Best Near-Premium SUV Shootout: Luxurious SUVs from Mainstream Brands

Like the vehicles featured within, this comparison is more mid-sized than our previous mega shootouts.

This wasn't the original plan. While the larger-two-row SUV scene was pretty small (or dated) at the turn of the decade, there's been a steady stream of new talent over the last few years. So much so that it has essentially split into two schools of thought: the road-biased, luxo crowd and the rugged, rough-and-tumble set. For this challenge, we wanted to focus on the former, the sub-set arguably kicked off by the Nissan Murano almost a quarter century ago.

Volkswagen may have come fourth place in this comparison, but it wins on longest model name. Officially, this is the 2025 Volkswagen Atlas Cross Sport SE with Technology with 4MOTION. At least in Canada the equivalent trim is a little more condensed, called the Comfortline R-Line Black Edition.

Astute readers will notice this is a mid-trim model while the other three are all top-of-the-line entries. So, what gives? Well, it’s a matter of what was available, but even in this trim, the Atlas Cross Sport still has a lot to offer. Plus, the drivetrain remains the same regardless of which model is selected.

The heart of the drivetrain is a 2.0-liter turbocharged engine that develops 269 hp and 273 lb-ft of torque. That’s the second most power here, only trailing the ridiculously overpowered CX-70. Does it make the Atlas Cross Sport the second quickest vehicle? Maybe or maybe not, but it sure feels like it. From behind the wheel the engine is so fluid, building power effortlessly with no peaks or valleys. The transmission is the quickest to respond as well amongst the conventional automatics.

All this allows the big SUV to scampers away from a stop quicker than one might expect. But big this Atlas Cross Sport is, and lacking any sort of hybrid hardware, it delivers the worst fuel economy in this comparison: 20 mpg (12.7 L/100 km) city and 26 mpg (9.2 L/100 km) highway.

Driving wise, the Atlas Cross Sport has the most old-school-SUV driving feel. Volkswagen did engineer some of that out during the sport utility’s facelift a few years ago, but compared to the others here, it feels the least car-like, for better or worse. It’s not the worst one to drive or has the poorest handling traits though. That’s an honor saved for the Santa Fe. The Atlas Cross Sport, in terms of driving response and refinement, can’t match the Crown Signia or CX-70. Again, a byproduct of its more truck-like driving experience.

Being the second largest vehicle here, the big VW had the highest rated rear seat space, tying the Mazda CX-70. The vehicle feels so wide, and there’s all the legroom in the world back there. It’s only head room that’s a bit tight for taller passengers. The front seats scored the second highest mark for overall comfort, even if the passenger seat is merely manually adjustable in our tester.

Cargo capacity is also generous, with a low, flat, wide rear hatch area. There are no remote controls to fold the rear seats though nor is there a 110-volt outlet in this trim level. Hurting the cargo area more is the steeply raked rear roof line. It cuts into the space, limiting how tall an item can be for transport. There’s a price to pay for style.

Speaking of style, the Atlas Cross Sport may be the least interesting design here, which can be a good or bad thing depending on your perspective. The conservative, typical Volkswagen face is unoffensive and the wide stance with the raked roofline gives it a cool off-road warrior look. But, with only 6.7-inches of ground clearance, the Atlas Cross Sport sits the lowest to the ground, making it the least capable of crawling over larger objects on or off the road.

An easy copout for the Volkswagen’s fourth place finish would be to assume since it’s not fully loaded, it can’t compete with the others. But that’s not entirely true. The Cross Sport may be missing some features at this price point, like a power passenger seat, 360-degree camera, heated rear seats, and head-up display. But it also has the lowest price point in our comparison, making up a lot of the deficit.

Fuel economy, a mediocre driving experience, and a lower IIHS/NTHSA safety score all contributed to its fourth-place finish. Oh, and don’t forget that button-less infotainment/climate control system. Although it’s easy enough to use once learned, there’s still some frustrating features and it did the Atlas Cross Sport no favors.

All of these factors are only marginally lower than the competitors though. The Atlas Cross Sport is still a very good vehicle with a lot going for it. In the near premium category we’re evaluating here, it was just slightly outclassed.

We've had nearly two years to get used to the Santa Fe's radically different design, and generally we all like it—at least from the front. The odd light placement at the rear still doesn’t sit right, but I can’t argue with the logic behind it.

Simply put, the liftgate opening is humongous. The Santa Fe is a big ol’ box on the outside, and it is on the inside too. The intrusive wheel wells stop it from having the absolute most storage space, but in terms of flat, easy square footage, the Hyundai is hard to beat. Well, so long as you've got the third row folded flat. Yes, we made an exception by bringing it here, but the current Santa Fe is now only offered with three rows.

We figure the trade-off in this size class is an additional seat in a pinch, though if you need to regularly seat five, the Santa Fe’s second-row captain’s chairs are a mark against it; you’ll have to settle for a lower trim to get a bench. The wayback offers a remote release with simple pull straps to bring the seats back up.

The Santa Fe launched with two engine options: the familiar 2.5-liter turbocharged four-cylinder and the 1.6-liter turbo-four hybrid you see here. For 2026, Canadian buyers only get the hybrid, which is sourced from Korea. Thanks, tariffs!

Power is a test-low 231 hp, but torque is a healthy 271 lb-ft, available across most of the rev range. This setup is notably different from the Toyota’s hybrid, as Hyundai uses a mechanical all-wheel drive system and integrates the 59-horsepower electric motor directly into the six-speed transmission. The result is a drive experience that feels more like a traditional ICE setup, for better and worse.

The good? Far less drone than the Crown Signia when you’re pushing on. The Santa Fe also seems happier to travel further (but still short) distances on nothing but electrons, too. The bad news? Responses are a little softer than in the Toyota, and there’s a slightly restrictive feel to how the Santa Fe doles out the power, like it’s holding its breath, especially while reversing. 

You can fiddle with the paddles on the wheel to adjust regen which is nice, but it also further dampens responses. Fuel economy is only slightly worse than the Toyota, and in our real-world 25-mile (40-kilometer) loop, it was even closer than the official figures.

Sounds good, so what hurt the Hyundai? It scored right near the bottom of the list for every driving dynamic category. That it isn't Mazda-sharp to drive is fine: we're strong believers that this class should prioritize passenger comfort anyway. But the Hyundai leans too far that way—literally—with a roll-prone suspension that feels like a wayward ship against not just the CX-70 but also the nimble Toyota. Even the big-boned, truck-like VW outscored it! One aspect we both enjoyed was how much sound deadening Hyundai has employed here, ensuring the 'Fe has a quiet cabin.

Seat comfort was another area Mike and I both dinged the Santa Fe. Now admittedly nothing else here offers Hyundai’s full-recline relaxation seat, but that doesn’t make up for the flat cushion and lack of support. 

Hyundai touts the Nappa leather of these Calligraphy-spec seats. No doubt they're soft, but the rest of the materials in the Hyundai’s cabin are merely okay in this company. We like the design of the cabin quite a bit though, and all the various H's found within the cabin make for a great kid's game on long road trips. The Santa Fe just doesn’t feel as special as either of the models that finished ahead of it.

Like so many modern Hyundais, the Santa Fe comes loaded to its gills with features. Two wireless chargers, plus the swappable charger/phone pairing plug? Brilliant. A useful head-up display, surround view monitor, and family-friendly 12-speaker Bose setup all help, too. Is the UV cleaner a bit gimmicky? Maybe, but our phones are some of the filthiest things we touch everyday. They could use a light bath now and again.

No doubt about it: the Hyundai has the best user interface here. The 12.3-inch touchscreen defaults to a dark setup for low light pollution, and its big menu tiles make it easy to use at a glance. There isn't a whole lot of sub-menu diving either, and there are lots of redundant controls below it. One minor complaint: both Mike and I dislike how there's no way to permanently view audio info in the instrument cluster.

In America, the Santa Fe rings in at $51,850 including destination; exactly the same as the Crown Signia down to the dollar. Canadian pricing is $59,249 CAD, very nearly making the Hyundai the most affordable choice there.

Make no mistake, the Santa Fe remains an excellent family hauler... but in a lower trim. Up here at the top of its trim walk, the price gets too close to the Toyota and Mazda, and while it out-points them on equipment it doesn't walk that mainstream/premium line as well as either. And since that was the focus here, it's time to hand it back to Mike in the fanciest two-row in the land...

Mazda should have used Billy Idol for the launch campaign of the CX-70 because it has more, more, more. It has the biggest engine, the most power, the most torque, it’s physically the largest SUV, it’s the heaviest, it’s got the most features and, of course, the highest price tag.

Although there is a plug-in hybrid option, this shootout is all about premium content, so we wanted the premium engine. That means the high output version of the 3.3-liter turbocharged inline-6. When drinking premium fuel, it unleashes 340 hp and 369 lb-ft of torque, or in other words, about 100 more horsepower and torque than the others on hand.

Despite it weighing over 4,800 pounds, the CX-70 is easily the quickest vehicle here, sprinting towards the horizon under full boil. It also sounds the best in the higher rev range and easily evokes the most sophisticated feeling from behind the wheel.

This sleek Mazda could have felt even quicker if it were not for the 8-speed automatic transmission. We’ve complained in the past about its indecisiveness when choosing gears and that has been addressed with a reprogramming for new models. The side effect is a transmission that now takes a while to ensure it is selecting the proper gear. Gear changes are deliberate and slow. On the plus side, even with the large engine making oodles of power, thanks to a mild-hybrid set-up, the CX-70 gets better fuel mileage than the Atlas Cross Sport.

Steering feel is not a stiff as when the CX-70’s sibling, the CX-90, first debuted and the suspension in the 2025 CX-70 feels a bit softer. That stated, this is the stiffest riding vehicle here. Medium to large bumps are felt through the chassis, but only momentarily. The CX-70 has the most sophisticated driving experience, as the suspension rebound immediately mutes vibrations and stops body bobbing in a way that equals the German luxury set.

That solid feeling continues with handling as the CX-70 is only outmatched by the lighter, car-in-SUV-clothing Crown Signia. The weight of the Mazda is felt when cornering, as this is the heaviest vehicle here. But the mass felt shifting around feels almost like there’s twice the extra pounds than there really are.

As the only SUV here that’s longer than 200-inches in length, the big Mazda doesn’t disappoint when it comes to comfort. The rear seats offer great space and comfort, just trailing the leaders, while the front seats were judged to the be the most comfortable of this group. Despite a load floor that angles upwards towards the rear seats, the CX-70 was voted best in test for cargo capability as it has remote controls to lower the rear seats, dual plug type outlets, plus the bubbly rear end doesn’t intrude into cargo capacity like the Crown Signia and Atlas Cross Sport.

The biggest advantage outside of power the CX-70 has is style and quality. The exterior and interior were both judged to be best in test. Inside, we especially love the design and finish. The faux suede on the dashboard, the wood accents, the metal-like trim, all surrounded by soft touch everything. It just feels special inside the CX-70, like stepping into a vehicle a class or two higher than the others in this comparison.

There’re some high-end features included as well on this SUV like wet wipers, a panoramic moonroof, and all the latest active safety systems.

The only negative inside is the infotainment system, and it’s not the center console wheel and buttons that are the issue either. In fact, some quite like that set-up. The problem is the home screen layout, menu set-up, and user experience all trail the competition. Plus, the digital driver information center offers the least amount of customization. Oh, and the front cup holders are really small.

All that said, this is easily the best vehicle in the comparison. If money is no object, here’s the one to have. But it’s money that keeps the Mazda CX-70 from taking top spot in our comparison. As tested, in the United States, it costs over $58,000 including destination charges. The Santa Fe and Crown Signia are several thousands of dollars less and the Atlas Cross Sport is over $10,000 cheaper. That’s a big gap to overcome and the CX-70 couldn’t quite do it.

In Canada though, that price gap shrinks significantly, nudging the CX-70 just ahead of the Crown Signia in final scoring. But we take the average transaction price between the two countries when tallying our scores and thus, the CX-70 is relegated to second place: barely.

We're all as shocked as you are. We came into this comparo having no clue where the low-slung Toyota Crown Signia would fit in. With nary a rear window tint in sight, could the vehicle I called Camry Cross on our first encounter last year really duke it out with these larger, taller crossovers? It turns out that, thanks to a combination of stellar road manners and a cabin befitting the name, the Crown not only competes, it wins the whole show—if only just.

While both of us are fans of wagons, the Signia’s styling is where Mike and I differ more than anything else here. I personally like the hammerhead look because it is distinctive: you now know you’re looking at a Toyota when you see it. Mike doesn’t like the split headlight trend where the main beams are actually lower in the fascia, and I get that. And look, I’m not sold on the cheese grater grille, either. The proportions, with the large 21-inch alloys, are strong and athletic, a visual counterpoint to Hyundai looking like the shipping container it arrived in.

Surprise surprise: the low roof and smaller footprint make the Toyota the tightest here, for people and their things. It has a usefully large floor and easy-access pulls to drop the rear seats, but the swoopy design does limit ultimate space. 

Rear-seat headroom is actually right on par with the rest of the pack, though the C-pillar does feel a little close to adult temples. Backseat passengers better like the seat angle because it isn’t adjustable; the cushion is slightly too low, too. It’s important to note that the lower, car-like seating position this 30-something enjoys can just as easily be a strike against the Crown Signia for older buyers.

Like an increasingly large number of modern Toyotas, the Signia is available exclusively with hybrid power. It’s the 2.5-liter four-cylinder setup found in basically everything, here making a useful 240 horsepower combined.

This is Toyota’s older motor/battery pair, not the latest fifth-gen setup found in the new 2026 RAV4. That means it’s noisier, and that grumbly four-cylinder remains one of the least refined four-cylinders out there. It’s a big knock on the otherwise calming Crown experience. The noise at least translates to good get-up-and-go, though: on our highway on-ramp test, the Toyota piles on speed almost as quickly as the Mazda despite a 100-horsepower disadvantage.

Of course the payoff here is a test-best efficiency rating, both on paper and in our real-world loop. Officially the Crown pulls off 38 mpg (6.2 L/100 km) combined, but our tester managed 39 mpg or an even 6.0 L/100 km.

One of the advantages of been so (relatively) low is that the Crown offers a smoother, more controlled ride than either the Hyundai or Volkswagen. The suspension is still on the softer side but stops shy of wallowy, and the ride is way better than those huge wheels would suggest. Yes, bigger potholes do arrive with a thwack that the Santa Fe in particular avoids, but otherwise the Crown is positively premium in its ride comfort. What's the point in the Lexus NX 350h, again?

The Crown's clearer car-based roots bless it with a positive steering feel closest to the Mazda's. Since this is the lightest vehicle here—and feels it from behind the wheel—the Signia is easy to place on the road, building driver confidence nice and early.

One important thing to note: if you’re thinking of towing with any of these, the Crown is rated at a low 2,700 pounds, beating the Hyundai but offering barely half what the Mazda and VW are capable of.

Nearly as swanky as the Mazda's interior, the Crown's cabin is a great place to spend time. The saddle tan leather looks and feels great, especially on the well-shaped and supportive seats. Like many modern Toyotas the driver's seat feels about two inches too high, but unlike the Crown sedan there's still good headroom here. Both of us like the distinctly two-tier design of the Toyota's dashboard, and I commend it for the correct cupholder placement (to the side of a traditionally-placed shifter). The Crown also has the best wireless charger design on the whole market.

Toyota’s in-cabin tech is generally mid-pack: it’s easy to use and pair phones with, but it’s a little too basic at times. At least this uses the larger screen, so the satellite radio station page doesn’t get cramped. I really enjoy Toyota’s multi-screen instrument cluster solution, allowing folks to quickly set a few favorites. On the other hand, separating out trip info and fuel economy is needlessly complicated. What’s wrong with a classic Trip A and B, huh Toyota?

Keeping family safe is always important, and I’m a big fan of Toyota’s Safety Sense 3.0+ suite. All the typical assists like lane-keep and adaptive cruise control work exactly as expected, with much smoother inputs than before. Both the front cross-traffic alert and Toyota’s Pro Active Driving Assist (PDA) are over-eager, but I’d rather have the option than not.

There are qualifiers for this win: if you need to tow regularly the Crown may not work, and if you're Canadian the Mazda's comparative value is hard to ignore. But when we tallied up the points, it was the Toyota that (hammerhead) nosed its way into the lead.

Is it a little strange for a wagon to win our SUV shootout? Yes, but there's a good reason for it. All of these vehicles are really crossovers; we just call them SUVs because a) that was the older, established term and b) everyone apparently needs to worship at the alter of SEO optimization these days. But the entire reason crossovers ended up dominating the market is because they blended car-like driving dynamics with the added versatility (and yes, looks) of an SUV. And what's a crossover if not a wagon in off-roader cosplay?

Become an AutoGuide insider. Get the latest from the automotive world first by subscribing to our newsletter here.