Simpson by soft-roader

A little old, but great story anyway, realistically testing the off-road capability of the CX-5 and CX-3. I love how they taped fly nets over the lower intake to filter out the sands.

http://www.motoring.com.au/simpson-by-soft-roader-102950/

CX-5 is a horrible off-road choice. Yes it can be done, but you can also tow a boat with a Corvette, too. Neither are smart, and both usually end with damage. It's very good for gravel roads or roads with loose sand from motor vehicle accident clean-up, and that's it as far as "offroad" goes.

I don't know John,,,, I did some pretty good off-roading on my last trip to S.D.-Wyoming! All with stock tires and suspension! I was quite surprised myself! My next trip down by you and I'm going to try out that off road park just south of Eureka..

davesxx01 said:

I don't know John,,,, I did some pretty good off-roading on my last trip to S.D.-Wyoming! All with stock tires and suspension! I was quite surprised myself! My next trip down by you and I'm going to try out that off road park just south of Eureka..

Click to expand...

I've taken family cars and sports cars through stuff that wrecked my CX-5. I remain completely unimpressed with its ability to leave well-maintained roads. I'd highly recommend not going offroad in it, but it's your money. Last time I took it through 10" of water, it caused $2700 in damage. Many a time I have been in a car, and driven a car, through that and more, with no issues. The CX-5 simply is not a very durable offroader when it comes to water. I would put it as slightly better than a Corvette, equal to my WS.6, and worse than my P71 cop car.

As to dry offroading, it is decent if you can keep from smashing its snout in. Departure angle is okay, but approach angle is very very touchy with this vehicle. Treat it like a Corvette around nasty speed-bumps and sloped drive-ways. You need to approach EVERYTHING from an angle, or you will wreck the front end. Even little things that don't look bad from the driver's seat are more than enough.

Well, the $2700 damage has been warned in the user manual, just search for "submerged" :-D I guess we learned the lesson from your experience: oil should be replaced immediately if you have just a slight hint of crossing water, better be safe than sorry. So, thanks for sharing!

Joking aside, I think most of us love our delicate CX-5 baby enough to not try off-roading it recklessly, but the Simpson story at least tells us what it's capable of and what to avoid, good to know in case of emergency or zombie apocalypse (when you would care more about your life instead of the car).

Hopefully Motoring AU will share the post-inspection report from Mazda on internal damages from the trip.

sillyxone said:

Well, the $2700 damage has been warned in the user manual, just search for "submerged" :-D I guess we learned the lesson from your experience: oil should be replaced immediately if you have just a slight hint of crossing water, better be safe than sorry. So, thanks for sharing!

I just find it kindof lame that I have taken CARS through worse. No problems. No oil changes needed. Done it plenty.

Joking aside, I think most of us love our delicate CX-5 baby enough to not try off-roading it recklessly, but the Simpson story at least tells us what it's capable of and what to avoid, good to know in case of emergency or zombie apocalypse (when you would care more about your life instead of the car).

Hopefully Motoring AU will share the post-inspection report from Mazda on internal damages from the trip.

Click to expand...

I honestly think if you are worried about zombies, that a Jeep in CJ guise would be a good idea. Cheap, stout, simple. The CX-5 is a delicate and complex snowflake compared to actual offroad vehicles. I get that it's fun, but it can get expensive fast, and doing things that don't even concern you until you hear a crunch, in the CX-5.

I typically don't trust published tests much, anymore, unless it's "hard numbers" type stuff. I've seen too many industry folks talk gear up that they wouldn't dare use when all the marbles are in the fight, and then you have to look at sponsorship, ego, intellectual property, industry relationships, etc. Of course, that's the firearm world, but I bet cars/SUV's are no different at all.

For example, I just read an article in a magazine where it stated that C158 was the BEST material for an M4 bolt, and so and so company used it, and then a few pages over, another company's story was published, and 9310 was listed as the BEST material, and they used it, lol! Then I flipped back and saw that the other author had said the company's rifle shot something like a 5-shot 1/2" group at 100 yards, and I know for FACT that the barrel is not capable of that on ANY sort of consistent basis. Have I done it? Yeah. Could I do it again? Sure....just give me a heap of ammo, and all day, and then pick 1-2 out of the 100+ groups I had shot...

I guess what I'm saying is, I don't trust reviews, typically, unless they offer tangible things "The 0-60 was..." "The ground clearance and approach angles are..." "The MPG observed doing this, this, and this driving, was..."