Road Trip 2014

M

metalfab

Member
:
2014 Ford Edge AWD LTD
Not so much of a road trip this year as we only have 1 destination. We woke up on Sat morning, drove 670KM and setup camp. With an absolutely packed cargo area, 2 kids bikes on the Thule the CX-5 did pretty well.

However I absolutely know the Mazda 5 has a better interior for arranging cargo and carrying more. When I pre-packed before leaving we had to leave behind 4 folding chairs and the small BBQ, last year we had no issues. Also, the CX-5 is not as responsive in passing or going up mountains. It doesn't know when to shift, luckily I do and without the semi-manual option it would be painful.

I might consider building a cargo tray for the rear hitch that can fold up and also accommodate the Thule bike rack.

We are here for a full week, with little day trips along the way. Great weather so far and a fantastic camp site. Last day will be another long drive so maybe my opinion will be confirmed more or hopefully changed.
 
Just a quick note before work; Got back from a 1600KM camping trip last night, loved the trip but the CX-5 disappointed. It lags on climbs/passing especially in auto mode. This new tranny is dumb, it just doesn't know when to shift. As I mentioned the Mazda 5 has better shifting, handling and better interior space for cargo.
 
If you push the throttle half way, it won't downshift.
If you snap the throttle half way, it will downshift.
Its designed this way to save gas, but give you the option to zoom zoom.
Newer cars try to stay in high gear to save gas.
My CX-5 gets same avg mpg as my old 2007 Civic. Its worth it!
What was your MPG?
 
Tried that, even before the trip and its still has lag. Much better results when I shift, which I don't mind doing.

I was considering a teardrop trailer but not after this trip. The CX-5 with all seats occupied and packed cargo area lag enough already. Imagine a 1100lbs trailer including the above. Not in BC with the mountain roads we have.
 
I towed a trailer close to the 2000lbs limit 1400 miles and the CX-5 never strained at all, but there were no mountains. With four people, lots of cargo, a trailer, and going up mountains, that would be worst case scenario you could throw at it. With half your weight capacity inside the CX-5, I'm sure it would handle well, but acceleration would be at its worst. Towing at maximum capacity, up a mountain, would strain any vehicle.
 
On a rest point at the top of a mountain view another CX-5 owner happened to be there. She had a 14 GT as well and commented that is was sluggish on the mountains. It was just her and some luggage. We were packed full!

To go anywhere from here means mountains. The lightest teardrop model camper that has the room we need is 1100lbs. Not only would it be straining the engine/tranny but the brakes would be cooked from the downhill portions. If towing is going to happen I think a Tacoma SR5 is going to be seriously looked at sooner than later. It can tow 6500lbs so a more realistic camper can be purchased. Still all in thought mode right now.
 
Last edited:
CC58 said:
If you push the throttle half way, it won't downshift.
If you snap the throttle half way, it will downshift.
Its designed this way to save gas, but give you the option to zoom zoom.
Newer cars try to stay in high gear to save gas.
My CX-5 gets same avg mpg as my old 2007 Civic. Its worth it!
What was your MPG?
Click to expand...

There is a plus side to this story. I just gathered the 3 gas receipts from the trip. We traveled 1595KM and used about 120 liters, this equals 7.5L per 100KM, excellent considering my avg is 9.3L/100KM in the city.
 
Last edited:
metalfab said:
There is a plus side to this story. I just gathered the 3 gas receipts from the trip. We traveled 1595KM and used about 120 liters, this equals 7.5L per 100KM, excellent considering my avg is 9.3L/100KM in the city.
Click to expand...

That comes out to 31.3mpg with four passengers and luggage on mountain roads. That is pretty amazing.
 
CC58 said:
That comes out to 31.3mpg with four passengers and luggage on mountain roads. That is pretty amazing.
Click to expand...

That is pretty amazing!!! I know the CX-5 will never match the performance of my G35x (306HP) but with fuel mileage like that for what it can haul and do that is an awesome compromise.
 
I know what you mean because I own both a 2012 Mazda5 Sport and a 2014 CX5 Touring. I Just went 2000 miles on a trip with two kids, wife, and loaded with cargo to North Myrtle Beach SC. I got a low of 27.9 mpg and a high of 31.66 mpg with the 5. It definitely packs more than my CX5 and almost matches the highway mileage too.
 
V8toilet said:
I know what you mean because I own both a 2012 Mazda5 Sport and a 2014 CX5 Touring. I Just went 2000 miles on a trip with two kids, wife, and loaded with cargo to North Myrtle Beach SC. I got a low of 27.9 mpg and a high of 31.66 mpg with the 5. It definitely packs more than my CX5 and almost matches the highway mileage too.
Click to expand...

Does the Mazda 5 have similar driving dynamics to the CX-5? I really need AWD so had never considered the 5.
 
It has better driving dynamics compared to my CX5. It handles better and rides better than the CX5. This is I think because it has a lower center of gravity. The steering gives a little more feedback but is lighter than the CX5 so I would say steering is a tie. I really like to toss the 5 into corners and it feels like it leans a little less than the CX5. The CX5 could probably hang with the 5 in the turns but the 5 just feels more like a sports car of the two doing it. The older previous generation 2.5 liter engine feels more peppy and definitely pulls well especially from 0 to 40 mph unloaded but the CX5 is faster in an instrumented test with my G-tech. The CX5 though I feel has the better transmission.
 
V8toilet said:
It has better driving dynamics compared to my CX5. It handles better and rides better than the CX5. This is I think because it has a lower center of gravity. The steering gives a little more feedback but is lighter than the CX5 so I would say steering is a tie. I really like to toss the 5 into corners and it feels like it leans a little less than the CX5. The CX5 could probably hang with the 5 in the turns but the 5 just feels more like a sports car of the two doing it. The older previous generation 2.5 liter engine feels more peppy and definitely pulls well especially from 0 to 40 mph unloaded but the CX5 is faster in an instrumented test with my G-tech. The CX5 though I feel has the better transmission.
Click to expand...

Totally agree.
 
Interesting to hear .. that sounds impressive because I find the CX-5 pretty good. I'll have to drive my parent's '10 Mazda 3 with 2.5L. It does seem to pull fairly good but mileage lacks from what my dad has told me.
 
When I went to the dealership, on paper and in person the CX-5 looked to have more room than the 5. Its hard to vision without actually having gear you pack with you at the dealership ;-) I trusted the numbers and went with the CX-5. Hindsight is 20/20, if I could I'd pick the 5 again in a heartbeat. Minus out the audio touch screen/Bluetooth/GPS unit, the AWD, and all the other tech stuff and I'd be just as happy.
 
Last edited:
V8toilet said:
It has better driving dynamics compared to my CX5. It handles better and rides better than the CX5. This is I think because it has a lower center of gravity. The steering gives a little more feedback but is lighter than the CX5 so I would say steering is a tie. I really like to toss the 5 into corners and it feels like it leans a little less than the CX5. The CX5 could probably hang with the 5 in the turns but the 5 just feels more like a sports car of the two doing it. The older previous generation 2.5 liter engine feels more peppy and definitely pulls well especially from 0 to 40 mph unloaded but the CX5 is faster in an instrumented test with my G-tech. The CX5 though I feel has the better transmission.
Click to expand...

The Mazda 5 is long over due to get the skyactiv 2.5L engine. It has old tech 2.5L that makes 156hp with 22/28mpg. When it gets skyactiv it will have 185hp with 25/32mpg. Probably even better mpg since its more streamlined than CX-5. IMO, I would have bought the Mazda 5 instead of the CX-5 if it had the skyactiv engine. Maybe next year?
 
Newer isn't always better. Fact is the 5's 2.5L feels more responsive that the CX-5's 2.5L even with the 26HP difference.
 
The older 2.5 has better NVH than the Skyactiv motor especially because of the DI. You know the old saying horsepower sells cars and torque moves them. Of course gearing also has a lot to do with it but the 5's older 2.5 makes a lot of usable low end torque that makes it very responsive in every day driving. When I owned my CX5 sport 2.0 with 155 horsepower it felt slow compared to my 2012 Mazda 5 and I swore the 5 was faster. When I ran them both on the G-tech I got 0-60 mph in 8.9 seconds with the 5 and 0-60 mph in 8.44 seconds with the tiny 2.0 Skyactiv. In everyday driving though the older 157 HP 2.5 just felt more responsive and overall more powerful.

In the end it's actually usable power, mainly torque, that matters and not the peak horsepower when it comes to daily drivers. If you want to win drag races at the strip than yeah horsepower wins but usable lower end torque is what counts in a daily driver. The older 2.5 is a quiet relatively torquey engine compared to its Skyactiv siblings.
 
I phoned my Mazda dealership today regarding the NB1 unit and also made a comment on the CX-5 performance and cargo as compared to the 5. I couldn't believe the answer: "The CX-5 is not as good in handling or performance compared to the 5." "Mazda is moving away from the "Zoom-zoom" and making more efficient vehicles." What?!
 
Please log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
    • Like
  • Question
Bike inside CX-5?
Replies
5
Views
438
rochrunner
R
1
    • Like
2023 CX-5 engine break-in trip
Replies
2
Views
2K
yrwei52
yrwei52
A
    • Wow
Which trim level for new CX-5?
2 3
Replies
44
Views
4K
N7turbo
N7turbo

Latest posts

Back