Stunning Roma-replacing Ferrari Amalfi revealed
Although it's a comprehensive evolution – rather than an all-new car – enough has changed to warrant the switch to the Amalfi moniker, which is inspired by the stunning 50km stretch of coastline in south-western Italy along the Sorrentine Peninsula.
First Australian customer deliveries of the Ferrari Amalfi are due to take place in the second half of 2026, and buyers won't be left with too much (if any) change out of $500,000 by the time they option the car to their liking.
Hundreds of new car deals are available through CarExpert right now. Get the experts on your side and score a great deal. Browse now. Supplied Credit: CarExpert
The core building blocks of the Amalfi are as per the Roma, but Ferrari has focused on sharpening all elements of its dynamics. The powertrain, chassis control systems, steering and braking are all revised to yield a package that, according to the Italian brand, provides a significantly broader spread between relaxed touring capability and hard-edged performance.
So much so that Ferrari's chief marketing and commercial officer, Enrico Galliera, says: 'Previously we referred to it as a GT, but now we call it 'sportscar driver'.'
That's obviously marketing-speak, but there may be a grain of truth in his words. Supplied Credit: CarExpert
More significant still is the fact that the main polarising elements of the Roma have been successfully addressed – namely that awkward perforated grille and the hit-and-miss haptic controls on the steering wheel, which are now replaced by physical buttons, plus the return of an aluminium start button.
Visually, the Amalfi (which carries over no body panels from the Roma) shares a clear family resemblance with the 12Cilindri, sporting slit-like headlights that peer out from within a dark recessed band positioned below a visor-mimicking panel at the front.
A similar theme is applied at the rear, where the tail-lights are hidden within what Ferrari refers to as 'graphical cuts'. An active rear spoiler with three positions – Low Drag, Medium Downforce and High Downforce – is neatly integrated into the rump, and in its most aggressive setting it's claimed to generate 110kg of downforce over the rear axle at 250km/h. Supplied Credit: CarExpert
The wing remains in Low Drag or Medium Downforce mode on straights, with the High Downforce setting only being triggered under hard braking or when cornering at speed.
Ferrari says it has worked extensively on the Amalfi's aero, and even the underfloor has been optimised for smoother airflow. There is also a hidden duct above each headlight that helps lower under-bonnet temperatures, as well as reduce pressure build-up.
There's an aggressive diffuser at the rear, and its elaborate high-tech structure provides an interesting contrast to the clean surfaces above it. Supplied Credit: CarExpert
Overall, there's a great visual purity to the Amalfi and it's hard to find a bad angle on the car. Ferrari chief design officer Flavio Manzoni describes the styling theme as 'beauty through simplicity', and it's an apt description. There's a pleasing minimalism to the car's surfacing, with little to distract from its smooth voluptuous contours.
As alluded to earlier, the Amalfi isn't merely a cosmetic makeover, as all the oily bits underneath have also been reworked.
At the car's heart is again the F154 90-degree, flat-plane V8 that displaces 3855cc, but it features lightweight new camshafts (they save 1.3kg) and even the engine block has been redesigned (saving another 1kg). Supplied Credit: CarExpert
Peak power has been bumped up to 471kW (456kW for the Roma), although torque remains unchanged at 760Nm. The engine redlines at 7600rpm.
The power increase is the result of a new turbocharging management system, enabling independent control of the rotational speed of the two turbochargers and an increase in the maximum turbo speed up to 171,000rpm.
Ferrari says this approach improves throttle response and boosts pressure control precision, thanks also to the introduction of dedicated pressure sensors for each cylinder bank. Supplied Credit: CarExpert
The Amalfi sprints from 0-100km/h in a claimed 3.3 seconds (0.1 seconds sooner than the Roma), while 200km/h flashes past in a claimed 9.0 seconds (0.3 seconds quicker than the Roma).
Although the raw numbers aren't dramatically changed, Ferrari's chief product development officer, Gianmaria Fulgenzi, says the perception from behind the wheel is of a car with much sharper responses, thanks to the V8's lower reciprocating masses and revised turbocharger setup including its low-inertia turbines.
A key technical change for the Amalfi is the introduction of a brake-by-wire system, bringing the car in line with the 296 GTB/GTS, Purosangue and 12Cilindri. Supplied Credit: CarExpert
Rather than diluting pedal feel, Fulgenzi says the new ABS Evo setup enhances modulation, reduces pedal travel and significantly improves braking efficiency. The Amalfi is capable of coming to a standstill from 100km/h in just 30.8 metres, while 200km/h is wiped off in 119.5 metres, says Ferrari.
A further advancement is the evolved grip estimation system that works in tandem with the electrically power-assisted steering. In this new iteration, grip estimation is said to be 10 per cent faster and more accurate, even on surfaces with very low traction.
Mr Fulgenzi says the enhancements to braking, steering and chassis control systems has enabled a greater dynamic spread between the Wet and Comfort drive modes to the more aggressive Sport, Race and ESC Off settings. Supplied Credit: CarExpert
He emphasises that the Amalfi still comes across as a thoroughly safe and non-intimidating car, as its target audience is generally not seeking the hardcore driving experience that the 296 and SF90 serve up.
The Amalfi also represents a notable step forward in cabin comfort and aesthetics vis-à-vis the Roma. There's again a pronounced dual-cockpit layout in which the driver and passenger are each ensconced within their own domain, but a lower-set centre console creates the perception of more cabin space.
The central tunnel is milled from a block of anodised aluminium and houses the gear selector gate, key slot, wireless phone charging pad, and secondary controls. Supplied Credit: CarExpert
Facing the driver is a 'monolithic' instrument cluster that houses a 15.6-inch digital display panel with all key information able to be easily taken in at a glance.
A horizontal 10.25-inch infotainment screen in the centre replaces the old portrait screen, while the passenger gets their own 8.8-inch screen that displays parameters such as G-force and engine revs.
As alluded to earlier, the biggest improvement is that the haptic switches on the steering wheel have been banished in favour of physical buttons. Supplied Credit: CarExpert
The controls are functionally distributed: on the steering wheel's left spoke are the ADAS controls, adaptive cruise control, phone, and voice command burrons, while on the right are the selectors for display views, windscreen wipers, and indicators. On the back, two rotary dials manage volume and radio station selection.
Connectivity is provided by Apple CarPlay and Android Auto and the car is also equipped with the MyFerrari Connect system, which allows remote monitoring of the vehicle's status via a dedicated app.
Optional features include comfort seats available in three sizes and equipped with 10 air chambers for the massage function – with five programs and three intensity levels – together with ventilation for both the seat base and backrest. Supplied Credit: CarExpert
Also optional is a Burmester Premium Audio System that promises to belt out banging beats, thanks to 14 speakers and 1200 Watts of power.
Twenty-inch rims (shod with 245/35 R20 rubber at the front and 285/35 R20 boots at the rear) are standard issue, and Mr Fulgenzi says this delivers a good balance between ride quality and cornering grip. Ferrari says it worked with Bridgestone and Pirelli in developing optimal tyres for the Amalfi.
The Amalfi's launch colour is Verde Costiera, a striking shade of green that's meant to mimic the reflections off the sea adjacent to the Amalfi Coast. It's complemented by Verde Bellagio interior trim.
As with the Roma, Ferrari expects roughly half of all Amalfi buyers to be new to the prancing horse brand, with sales spread fairly evenly across the major global regions.
MORE: Everything Ferrari
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sydney Morning Herald
an hour ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Latitude 66 offloads Qld copper for $2M upfront and future upside
Latitude 66 has cashed in on a non-core asset, locking in $2 million in upfront funding by selling its 17.5 per cent stake in the Greater Duchess copper-gold project in Queensland, which it owns with ASX-listed Carnaby Resources. The company has also positioned itself for a further $4 million windfall if the full project changes hands in the coming months. The company has signed a non-binding term sheet with Argonaut Partners and Neon Space to offload its interest, with a baked-in bonus clause. If the entire joint venture is snapped up within 90 days of the announcement, Latitude will receive a further $4 million in cash or the same value in ASX-listed shares, based on the 30-day volume-weighted average price. 'The sale transaction announced today is in line with our strategy to unlock value from our Australian assets.' Latitude 66 managing director Grant Coyle Alternatively, if the new buyers decide to flick the stake onto a third party other than Carnaby, the company could still bank 50 per cent of any upside above $4 million, giving the deal serious contingent kicker potential. Under the joint venture terms, Carnaby has been formally offered the same deal under a right-of-first-refusal clause. It now has 30 days to match the terms and acquire Latitude's share itself. If Carnaby exercises its right, Argonaut and Neon Space will be compensated with 7.5 million unlisted options in Latitude, exercisable at 7.5 cents and valid until June 2028. Latitude 66 managing director Grant Coyle said: 'The Greater Duchess joint venture is a non-core asset and the sale transaction announced today is in line with our strategy to unlock value from our Australian assets. This transaction is well timed to provide Lat66 with near term, non-dilutive funding that will enable the company to continue advancing its Finnish and Western Australian projects.'
The Advertiser
an hour ago
- The Advertiser
The average home is now worth $1 million. This boom is blowing up in a bad way
More than two decades ago, former prime minister John Howard said, "I don't get people stopping me in the street and saying, 'John you're outrageous, under your government the value of my house has increased".' The nation's home owners would have been pleased by recent news from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) that the national mean price of residential dwellings had risen to $1,002,500, the first time it has passed the million-dollar mark. Of course, that level was exceeded long ago in many city suburbs, with prices in regional areas also going sky-high as sea and tree changers took real estate windfalls and relocated. Around 66 per cent of Australian households own their own home with or without a mortgage. Home ownership, with a consistent rise in values, is Australians' most important asset, along with superannuation, which ticks over in the background, accessible only in later years. Renters, numbering one-third of Australian households, have also experienced the impacts of the ongoing property boom, except not in a good way. They are mostly dependent on the one-in-five households that own residential properties other than their usual domicile. For the record, one in 25 of these owners has four or more properties. Yet very few are affordable to low-income earners. Anglicare Australia's 2025 Rental Affordability Snapshot surveyed 51,238 rental listings across Australia and found that just 352 rentals (0.7 per cent) were affordable for a person earning a full-time minimum wage. Almost none was affordable for a person on JobSeeker wanting a room in a share house, and none for a person on Youth Allowance. Median advertised rents have risen 35 per cent since this government came to office, more than three times the rise in wages. Another recent report, Rights at risk: Rising rents and repercussions, by ACOSS and the University of NSW, carries further alarming findings. Almost seven in 10 people who rent privately worry about asking for repairs in case they face a rent increase, with 56 per cent fearing it would lead to eviction and 52 per cent fearing being placed on a blacklist that would prevent them renting another property. Half of all renters live in homes that need repairs, one in 10 urgently. Almost one-in-five bathrooms has mould, which is a major health risk. Some 82 per cent of renters would find a 5 per cent rent hike "difficult or very difficult". A significant problem, and a major eyesore, is that many potential rentals are left empty - around a million Australia-wide. If occupied, these so-called "speculative vacancies" could greatly assist would-be renters. St Vincent de Paul Society calls for taxation reform to incentivise the use of long-term vacant residential properties and land. Homes that are rented have the added benefit (to owners) of generous tax concessions, both during ownership and at point of sale. This creates a considerable loss to the Treasury, with the Parliamentary Budget Office calculating that tax revenue foregone over the decade to 2034-35 due to negative gearing deductions and the capital gains tax (CGT) discount on residential investment properties will total a massive $165 billion. This is money lost to healthcare, education, housing and other social essentials. St Vincent de Paul Society regards housing as a basic human right and we firmly believe all Australians deserve a secure place to live. Properties should be treated primarily as homes, not investment opportunities. The Society supports reducing CGT concessions from 50 per cent to 37.5 per cent to generate revenue that could be used to improve social services, plus a review of negative gearing. The government should increase needs-based funding of homelessness services and permanent supportive housing, including client-led support services. If not now, when? The last census recorded 122,494 people experiencing homelessness, and that was four years ago. Governments should fund and perhaps mandate policies that improve energy efficiency in low-income households, including apartment buildings. This goes hand in hand with funding and legislating national minimum standards for renters. The package known as "A Better Deal for Renters" was endorsed by national cabinet in 2023 with the promise that, "These changes will make a tangible impact for the almost one-third of Australian households who rent". The plan is yet to be fully implemented. Meanwhile, rent increases have accelerated, and pests are the most common tenant complaint, affecting one-third of premises. We're urging for a compassionate review of the base rate of working-age payments to lift recipients above the poverty line. So many people simply cannot afford decent housing. Achieving this basic goal is fundamental to Australia's future and for our much-prized social harmony. As the Human Rights Law Centre puts it, "every person should have a safe, secure and healthy place to call home, regardless of your postcode or bank balance. Yet too many Australians are homeless, live in inadequate, insecure or unsafe housing, or need to sacrifice other necessities - from food to school uniforms - to keep a roof over their heads." Our members see these challenges every day, and while we can offer assistance within our means, structural change to the national housing market is needed urgently. More than two decades ago, former prime minister John Howard said, "I don't get people stopping me in the street and saying, 'John you're outrageous, under your government the value of my house has increased".' The nation's home owners would have been pleased by recent news from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) that the national mean price of residential dwellings had risen to $1,002,500, the first time it has passed the million-dollar mark. Of course, that level was exceeded long ago in many city suburbs, with prices in regional areas also going sky-high as sea and tree changers took real estate windfalls and relocated. Around 66 per cent of Australian households own their own home with or without a mortgage. Home ownership, with a consistent rise in values, is Australians' most important asset, along with superannuation, which ticks over in the background, accessible only in later years. Renters, numbering one-third of Australian households, have also experienced the impacts of the ongoing property boom, except not in a good way. They are mostly dependent on the one-in-five households that own residential properties other than their usual domicile. For the record, one in 25 of these owners has four or more properties. Yet very few are affordable to low-income earners. Anglicare Australia's 2025 Rental Affordability Snapshot surveyed 51,238 rental listings across Australia and found that just 352 rentals (0.7 per cent) were affordable for a person earning a full-time minimum wage. Almost none was affordable for a person on JobSeeker wanting a room in a share house, and none for a person on Youth Allowance. Median advertised rents have risen 35 per cent since this government came to office, more than three times the rise in wages. Another recent report, Rights at risk: Rising rents and repercussions, by ACOSS and the University of NSW, carries further alarming findings. Almost seven in 10 people who rent privately worry about asking for repairs in case they face a rent increase, with 56 per cent fearing it would lead to eviction and 52 per cent fearing being placed on a blacklist that would prevent them renting another property. Half of all renters live in homes that need repairs, one in 10 urgently. Almost one-in-five bathrooms has mould, which is a major health risk. Some 82 per cent of renters would find a 5 per cent rent hike "difficult or very difficult". A significant problem, and a major eyesore, is that many potential rentals are left empty - around a million Australia-wide. If occupied, these so-called "speculative vacancies" could greatly assist would-be renters. St Vincent de Paul Society calls for taxation reform to incentivise the use of long-term vacant residential properties and land. Homes that are rented have the added benefit (to owners) of generous tax concessions, both during ownership and at point of sale. This creates a considerable loss to the Treasury, with the Parliamentary Budget Office calculating that tax revenue foregone over the decade to 2034-35 due to negative gearing deductions and the capital gains tax (CGT) discount on residential investment properties will total a massive $165 billion. This is money lost to healthcare, education, housing and other social essentials. St Vincent de Paul Society regards housing as a basic human right and we firmly believe all Australians deserve a secure place to live. Properties should be treated primarily as homes, not investment opportunities. The Society supports reducing CGT concessions from 50 per cent to 37.5 per cent to generate revenue that could be used to improve social services, plus a review of negative gearing. The government should increase needs-based funding of homelessness services and permanent supportive housing, including client-led support services. If not now, when? The last census recorded 122,494 people experiencing homelessness, and that was four years ago. Governments should fund and perhaps mandate policies that improve energy efficiency in low-income households, including apartment buildings. This goes hand in hand with funding and legislating national minimum standards for renters. The package known as "A Better Deal for Renters" was endorsed by national cabinet in 2023 with the promise that, "These changes will make a tangible impact for the almost one-third of Australian households who rent". The plan is yet to be fully implemented. Meanwhile, rent increases have accelerated, and pests are the most common tenant complaint, affecting one-third of premises. We're urging for a compassionate review of the base rate of working-age payments to lift recipients above the poverty line. So many people simply cannot afford decent housing. Achieving this basic goal is fundamental to Australia's future and for our much-prized social harmony. As the Human Rights Law Centre puts it, "every person should have a safe, secure and healthy place to call home, regardless of your postcode or bank balance. Yet too many Australians are homeless, live in inadequate, insecure or unsafe housing, or need to sacrifice other necessities - from food to school uniforms - to keep a roof over their heads." Our members see these challenges every day, and while we can offer assistance within our means, structural change to the national housing market is needed urgently. More than two decades ago, former prime minister John Howard said, "I don't get people stopping me in the street and saying, 'John you're outrageous, under your government the value of my house has increased".' The nation's home owners would have been pleased by recent news from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) that the national mean price of residential dwellings had risen to $1,002,500, the first time it has passed the million-dollar mark. Of course, that level was exceeded long ago in many city suburbs, with prices in regional areas also going sky-high as sea and tree changers took real estate windfalls and relocated. Around 66 per cent of Australian households own their own home with or without a mortgage. Home ownership, with a consistent rise in values, is Australians' most important asset, along with superannuation, which ticks over in the background, accessible only in later years. Renters, numbering one-third of Australian households, have also experienced the impacts of the ongoing property boom, except not in a good way. They are mostly dependent on the one-in-five households that own residential properties other than their usual domicile. For the record, one in 25 of these owners has four or more properties. Yet very few are affordable to low-income earners. Anglicare Australia's 2025 Rental Affordability Snapshot surveyed 51,238 rental listings across Australia and found that just 352 rentals (0.7 per cent) were affordable for a person earning a full-time minimum wage. Almost none was affordable for a person on JobSeeker wanting a room in a share house, and none for a person on Youth Allowance. Median advertised rents have risen 35 per cent since this government came to office, more than three times the rise in wages. Another recent report, Rights at risk: Rising rents and repercussions, by ACOSS and the University of NSW, carries further alarming findings. Almost seven in 10 people who rent privately worry about asking for repairs in case they face a rent increase, with 56 per cent fearing it would lead to eviction and 52 per cent fearing being placed on a blacklist that would prevent them renting another property. Half of all renters live in homes that need repairs, one in 10 urgently. Almost one-in-five bathrooms has mould, which is a major health risk. Some 82 per cent of renters would find a 5 per cent rent hike "difficult or very difficult". A significant problem, and a major eyesore, is that many potential rentals are left empty - around a million Australia-wide. If occupied, these so-called "speculative vacancies" could greatly assist would-be renters. St Vincent de Paul Society calls for taxation reform to incentivise the use of long-term vacant residential properties and land. Homes that are rented have the added benefit (to owners) of generous tax concessions, both during ownership and at point of sale. This creates a considerable loss to the Treasury, with the Parliamentary Budget Office calculating that tax revenue foregone over the decade to 2034-35 due to negative gearing deductions and the capital gains tax (CGT) discount on residential investment properties will total a massive $165 billion. This is money lost to healthcare, education, housing and other social essentials. St Vincent de Paul Society regards housing as a basic human right and we firmly believe all Australians deserve a secure place to live. Properties should be treated primarily as homes, not investment opportunities. The Society supports reducing CGT concessions from 50 per cent to 37.5 per cent to generate revenue that could be used to improve social services, plus a review of negative gearing. The government should increase needs-based funding of homelessness services and permanent supportive housing, including client-led support services. If not now, when? The last census recorded 122,494 people experiencing homelessness, and that was four years ago. Governments should fund and perhaps mandate policies that improve energy efficiency in low-income households, including apartment buildings. This goes hand in hand with funding and legislating national minimum standards for renters. The package known as "A Better Deal for Renters" was endorsed by national cabinet in 2023 with the promise that, "These changes will make a tangible impact for the almost one-third of Australian households who rent". The plan is yet to be fully implemented. Meanwhile, rent increases have accelerated, and pests are the most common tenant complaint, affecting one-third of premises. We're urging for a compassionate review of the base rate of working-age payments to lift recipients above the poverty line. So many people simply cannot afford decent housing. Achieving this basic goal is fundamental to Australia's future and for our much-prized social harmony. As the Human Rights Law Centre puts it, "every person should have a safe, secure and healthy place to call home, regardless of your postcode or bank balance. Yet too many Australians are homeless, live in inadequate, insecure or unsafe housing, or need to sacrifice other necessities - from food to school uniforms - to keep a roof over their heads." Our members see these challenges every day, and while we can offer assistance within our means, structural change to the national housing market is needed urgently. More than two decades ago, former prime minister John Howard said, "I don't get people stopping me in the street and saying, 'John you're outrageous, under your government the value of my house has increased".' The nation's home owners would have been pleased by recent news from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) that the national mean price of residential dwellings had risen to $1,002,500, the first time it has passed the million-dollar mark. Of course, that level was exceeded long ago in many city suburbs, with prices in regional areas also going sky-high as sea and tree changers took real estate windfalls and relocated. Around 66 per cent of Australian households own their own home with or without a mortgage. Home ownership, with a consistent rise in values, is Australians' most important asset, along with superannuation, which ticks over in the background, accessible only in later years. Renters, numbering one-third of Australian households, have also experienced the impacts of the ongoing property boom, except not in a good way. They are mostly dependent on the one-in-five households that own residential properties other than their usual domicile. For the record, one in 25 of these owners has four or more properties. Yet very few are affordable to low-income earners. Anglicare Australia's 2025 Rental Affordability Snapshot surveyed 51,238 rental listings across Australia and found that just 352 rentals (0.7 per cent) were affordable for a person earning a full-time minimum wage. Almost none was affordable for a person on JobSeeker wanting a room in a share house, and none for a person on Youth Allowance. Median advertised rents have risen 35 per cent since this government came to office, more than three times the rise in wages. Another recent report, Rights at risk: Rising rents and repercussions, by ACOSS and the University of NSW, carries further alarming findings. Almost seven in 10 people who rent privately worry about asking for repairs in case they face a rent increase, with 56 per cent fearing it would lead to eviction and 52 per cent fearing being placed on a blacklist that would prevent them renting another property. Half of all renters live in homes that need repairs, one in 10 urgently. Almost one-in-five bathrooms has mould, which is a major health risk. Some 82 per cent of renters would find a 5 per cent rent hike "difficult or very difficult". A significant problem, and a major eyesore, is that many potential rentals are left empty - around a million Australia-wide. If occupied, these so-called "speculative vacancies" could greatly assist would-be renters. St Vincent de Paul Society calls for taxation reform to incentivise the use of long-term vacant residential properties and land. Homes that are rented have the added benefit (to owners) of generous tax concessions, both during ownership and at point of sale. This creates a considerable loss to the Treasury, with the Parliamentary Budget Office calculating that tax revenue foregone over the decade to 2034-35 due to negative gearing deductions and the capital gains tax (CGT) discount on residential investment properties will total a massive $165 billion. This is money lost to healthcare, education, housing and other social essentials. St Vincent de Paul Society regards housing as a basic human right and we firmly believe all Australians deserve a secure place to live. Properties should be treated primarily as homes, not investment opportunities. The Society supports reducing CGT concessions from 50 per cent to 37.5 per cent to generate revenue that could be used to improve social services, plus a review of negative gearing. The government should increase needs-based funding of homelessness services and permanent supportive housing, including client-led support services. If not now, when? The last census recorded 122,494 people experiencing homelessness, and that was four years ago. Governments should fund and perhaps mandate policies that improve energy efficiency in low-income households, including apartment buildings. This goes hand in hand with funding and legislating national minimum standards for renters. The package known as "A Better Deal for Renters" was endorsed by national cabinet in 2023 with the promise that, "These changes will make a tangible impact for the almost one-third of Australian households who rent". The plan is yet to be fully implemented. Meanwhile, rent increases have accelerated, and pests are the most common tenant complaint, affecting one-third of premises. We're urging for a compassionate review of the base rate of working-age payments to lift recipients above the poverty line. So many people simply cannot afford decent housing. Achieving this basic goal is fundamental to Australia's future and for our much-prized social harmony. As the Human Rights Law Centre puts it, "every person should have a safe, secure and healthy place to call home, regardless of your postcode or bank balance. Yet too many Australians are homeless, live in inadequate, insecure or unsafe housing, or need to sacrifice other necessities - from food to school uniforms - to keep a roof over their heads." Our members see these challenges every day, and while we can offer assistance within our means, structural change to the national housing market is needed urgently.
The Advertiser
an hour ago
- The Advertiser
2025 Mahindra XUV700 AX7L vs Nissan X-Trail ST-L comparison: Spec battle
The typical Australian family car is evolving all the time. Nothing signifies the changing demands better than these two models, the 2025 Mahindra XUV700 and 2025 Nissan X-Trail – a pair of high-riding, seven-seat mid-size SUVs, a vehicle type that has essentially replaced the station wagon as the default choice for suburban runabouts. Both cost just over $40k and offer spacious, flexible cabins that feature modern tech, and are fitted with the latest in automated safety systems. But which is best? Let's find out… There's only a handful of mid-size SUVs that offer a third-row option, which puts this pair among a select group for Australian families that need space for seven – especially if they're on a tighter budget. The Mahindra is the most accessible of these two, with a starting price of just $39,990 drive-away for the entry-level AX7, while the flagship AX7L we're testing here costs an additional $3000. Nissan offers a wider variety of models across its X-Trail range, with the choice of both front-wheel drive and all-wheel drive variants, as well as the groundbreaking e-Power hybrid powertrain. But even the most affordable – the entry-level five-seat, front-drive ST – will cost around the same as the range-topping XUV700 on the road, with a starting price of $38,025 plus on-roads. If you're after the seven-seat option, it is exclusively available with all-wheel drive in the two mid-level model grades, including the ST-L we're comparing here and the N-Trek, which cost $47,565 and $52,160 plus on-roads respectively. To see how the Mahindra XUV700 stacks up against its rivals, check out our comparison tool Standard equipment common to both vehicles includes: However, the Mahindra extends its value for money philosophy even further with with a few more features, such as a panoramic glass sunroof, a fully digital instrument cluster, ventilated front seats and a 12-speaker premium audio system compared to the X-Trail's six-speaker unit. To see how the Mahindra XUV700 stacks up against its rivals, check out our comparison tool The Mahindra hasn't been tested by ANCAP, and therefore does not have an independent safety rating to match the X-Trail's five-star result from 2021, when this current generation first arrived in Australian showrooms. Standard safety features in both vehicles include: Both also feature seven airbags including dual front, side and curtain airbags that cover all three rows, with the Nissan having an extra airbag between the front seat passengers while the Mahindra has a knee airbag for the driver. They each also have a reversing camera, but the Mahindra offers a wider perspective with a 360-degree view. To see how the Mahindra XUV700 stacks up against its rivals, check out our comparison tool The XUV700 and X-Trail plant an almost identical footprint on the road with roughly the same dimensions. The Mahindra is a fraction longer and taller with more space between the axles, but not by much. What that translates to inside the cabin is generous space for five with decent cargo storage for everyday family duties in both vehicles. But they also have the added flexibility of a third row, which is best suited to small kids or occasional use only. The Mahindra fuses its modern tech, with twin 10.25-inch digital displays for the instrument cluster and infotainment touch screen, into a more conservative dashboard design with a dark colour palette and piano black highlights with chrome trim elements. The X-Trail, on the other hand, has more conventional tech – a larger 12.3-inch tablet-style touchscreen and analogue gauges with a 7.0-inch display between the tacho and speedo – incorporated into a modern dashboard design with a high-set, floating centre console, stubby gear lever and two-tone colour scheme. Both cars offer plenty of headroom for front seat occupants and an array of convenient storage solutions with twin cupholders and bottle holders in the door pockets. While the X-Trail has a handy hidden tray under the console that keeps the overall aesthetic a bit cleaner, the lidded bin between the front seats in the XUV700 is ventilated, which is a cool feature (literally). The glovebox is also massive. For those in the middle row, both cars boast rear vents and USB power outlets, as well as enough space for three across the rear bench with decent legroom. Access to the third row in either isn't as easy as it is in larger, dedicated seven-seaters, and the space is best left to small children. Both have cupholders, but the Mahindra makes it more bearable with additional air vents. To see how the Mahindra XUV700 stacks up against its rivals, check out our comparison tool Here's where these two cars diverge the most. First of all, the XUV700 is only available as a front-driver, while the seven-seat option in the X-Trail is exclusive to AWD variants – if that matters to you. The Mahindra produces significantly higher outputs too, thanks to its turbocharged 2.0-litre four-cylinder petrol engine that delivers 150kW of power and 380Nm of torque to the front wheels via a six-speed automatic transmission. The Nissan has a larger-capacity engine and it isn't turbocharged: a 2.5-litre normally aspirated four-cylinder delivering 135kW and 244Nm to all four wheels through a continuously variable automatic transmission (CVT). Both engines are optimised to run on the most affordable 91-octane standard unleaded, but the Mahindra uses slightly more with a combined average of 8.3L/100km compared to Nissan's 7.8L/100km claim. If you're towing a small trailer or caravan, the X-Trail has a little extra headroom in terms of its maximum braked towing capacity (2000kg versus 1500kg) and also includes specific safety features such as Trailer Sway Control. To see how the Mahindra XUV700 stacks up against its rivals, check out our comparison tool Both Mahindra and Nissan provide excellent long-term ownership benefits with these cars. At face value, the XUV700 comes out on top with a seven-year factory warranty that includes roadside assistance (the first year is free and renewed each time you visit an authorised service dealer for scheduled maintenance) with longer service intervals in terms of mileage. But it limits the coverage to 150,000km and its capped price servicing scheme is more expensive and is only offered for the first four years. Nissan's standard five-year/unlimited-km warranty is on par with most other mainstream brands, and it has more affordable service pricing. But the Japanese brand goes further by adding an extra year of warranty coverage – and roadside assistance – for every scheduled service within its dealer network, providing up to an unrivalled 10 years and 300,000km of coverage. To see how the Mahindra XUV700 stacks up against its rivals, check out our comparison tool It's a tight race between these two, as both the Mahindra XUV700 and Nissan X-Trail deliver where it counts. Both have spacious and flexible cabins, and the latest in safety tech and digital conveniences, and both are affordable to run. The Nissan has a slight advantage if you're more adventurous, with better light-duty off-road potential and a higher towing capacity thanks to its AWD configuration. But for growing Aussie families on a shrinking budget, the Mahindra offers more features for less. Interested in buying a Mahindra XUV700? Let CarExpert find you the best deal here Interested in buying a Nissan X-Trail? Let CarExpert find you the best deal hereMORE: Explore the Mahindra XUV700 showroomMORE: Explore the Nissan X-Trail showroom Content originally sourced from: The typical Australian family car is evolving all the time. Nothing signifies the changing demands better than these two models, the 2025 Mahindra XUV700 and 2025 Nissan X-Trail – a pair of high-riding, seven-seat mid-size SUVs, a vehicle type that has essentially replaced the station wagon as the default choice for suburban runabouts. Both cost just over $40k and offer spacious, flexible cabins that feature modern tech, and are fitted with the latest in automated safety systems. But which is best? Let's find out… There's only a handful of mid-size SUVs that offer a third-row option, which puts this pair among a select group for Australian families that need space for seven – especially if they're on a tighter budget. The Mahindra is the most accessible of these two, with a starting price of just $39,990 drive-away for the entry-level AX7, while the flagship AX7L we're testing here costs an additional $3000. Nissan offers a wider variety of models across its X-Trail range, with the choice of both front-wheel drive and all-wheel drive variants, as well as the groundbreaking e-Power hybrid powertrain. But even the most affordable – the entry-level five-seat, front-drive ST – will cost around the same as the range-topping XUV700 on the road, with a starting price of $38,025 plus on-roads. If you're after the seven-seat option, it is exclusively available with all-wheel drive in the two mid-level model grades, including the ST-L we're comparing here and the N-Trek, which cost $47,565 and $52,160 plus on-roads respectively. To see how the Mahindra XUV700 stacks up against its rivals, check out our comparison tool Standard equipment common to both vehicles includes: However, the Mahindra extends its value for money philosophy even further with with a few more features, such as a panoramic glass sunroof, a fully digital instrument cluster, ventilated front seats and a 12-speaker premium audio system compared to the X-Trail's six-speaker unit. To see how the Mahindra XUV700 stacks up against its rivals, check out our comparison tool The Mahindra hasn't been tested by ANCAP, and therefore does not have an independent safety rating to match the X-Trail's five-star result from 2021, when this current generation first arrived in Australian showrooms. Standard safety features in both vehicles include: Both also feature seven airbags including dual front, side and curtain airbags that cover all three rows, with the Nissan having an extra airbag between the front seat passengers while the Mahindra has a knee airbag for the driver. They each also have a reversing camera, but the Mahindra offers a wider perspective with a 360-degree view. To see how the Mahindra XUV700 stacks up against its rivals, check out our comparison tool The XUV700 and X-Trail plant an almost identical footprint on the road with roughly the same dimensions. The Mahindra is a fraction longer and taller with more space between the axles, but not by much. What that translates to inside the cabin is generous space for five with decent cargo storage for everyday family duties in both vehicles. But they also have the added flexibility of a third row, which is best suited to small kids or occasional use only. The Mahindra fuses its modern tech, with twin 10.25-inch digital displays for the instrument cluster and infotainment touch screen, into a more conservative dashboard design with a dark colour palette and piano black highlights with chrome trim elements. The X-Trail, on the other hand, has more conventional tech – a larger 12.3-inch tablet-style touchscreen and analogue gauges with a 7.0-inch display between the tacho and speedo – incorporated into a modern dashboard design with a high-set, floating centre console, stubby gear lever and two-tone colour scheme. Both cars offer plenty of headroom for front seat occupants and an array of convenient storage solutions with twin cupholders and bottle holders in the door pockets. While the X-Trail has a handy hidden tray under the console that keeps the overall aesthetic a bit cleaner, the lidded bin between the front seats in the XUV700 is ventilated, which is a cool feature (literally). The glovebox is also massive. For those in the middle row, both cars boast rear vents and USB power outlets, as well as enough space for three across the rear bench with decent legroom. Access to the third row in either isn't as easy as it is in larger, dedicated seven-seaters, and the space is best left to small children. Both have cupholders, but the Mahindra makes it more bearable with additional air vents. To see how the Mahindra XUV700 stacks up against its rivals, check out our comparison tool Here's where these two cars diverge the most. First of all, the XUV700 is only available as a front-driver, while the seven-seat option in the X-Trail is exclusive to AWD variants – if that matters to you. The Mahindra produces significantly higher outputs too, thanks to its turbocharged 2.0-litre four-cylinder petrol engine that delivers 150kW of power and 380Nm of torque to the front wheels via a six-speed automatic transmission. The Nissan has a larger-capacity engine and it isn't turbocharged: a 2.5-litre normally aspirated four-cylinder delivering 135kW and 244Nm to all four wheels through a continuously variable automatic transmission (CVT). Both engines are optimised to run on the most affordable 91-octane standard unleaded, but the Mahindra uses slightly more with a combined average of 8.3L/100km compared to Nissan's 7.8L/100km claim. If you're towing a small trailer or caravan, the X-Trail has a little extra headroom in terms of its maximum braked towing capacity (2000kg versus 1500kg) and also includes specific safety features such as Trailer Sway Control. To see how the Mahindra XUV700 stacks up against its rivals, check out our comparison tool Both Mahindra and Nissan provide excellent long-term ownership benefits with these cars. At face value, the XUV700 comes out on top with a seven-year factory warranty that includes roadside assistance (the first year is free and renewed each time you visit an authorised service dealer for scheduled maintenance) with longer service intervals in terms of mileage. But it limits the coverage to 150,000km and its capped price servicing scheme is more expensive and is only offered for the first four years. Nissan's standard five-year/unlimited-km warranty is on par with most other mainstream brands, and it has more affordable service pricing. But the Japanese brand goes further by adding an extra year of warranty coverage – and roadside assistance – for every scheduled service within its dealer network, providing up to an unrivalled 10 years and 300,000km of coverage. To see how the Mahindra XUV700 stacks up against its rivals, check out our comparison tool It's a tight race between these two, as both the Mahindra XUV700 and Nissan X-Trail deliver where it counts. Both have spacious and flexible cabins, and the latest in safety tech and digital conveniences, and both are affordable to run. The Nissan has a slight advantage if you're more adventurous, with better light-duty off-road potential and a higher towing capacity thanks to its AWD configuration. But for growing Aussie families on a shrinking budget, the Mahindra offers more features for less. Interested in buying a Mahindra XUV700? Let CarExpert find you the best deal here Interested in buying a Nissan X-Trail? Let CarExpert find you the best deal hereMORE: Explore the Mahindra XUV700 showroomMORE: Explore the Nissan X-Trail showroom Content originally sourced from: The typical Australian family car is evolving all the time. Nothing signifies the changing demands better than these two models, the 2025 Mahindra XUV700 and 2025 Nissan X-Trail – a pair of high-riding, seven-seat mid-size SUVs, a vehicle type that has essentially replaced the station wagon as the default choice for suburban runabouts. Both cost just over $40k and offer spacious, flexible cabins that feature modern tech, and are fitted with the latest in automated safety systems. But which is best? Let's find out… There's only a handful of mid-size SUVs that offer a third-row option, which puts this pair among a select group for Australian families that need space for seven – especially if they're on a tighter budget. The Mahindra is the most accessible of these two, with a starting price of just $39,990 drive-away for the entry-level AX7, while the flagship AX7L we're testing here costs an additional $3000. Nissan offers a wider variety of models across its X-Trail range, with the choice of both front-wheel drive and all-wheel drive variants, as well as the groundbreaking e-Power hybrid powertrain. But even the most affordable – the entry-level five-seat, front-drive ST – will cost around the same as the range-topping XUV700 on the road, with a starting price of $38,025 plus on-roads. If you're after the seven-seat option, it is exclusively available with all-wheel drive in the two mid-level model grades, including the ST-L we're comparing here and the N-Trek, which cost $47,565 and $52,160 plus on-roads respectively. To see how the Mahindra XUV700 stacks up against its rivals, check out our comparison tool Standard equipment common to both vehicles includes: However, the Mahindra extends its value for money philosophy even further with with a few more features, such as a panoramic glass sunroof, a fully digital instrument cluster, ventilated front seats and a 12-speaker premium audio system compared to the X-Trail's six-speaker unit. To see how the Mahindra XUV700 stacks up against its rivals, check out our comparison tool The Mahindra hasn't been tested by ANCAP, and therefore does not have an independent safety rating to match the X-Trail's five-star result from 2021, when this current generation first arrived in Australian showrooms. Standard safety features in both vehicles include: Both also feature seven airbags including dual front, side and curtain airbags that cover all three rows, with the Nissan having an extra airbag between the front seat passengers while the Mahindra has a knee airbag for the driver. They each also have a reversing camera, but the Mahindra offers a wider perspective with a 360-degree view. To see how the Mahindra XUV700 stacks up against its rivals, check out our comparison tool The XUV700 and X-Trail plant an almost identical footprint on the road with roughly the same dimensions. The Mahindra is a fraction longer and taller with more space between the axles, but not by much. What that translates to inside the cabin is generous space for five with decent cargo storage for everyday family duties in both vehicles. But they also have the added flexibility of a third row, which is best suited to small kids or occasional use only. The Mahindra fuses its modern tech, with twin 10.25-inch digital displays for the instrument cluster and infotainment touch screen, into a more conservative dashboard design with a dark colour palette and piano black highlights with chrome trim elements. The X-Trail, on the other hand, has more conventional tech – a larger 12.3-inch tablet-style touchscreen and analogue gauges with a 7.0-inch display between the tacho and speedo – incorporated into a modern dashboard design with a high-set, floating centre console, stubby gear lever and two-tone colour scheme. Both cars offer plenty of headroom for front seat occupants and an array of convenient storage solutions with twin cupholders and bottle holders in the door pockets. While the X-Trail has a handy hidden tray under the console that keeps the overall aesthetic a bit cleaner, the lidded bin between the front seats in the XUV700 is ventilated, which is a cool feature (literally). The glovebox is also massive. For those in the middle row, both cars boast rear vents and USB power outlets, as well as enough space for three across the rear bench with decent legroom. Access to the third row in either isn't as easy as it is in larger, dedicated seven-seaters, and the space is best left to small children. Both have cupholders, but the Mahindra makes it more bearable with additional air vents. To see how the Mahindra XUV700 stacks up against its rivals, check out our comparison tool Here's where these two cars diverge the most. First of all, the XUV700 is only available as a front-driver, while the seven-seat option in the X-Trail is exclusive to AWD variants – if that matters to you. The Mahindra produces significantly higher outputs too, thanks to its turbocharged 2.0-litre four-cylinder petrol engine that delivers 150kW of power and 380Nm of torque to the front wheels via a six-speed automatic transmission. The Nissan has a larger-capacity engine and it isn't turbocharged: a 2.5-litre normally aspirated four-cylinder delivering 135kW and 244Nm to all four wheels through a continuously variable automatic transmission (CVT). Both engines are optimised to run on the most affordable 91-octane standard unleaded, but the Mahindra uses slightly more with a combined average of 8.3L/100km compared to Nissan's 7.8L/100km claim. If you're towing a small trailer or caravan, the X-Trail has a little extra headroom in terms of its maximum braked towing capacity (2000kg versus 1500kg) and also includes specific safety features such as Trailer Sway Control. To see how the Mahindra XUV700 stacks up against its rivals, check out our comparison tool Both Mahindra and Nissan provide excellent long-term ownership benefits with these cars. At face value, the XUV700 comes out on top with a seven-year factory warranty that includes roadside assistance (the first year is free and renewed each time you visit an authorised service dealer for scheduled maintenance) with longer service intervals in terms of mileage. But it limits the coverage to 150,000km and its capped price servicing scheme is more expensive and is only offered for the first four years. Nissan's standard five-year/unlimited-km warranty is on par with most other mainstream brands, and it has more affordable service pricing. But the Japanese brand goes further by adding an extra year of warranty coverage – and roadside assistance – for every scheduled service within its dealer network, providing up to an unrivalled 10 years and 300,000km of coverage. To see how the Mahindra XUV700 stacks up against its rivals, check out our comparison tool It's a tight race between these two, as both the Mahindra XUV700 and Nissan X-Trail deliver where it counts. Both have spacious and flexible cabins, and the latest in safety tech and digital conveniences, and both are affordable to run. The Nissan has a slight advantage if you're more adventurous, with better light-duty off-road potential and a higher towing capacity thanks to its AWD configuration. But for growing Aussie families on a shrinking budget, the Mahindra offers more features for less. Interested in buying a Mahindra XUV700? Let CarExpert find you the best deal here Interested in buying a Nissan X-Trail? Let CarExpert find you the best deal hereMORE: Explore the Mahindra XUV700 showroomMORE: Explore the Nissan X-Trail showroom Content originally sourced from: The typical Australian family car is evolving all the time. Nothing signifies the changing demands better than these two models, the 2025 Mahindra XUV700 and 2025 Nissan X-Trail – a pair of high-riding, seven-seat mid-size SUVs, a vehicle type that has essentially replaced the station wagon as the default choice for suburban runabouts. Both cost just over $40k and offer spacious, flexible cabins that feature modern tech, and are fitted with the latest in automated safety systems. But which is best? Let's find out… There's only a handful of mid-size SUVs that offer a third-row option, which puts this pair among a select group for Australian families that need space for seven – especially if they're on a tighter budget. The Mahindra is the most accessible of these two, with a starting price of just $39,990 drive-away for the entry-level AX7, while the flagship AX7L we're testing here costs an additional $3000. Nissan offers a wider variety of models across its X-Trail range, with the choice of both front-wheel drive and all-wheel drive variants, as well as the groundbreaking e-Power hybrid powertrain. But even the most affordable – the entry-level five-seat, front-drive ST – will cost around the same as the range-topping XUV700 on the road, with a starting price of $38,025 plus on-roads. If you're after the seven-seat option, it is exclusively available with all-wheel drive in the two mid-level model grades, including the ST-L we're comparing here and the N-Trek, which cost $47,565 and $52,160 plus on-roads respectively. To see how the Mahindra XUV700 stacks up against its rivals, check out our comparison tool Standard equipment common to both vehicles includes: However, the Mahindra extends its value for money philosophy even further with with a few more features, such as a panoramic glass sunroof, a fully digital instrument cluster, ventilated front seats and a 12-speaker premium audio system compared to the X-Trail's six-speaker unit. To see how the Mahindra XUV700 stacks up against its rivals, check out our comparison tool The Mahindra hasn't been tested by ANCAP, and therefore does not have an independent safety rating to match the X-Trail's five-star result from 2021, when this current generation first arrived in Australian showrooms. Standard safety features in both vehicles include: Both also feature seven airbags including dual front, side and curtain airbags that cover all three rows, with the Nissan having an extra airbag between the front seat passengers while the Mahindra has a knee airbag for the driver. They each also have a reversing camera, but the Mahindra offers a wider perspective with a 360-degree view. To see how the Mahindra XUV700 stacks up against its rivals, check out our comparison tool The XUV700 and X-Trail plant an almost identical footprint on the road with roughly the same dimensions. The Mahindra is a fraction longer and taller with more space between the axles, but not by much. What that translates to inside the cabin is generous space for five with decent cargo storage for everyday family duties in both vehicles. But they also have the added flexibility of a third row, which is best suited to small kids or occasional use only. The Mahindra fuses its modern tech, with twin 10.25-inch digital displays for the instrument cluster and infotainment touch screen, into a more conservative dashboard design with a dark colour palette and piano black highlights with chrome trim elements. The X-Trail, on the other hand, has more conventional tech – a larger 12.3-inch tablet-style touchscreen and analogue gauges with a 7.0-inch display between the tacho and speedo – incorporated into a modern dashboard design with a high-set, floating centre console, stubby gear lever and two-tone colour scheme. Both cars offer plenty of headroom for front seat occupants and an array of convenient storage solutions with twin cupholders and bottle holders in the door pockets. While the X-Trail has a handy hidden tray under the console that keeps the overall aesthetic a bit cleaner, the lidded bin between the front seats in the XUV700 is ventilated, which is a cool feature (literally). The glovebox is also massive. For those in the middle row, both cars boast rear vents and USB power outlets, as well as enough space for three across the rear bench with decent legroom. Access to the third row in either isn't as easy as it is in larger, dedicated seven-seaters, and the space is best left to small children. Both have cupholders, but the Mahindra makes it more bearable with additional air vents. To see how the Mahindra XUV700 stacks up against its rivals, check out our comparison tool Here's where these two cars diverge the most. First of all, the XUV700 is only available as a front-driver, while the seven-seat option in the X-Trail is exclusive to AWD variants – if that matters to you. The Mahindra produces significantly higher outputs too, thanks to its turbocharged 2.0-litre four-cylinder petrol engine that delivers 150kW of power and 380Nm of torque to the front wheels via a six-speed automatic transmission. The Nissan has a larger-capacity engine and it isn't turbocharged: a 2.5-litre normally aspirated four-cylinder delivering 135kW and 244Nm to all four wheels through a continuously variable automatic transmission (CVT). Both engines are optimised to run on the most affordable 91-octane standard unleaded, but the Mahindra uses slightly more with a combined average of 8.3L/100km compared to Nissan's 7.8L/100km claim. If you're towing a small trailer or caravan, the X-Trail has a little extra headroom in terms of its maximum braked towing capacity (2000kg versus 1500kg) and also includes specific safety features such as Trailer Sway Control. To see how the Mahindra XUV700 stacks up against its rivals, check out our comparison tool Both Mahindra and Nissan provide excellent long-term ownership benefits with these cars. At face value, the XUV700 comes out on top with a seven-year factory warranty that includes roadside assistance (the first year is free and renewed each time you visit an authorised service dealer for scheduled maintenance) with longer service intervals in terms of mileage. But it limits the coverage to 150,000km and its capped price servicing scheme is more expensive and is only offered for the first four years. Nissan's standard five-year/unlimited-km warranty is on par with most other mainstream brands, and it has more affordable service pricing. But the Japanese brand goes further by adding an extra year of warranty coverage – and roadside assistance – for every scheduled service within its dealer network, providing up to an unrivalled 10 years and 300,000km of coverage. To see how the Mahindra XUV700 stacks up against its rivals, check out our comparison tool It's a tight race between these two, as both the Mahindra XUV700 and Nissan X-Trail deliver where it counts. Both have spacious and flexible cabins, and the latest in safety tech and digital conveniences, and both are affordable to run. The Nissan has a slight advantage if you're more adventurous, with better light-duty off-road potential and a higher towing capacity thanks to its AWD configuration. But for growing Aussie families on a shrinking budget, the Mahindra offers more features for less. Interested in buying a Mahindra XUV700? Let CarExpert find you the best deal here Interested in buying a Nissan X-Trail? Let CarExpert find you the best deal hereMORE: Explore the Mahindra XUV700 showroomMORE: Explore the Nissan X-Trail showroom Content originally sourced from:
