Wash. Post's Warren Brown bashes the 5!

S

schokie

Member
From his Real Wheels Discussion on Jan 25th:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/18/DI2008011802070.html

Driver's Seat, Md.: Hi -- love your columns, and I read your minivan review with great interest. We're in need of a new car but don't need to herd huge numbers, so we're looking at the Mazda5 (now dubbed a "microvan"). Item of concern: lack of government crash tests, reflecting either poor sales or no complaints about its safety. Otherwise, it seems like a pretty good vehicle. Your thoughts, or should we be looking for something else?

Warren Brown: Look at something else for reasons that have nothing to do with intrinsic vehicle quality or safety.

The trouble with the Mazda5, despite Mazda's marketing boasts to the contrary, is that the Mazda5 lacks that inherent thing that makes a Mazda a Mazda. It somehow came off the computer assisted design screen and out of the factory into the market without a single ounce of Zoom-Zoom. In short, it's boring, uninteresting, woefully uninspired--which means, I suppose, that Mazda will not use these quotes in an advertisement.

But, perhaps, the company will use these:

Buy the Mazda CX7. It's small enough to suit your psyche and big enough to suit your needs. It's excellently styled, has ample utility, and it's fun to drive. But most of all, it has Zoom-Zoom and lots of it.

Caveat: The CX7 drives and feels like a sports car. Drivers love it. But some soft-bottomed passengers don't.

I disagree with his assessment and thought he didn't answer the question. Your thoughts/comments?
 
I usually like his radio show and WaPo columns, but he is completely wrong about the Mazda5.

Mazda's marketing boasts to the contrary
Click to expand...
I have NEVER seen a Mazda5-specific commercial on TV or radio or a printed advert in the US.

In short, it's boring, uninteresting, woefully uninspired
Click to expand...
He obviously hasn't driven the 5-spd base Sport. I love driving my 5. It has all the "zoom zoom" I could ever want in a small van.
 
Last edited:
  • LOL, find me another similar people mover that has Manual Transmission and drives like a car.
  • Marketing, what marketing?
  • The CX-7, It is a nice car, no doubt, but it is an SUV, since when an SUV is fun to drive?? I have rented many over the years and they are everything except fun to drive. What is next? A Hummer will race in Indianapolis? THAT will be fun ;)

Don't know the guy, he might have car experience, but I guess he has not driven a Mazda5 and his comments are based on minivan stereotypes. My 2 pesos...
 
I wonder what he has to say about the Kia Rondo......Everyone is entitled to his/her opinion......Anyway, this is my response to his opinion......hehehehe....(fu)
 
Some people think that all it takes for a Mazda to be a quality car is how much Zoom-Zoom it has. The only negative to the 5 is it’s choice to have ‘adequate’ power, rather than getting low 20 mpg’s. It would be different if someone bashed the Porsche Cayenne because it wasn’t sports-car enough, because Porsche is inherently a sports-car manufacturer. However, Mazda is not.

Find me another minivan that offers 5MT and easily tops 30mpg under $20k, then we’ll talk. I couldn’t exactly afford (nor want) to throw down $25k for a CX-7. I guess he thinks that all people care about is high-performance vehicles. When shopping for a family hauler, performance wasn’t at the top of my list, buddy. A one-track, close minded, individual makes for a bad reviewer. This guy’s reviewing and advice-giving skills have more flaws than the 5.
 
Well, I sent this email to Warren Brown:

Warren:

I thought your recent advice about the Mazda 5 in your 1/25/08 Real Wheels discussion was somewhat off base and did not address the reader's question. If you can, please forward this information to her.

The Mazda5 has done well in crash tests overseas.
EuroNCAP:
http://www.euroncap.com/tests/mazda_5_2005/241.aspx

JNCAP: Called the Premacy in Japan http://www.nasva.go.jp/mamoru/english/2006/type/16_premacy.html

Furthermore, you suggest she would be better off with a CX-7. With that suggestion, I would also tell her that it costs around $5k more, only seats 5, uses recommended premium fuel and will get lower fuel mileage than a 5.

Different strokes for different folks. Thanks for listening to my opinion.

We'll see if I get any response.
 
Bizzare, I searched Warren Brown's reviews, and in a separate dedicated 2006 Mazda5 review, he had mostly good to say about it...



"The front-wheel-drive Mazda5 is a brilliant, space-efficient concept."

"The Mazda5 also has moxie -- the guts to move nimbly and quickly through urban traffic, and the ability to steal your heart in the process. That does not mean it will satisfy racetrack lusts. It is a minivan, after all."

"But there is enough oomph in the Mazda5's 2.3-liter, four-cylinder, 157-horsepower engine to get you to the church and everywhere else on time. And because that engine is fuel-efficient, especially when combined with the standard five-speed manual transmission, you should have enough money left to enjoy yourself when you arrive."

"Ride, acceleration and handling: Exceptionally nimble and agile in city traffic. Comfortable ride. Good acceleration, meaning that it changes lanes competently in high-speed traffic."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/22/AR2005072201412.html

Snug Minivan Built for City Agility
2006 Mazda5 Touring minivan

By Warren Brown
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, July 24, 2005; Page G01

Small has a chance to make it big in America. Consider the 2006 Mazda5, a minivan that is "mini" in the truest sense of the word.

It is built for the city.

It fits neatly into tight spaces. It presents no visual obstruction to other drivers. But it can carry six passengers and judicious amounts of their stuff.

The Mazda5 also fits into tight pocketbooks, starting below $20,000. But for families with small children, it offers as much utility as the Mercedes-Benz R350, a minivan that has a base price of $48,000.

That could be seen as an apples-and-oranges comparison. The Mazda5 is for the Striving Class. The Mercedes-Benz R-Class is unmistakably for the rich. But these two new-generation minivans are remarkably similar in function and design.

The R-Class, reviewed in this column July 17, also seats six. But it is made for adults who have already reared children, as opposed to those who are still rearing them. Thus, the R-Class has comfortable seating for six adult bodies. The Mazda5 has comfortable seating for four adults -- two up front and two in the middle -- and two small children in the rear.

I am using the term "minivan" because its euphemistic alternatives -- "touring" and "tourer," preferred by fashion-conscious automotive marketers -- make no sense. The official name for this week's vehicle, for example, is "Mazda5 Touring." The Mercedes-Benz R350 and its sibling R500 have been festooned with the moniker "Grand Sport Tourer."

I don't know what a "tourer" is. Here's betting that the buying public is equally befuddled. But I do know a minivan when I see one, and the tubular, high-ceilinged Mazda5 and R-Class -- as well as the Chrysler Pacifica -- are new-generation minivans.

Their newness is in their approach to answering an old question: How do you give sex appeal to what essentially is a utilitarian people hauler?

In the 1990s, with consumers growing weary of unstylish traditional minivans, car companies responded by rolling out sport-utility vehicles. Those models were big, bossy, bodacious. They were assertive. SUVs and other truck-based vehicles now have become so popular that their sales account for nearly 50 percent of the U.S. automotive market.

But SUVs have shortcomings. Larger models swallow fuel and space. Some models that are agile off-road are relatively clumsy on the highway. SUVs have been portrayed as environmental villains, and their owners have been maligned as selfish gluttons. SUV ownership, in that context, is not for the fainthearted.

Many consumers want something else -- something that can carry people and baggage without bearing a load of social opprobrium. Practically, they need minivans and station wagons. But psychically, they want something with more panache than traditional minivans and wagons can offer.

The Mazda5, R-Class and Chrysler Pacifica -- and others, such as the Nissan Murano and Subaru B9 Tribeca -- are the results of that internal consumer conflict. They are all minivans masquerading as SUV equivalents absent SUV problems. But, as shown by the Mazda5, there is much competence in that pretense.

The front-wheel-drive Mazda5 is a brilliant, space-efficient concept. It has no wasted sheet metal. That means it is the right size on the outside with enough space on the inside to do what a minivan is supposed to do -- carry lots of people and things. It has the same business-class three-row seating found in the R-Class and the Pacifica, and it offers many of the amenities, often as options, sold in those more expensive vehicles.

The Mazda5 also has moxie -- the guts to move nimbly and quickly through urban traffic, and the ability to steal your heart in the process. That does not mean it will satisfy racetrack lusts. It is a minivan, after all.

But there is enough oomph in the Mazda5's 2.3-liter, four-cylinder, 157-horsepower engine to get you to the church and everywhere else on time. And because that engine is fuel-efficient, especially when combined with the standard five-speed manual transmission, you should have enough money left to enjoy yourself when you arrive.

- - - - - - - - - -


2006 Mazda5 Touring minivan (Mazda)

Nuts & Bolts
2006 Mazda5

Downside: The rear shoulder belts in the Mazda5 need better anchoring and/or positioning. They bang against the interior wall when they are not in use. Wrapping them around the rear seat headrests -- an inelegant fix -- ends the noise.

Ride, acceleration and handling: Exceptionally nimble and agile in city traffic. Comfortable ride. Good acceleration, meaning that it changes lanes competently in high-speed traffic.

Head-turning quotient: Cosmopolitan, sophisticated. This one looks as though it belongs in traffic in Paris, Rome or Washington.

Body style/layout: The Mazda5 is a compact front-wheel-drive minivan expressly designed for urban areas. It has four doors and a rear hatch.

Engine/transmission: The standard 2.3-liter, inline four-cylinder engine develops 157 horsepower at 6,500 revolutions per minute and 148 foot-pounds of torque at 4,500 rpm. The engine is linked to a standard five-speed manual transmission. A four-speed automatic is optional.

Cargo and fuel capacities: The Mazda5 has seating for six people -- four adults in the first and second rows, and two children in the rear. Total cargo capacity is 44.4 cubic feet. Maximum payload, the weight of what can be carried onboard, is 1,239 pounds. Fuel capacity is 15.9 gallons of recommended regular unleaded gasoline.

Mileage: I averaged 25 miles per gallon in highway driving.

Safety: Front, rear and third-row head protection air bags; side air bags; four-wheel anti-lock brakes.

Price: Base price on the tested 2006 Mazda5 Touring minivan is $18,950. Dealer's invoice price on the base model is $17,717. Price as tested is $22,460, including $2,950 in options (including navigation) and a $560 destination charge. Dealer's price with options and charges is $20,847. Prices sourced from Mazda, Edmunds.com, and Cars.com, a Washington Post affiliate.

Purse-strings note: The Mazda5 is a solid family vehicle buy.
Click to expand...
 
Hmm. Interesting.

Maybe he has non-paid interns doing the driving, evaluation and writeup?
 
I seriously think the Mazda5 is damn hot. I saw one rolling on the highway the other day and the rims just like so well with the body...That would def be my family car if I needed one!
 
coolmazda5 said:
  • LOL, find me another similar people mover that has Manual Transmission and drives like a car.
  • Marketing, what marketing?
  • The CX-7, It is a nice car, no doubt, but it is an SUV, since when an SUV is fun to drive?? I have rented many over the years and they are everything except fun to drive. What is next? A Hummer will race in Indianapolis? THAT will be fun ;)

Don't know the guy, he might have car experience, but I guess he has not driven a Mazda5 and his comments are based on minivan stereotypes. My 2 pesos...
Click to expand...

Have you ever driven the CX-7? It's sportier, sorry.

Don't bash the CX-7 because the 5 got bashed and the CX-7 got praise in return.
 
CX-7's=LOVE said:
Have you ever driven the CX-7? It's sportier, sorry.

Don't bash the CX-7 because the 5 got bashed and the CX-7 got praise in return.
Click to expand...

Hey, no one's bashing the CX-7, it's just that the CX-7 and Mazda5 are two totally different cars intended for two totally different customers. Therefore for any journalist to say that the CX-7 better than the Mazda5 (or vice-versa) shows that they don't quite get the intent of these vehicles.
 
antlind said:
Hey, no one's bashing the CX-7, it's just that the CX-7 and Mazda5 are two totally different cars intended for two totally different customers. Therefore for any journalist to say that the CX-7 better than the Mazda5 (or vice-versa) shows that they don't quite get the intent of these vehicles.
Click to expand...


"since when is an SUV fun to drive"

Is bashing the CX-7 because it is, more so than the 5.
It goes against all of what the CX-7 is about, sports car feel, so it is bashing.

I hear what you're saying about them not being in the same class, but I'm talking about something different.

Sporty only speaks one language, so it doesn't even apply to that aspect, now hauling, carrying people, I see what you're talking about.
 
CX-7's=LOVE said:
Have you ever driven the CX-7? It's sportier, sorry.

Don't bash the CX-7 because the 5 got bashed and the CX-7 got praise in return.
Click to expand...
Throw the 2.3L DISI in a 5MT Mazda5, then we'll talk ;)

Kidding aside, the reason us 5 owners got our feathers ruffled is because the person was asking about the Mazda5 and it basically got kicked to the curb for a completely different type of vehicle, the CX-7. That's automatically going to bias us in favor of "our own" and against the "CX-7 intruder".

Personally, I'd love to get my hands on a CX-7 and would consider it if I had another $5k to bring to the table. But I, and no doubt others, didn't have that money, and can't help but defend our purchase.

One final point is that just because it doesn't have a boosted engine, that doesn't necessarily make the 5 boring and un-sporty. It's nimble and hugs corners like a dream. And Tiptronic automatic shifting is a far cry from the experience of clutching a 5MT. I've heard a quote before that goes... "It's more fun to drive a slow car fast, than it is to drive a fast car slow." There's no clear cut definition of sporty.
 
Last edited:
I think Warren may have forgotten his apparently positive experience with the5 when he dispensed his advice about the CX-7. While I don't doubt that the CX-7 is a great crossover (SUV with all the nasty connotation removed) It didn't and doesn't suit my needs. The 5 doe's that is why I bought one. I have read very positive reviews of the CX-7 in many publications and that may be why Mr. Brown so highly recommends it, it stood out in his mind. As happy as we all are with our 5s a minivan just doesn't stand out in the memory of someone whose job it is to drive for fun. I still love the hell out of mine though, and I wonder what spurred him to call it "boring" which is one thing the 5 isn't, even if you do drive for fun for a living.
 
CX-7's=LOVE said:
Have you ever driven the CX-7? It's sportier, sorry.
Click to expand...

Yes, I test drove one just for the heck of it when I was getting my 08 Mazda5 (my 2nd Mazda5). First turn-off, it is auto tranny, 2nd turn-off, it is an SUV. It looks much better than any other SUV (call it "sportier" if you want), but it is SUV driving at the end (large, tall, bumpy on backroads, interior space is not used very efficiently).

CX-7's=LOVE said:
Don't bash the CX-7 because the 5 got bashed and the CX-7 got praise in return.
Click to expand...

LOL, if saying that the CX-7 "it is a nice car, no doubt, but it is an SUV, since when an SUV is fun to drive??" is bashing, be my guest, if you track my posts I have praised the CX-7 in the past, but the last time I checked it was still an SUV (same as the CX-9). Please note that having turbo is not the only consideration for a fun-driving car, it is the handling as well. Yeah, and I'm not saying that I'm driving a sports car, but from there to say there is no Zoom-Zoom on the Mazda5, wroooong.
 
Interesting.
I read WB's editorial and was about to post, but then I read all the posts after the first and was caught off-guard.
I guess I should have looked to see what sub-forum I was in!

While his assessment is a bit harsh, it is pretty accurate.

Well, don't feel bad. You should read what he said about the Corvette a few years back!
 
CX-7's=LOVE said:
Have you ever driven the CX-7? It's sportier, sorry.

Don't bash the CX-7 because the 5 got bashed and the CX-7 got praise in return.
Click to expand...

i could care less personally. my 5 Grand Touring was cheaper, more fuel efficient, holds more passengers, has far more cargo room and was much nicer appointed than even the bottom of the barrel CX-7 with no options. opinions aside, this is pretty much fact.
 
Captain KRM P5 said:
i could care less personally. my 5 Grand Touring was cheaper, more fuel efficient, holds more passengers, has far more cargo room and was much nicer appointed than even the bottom of the barrel CX-7 with no options. opinions aside, this is pretty much fact.
Click to expand...

More value.
It holds one more person, In a smallish third row.
It does hold more passengers, but with a 4cyl with less than 160HP? I'd be afraid to go up hills with more than me and passenger in the car.

It has a considerably cheaper interior compared to the stripper CX-7, way less power, and it's down 1 or 2 gears depending on what year. It's also missing a available AWD, ground clearance, it's not dynamically the same, it's down on cargo space compared to the CX-7(with the second row folded down the CX-7 offers 58 cubic feet of space, the 5 has 44 cubes)
I could go on why the CX-7 is better, even when compared to a stripper.
 
coolmazda5 said:
Yes, I test drove one just for the heck of it when I was getting my 08 Mazda5 (my 2nd Mazda5). First turn-off, it is auto tranny, 2nd turn-off, it is an SUV. It looks much better than any other SUV (call it "sportier" if you want), but it is SUV driving at the end (large, tall, bumpy on backroads, interior space is not used very efficiently).



LOL, if saying that the CX-7 "it is a nice car, no doubt, but it is an SUV, since when an SUV is fun to drive??" is bashing, be my guest, if you track my posts I have praised the CX-7 in the past, but the last time I checked it was still an SUV (same as the CX-9). Please note that having turbo is not the only consideration for a fun-driving car, it is the handling as well. Yeah, and I'm not saying that I'm driving a sports car, but from there to say there is no Zoom-Zoom on the Mazda5, wroooong.
Click to expand...

Ok, that doesn't retract what you said, the CX-7 is sportier, and to say "since when is an SUV fun to drive" GOES against what the CX-7 is all about, I've said that before, it DOES handles better, and offers far more power for a more fun to drive experience.
There isn't really much zoom zoom for the 5, the MT option is great, but it needs way more power.
0-60 in 10 seconds is boring and lacks Zoom Zoom.
The CX-7 offers more cargo area, anyway, and don't forget the dimensions are nearly the SAME, so it's not any much more larger, or taller, nor is the space inefficiently used, it offers more space with nearly the same dimensions. It even offers more leg room in the second row.

The only thing the CX-7 lacks compared to the 5 is sliding doors, and a third row.

The CX-7 IS better in many ways, face it.
 
MZ5 and CX-7 are totally different kind of vehicle. How can people put them together and see which one is better.????
MZ5 may vs Element, Xb or XL7
CX-7 may vs Escape, Highlander or CRV
This is how I look at price, size and the type of the vehicle.
 
Please log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
    • Like
Stress tested the Mazda5
Replies
0
Views
2K
MazdaVelo
M
GTXT23
Toyota Master Tech Recommends CX-5 Turbo!
Replies
10
Views
1K
N7turbo
N7turbo
I
    • Like
    • Wow
Mazda5 parts sharing with Volvos and other European cars
Replies
9
Views
5K
Navigator
N

Latest posts

Back