh
Lower leg/foot
Driver restraints and dummy kinematics

Action shot taken during the driver-side small overlap frontal crash test.

The dummy's position in relation to the door frame, steering wheel, and instrument panel after the crash test indicates that the driver's survival space was maintained very well.

The frontal and side curtain airbags worked well together to keep the head from coming close to any stiff structure or outside objects that could cause injury.

The driver's space was maintained well, and risk of injuries to the dummy's legs and feet was low.

Technical measurements for this test

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	CEN2306
Lower occupant compartment
Lower hinge pillar max (cm)	4
Footrest (cm)	7
Left toepan (cm)	3
Brake pedal (cm)	5
Parking brake (cm)
Rocker panel lateral average (cm)	2
Upper occupant compartment
Steering column	0
Upper hinge pillar max (cm)	4
Upper dash (cm)	3
Lower instrument panel (cm)	4

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	CEN2306
Head
HIC-15	68
Peak gs at hard contact	no contact
Neck
Tension (kN)	0.8
Extension bending moment (Nm)	12
Maximum Nij	0.19
Chest maximum compression (mm)	22
Femur (kN)
Left	0.2
Right	0.2
Knee displacement (mm)
Left	1
Right	1
Knee-thigh-hip injury risk (%)
Left	0
Right	0
Maximum tibia index
Left	0.40
Right	0.34
Tibia axial force (kN)
Left	1.4
Right	0.9
Foot acceleration (g)
Left	58
Right	44

Passenger-side

Rating applies to 2025 models

Tested vehicle: 2024 Mazda CX-90 4-door 4wd

The Mazda CX-90 was introduced for the 2024 model year. These ratings also apply to the Mazda CX-70, CX-70 PHEV and CX-90 PHEV (plug-in hybrid variant). Passenger-side small overlap frontal ratings are assigned by the Institute based on a test of a 2024 CX-90 conducted by Mazda.

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Overall passenger-side evaluation
Structure and safety cage
Passenger injury measures
Head/neck
Chest
Hip/thigh
Lower leg/foot
Passenger restraints and dummy kinematics
Driver injury measures
Head/neck
Chest
Hip/thigh
Lower leg/foot
Driver restraints and dummy kinematics

Technical measurements for this test

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	VTP2310
Lower occupant compartment
Lower hinge pillar max (cm)	6
Footrest (cm)	11
Right toepan (cm)	7
Center toepan (cm)	2
Rocker panel lateral average (cm)	3
Upper occupant compartment
Center dash (cm)	2
Upper hinge pillar max (cm)	5
Upper dash (cm)	4
Right lower dash (cm)	4

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	VTP2310
Head
HIC-15	113
Peak gs at hard contact	no contact
Neck
Tension (kN)	1.2
Extension bending moment (Nm)	19
Maximum Nij	0.27
Chest maximum compression (mm)	20
Femur (kN)
Left	1.2
Right	1.5
Knee displacement (mm)
Left	2
Right	2
Knee-thigh-hip injury risk (%)
Left	0
Right	0
Maximum tibia index
Left	0.50
Right	0.43
Tibia axial force (kN)
Left	3.1
Right	2.1
Foot acceleration (g)
Left	51
Right	58

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	VTP2310
Head
HIC-15	40
Peak gs at hard contact	no contact
Neck
Tension (kN)	1.1
Extension bending moment (Nm)	10
Maximum Nij	0.20
Chest maximum compression (mm)	24
Femur (kN)
Left	0.2
Right	0.5
Knee displacement (mm)
Left	1
Right	1
Knee-thigh-hip injury risk (%)
Left	0
Right	0
Maximum tibia index
Left	0.30
Right	0.26
Tibia axial force (kN)
Left	0.5
Right	1.0
Foot acceleration (g)
Left	42
Right	67

About the small overlap front test

Moderate overlap front: original test

Rating applies to 2025 models

Tested vehicle: 2024 Mazda CX-90 4-door 4wd

The Mazda CX-90 was introduced for the 2024 model year. These ratings also apply to the Mazda CX-70, CX-70 PHEV and CX-90 PHEV (plug-in hybrid variant). Moderate overlap frontal ratings are assigned by the Institute based on a test of a 2024 CX-90 conducted by Mazda.

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Overall evaluation
Structure and safety cage
Driver injury measures
Head/neck
Chest
Leg/foot, left
Leg/foot, right
Driver restraints and dummy kinematics

Technical measurements for this test

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	VTF2311
Footwell intrusion
Footrest (cm)	4
Left (cm)	5
Center (cm)	4
Right (cm)	1
Brake pedal (cm)	2
Instrument panel rearward movement
Left (cm)	0
Right (cm)	0
Steering column movement
Upward (cm)	3
Rearward (cm)	0
A-pillar rearward movement (cm)	1

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	VTF2311
Head
HIC-15	101
Peak gs at hard contact	no contact
Neck
Tension (kN)	0.7
Extension bending moment (Nm)	11
Maximum Nij	0.15
Chest maximum compression (mm)	30
Legs
Femur force - left (kN)	0.3
Femur force - right (kN)	0.2
Knee displacement - left (mm)	1
Knee displacement - right (mm)	1
Maximum tibia index - left	0.45
Maximum tibia index - right	0.37
Tibia axial force - left (kN)	1.9
Tibia axial force - right (kN)	1.8
Foot acceleration (g)
Left	80
Right	59

About the original moderate overlap front test

Moderate overlap front: updated test

Rating applies to 2025 models

Tested vehicle: 2025 Mazda CX-70 3.3 Turbo Preferred 4-door 4wd

The Mazda CX-70 was introduced for the 2025 model year. These ratings do not apply to the Mazda CX-70 PHEV, CX-90 or CX-90 PHEV models.

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Overall evaluation
Structure and safety cage
Driver injury measures
Head/neck
Chest
Thigh/hip
Leg/foot
Driver restraints and dummy kinematics
Rear passenger injury measures
Head/neck
Chest
Thigh
Rear passenger restraints and dummy kinematics

View of the vehicle after the crash showing the airbags and damage to the occupant compartment.

The rear passenger dummy's head remained a safe distance from the front seatback.

Rear passenger dummy injury values indicate a low risk of injury to the head or neck and chest. During the crash, the shoulder belt remained in an ideal position on the dummy’s chest.

The rear passenger dummy's lap belt remained in the ideal position on the pelvis.

Technical measurements for this test

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	CEF2445
Footwell intrusion
Footrest (cm)	2
Left (cm)	3
Center (cm)	3
Right (cm)	2
Brake pedal (cm)	3
Instrument panel rearward movement
Left (cm)	0
Right (cm)	0
Steering column movement
Upward (cm)	3
Rearward (cm)	1
A-pillar rearward movement (cm)	0

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	CEF2445
Head
HIC-15	64
Peak gs at hard contact	no contact
Neck
Tension (kN)	0.8
Extension bending moment (Nm)	11
Maximum Nij	0.16
Chest maximum compression (mm)	27
Femur (kN)
Left	0.5
Right	0.4
Knee displacement (mm)
Left	1
Right	1
Knee-thigh-hip injury risk (%)
Left	0
Right	0
Maximum tibia index
Left	0.44
Right	0.66
Tibia axial force (kN)
Left	1.2
Right	1.2
Foot acceleration (g)
Left	39
Right	74

Test ID	CEF2445
Head
HIC-15 for head contact during forward excursion	no contact
Peak gs at hard contact	no contact
Neck
Tension (kN)	1.1
Compression (kN)	0.2
Maximum Nij for head contact during forward excursion	no contact
Chest
Chest index	32
Shoulder belt tension (kN)	4.1
Thigh (kN)
Left femur compression	0.1
Right femur compression	0.2

About the moderate overlap front test

February 2024 adjustment to rating criteria

Side: updated test

Rating applies to 2025 models

Tested vehicle: 2024 Mazda CX-90 4-door 4wd

The Mazda CX-90 was introduced for the 2024 model year. These ratings also apply to the Mazda CX-70, CX-70 PHEV and CX-90 PHEV (plug-in hybrid variant). Side 2.0 ratings are assigned by the Institute based on a test of a 2024 CX-90 conducted by Mazda.

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Overall evaluation
Structure and safety cage
Driver injury measures
Head/neck
Torso
Pelvis
Driver head protection
Rear passenger injury measures
Head/neck
Torso
Pelvis
Rear passenger head protection

Technical measurements for this test

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	VTS2323
B-pillar to longitudinal centerline of driver's seat (cm)	-28.5
Negative numbers indicate the amount by which the crush stopped short of the seat centerline.

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	VTS2323
Head
HIC-15	104
Peak gs at hard contact	no contact
Neck
Tension (kN)	0.2
Compression (kN)	0.4
Shoulder
Lateral deflection (mm)	7
Lateral force (kN)	0.6
Torso
Maximum deflection (mm)	31
Average deflection (mm)	26
Maximum deflection rate (m/s)	6.09
Maximum viscous criterion (m/s)	0.43
Pelvis
Combined force (kN)	2.3

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	VTS2323
Head
HIC-15	18
Peak gs at hard contact	no contact
Neck
Tension (kN)	0.4
Compression (kN)	0.3
Shoulder
Lateral deflection (mm)	10
Lateral force (kN)	0.7
Torso
Maximum deflection (mm)	19
Average deflection (mm)	15
Maximum deflection rate (m/s)	3.32
Maximum viscous criterion (m/s)	0.17
Pelvis
Combined force (kN)	3.7

About the side crash test

Headlights

Ratings are given for 2 different headlight variations available on this vehicle.

Trim level(s)

3.3 Turbo S Premium trim
3.3 Turbo S Premium Plus trim

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Low-beam headlight type	LED projector
High-beam headlight type	LED projector
Curve-adaptive?	Yes
High-beam assist?	Yes
Overall rating
Distance at which headlights provide at least 5 lux illumination:

Low beams
On the straightaway, visibility was good on the right side of the road and fair on the left side. On curves, visibility was good on the sharp left and both right curves and fair on the gradual left curve.

The low beams created some glare.

High beams
On the straightaway, visibility was good on both sides of the road. On curves, visibility was good in all 4 tests.

High-beam assist compensates for some limitations of this vehicle's low beams on the straightaway and on both left curves.

Technical measurements for this test

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Trim level(s)	3.3 Turbo S Premium trim 3.3 Turbo S Premium Plus trim
Low-beam headlight type	LED projector
High-beam headlight type	LED projector
Curve-adaptive?	Yes
High-beam assist?	Yes
Overall rating Applies to 2025 models

LOW BEAMS	Average minimum useful illumination distance (5 lux)	Amount glare exceeded threshold
Straightaway right edge	110.7 m	None
Straightaway left edge	54.2 m	None
250m radius right curve, right edge	85.3 m	3.4%
250m radius left curve, left edge	57.7 m	None
150m radius right curve, right edge	73.4 m	13.3%
150m radius left curve, right edge	58.5 m	None

HIGH BEAMS	Average minimum useful illumination distance (5 lux)
Straightaway right edge	178.4 m
Straightaway left edge	166.8 m
250m radius right curve, right edge	93.5 m
250m radius left curve, left edge	88.2 m
150m radius right curve, right edge	76.5 m
150m radius left curve, left edge	67.8 m

Trim level(s)

3.3 Turbo Premium trim
3.3 Turbo Premium Plus trim
3.3 Turbo Preferred trim

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Low-beam headlight type	LED projector
High-beam headlight type	LED projector
Curve-adaptive?	No
High-beam assist?	Yes
Overall rating
Distance at which headlights provide at least 5 lux illumination:

Low beams
On the straightaway, visibility was fair on the right side of the road and inadequate on the left side. On curves, visibility was good on both right curves and inadequate on both left curves.

The low beams never exceeded glare limits.

High beams
On the straightaway, visibility was good on both sides of the road. On curves, visibility was good on the gradual right curve, fair on the sharp right curve and inadequate on both left curves.

High-beam assist compensates for some limitations of this vehicle's low beams on the straightaway and on both left curves.

Technical measurements for this test

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Trim level(s)	3.3 Turbo Premium trim 3.3 Turbo Premium Plus trim 3.3 Turbo Preferred trim
Low-beam headlight type	LED projector
High-beam headlight type	LED projector
Curve-adaptive?	No
High-beam assist?	Yes
Overall rating Applies to 2025 models

LOW BEAMS	Average minimum useful illumination distance (5 lux)	Amount glare exceeded threshold
Straightaway right edge	83.3 m	None
Straightaway left edge	41.2 m	None
250m radius right curve, right edge	75.3 m	None
250m radius left curve, right edge	41.1 m	None
150m radius right curve, right edge	62.8 m	None
150m radius left curve, right edge	42.6 m	None

HIGH BEAMS	Average minimum useful illumination distance (5 lux)
Straightaway right edge	153.3 m
Straightaway left edge	167.1 m
250m radius right curve, right edge	78.7 m
250m radius left curve, left edge	59.4 m
150m radius right curve, right edge	62.7 m
150m radius left curve, left edge	45.7 m

About the headlight evaluation

Front crash prevention: pedestrian

Rating applies to all 2025 models

System details

standard Smart Brake Support

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Overall evaluation
Includes high-beam assist credit

Crossing child — day

In the 12 mph test, this vehicle avoided a collision.
In the 25 mph test, impact speed was reduced by 23 mph.

Crossing adult — night

In the 12 mph test, this vehicle avoided a collision when using its high beams. When using its low beams, this vehicle avoided a collision.
In the 25 mph test, this vehicle avoided a collision when using its high beams. When using its low beams, this vehicle avoided a collision.

Parallel adult — night

In the 25 mph test, this vehicle avoided a collision when using its high beams. When using its low beams, this vehicle avoided a collision.
In the 37 mph test, impact speed was reduced by 33 mph when using its high beams and a warning was issued 2.4 seconds before impact. When using its low beams, impact speed was reduced by 26 mph and a warning was issued 1.5 seconds before impact.

About the pedestrian front crash prevention test

Seat belt reminders

Rating applies to 2025 models

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Overall evaluation
Front row
Unbelted occupant alert (audible & visual)
Initiation time
Duration	Long enough (90+ seconds)
Volume
Audio frequency
Second row
Startup status alert (visual)
Initiation time
Duration at least 60 seconds
Belt disengaged alert (audible & visual)
Initiation time
Duration at least 30 seconds
Volume
Audio frequency

Technical measurements for this test

About the seat belt reminder evaluation

Child seat anchors

Rating applies to 2025 models

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Overall evaluation	+ extra LATCH positions
Vehicle trim	Premium
Seat type	leatherette

This vehicle has 2 rear seating positions with complete child seat attachment (LATCH) hardware.

It has 1 additional seating position with a tether anchor and the ability to borrow lower anchors from the other seating positions.

Note: When anchors are borrowed, they aren't available to use in their designated positions.

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Overall evaluation	+ extra LATCH positions
Vehicle trim	Premium
Seat type	leatherette

Rating icon	Rating
G	Good
A	Acceptable
M	Marginal
P	Poor
	Seating positions that rely on borrowed lower anchors or have only a tether anchor available are not rated.
thether anchor symbol	Tether anchor
lower anchor symbol	Lower anchors
shared lower achors symbol	Lower anchor(s) can be borrowed from adjacent positions(s)
	No hardware available

Details by seating position

Position	Rating
1
1	Tether anchor
	easy-to-find location
	no other hardware could be confused for anchor
	Lower anchors
	not too deep in seat
	not too much force needed to attach
	easy to maneuver around anchors
2
2	Tether anchor
	easy-to-find location
	no other hardware could be confused for anchor
	Lower anchors
	Can be borrowed from 1 and 3
3
3	Tether anchor
	easy-to-find location
	no other hardware could be confused for anchor
	Lower anchors
	not too deep in seat
	not too much force needed to attach
	easy to maneuver around anchors

Technical measurements for this test

Lower anchor A
Open access rated	Yes
Depth	Visible
Force (lbs)	1
Clearance angle (degrees)	93
Lower anchor B
Open access rated	Yes
Depth	Visible
Force (lbs)	0
Clearance angle (degrees)	89
Tether anchor
Location	Middle seatback
Confusing hardware present	Yes
Has contrasting label within 3 inches of tether anchor	Yes
Tether anchors can be accessed while seatback is properly positioned for use of LATCH	Yes

Lower anchor A
Lower latch is shared for this seat position
Lower anchor B
Lower latch is shared for this seat position
Tether anchor
Location	Middle seatback
Confusing hardware present	Yes
Has contrasting label within 3 inches of tether anchor	Yes
Tether anchors can be accessed while seatback is properly positioned for use of LATCH	Yes

Lower anchor A
Open access rated	Yes
Depth	Visible
Force (lbs)	1
Clearance angle (degrees)	94
Lower anchor B
Open access rated	Yes
Depth	Visible
Force (lbs)	0
Clearance angle (degrees)	91
Tether anchor
Location	Middle seatback
Confusing hardware present	Yes
Has contrasting label within 3 inches of tether anchor	Yes
Tether anchors can be accessed while seatback is properly positioned for use of LATCH	Yes

About the child seat anchor evaluation

Background cabin sound pressure level at 24 km/h	51 dB
Audible signal sound pressure level at 24 km/h	71 dB
Difference between background and signal	20.1 dB
Background cabin sound pressure level at 40 km/h	55 dB
Audible signal sound pressure level at 40 km/h	73 dB
Difference between background and signal	18.3 dB
Dominant audio frequency	552 Hz