This new addition doesn’t lack for appeal, yet in respect to electrical enhancement we’re talking a small step rather than a giant leap.

Price: $44,390.

Powertrain and economy: 2.0-litre petrol inline four, 114kW/200Nm, 6-speed automatic, FWD, combined economy 6.3L/100km, CO2 165g/km.

Vital statistics: 4395mm long, 1795mm wide, 1540mm high, 2655mm wheelbase, luggage capacity 430 litres, 18-inch alloy wheels.

We like: Less overt alternate to MX-30, good refinement, well-sorted chassis.

Not so much: Only delivers marginal improvement over donor, too closely priced to AWD 2.5 option.

HERE’S a long-winded badge that says more than it needs to.

The first two parts are no issue - ‘Mazda’ is the maker, CX-30 the model, of course – and while ‘M-Hybrid’ is a relatively new tag, it’s one we’re getting to already know and also understand that it’s very much part of Mazda’s future. Just to be doubly clear, in this instance it signals this compact crossover has adopted the (small) battery-fed mild hybrid drivetrain that first hit this market in the MX-30; an easy adoption as they’re on a common platform.

That’s where the badging could and should have stopped. The next two elements are just confusing.

In Mazda-speak, the ‘SP’ tag has been taken to be shorthand for ‘sports performance’. In this instance, it’s mis-applied. As much as a hybrid-assisted CX-30 isn’t short of perkiness, it makes no more grunt than the fully fossil-fuelled CX-30 GSX from which it is derived. The outputs aren’t exactly right at the top of the zoom zoom register.

As for that last word? Well, it just seems a bit premature. The NZ market is from time-to-time proliferated with ‘blackout’ or just plain ‘black’ editions. As a rule, it’s a execution that arrives, with a trim or equipment treatment, to signal said vehicle is in the final stage of its production life. The consumer interest curve has begun to heading in the downward direction. So, time for a bit of a visual curry up.

The CX-30 seems too young for this. The shape as we know it was introduced just three years ago, which surely means at best it’s just halfway through its production life?

That’s not to say the Blackout bits that add here aren’t worthwhile. The CX-30 has always been a good-looking model, but the test car was all the more handsome on its glossy black 18-inch alloys and the variant-specific black mirror caps also looked good.

Likewise the grille trim; even though that breaks from black and is in chrome. Still, it does look all the better for it; lending good kerbside glam. Slip inside, and you’re back in a more budget-themed ambience, though it’s hardly a place of penury.

Even when it themes dollar-saving, Mazda design and material choices are nicer than some. Still, as much as the overall fit and finish and quality of materials feels sophisticated, you cannot help but notice there’s single-zone air-conditioning with an analogue knob operability that’s now relatively rare these days. Plus it has cloth seats, a thin-rimmed wheel and little digitalisation.

Conceivably, though, as much as the enhanced appearance is a draw, it’s more likely that anticipated environmental benefits of the drivetrain are more likely to be what draws a consumer’s pen to a sales contract. Best to bear in mind ‘m’ stands for ‘mild.’

Electric-assisted drivetrains are good for emissions and good for economy and occasionally can lend a bit of a power and torque gee-up.

By those standards, as much as the CX-30 is better for having this system, you’re getting a relatively subtle involvement. The interaction and outcomes here remind that in respect to Green, there are many hues out there. On the shade scale, Mazda’s is well to the left of ‘Kermit’. Realistically, it’s more in the ‘tea’ or ‘pale jade’ range.

That’s a brand intention. A lot of mild hybrids are 48-volt units but Mazda’s goes down to 24 volts, because it has a firm view that more just isn’t required.

It also likes to avoid wastage so, accordingly, the engine in use is the familiar non-turbo four-cylinder petrol, onto which a belt alternator starter (BAS) is affixed in place of the alternator. This charges a 0.17kWh lithium-ion battery under braking, which is then used to power vehicle electronics and a more advanced stop-start system.

The system is purpose-designed to be highly unobtrusive in its operability, so as to maintain the sort of familiarities drivers feel comfortable with. There’s no question: It’s good at that. Maybe a bit too good, in that it can be difficult to pinpoint just how much it's helping, even when keeping check on the fuel gauge.

If you are one to drive a lot around town – an environment to which the CX-30 is well-suited - the more obvious involvement appears to be with the stop-start system.

Most makers have worked out how to make that function quite friendly nowadays, but the Mazda’s is particularly beautifully calibrated. Draw to a halt at the lights and the pistons of the engine are carefully stopped just before their point of combustion. You only have to think about going and the engine will re-engage with commendable smoothness.

That’s all good for the environment, but when it comes to economy and emissions improvement, the gains from this set-up are only modestly north of incremental.

By Mazda’s own measurement, fuel burn drops by just 0.2 litres per 100 kilometres, from 6.5L/100km for the non-hybrid variant to 6.3; not a count achieved on test, where the average for a week’s worth of mixed speed and environment driving came to 7.3L/100km. While CO2 count also reduces, it’s also by only modest amount; not enough for it to win a Government rebate.

So, yeah, it’s all about small steps gain from a powertrain that was already quite frugal. Still, even though the influence from M-Hybrid is modest, it does nonetheless support the view that even a small gain is better than no gain at all.

And there’s nothing about its interactions that make the driving experience itself any less enjoyable. If anything, there’s sense that, even though the on-paper outputs seems unaffected, it nonetheless does add a touch more smoothness and just a smidge extra edge to the engine’s operability, not least during step-off, and the interaction with the transmission is good, with well-judged shift actions. It is, generally, a refined powertrain, as well. So, even if not a lot is gained, nothing is lost, either.

In terms of driving feel, the CX-30 already holds good standing; but fair to say it also reminds there’s a difference in traction and grip separating the front-drive models, such as this, from the more expensive all-wheel-drive options, which kick in with the next-rung GTX variant.

There's a tautness and a tightness to the controls that inspires confidence. Steering feedback could be a little better, but the overall feel and weight are good. G-Vectoring Control Plus, which applies a hint of brake to improve the steering and chassis when taking a corner, is now part of the package. The brakes do take a bit of getting used to, as Mazda has now enabled them to deliver a degree of regenerative effort to put kinetic energy back into the battery; the trade-off is a slightly wooden pedal feel. Overall, then, on this side of things it ticks the boxes. On the other hand, there’s still a mainstream Mazda feel to all it does and nothing more. That extra SP sweetness just doesn’t ever evidence. Push this car beyond a point and it finds understeer and body lean; the front wheels will also scrabble if you hoof on loose surfaces.

As relatively new as CX-30 is, the interior has yet to step up to the latest

touchscreen-operability now filtering elsewhere. Instead, every function on the centre screen is sorted by a chunky rotary dial located between the volume knob and electric parking brake.

It’s superior by far to touchpad set-ups, but a touchscreen is more convenient for everyday usage; notwithstanding that, size-wise the 8.8 inches display here really is borderline for that kind of operability anyway. Mazda’s system allows for Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, as well as native navigation and digital radio; stepping across to the phone apps is easy, getting out of them again to revert to an onboard system less so.

The SP20 treatment signals with with red contrast stitching and … yup, that’s about it for visual context. There’s no particular operability for the hybrid side, though you can check out its involvements on displays. When some cars undergo hybrid enhancement, they lose boot space – the battery as to go somewhere, after all – but that’s not the case with this car. On the other hand, while luggage space isn’t eroded, a 317-litre capacity is not class-leading in this segment. The 60/40-split folding rear seats add load flexibility. A temporary spare lays below the floor.

CX-30 presents solidly on the safety front, with autonomous emergency braking (AEB) with pedestrian and cyclist detection, blind spot monitoring, front and rear cross traffic alert, lane departure warning and lane keep assist, driver attention alert, traffic sign recognition, adaptive cruise control, front and rear parking sensors and an outside view camera.

The hybrid drivetrain adds $2000 more to the CX-30 GSX and still presents as a $2500 cheaper option to the MX-30 M-Hybrid; with which you get the same drivetrain.

CX-30’s appeal in that evaluation is that it’s a more practical and, if you feel this less ‘look at me’ is important’, a more mainstream-looking car. On the other hand, you can spend just $1500 to buy into the cheapest all-wheel-drive CX-30, the GTX.

The latter remains a thorn; it which provisions more kit and a strong 2.5-litre engine that, admittedly, will chew through more petrol but in return will also deliver more oomph. The stronger performance might well appeal if you have desire to break out of the suburbs and drive with frequency at open road pace. While the smaller powertrain is very good in the urban environment, it has less to give than the larger engine out in the 100kmh zone. And, of course, even when it is operating optimally, the hybrid really doesn’t make all that much difference over the regular 2.0-litre.