Performance, power and 0-100 km/h
2025 Mazda CX-70 2.5 e-Skyactiv PHEV Premium Plus has the quicker recorded 0-100 km/h time at 6.0 seconds, compared with 6.5 seconds for 2025 Dodge Hornet R/T PHEV. 2025 Mazda CX-70 2.5 e-Skyactiv PHEV Premium Plus has the higher listed output at 323 hp; 2025 Dodge Hornet R/T PHEV is rated at 288 hp, a difference of 35 hp. The torque figures follow 2025 Dodge Hornet R/T PHEV at 519 Nm and 2025 Mazda CX-70 2.5 e-Skyactiv PHEV Premium Plus at 500 Nm. These figures describe straight-line potential only; they do not establish braking performance, ride quality, steering response or durability under repeated hard use.
Range, battery, charging and efficiency
2025 Dodge Hornet R/T PHEV carries the longer listed range at 53 km, against 42 km for 2025 Mazda CX-70 2.5 e-Skyactiv PHEV Premium Plus. 2025 Mazda CX-70 2.5 e-Skyactiv PHEV Premium Plus has the lower recorded consumption at 2.5 L/100km; 2025 Dodge Hornet R/T PHEV is listed at 2.6 L/100km. Test cycle, temperature, wheel size and charging conditions can materially affect these results, so only figures measured on the same basis should be treated as directly comparable.
Dimensions, cargo space and towing
2025 Mazda CX-70 2.5 e-Skyactiv PHEV Premium Plus provides the larger quoted cargo volume: 854 litres versus 398 litres, a difference of 456 litres. 2025 Mazda CX-70 2.5 e-Skyactiv PHEV Premium Plus carries the higher towing rating at 1,588 kg, while 2025 Dodge Hornet R/T PHEV is listed at 1,134 kg. 2025 Mazda CX-70 2.5 e-Skyactiv PHEV Premium Plus is 484 mm longer overall. Exterior size is not a benefit by itself: a longer body may create useful room, but cargo shape, rear-seat space and ease of parking still require a physical inspection.
Price and overall assessment
2025 Dodge Hornet R/T PHEV has the lower listed starting price at $39,995, compared with $42,750 for 2025 Mazda CX-70 2.5 e-Skyactiv PHEV Premium Plus. 2025 Mazda CX-70 2.5 e-Skyactiv PHEV Premium Plus leads in more of the shared headline fields, but that is not a universal verdict: a buyer should weight price, performance, range and utility rather than simply count category wins. The assessment is based on the specifications shown here; it is not presented as a two-car road test.