Ford Mustang Mach-E Premium AWD (2026) vs Mazda CX-90 3.3L AWD HEV Turbo Exclusive (2024)
A full spec-by-spec comparison of Ford Mustang Mach-E Premium AWD (2026) vs Mazda CX-90 3.3L AWD HEV Turbo Exclusive (2024) — engine, performance, dimensions, features and price, with the differences highlighted to help you decide.
| Specification | Ford Mustang Mach-E Premium AWD (2026) Ford ₱3,499,000 | Mazda CX-90 3.3L AWD HEV Turbo Exclusive (2024) Mazda ₱3,880,000 |
|---|---|---|
| Overview | ||
| Model Year | 2026 | 2024 |
| Warranty | 3-years/100,000 km | 3-years/100,000km |
| Availability | Current | Current |
| Engine & Drivetrain | ||
| Engine Type | Electric Motor | Inline-4 |
| Fuel Type | Electric | Gasoline |
| Max Power | 394 PS | 284 PS @ 5000 - 6000 rpm |
| Max Torque | 676 Nm | 450 Nm @ 2000 - 3500 rpm |
| Transmission | Automatic | 8-A/T |
| Drivetrain | AWD | AWD |
| Displacement | — | 3283cc |
| Valvetrain | — | DOHC 24-valve |
| Compression Ratio | — | 12:1 |
| Aspiration | — | Turbocharged |
| Body & Dimensions | ||
| Body Type | Midsize Crossover SUV | Large Crossover SUV |
| Segment | SUV | Crossover |
| Construction | Unibody | Unibody |
| Exterior Colors | Shadow Black, Star White, Velocity Blue Metallic, Glacier Gray, Grabber Yellow | Artisan Red Premium, Sonic Silver, Jet Black, Deep Crystal Blue Mica, Rhodium White |
| Doors | 5 | 5 |
| Seating Capacity | 2+3 | 2+2+2 |
| Length (mm) | 4713 | 5120 |
| Width (mm) | 1881 | 1994 |
| Height (mm) | 1627 | 1745 |
| Wheelbase (mm) | 2984 | 3120 |
| Curb Weight (kg) | 2084 | 2140 |
| Fuel Tank (L) | — | 74 |
| Chassis, Wheels & Brakes | ||
| Front Suspension | MacPherson Strut w/Coil Spring | Double Wishbone, Coil Spring |
| Rear Suspension | Multi-link with Coil Spring | Multi-Link w/ Coil Spring |
| Front Wheels | 19 | 21 |
| Rear Wheels | 19 | 21 |
| Front Tires | 225/55R19 | 275/45/R21 |
| Rear Tires | 225/55R19 | 275/45/R21 |
| Front Brakes | Disc | Disc |
| Rear Brakes | Disc | Disc |
| Steering Type | EPS | EPS |
| Steering Column | Tilt & Telescope | Tilt + Telescopic |
| Tire Pressure Monitoring | Yes | Yes |
| Differential Lock | No | No |
| Safety | ||
| Anti-lock Braking (ABS) | Yes | Yes |
| Electronic Brakeforce Distribution | Yes | Yes |
| Brake Assist | Yes | No |
| Parking Sensors | Yes | No |
| Stability Control | Yes | No |
| Traction Control | Yes | No |
| Vehicle Dynamic Control | No | Yes |
| Forward Collision Mitigation | No | No |
| Blind Spot Warning | No | Yes |
| Hill Start Assist | Yes | Yes |
| Hill Descent Control | Yes | Yes |
| Auto Stop/Start | No | No |
| Driver Airbag | Yes | No |
| Knee Airbag | No | No |
| Passenger Airbag | Yes | No |
| Front Curtain Airbags | Yes | No |
| Rear Curtain Airbags | Yes | No |
| Rear Side Airbags | Yes | No |
| Engine Immobilizer | Yes | Yes |
| Security Alarm | Yes | Yes |
| Door Locking | Central Locking | Central Locking |
| Comfort & Convenience | ||
| Air Conditioning | Automatic Climate Control Dual Zone | Dual Zone Automatic Climate Control |
| Rear A/C Vents | Yes | No |
| Seat Material | Leather | Leather |
| Parking Brake | EPB | EPB |
| Key Type | Keyless Entry | Keyless Entry |
| Push-Button Start | Yes | No |
| Cruise Control | Yes | Yes |
| Multi-Info Display | Yes | Yes |
| Paddle Shifters | No | Yes |
| Reverse Camera | Yes | No |
| Auto Headlights | No | No |
| Power Windows | Yes | Yes |
| Power Seats | Yes | Yes |
| Remote Trunk Release | Yes | Yes |
| Eco Mode | No | No |
| Antenna | yes | yes |
| Infotainment & Audio | ||
| Speakers | 9 | 12 |
| Touchscreen | Yes | Yes |
| Navigation | No | No |
| Bluetooth | Yes | Yes |
| Apple CarPlay | Yes | No |
| Android Auto | Yes | No |
| USB | Yes | Yes |
| AUX Input | No | No |
| AM/FM Radio | Yes | Yes |
| CD Player | No | No |
| DVD Player | No | No |
| MP3 Playback | No | No |
| iPod Support | No | No |
| SD Card Slot | No | No |
| Lighting | ||
| Headlights | LED | LED |
| Fog Lights | No | No |
| Daytime Running Lights | Yes | Yes |
Ford Mustang Mach-E Premium AWD (2026) vs Mazda CX-90 3.3L AWD HEV Turbo Exclusive (2024): which should you buy?
The 2026 Ford Mustang Mach‑E Premium AWD and the 2024 Mazda CX‑90 3.3L AWD HEV Turbo Exclusive sit at the top end of the Philippine SUV market, but they cater to different priorities. The Mach‑E commands a lower price (₱3,499,000 vs ₱3,880,000) and delivers far more power – 394 PS and 676 Nm from an electric motor – compared with the CX‑90’s 284 PS and 450 Nm gasoline‑turbo unit. If outright performance, instant torque and lower running costs of electricity matter, the Mach‑E is the clear pick. Its midsize crossover SUV dimensions (4713 mm L × 1881 mm W × 1627 mm H) provide a compact footprint while still offering 2+3 seating, making it suitable for urban families who value sportier driving dynamics. Conversely, the CX‑90 offers a larger cabin typical of a large crossover and a proven gasoline‑turbo hybrid powertrain, which may appeal to buyers who prefer conventional refuelling and a higher seating capacity for longer trips. Both carry the same 3‑year/100,000 km warranty and AWD drivetrain, but the Mach‑E’s electric platform gives it a modern tech edge, whereas the CX‑90’s turbo‑charged engine may feel more familiar to traditional SUV owners. Choose the Mach‑E if you want a cheaper, more powerful, eco‑friendly SUV with sporty character; opt for the CX‑90 if you need a larger, gasoline‑based SUV with hybrid efficiency for longer journeys.
Frequently asked questions
Which model is cheaper?
The Ford Mustang Mach‑E Premium AWD is priced at ₱3,499,000, which is ₱381,000 less than the Mazda CX‑90’s ₱3,880,000 price tag.
Which vehicle has more power?
The Mach‑E produces 394 PS and 676 Nm of torque, surpassing the CX‑90’s 284 PS and 450 Nm.
Is the Mach‑E suitable for daily commuting in the city?
Yes; its electric drivetrain offers instant torque, lower operating costs and a midsize footprint (4713 mm length) that is easier to maneuver in urban traffic.
What are the seating capacities and cabin sizes?
The Mach‑E seats 2+3 passengers in a midsize crossover SUV, while the CX‑90 is a large crossover SUV that typically accommodates more passengers, though exact seating numbers aren’t specified in the data.