Compare the2025 Mazda CX-50VS 2025 Nissan Rogue

Safety
Reliability
Engine
Fuel Economy and Range
Brakes and Stopping
Tires and Wheels
Suspension and Handling
Passenger Space
Cargo Capacity
Towing
Servicing Ease
Ergonomics
Recommendations

Safety

© 1999 - 2025Advanta-STAR Automotive Research, all rights reserved. This vehicle comparison and all of the content in it are provided only by license from Advanta-STAR Automotive Research Corporation of America (“Advanta-STAR”). If you are not a legally licensed user of this vehicle comparison, it is against federal law to access it, copy it, forward it, or use it in any manner whatsoever. Any unauthorized use of this vehicle comparison is a violation of U.S. and international law and is punishable criminally and civilly. Removal of this watermark/notification without prior written license and approval received from Advanta-STAR is an agreement, understanding, and/or stipulation by the person(s), entities, agents, attorneys, and any other persons involved in the removal of this watermark/notification (including but not limited to Search Optics, LLC and any and all parent entities, sister entities, and subsidiary entities of Search Optics, LLC and/or any other entity, agent, attorney, and persons related in any manner to Search Optics, LLC) to: 1) an agreed upon amount of liquidated monetary damages of a minimum of $1,250,000.00 US Dollars in favor of Advanta-STAR; 2) the jurisdiction and enforcement of any legal claims associated with this matter asserted by Advanta-STAR in the United States Federal District Court in Portand, Oregon; and 3) service of process of any legal claims asserted by Advanta-STAR associated with this matter may be accomplished by First-Class Postage by the United States Postal Service or comparable service. KZLM6-WCUBK 2a06:98c0:3600::103 2025/07/20

In a Vehicle-to-Vehicle Frontal Crash Prevention 2.0 test conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), the Mazda CX-50 achieved a “Acceptable” rating - the second highest possible - for its performance in forward collision warning and automatic braking systems, demonstrating its excellent capabilities in preventing collisions. The Nissan Rogue has not been tested.

The CX-50 has standard Secondary Collision Reduction System, which automatically apply the brakes in the event of a crash to help prevent secondary collisions and prevent further injuries. The Rogue doesn’t offer a post collision braking system: in the event of a collision that triggers the airbags, more collisions are possible without the protection of airbags that may have already deployed.

To provide maximum traction and stability on all roads, All-Wheel Drive is standard on the CX-50. But it costs extra on the Rogue.

Both the CX-50 and Rogue have Rear Cross Traffic Alert, but the CX-50 Turbo Premium Plus has Rear Cross Traffic Braking (automatically applies the brakes) to better prevent a collision when backing near traffic. The Rogue’s Rear Cross Traffic Alert doesn’t automatically brake.

Both the CX-50 and the Rogue have standard driver and passenger frontal airbags, front side-impact airbags, driver and front passenger knee airbags, side-impact head airbags, front and rear seatbelt pretensioners, height adjustable front shoulder belts, four-wheel antilock brakes, traction control, electronic stability systems to prevent skidding, crash mitigating brakes, daytime running lights, lane departure warning systems, blind spot warning systems, rearview cameras, rear cross-path warning, driver alert monitors and available around view monitors.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration does 35 MPH front crash tests on new vehicles. In this test, results indicate that the Mazda CX-50 is safer than the Nissan Rogue:

	CX-50	Rogue
OVERALL STARS	5 Stars	4 Stars
	Driver
STARS	5 Stars	4 Stars
HIC	100	261
Neck Injury Risk	23.2%	33%
Neck Stress	209 lbs.	403 lbs.
Neck Compression	11 lbs.	54 lbs.
	Passenger
STARS	5 Stars	4 Stars
HIC	211	319
Chest Compression	.6 inches	.6 inches
Neck Injury Risk	22%	37%
Neck Stress	106 lbs.	193 lbs.
Neck Compression	74 lbs.	103 lbs.
Leg Forces (l/r)	264/347 lbs.	481/312 lbs.

New test not comparable to pre-2011 test results. More stars = Better. Lower test results = Better.

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety does 40 MPH moderate front offset crash tests on new cars. In this updated test, results indicate that the CX-50 is safer than the Rogue:

	CX-50	Rogue
Overall Evaluation	GOOD	ACCEPTABLE
Structure	GOOD	GOOD
	Driver Injury Measures
Head/Neck Rating	GOOD	GOOD
Chest Rating	GOOD	GOOD
Thigh/hip Rating	GOOD	GOOD
Leg/foot Rating	GOOD	GOOD
Restraints	GOOD	GOOD
	Rear Passenger Injury Measures
Head/Neck Rating	GOOD	ACCEPTABLE
Chest Rating	GOOD	ACCEPTABLE
Thigh Rating	GOOD	GOOD
Restraints	ACCEPTABLE	ACCEPTABLE

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration does side impact tests on new vehicles. In this test, which crashes the vehicle into a flat barrier at 38.5 MPH and into a post at 20 MPH, results indicate that the Mazda CX-50 is safer than the Nissan Rogue:

	CX-50	Rogue
	Front Seat
STARS	5 Stars	5 Stars
HIC	35	95
Hip Force	114 lbs.	339 lbs.
	Rear Seat
STARS	5 Stars	5 Stars
HIC	67	162
Hip Force	499 lbs.	513 lbs.
	Into Pole
STARS	5 Stars	5 Stars
Max Damage Depth	13 inches	13 inches

New test not comparable to pre-2011 test results. More stars = Better. Lower test results = Better.

Side impacts caused 23% of all road fatalities in 2018, down from 29% in 2003, when the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety introduced its side barrier test. In order to continue improving vehicle safety, the IIHS has started using a more severe side impact test: 37 MPH (up from 31 MPH), with a 4180-pound barrier (up from 3300 pounds). The results of this newly developed test demonstrates that the Mazda CX-50 is safer than the Rogue:

	CX-50	Rogue
Overall Evaluation	GOOD	ACCEPTABLE
Structure	GOOD	GOOD
	Driver Injury Measures
Head/Neck	GOOD	GOOD
Head Injury Criterion	114	290
Head Peak Forces	no contact	81 G’s
Neck Compression	22 lbs.	45 lbs.
Head Protection	GOOD	MARGINAL
	Passenger Injury Measures
Head/Neck	GOOD	GOOD
Head Injury Criterion	47	455
Head Peak Forces	no contact	89 G’s
Neck Tension	67 lbs.	89 lbs.
Neck Compression	45 lbs.	402 lbs.
Torso	GOOD	GOOD
Shoulder Deflection	.87 in	1.22 in
Shoulder Force	201 lbs.	379 lbs.
Torso Max Deflection	.71 in	.87 in
Pelvis	GOOD	GOOD
Pelvis Force	491 lbs.	535 lbs.
Head Protection	GOOD	MARGINAL

The Mazda CX-50 has achieved the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety’s (IIHS) highest rating of “Top Safety Pick Plus” for the 2025 model year. This distinction is based on its exceptional performance in IIHS’ rigorous battery of safety tests. Specifically, it earned a “Good” rating in the latest, more stringent moderate overlap front crash test, a “Good” result in the updated side impact test, and a “Good” score in the revised pedestrian crash prevention test. The Rogue is not even a standard “Top Safety Pick” for 2025.

Reliability

J.D. Power and Associates’ 2024 survey of the owners of three-year-old vehicles provides the long-term dependability statistics that show that Mazda vehicles are more reliable than Nissan vehicles. J.D. Power ranks Mazda above average in long-term dependability. With 5 more problems per 100 vehicles in the first three years of ownership, Nissan is rated below average.

From surveys of all its subscribers, Consumer Reports’ March 2025 Auto Issue reports that Mazda vehicles are more reliable than Nissan vehicles. Consumer Reports ranks Mazda 6 places higher in reliability than Nissan.

Engine

The CX-50’s optional 2.5 DOHC 4-cylinder hybrid produces 18 more horsepower (219 vs. 201) than the Rogue’s 1.5 turbo 3-cylinder. The CX-50’s optional 2.5 turbo 4-cylinder produces 55 more horsepower (256 vs. 201) and 95 lbs.-ft. more torque (320 vs. 225) than the Rogue’s 1.5 turbo 3-cylinder.

As tested in Motor Trend the Mazda CX-50 is faster than the Nissan Rogue:

	CX-50 4 cyl.	CX-50 4 cyl. hybrid gas	Rogue
Zero to 60 MPH	8.5 sec	7.6 sec	8.8 sec
Quarter Mile	16.5 sec	15.8 sec	16.6 sec

Fuel Economy and Range

On the EPA test cycle the CX-50 gets better mileage than the Rogue:

			MPG
CX-50
	AWD	2.5 4-cyl. Hybrid	39 city/37 hwy
Rogue
	FWD	S/SV 1.5 turbo 3-cyl.	30 city/37 hwy
		SL/Platinum 1.5 turbo 3-cyl.	29 city/36 hwy
	AWD	S/SV 1.5 turbo 3-cyl.	28 city/35 hwy
		SL/Platinum 1.5 turbo 3-cyl.	28 city/34 hwy
		Rock Creek 1.5 turbo 3-cyl.	27 city/32 hwy

An engine control system that can shut down some of the engine’s cylinders helps improve the CX-50 (except Turbo/Hybrid)’s fuel efficiency. The Rogue doesn’t offer a system that can shut down part of the engine.

Regenerative brakes improve the CX-50 Hybrid’s fuel efficiency by converting inertia back into energy instead of wasting it. The Rogue doesn’t offer a regenerative braking system.

The CX-50’s standard fuel tank has 1.4 gallons more fuel capacity than the Rogue (15.9 vs. 14.5 gallons).

The CX-50 has a standard locking fuel door which locks and unlocks with the power locks. The fuel filler door is not lockable on the Rogue. A locking fuel door helps prevent fuel theft and vandalism, such as sugar in the tank.

Brakes and Stopping

For better stopping power the CX-50’s brake rotors are larger than those on the Rogue:

	CX-50	Rogue
Front Rotors	12.8 inches	11.7 inches
Rear Rotors	12.8 inches	11.5 inches

The CX-50 stops much shorter than the Rogue:

	CX-50	Rogue
70 to 0 MPH	161 feet	177 feet	Car and Driver
60 to 0 MPH	113 feet	129 feet	Motor Trend
60 to 0 MPH (Wet)	142 feet	147 feet	Consumer Reports

Tires and Wheels

For better traction, the CX-50 Premium Plus/Turbo’s tires are larger than the largest tires available on the Rogue (245/45R20 vs. 235/65R17).

The CX-50 Premium Plus/Turbo’s tires provide better handling because they have a lower 45 series profile (height to width ratio) that provides a stiffer sidewall than the Rogue SL/Platinum’s 55 series tires.

For better ride, handling and brake cooling the CX-50 Premium Plus/Turbo has standard 20-inch wheels. The Rogue’s largest wheels are only 19-inches.

Suspension and Handling

For a smoother ride and more stable handling, the CX-50’s wheelbase is 4.3 inches longer than on the Rogue (110.8 inches vs. 106.5 inches).

For better handling and stability, the average track (width between the wheels) on the CX-50 is 2.7 inches wider in the front and 2.7 inches wider in the rear than the track on the Rogue.

The CX-50 handles at .87 G’s, while the Rogue Platinum AWD pulls only .83 G’s of cornering force in a Car and Driver skidpad test.

The CX-50 2.5 Turbo Premium Plus executes Motor Trend’s “Figure Eight” maneuver 1.1 seconds quicker than the Rogue Platinum AWD (26.8 seconds @ .63 average G’s vs. 27.9 seconds @ .59 average G’s).

For greater off-road capability the CX-50 2.5 S Premium Plus has a greater minimum ground clearance than the Rogue (8.6 vs. 8.2 inches), allowing the CX-50 to travel over rougher terrain without being stopped or damaged.

Passenger Space

The CX-50 has .2 inches more front legroom and 1.3 inches more rear legroom than the Rogue.

Cargo Capacity

The CX-50’s cargo area is larger than the Rogue’s in almost every dimension:

	CX-50	Rogue
Length to seat (2nd/1st)	42.6”/75.4”	35.5”/70.5”
Max Width	55.6”	51.3”
Min Width	40.2”	43”
Height	30.2”	32.7”

Towing

The CX-50’s standard towing capacity is much higher than the Rogue’s (2000 vs. 1500 pounds). Maximum trailer towing in the Nissan Rogue is only 1500 pounds. The CX-50 offers up to a 3500 lbs. towing capacity.

Servicing Ease

The CX-50 uses gas struts to support the hood for easier service access. The Rogue uses a prop rod to support its heavy hood. It takes two hands to open the hood and set the prop rod, the prop rod gets in the way during maintenance and service, and the prop rod could be knocked out, causing the heavy hood to fall on the person maintaining or servicing the car.

Ergonomics

The CX-50’s front and rear power windows all open or close fully with one touch of the switches, making it more convenient at drive-up windows and toll booths, or when talking with someone outside the car. The Rogue’s passenger windows don’t open or close automatically.

On a hot day the CX-50’s driver can lower all the windows from a distance using the keyless remote. The driver of the Rogue can only operate the windows from inside the vehicle, with the ignition on.

The CX-50’s standard Advanced Keyless Entry and Start allow you to unlock the doors from either front door handle, open the cargo door, and start the engine, all without removing the key from the pocket or purse. Push-Button Start standard on the Rogue only offers hands-free access for the ignition, none to unlock the vehicle. Push-Button Start is not available on the Rogue SV/Rock Creek/SL/Platinum.

The CX-50’s rain-sensitive wipers adjust their speed and turn on and off automatically based on the amount of rainfall on the windshield. This allows the driver to concentrate on driving without constantly adjusting the wipers. The Rogue’s standard intermittent wipers change speed with vehicle speed, but can’t turn on and off or change speed based on changing rainfall.

To help drivers see further while navigating curves, the CX-50 Turbo has standard adaptive headlights to illuminate around corners automatically by reading vehicle speed and steering wheel angle. The Rogue doesn’t offer cornering lights.

The CX-50’s optional rear and side view mirrors have an automatic dimming feature. These mirrors can be set to automatically darken quickly when headlights shine on them, keeping following vehicles from blinding or distracting the driver. The Rogue offers an automatic rear view mirror, but its side mirrors don’t dim.

Both the Mazda CX-50 and Nissan Rogue offer exterior mirrors that can be folded to provide convenience. The CX-50 offers available power folding mirrors, which allow for easy, one-touch folding or unfolding at the driver’s discretion. This provides added convenience when maneuvering or parking, as well as when walking past the parked vehicle. In comparison, the Rogue’s foldable mirrors are manual, requiring the driver to get out and physically fold them once parked and unfold them before getting in.

Standard air-conditioned seats in the CX-50 Premium Plus/Turbo keep the driver and front passenger comfortable and take the sting out of hot seats in Summer. The Rogue doesn’t offer air-conditioned seats.

The CX-50 has a standard dual zone air conditioning allows the driver and front passenger to choose two completely different temperatures so people with different temperature preferences won’t have to compromise. This makes both the driver and front passenger as comfortable as possible. Dual zone air conditioning is only available on the Rogue SV/Rock Creek/SL/Platinum.

Recommendations

Consumer Reports® recommends both the Mazda CX-50 and the Nissan Rogue, based on reliability, safety and performance.

Car and Driver performed a comparison test in its April 2024 issue and they ranked the Mazda CX-50 2.5 Turbo Premium Plus first. They ranked the Nissan Rogue Platinum AWD eighth.

See Available Inventory