PDA

View Full Version : Test drive Concerns for CX-5



udayse
03-27-2012, 10:57 AM
I love the interior and exterior of the car. It seems like thought was put into this.

I have 2 concerns.
1) Engine noise: The CX-5 does not give you a luxury feel at all. The start up is noisy and the noise still seems to be there even after going a mile. I test drove the grand touring, I love the leather and everything that comes with it, but I am disappointed by the cheap car feel to driving it. Dont others feel this way?

2) Driving torque: When I had to accelerate from 40mph to a highway 65mph it seemed like it did take a lot of effort, granted, I am used to driving my honda accord and you cant really compare the two, But still, I feel this will limit me on how I drive on the highway.


Fuel gauge had one dot over the 1/2 way mark, with 15 gal tank, leaving two for reserve, lets say that is 7.5 gals left in the tank, The range showed 191 miles, which translates to about 25mpg, which is pretty good.

Do others share the same concerns? I am still on the fence, about buying this, because of the noise. It is very irritating, when you are talking on the phone and you have to repeat yourself, each time because there is so much noise.

Just curious what others think.

CodyZoom
03-27-2012, 11:11 AM
I agree there is quite a bit of racquet at startup, but once the engine reaches normal operating temperature, it quiets down to acceptable levels to me.

Orangutan
03-27-2012, 11:12 AM
Compared to my Mazda5 the CX-5 is silent. No matter how many thousands of dollars in moonroofs and cowskins you add, though, fundamentally the CX-5 is still just a $20,000 tall Mazda3 with a small, naturally aspirated four-cylinder. The most fancy stuff you add, the more weight you add, the harder the engine has to work against that mass. Combined with an automatic tuned more for mileage than performance, you're going to have something that doesn't feel fast, because it isn't. Look at the CX-5 for what it is at its core, not what it is when you start ticking off options boxes and raising the price into territory reserved for larger, more powerful, more refined vehicles.

mazdadude
03-27-2012, 11:22 AM
I agree there is quite a bit of racquet at startup, but once the engine reaches normal operating temperature, it quiets down to acceptable levels to me.

If you read the manual, it notes that upon startup there are some valves that open up to reduce emissions, and that the sounds are normal. After the engine is on for a few moments, the sound goes away. (It almost sounds like there is an exhaust leak.)

vfrguy
03-27-2012, 11:25 AM
The engine noise is there at start up and after a few minutes. I asked the dealership about it and they said it was the engine design. I was still uncertain about and we checked other Skyactiv Mazda 3s and they all had the same engine noise at start up. My mom has a new Mazda 3 and confirms that hers makes the same noise at startup. The noise does go away after a few minutes.

As far as highway driving, the little that we have driven this car on the highway we haven't had any issues with it on the highway. It has plenty of get up and go when you need it. It's not the fastest in the world but it does what it needs.

We are at roughly 850 miles on our CX5 now and on the third tank of gas. The low fuel light comes on at about 11.5 gallons, which it seems like the computer is reading off of. We averaged 27.6 MPG on the first tank and 28.5 MPG on the second with about 90% city driving.

For me I don't get the cheap car feel. We went from a 08 CX9 GT to the CX5 Touring and this in my opinion feels like its better quality material and better made. The CX9 had the paint chipping off of all the interior pieces and the hard plastic pieces. The CX5 has the soft touch dash and it seems like better materials in my opinion. I loved our old CX9, but for my family needs this is a better car and seems like a lot batter quality.

cptkloss
03-27-2012, 12:16 PM
I'm pretty sure, CX-5 (Touring) is the best choice in it's segment (when you need AWD, cargo space , utility) at the moment. What i mean by "best" is most economical to own over period of time as a primary consideration, with a reasonable amount of compromise when it comes to power, "fun" factor , interior/exterior quality/fit and included features. Big part of it is the fuel consumption for such a relatively big car. While , say Kia Sorento may offer better space and warranty at comparable purchase price - it's resale value and poor gas economy will make it significantly more expensive to own. New Ford Escape, while may math in MPG dept will have a price tag premium. CR-V is the one that comes close...maybe new Santa Fe as well, when they reveal it in 2 weeks... well, overall i see a lot of positive competition showing up in this segment. Will be interesting couple of years

Canadian-ES-GT
03-27-2012, 12:52 PM
cptkloss


have you driven a CX-5? How does it compare to your Q5 in terms of feel and driving?
My old folks are looking for something this size and are interested in CX-5, Q5, and Tiguan

Thanks in advance

Modshack
03-27-2012, 01:03 PM
I agree there is quite a bit of racquet at startup, but once the engine reaches normal operating temperature, it quiets down to acceptable levels to me.

My new GTI is the same way..You'll find this a pretty common situation with direct injection cars.

udayse
03-27-2012, 01:53 PM
Thanks for the replies everyone. I guess i wasnt clear. I am not so worried about the interior looking like a luxury vehicle. I'd rather have a quieter car. I think I need to test drive it one more time to see if I like it.

kvetcha
03-27-2012, 02:01 PM
Thanks for the replies everyone. I guess i wasnt clear. I am not so worried about the interior looking like a luxury vehicle. I'd rather have a quieter car. I think I need to test drive it one more time to see if I like it.

The engine does have a pronounced clatter when it's warming up, but it's quite refined and pleasant once at proper temperature.

cptkloss
03-27-2012, 02:16 PM
cptkloss


have you driven a CX-5? How does it compare to your Q5 in terms of feel and driving?
My old folks are looking for something this size and are interested in CX-5, Q5, and Tiguan

Thanks in advance

i'd not compare them really, Q5 is not, by any mean a "perfect" car - it's got a long list of irritating things. But it's a very pleasurable experience to drive one. In CX-5 i didnt feel that. Just a solid mean of transportation, that will get a job done. Gives you that good feeling of getting a great value for your $$$.

I'm pretty sure (didnt drive one, but i did own a Golf) Tiguan is a middle-of-the-road solution here... both money/performance wise.

Canadian-ES-GT
03-27-2012, 02:23 PM
^ thanks

I thought the same for the Tiguan although they prefer the styling of the CX-5.

joepro
03-27-2012, 03:04 PM
The engine noise seems to go away within 30 seconds, or as soon as I shift out of P. I usually let it do it's thing for 30 seconds before driving away. I find the engine surprisingly quiet afterwards. The ride is much quieter than my old mazda 3 2004 and 2005 honda civic.

Kornik
03-27-2012, 05:09 PM
Thanks for the replies everyone. I guess i wasnt clear. I am not so worried about the interior looking like a luxury vehicle. I'd rather have a quieter car. I think I need to test drive it one more time to see if I like it.
Two notes here:
1. In ours the engine noise went down considerably over the first 300 miles or so.
2. You can expect elevated rattle from all directly injected gas engines.

Having said so I do not feel like I'm driving cheap car. I feel like I'm driving underpowered car (or rather car with too little torque). I bet you wouldn't have those feelings at all in diesel version.

unixxus
03-27-2012, 07:48 PM
As ModShack and others had stated, the engine clatter is typical of direct injection engines and especially this one with it's high 13:1 compression.

DougNuts
03-27-2012, 09:59 PM
From what I have read, it is hard for a direct injection engine to get the catalytic converters up to temp. That is why the new Toyota/Subaru has both types of injection, traditional injection for startup.

inodes
03-28-2012, 03:45 AM
I have 2 concerns.
1) Engine noise: The CX-5 does not give you a luxury feel at all. The start up is noisy and the noise still seems to be there even after going a mile. I test drove the grand touring, I love the leather and everything that comes with it, but I am disappointed by the cheap car feel to driving it. Dont others feel this way?

2) Driving torque: When I had to accelerate from 40mph to a highway 65mph it seemed like it did take a lot of effort, granted, I am used to driving my honda accord and you cant really compare the two, But still, I feel this will limit me on how I drive on the highway.


I don't think the noise is too bad. If you look at Mazda's report card, it's top of the class in terms of reliability and driving feel. It has historically been bottom of class for noise.
The CX-5 though is recorded at idle is recorded under laboratory conditions as being 1 decibal louder than the Tiguan - which is an amazing feat.

Not sure what you mean by "cheap feel to driving it". It's the lightest in the class, but if you drive it and then drive the CR-V side by side, you'll be surprised at how much more accurate the steering is and the feedback it gives. The suspension and road soak up is very good. The CR-V feels quite boring in comparison.

Regarding torque.... the petrol is economic before it is performance. I wish you could drive the diesel. It has more torque than anything in the class (and the class above it). It feels like twice the car the petrol is.

Curlywasastooge
03-29-2012, 05:26 PM
I haven't decided on the CX5 yet, but did take it for a test drive today. I was really dissapointed by the acceleration. I owned a 2006 Rav4 which also was a 4 but it would run circles arount he CX5 in acceleration, and quieter as well when acclerating. To be honest that 3 mile test drive essentially made up my mind. Shame since it has all the bells and whistles i'd want, plus decent MPG.. Better than my Rav4 for sure, but that acceleration. I'd be concerned not realizing what i was driving, trying to merge or pull out somewhere and basically not move out of my own way.
Sorry, my opinion based on this brief driving experience. But it really is a nice looking vehicle. I'm really dissapointed.
Actually might next test a Toyota Prius V. sat in one, and great room. not my ideal manly vehicle, but, 45 mpg, i could live with that. Who knows, maybe i'll do nothing.
I'm sure all Mazda CX5 lovers will wonder why i posted this, but potential buyers need to really consider the acceleration part. May kill any decision for me on Prius V too, no sure yet.

smithsm1984
03-29-2012, 05:52 PM
I drove the manual CX-5 yesterday and I though the acceleration was fine. Floored it, watched the revs go berserk, chirped the tires out of second. No sports car, but it does what I expected it to do, and going around revin' the snot out of a little 4-cylinder is my idea of fun.

It's a lot quieter than my current car and I actually wish it wasn't. I don't want to hear road noise but I do want to hear the engine purr. But you can't have it all.

With this said, I can't say I begrudge Curly his sentiment. Unless gas prices continue to climb quickly, I think Mazda's conservative 40,000 unit sold (in North America) estimate is accurate. Most people do not want to have to rev an engine over 3000 RPM to get decent power and I've heard the automatic is hesitate to shift at times. Americans are power obsessed and will frown on a car this slow off the line.

SaUcE
03-29-2012, 06:09 PM
I didnt really think the CX5 was a 'luxury' oriented car so much as the 7 or 9?

inodes
03-29-2012, 06:15 PM
I was really dissapointed by the acceleration.

I'm sure many will tell you here, the engine is very good at the upper revs. It's very rev happy, and the acceleration is mapped with economy in mind. But when needed, a big boot will give it to you. The main Australian magazine gave it a bad rap on the way the revs were mapped this way but their pros and cons were simply:

Pro: Well packaged; capable dynamics
Cons: High tech four-cylinder engine struggles with weight, auto is eco-obsessed

And for the competition....

Toyota RAV4: You'd buy upper spec Cruiser L for typical Toyota reliability, low running costs and decent resale, not for the off-the-pace four-speed auto, ho-hum dynamics or dated interior.
Subaru Forester XT: Smooth boxer engine is saddled with four-speed auto, sadly but general refinement is good. Solid and dependable rather than truly engaging.

Effectively media has said nothing in its class will touch the CX-5 for dynamics. In one review it said that for once, BMW should be copying Mazda for steering feel not the other way around. It's also got the most modern engine and transmission in class.

If you can live with acceleration being lacklustre, made up for by dynamics then go for it.

Meanwhile unfortunately, picking up my Diesel CX-5 this afternoon - an engine which solves your problem.... then some.

smithsm1984
03-29-2012, 06:53 PM
It really is the Miata of CUVs. Power is down to the competition, but if you can get over that, you're golden.

erhayes
03-29-2012, 07:26 PM
I'm driving a CX7 presently and look forward to test driving a CX5. One thing concerns me is the power to weight ratio. I'm certainly not looking for a hot car off the line but, the acceleration times seem very pedestrian. I would be willing to lower the acceleration time and give up some fuel mileage. I wonder if Mazda will SkyActiv the 2.3 or 2.5L engine and bring the HP up to 170+?

CodyZoom
03-29-2012, 07:27 PM
Meanwhile unfortunately, picking up my Diesel CX-5 this afternoon - an engine which solves your problem.... then some.

I'm sooooo jealous.... Maybe a trade in if/when it reaches these shores...

mazdadude
03-29-2012, 08:03 PM
Throttle mapping feels like it is a different ratio for the first part (30%) of gas pedal travel. I think folks are not mashing the throttle down far enough...

inodes
03-29-2012, 08:11 PM
I'm sooooo jealous.... Maybe a trade in if/when it reaches these shores...
3 hours and counting. Have cheque in my hands.

I hope it's a "when" not an "if".

It's just so significantly better, Mazda US should have followed suit with all other countries by making it purchasable on the higher spec models only - then way not robbing the bottom end from sales.

Keep in mind you're getting a bargain in the US. My price is roughly the sale as Germany, UK and the weathier parts of Europe. US is getting bargain basement prices that are even less than Japan.

I'm paying an amount here that would make you die :)

lovmyrx7
03-30-2012, 01:30 AM
Throttle mapping feels like it is a different ratio for the first part (30%) of gas pedal travel. I think folks are not mashing the throttle down far enough...

You notice that too? I've PDI'd several and driven them numerous times and they all feel that way. Kind of like Mazda's way to conserve on fuel as much as they can, you really have to get into the gas pedal to make her go. Almost feels "heavy" in a way.

jaman_ca
03-30-2012, 09:16 AM
Well, when some magazines do fully instrumented CUV comparison tests we'll find out just how slow/fast the CX-5 is relative to its competitors. If the 80km/h-120km/h times are within a second or so, then in my opinion it's all the same.

However, regardless of what the watch says, consumer perception is key because people don't tend to test drive with stopwatches.

Perhaps Mazda should have had a "sport" button that changes the throttle mapping?

mazdadude
03-30-2012, 04:13 PM
Well, when some magazines do fully instrumented CUV comparison tests we'll find out just how slow/fast the CX-5 is relative to its competitors. If the 80km/h-120km/h times are within a second or so, then in my opinion it's all the same.

However, regardless of what the watch says, consumer perception is key because people don't tend to test drive with stopwatches.

Perhaps Mazda should have had a "sport" button that changes the throttle mapping?

I will say that It feels different in MANUAL-MODE, perhaps the throttle mapping changes when the stick is moved to the manual mode?

Modshack
03-30-2012, 04:24 PM
I will say that It feels different in MANUAL-MODE, perhaps the throttle mapping changes when the stick is moved to the manual mode?

It does...Don't know about the mapping, but it allows you to keep the engine in the sweet spot, where a Mileage skewed shift program does not.

My GTI with DSG is similar...Shifts up very quickly at low throttle inputs. I paddle shift it 90% of the time..

hooked
03-30-2012, 04:44 PM
I played around with the Manual shift for a little while. I put it in M at a stop light and started in 1 on the green. I didn't shift and the revs kept going up, but it didn't shift until I did it myself. I thought, the transmission would kick in sooner to shift it to second, but I chickened out and up-shifted. I thought the computer would kick in and save me (and my car) from myself. I guess it's a good thing that the car doesn't try to take over too soon, thus defeating the purpose of the Manual Mode. I'll have to play around with it a bit more.

ManMachine
03-30-2012, 04:52 PM
The automatic is geared for fuel economy. Switch to M to get a real feel of the engine. Better yet, try a manual.

mazdadude
03-30-2012, 04:54 PM
I played around with the Manual shift for a little while. I put it in M at a stop light and started in 1 on the green. I didn't shift and the revs kept going up, but it didn't shift until I did it myself. I thought, the transmission would kick in sooner to shift it to second, but I chickened out and up-shifted. I thought the computer would kick in and save me (and my car) from myself. I guess it's a good thing that the car doesn't try to take over too soon, thus defeating the purpose of the Manual Mode. I'll have to play around with it a bit more.

Yes, you are in charge of upshifting to the next gear when you are in MANUAL MODE. However when you decelerate and come to a stop, the transmission will return to 1st gear automatically, so there is no need to downshift. Or you can still downshift manually if you need some extra engine braking.

hooked
03-30-2012, 04:58 PM
Yes, you are in charge of upshifting to the next gear when you are in MANUAL MODE. However when you decelerate and come to a stop, the transmission will return to 1st gear automatically, so there is no need to downshift. Or you can still downshift manually if you need some extra engine braking.

LOL. Thanks. You just saved me the cost of replacing my engine or transmission!

P.S. I almost don't want to get used to this Manu-matic shifting because I know one day I'll try to change gears in my stick shift Accord and not use the clutch! Ouch!

mazdadude
03-30-2012, 05:12 PM
The automatic is geared for fuel economy. Switch to M to get a real feel of the engine. Better yet, try a manual.

There is going to be SEVEN different acceleration speeds-- based on transmission, FWD vs. 4x4, and overall weight.

1. SPORT M/T FWD = 3208 lbs
2. SPORT A/T FWD = 3272 lbs
3. SPORT A/T 4x4 = 3426 lbs
4. TOURING A/T FWD = ??? (3272+~20lbs??)
5. TOURING A/T 4x4 = ??? (3426+~20lbs??)
6. GRAND TOURING A/T FWD = ??? (3272+~40lbs??)
7. GRAND TOURING A/T 4x4 = ??? (3426+~40lbs??)

mazdadude
03-30-2012, 05:16 PM
LOL. Thanks. You just saved me the cost of replacing my engine or transmission!

LOL!

No, you don't have to worry about that. If you just floored it, after RPM REDLINE, the computer will cut off the engine from firing until RPM falls below redline. At which point, the engine will resume firing until REDLINE is reached again. Thus comes the term "hitting the rev-limiter". Keep it floored even longer and you will be "bouncing off the rev-limiter".

Canadian-ES-GT
03-30-2012, 05:54 PM
Whats the rev-limiter for the 2.0 Sky-g? Is it at 6500rpm (like the red-line), or does it go until 7000?

TheWiseFlea
03-30-2012, 11:28 PM
The automatic is geared for fuel economy. Switch to M to get a real feel of the engine. Better yet, try a manual.


Throttle mapping feels like it is a different ratio for the first part (30%) of gas pedal travel. I think folks are not mashing the throttle down far enough...

I'm thinking these folks are spot-on. From my test drive, it seemed like the automatic was indeed geared to keep the revs down, probably for the sake of fuel economy. I found this to be a bit annoying, as I'm not used to modifying pedal pressure to elicit different shifting points. Toward the end of the test drive, however, I quickly found myself using this "pedal-sensitive shifting" to achieve a greater measure of control in driving, unfortunately at the expense of having to be constantly cognizant of pedal pressure.

I didn't try the semi-manual or the manual, but I'm assuming irregular shifting would be less noticeable in both cases. With the the semi-manual, the trade-off would probably be worse gas mileage.

Comparatively, the Skyactiv Mazda 3 (same engine) shifts like a dream, and was considerably more consistent. Shifting was one of the ONLY things I was disappointed in with the CX5. But I still want one.

IHeartGroceries
04-02-2012, 01:51 PM
My old lady drives the new CX-5. She made a comment about the car's high rev idle start up. "Why does it do that? My Altima never did that..."

I kinda chuckled that she noticed.

My MS6 does it as well. Just more emissions based crap...

ManMachine
04-02-2012, 06:52 PM
I'm thinking these folks are spot-on. From my test drive, it seemed like the automatic was indeed geared to keep the revs down, probably for the sake of fuel economy. I found this to be a bit annoying, as I'm not used to modifying pedal pressure to elicit different shifting points. Toward the end of the test drive, however, I quickly found myself using this "pedal-sensitive shifting" to achieve a greater measure of control in driving, unfortunately at the expense of having to be constantly cognizant of pedal pressure.

I didn't try the semi-manual or the manual, but I'm assuming irregular shifting would be less noticeable in both cases. With the the semi-manual, the trade-off would probably be worse gas mileage.

Comparatively, the Skyactiv Mazda 3 (same engine) shifts like a dream, and was considerably more consistent. Shifting was one of the ONLY things I was disappointed in with the CX5. But I still want one.

I've noticed that people on Mazda3 forums have also complained about the auto there. Too bad Mazda doesn't have a S setting for the auto (sport) (what BMW does) - which means high RPM shift, so people can be lazy about manual shifting the auto and still gets a sporty response. But at least the M mode is there.

I tested the 6MT today. it's pretty sweet. nice short throws. I'm a bit rusty with a manual, but feel quite comfortable with it. By all means, Mazda3 is a more nimble vehicle, but if one needs the space of a CUV and want a sporty ride, you can't beat CX-5. Only unfortunate thing is 6MT isn't available in Sky Blue, the best color IMO, and lacks 40/20/40 split seat.

sami1228
04-08-2012, 02:13 AM
I have done about 3 test drives of the CX-5 and 1 test drive of the CR-V. As noted by many the cx-5 seems just a touch underpowered but the handling and drive and feel felt much better than the crv. The crv although had more power but the drive felt heavy and the handling too light.... I'm pretty much settled on the cx-5. Going to finalize on Monday for the black but the ol'lady wants me to consider the white... decisions!!? :)

inodes
04-08-2012, 08:37 AM
I have done about 3 test drives of the CX-5 and 1 test drive of the CR-V. As noted by many the cx-5 seems just a touch underpowered but the handling and drive and feel felt much better than the crv. The crv although had more power but the drive felt heavy and the handling too light.... I'm pretty much settled on the cx-5. Going to finalize on Monday for the black but the ol'lady wants me to consider the white... decisions!!? :)

This review sums it up for you:
http://www.windingroad.com/articles/reviews/driven-2013-mazda-cx-5-sport-fwd/

They do have reservations about the power:

It’s the least powerful vehicle in its class.... it’s overpowered by such mundane crossovers as the Toyota RAV4 and Honda CR-V.... Based on stats alone, it shouldn’t be an endearing car for the enthusiast. Except it totally is.

Their summary against the CR-V

The CR-V is pretty much the polar opposite of the CX-5. The Honda has more power, but its 2.4-liter engine and five-speed automatic (the sole transmission option) seem to have any sense of fun programed out of it during assembly. Compared to the Mazda, it’s a slow, dull-sounding, and unresponsive powertrain. The CX-5, meanwhile, is right there, like a caffeinated puppy, ready to be revved and driven hard.

Enough said really...

CX-SV
04-18-2012, 06:57 PM
I love the interior and exterior of the car. It seems like thought was put into this.

I have 2 concerns.
1) Engine noise: The CX-5 does not give you a luxury feel at all. The start up is noisy and the noise still seems to be there even after going a mile. I test drove the grand touring, I love the leather and everything that comes with it, but I am disappointed by the cheap car feel to driving it. Dont others feel this way?

2) Driving torque: When I had to accelerate from 40mph to a highway 65mph it seemed like it did take a lot of effort, granted, I am used to driving my honda accord and you cant really compare the two, But still, I feel this will limit me on how I drive on the highway.


.

Question: Is your Accord 4 cylinder or V6 Accord?

Canadian-ES-GT
04-18-2012, 10:38 PM
I don’t get it how people are saying the CX-5 is slow. Compared to the CR-V and the Rav4 (I4), it is just a few milliseconds slower to 100. I haven’t driven one so I can’t comment too much. Could it be that the CX-5 fells nicer to drive then the others making it feel like it needs more power to complement the better handing. (creating the full package)?

Lando
04-18-2012, 11:41 PM
I must admit that my first test drive in an AWD CX-5 left me a bit disappointed in the power. I was expecting amazing, formula-one like acceleration given the highly touted high compression ratio. I loved the interior and the overall size, but had been hoping for more juice. In my brief test, I fooled around with the auto/manual, but it just didn't satisfy like a manual. I left with the intention of checking out the Tiguan and the new Acura RDX. I had already checked out the KIA Sportage and the Forester, and they didn't make the cut.

A few weeks later, a 6 spd MT CX-5 showed up in the inventory at another dealer about 50 miles away, so I decided to check it out. I had owned an 1999 Acura CL that had 150 hp and the same 3200 lb curb weight as the CX, with a 5 spd manual and found the power more than adequate and the gas mileage outstanding. I was not disappointed. The manual version is a whole different animal. It just hits all the right notes for me.

inodes
04-18-2012, 11:48 PM
The manual version is a whole different animal. It just hits all the right notes for me.

I wish my wife could drive manual (she refuses to learn), and that it was offered on the GT here.
In Europe the MT is across the board.

A review in Germany compared various SUV's including the Tiguan and CX-5. The CX-5 (in MT + Diesel form) was the quickest 0-100 and had the best fuel economy.

The comparison was very narrowly given to the Tiguan. Although both CX-5 and Tiguan were considered to be well ahead of the rest of the pack.

I ended up going Diesel + auto because Petrol + auto didn't do it for me.
The Diesel *feels* a couple of seconds quicker to 100.

Lando
04-19-2012, 12:11 AM
I wish my wife could drive manual (she refuses to learn), and that it was offered on the GT here.

When I met my spousal unit 19 years ago, she was driving a Plymouth Voyager mini van. When she asked me if she could drive my Toyota T-100 pickup that had a 5 speed manual, I envisioned grinding gears and the smell of burning clutch. I was pleasantly surprised to find that she was a pro. Since then, we have owned several cars with manual transmissions, including her current ride, an Acura TSX 6spd manual. When she first test drove it, her comment was that it was almost as good a tranny as her 6 spd Miata. I am indeed blessed.

inodes
04-19-2012, 12:23 AM
When she first test drove it, her comment was that it was almost as good a tranny as her 6 spd Miata. I am indeed blessed.

I've taught many to drive manual. It's not difficult. I think my fastest lesson was no skill to perfect hill start in 40 minutes.
I prefer manual every time. But so far the CX-5 auto isn't as terrible as some autos.

CX-SV
04-19-2012, 01:15 AM
The auto tranny is very advanced and efficient, better than any tranny in this class of SUV. After seeing specs and before test driving I had expectations that were largely met upon driving. It was obvious to me the (racing) technology was mostly engineered for efficiency, not big horsepower, including direct injection, high compression, radical exhaust header, forged crankshaft.

In short a 4 cylinder engine is very different versus V6 and straight sixes in more expensive vehicles. And even the 4 bangers in BMW and Mercedes are less than perfect from a refinement standpoint.

I've owned too many manual cars to count, these days they don't have as much appeal to me, been there done that. And the new autos are getting better every year.

prhac
04-19-2012, 02:23 AM
A review in Germany compared various SUV's including the Tiguan and CX-5. The CX-5 (in MT + Diesel form) was the quickest 0-100 and had the best fuel economy.

The comparison was very narrowly given to the Tiguan. Although both CX-5 and Tiguan were considered to be well ahead of the rest of the pack.

I ended up going Diesel + auto because Petrol + auto didn't do it for me.
The Diesel *feels* a couple of seconds quicker to 100.

Do you still have the German site address, inodes? I know gearing makes a difference for the 0 - 100 km/h (or 0-62 mph here), but I would have thought the CX would be slightly ahead if the diesels were compared, as they have more power, torque and are lighter.

inodes
04-19-2012, 02:57 AM
Do you still have the German site address, inodes? I know gearing makes a difference for the 0 - 100 km/h (or 0-62 mph here), but I would have thought the CX would be slightly ahead if the diesels were compared, as they have more power, torque and are lighter.

I am fairly sure it was a video review on YouTube. It was all in German, so you might need a German translator.
But the specs, fuel economy and speed were all noted in the video.

I'll try to find the address tonight.

bigi1983
04-19-2012, 05:06 AM
I can help you here - http://www.autobild.de/artikel/tiguan-cx-5-evoque-xv-suvs-im-test-2868058.html

prhac
04-19-2012, 06:26 AM
I can help you here - http://www.autobild.de/artikel/tiguan-cx-5-evoque-xv-suvs-im-test-2868058.html
Thanks

All Autobild have done is just quote the manufacturers figures. They don't seem to have done their own performance testing.
They've got 0-100 (0 - 62 mph) as 10.2 s for the Tiguan and 9.4 s for the CX for the lower powered, AWD diesels - both values as stated by VW and Mazda

bigi1983
04-19-2012, 06:44 AM
You should know that Autobild is unofficially sponsored by VW so that in any comparison a VW product wins. The fact that the CX5 ends equal to the Tiguan says a lot about the car:) I ordered mine one day after I read the review in Autobild. In Germany however one has to wait for a new car between 3 and 12 months.I am getting mine sometime in June. Is it the same in the UK?

prhac
04-19-2012, 07:53 AM
You should know that Autobild is unofficially sponsored by VW so that in any comparison a VW product wins. The fact that the CX5 ends equal to the Tiguan says a lot about the car:) I ordered mine one day after I read the review in Autobild. In Germany however one has to wait for a new car between 3 and 12 months.I am getting mine sometime in June. Is it the same in the UK?
I agree with what you've said.
I'm getting my CX in mid June. For a Tiguan there is a longer waiting time.

When the comparison reviews mention the Tiguan's rear seats can slide to increase the boot/trunk volume (but only to the CX's size) they don't say that there is then a large gap between the seat backs and the boot floor... into which things fall and are then difficult to get out! The normal boot size, when the rear seats are back for leg room, is a bit too small.

hooked
04-19-2012, 08:19 AM
When I met my spousal unit 19 years ago, she was driving a Plymouth Voyager mini van. When she asked me if she could drive my Toyota T-100 pickup that had a 5 speed manual, I envisioned grinding gears and the smell of burning clutch. I was pleasantly surprised to find that she was a pro. Since then, we have owned several cars with manual transmissions, including her current ride, an Acura TSX 6spd manual. When she first test drove it, her comment was that it was almost as good a tranny as her 6 spd Miata. I am indeed blessed.

She sounds like a keeper! My wife (then girlfriend) learned how to drive stick when she purchased a '73 VW Beetle in college. I learned in a Datsun F10 while driving from Miami to Philadelphia with my roommate to go to college. Knowing how to drive stick came in handy when I had an assignment in France and most of the rental cars were manual. I will always try to have one of our cars as a manual. The challenge will be to teach my kids when they are ready. They don't seem too interested.

Back on topic, sort of, I read that Mazda used the Though as their reference design when creating the CX-5, so it's no wonder that they are being grouped together by the auto mags.

inodes
04-19-2012, 09:47 AM
You should know that Autobild is unofficially sponsored by VW so that in any comparison a VW product wins.
Quite likely. They have however given many of their long term quality awards to Mazda vehicles, so it's credit where credit is due.
I was torn between the Tiguan and the CX-5 at first. But being in Australia, with Japan so close - we buy Japanese cars in a similar way to British buying German cars.

My wife is Japanese, so I won't argue. But my boss is German, and he owns a a Japanese built car as well.
How can I argue?

Quote from an Australian magazine off the shelf here regarding CX-5:
"It's made in Japan, so build, fit and finish quality are superb. Nothin will ever, ever go wrong with the CX-5, and resale values will be rock solid"
Mind you, they were review the petrol version (because Diesels were not available at launch). And they had this to say...

Mazda claims it's like a Cheetah (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=goJu6S8-REs). We've seen faster Biggest Loser contestants. Either way, the CX-5 won't be breaking land-speed records any time soon...

The cheetah is the fastest land animal in the world. The CX-5 I drove at launch with Mazda's new SKYACTIV 2.0-litre petrol engine, is one of the slowest SUV's in the world, so perhaps they need a more fitting moggie. Maybe a dead one...

Australian CX-5 advertisement explaining Cheetah comment:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=goJu6S8-REs

Ouch!!

But positively...

The CX-5's a short, tall box, so you don't fling it into a corner like a real car, but it's still one of the best handlers in the class.
No problems with the ride, though. It's more comfortable and quieter than any BMW will ever be. (Obviously they mean the BMW SUV's - which aren't made in Germany anyway)

ManMachine
04-19-2012, 01:50 PM
X1 is made in Germany. Will be offered in the U.S. soon, but automatic only.

CX-SV
04-19-2012, 02:49 PM
X1 is selling well worldwide.

For the US market it X1 will be a little small even compared to CX-5 (length 175.4", width 70.8", height 60.8"), more tall wagon than SUV. But this will allow BMW to sell something at a very attractive price point.

ManMachine
04-19-2012, 03:36 PM
Based X1 with RWD is priced reasonably; if they actually offer a 6MT, that would be something worth getting, considering the amount of power from the turbo 4.

It would be interesting to see if Mazda could develop a gas turbo version of the Skyactiv - more power and still reasonably efficient. Also, I think the next generation Mazda 3 (as well as MazdaSpeed3) would also be something to watch for - fully implemented Skyactiv in an updated (aka losing that big grin design change) lower smaller lighter vehicle.

CX-SV
04-19-2012, 03:44 PM
It would be interesting to see a 2.0L turbo gasser from Mazda.

btw - 2013 Ford Escape EPA numbers are just out for the 2.0L Ecoboost/turbo (well over 200 hp, similar output to BMW's turbo 4):
21 city / 28 highway / 24 combined

xwedge
04-19-2012, 06:56 PM
It would be interesting to see a 2.0L turbo gasser from Mazda.

btw - 2013 Ford Escape EPA numbers are just out for the 2.0L Ecoboost/turbo (well over 200 hp, similar output to BMW's turbo 4):
21 city / 28 highway / 24 combined

do you have the link to the article?

CX-SV
04-19-2012, 07:47 PM
No article, just google EPA gas mileage and it takes you to website.

Select model year, make, model of vehicle in question and bingo. For comparison purposes
, this is useful.

I'm still trying to find EPA estimates for 1.6Lturbo, but not yet out.

smithsm1984
04-19-2012, 08:03 PM
No article, just google EPA gas mileage and it takes you to website.

Select model year, make, model of vehicle in question and bingo. For comparison purposes
, this is useful.

I'm still trying to find EPA estimates for 1.6Lturbo, but not yet out.

The Edmund's Inside Line first drive (http://www.insideline.com/ford/escape/2013/2013-ford-escape-se-1-6-ecoboost-first-drive.html) is saying an estimated 23/33 for the Escape 1.6 EcoBoost.

Not as good as I was expecting. I guess the FWD 6-speed will remain the champ for awhile since there are no other major redesigns coming out this year (AFAIK).

CX-SV
04-19-2012, 08:11 PM
Yes, I saw that on Edmunds (front wheel drive test car), but nothing is listed on EPA website so far for the 1.6L turbo.

Looking for EPA's stats on AWD 1.6L turbo (automatic only available of course), which will be the highest volume engine.