Test Driving this weekend

My wife and I are looking to buy a new car as we have a 7 month old son now and need something bigger than the current car. We test drove the CR-V EXL last weekend and it seemed ok. Nice car overall and we can get it at straight invoice price since I have a discount through work. We are going to test drive the CX-5 this weekend. I was wondering if any of you guys who have owned the car for a bit have found anything that annoys you or anything I should look for on the test drive. We are still trying to decide between the Touring and the Grand Touring. Any thoughts on that as well. Is there any noticeable difference between AWD and FWD. My wife is from the Oregon and seems to think every car needs AWD. Also has anyone seen a Black CX-5 with the tan interior? I can get the Mazda S plan through work and the dealer said they will honor the Splan price.

There is a photo of a Black Mica with tan somewhere on this forum. I can't seem to find it.
I have the black with black and loving it so far.

Unfortunately Gverrault (or possibly not), I've just come back from a drive in torrential rain. The conditions were extremely poor, and it was the first test of the CX-5 in such poor conditions. I would typically be cautious but decided to let the CX-5 prove its worth. The first 2km had me surprised. The CX-5 handled the wet weather like a pro. It felt solid and reassuring in a way that my Mazda 3 couldn't even match. (By the way I drive an AWD GT). This matches the driving on very twisty country roads where I thought I was driving the CX-5 slowly, but it was actually doing a better pace also than my Mazda 3 would have done.

After 2000km of driving, I can only say lots of positives so far.

But if I am going to be really picky I would say that the cargo cover in the back has slid slightly under heavy braking. Some people reckon the external mirrors vibrate, although it hasn't annoyed me. Most of the noise the vehicle makes is in the way of wind noise around the mirrors because they're mounted on the doors. Other annoyances include when plugging an iPhone into the USB and also having Bluetooth set up, that the audio will default to Bluetooth even if you select iPod (this is fixed by changing the output on the iPhone manually).
Voice recognition on the TomTom isn't crash hot (although the audio recognition for the phone is a champion).

If you're living in NC I don't see why you'd need AWD unless you go up to the mountains regularly. Even up here in the DC metro area it's useless about 362 days a year, and your mileage and performance will suffer for it. Not to mention the increased base cost.

We've got about 1500 miles on our CX-5 so far, and it's been great. It's hard to compare, really, since we're coming from 10-year-old crapboxes, but it drives confidently and the highway mileage has been even better than promised. If you're in a particularly hilly area or often carry four people plus cargo, you might find the engine underpowered, but with two people puttering around the suburbs it has plenty of go. I haven't had issues quickly gaining speed on on-ramps, etc.

I second inodes' comment about the Bluetooth and USB connections - it's irritating that the onboard audio defaults to Bluetooth (which doesn't sound as good) even when you've got the device directly connected. You have to manually disconnect Bluetooth either on the head unit or on your phone in order to get it to work. That said, the system is easy to use and sounds good.

We bought a loaded Touring rather than a Grand Touring, and the only thing I can say we miss is the 10-way power seat on the GT, which allows you to make thigh support adjustments. The seats on the Touring don't cover this. The seat heaters and dual-zone climate control are probably nice and all, but not dealbreakers.

gverrault - Yes, I selected AWD for infrequent use in Lake Tahoe ski country. SUV's with AWD and 4WD do well at resale in areas close to snow, so much of the upfront cost is recovered at resale. I consider it money well spent.

The gas mileage is currently best in compact SUV class, it's still unknown if the new 2013 Escape will match gas mileage of CX-5, I expect it will (the 1.6L turbo).

You probably saw the IIHS top safety pick rating for the CX-5 announced in March, certainly important for transporting family.

The in-dash nav is lower in price than most and a little confusing upon first use, but gets easier to use with practice. I agree, voice recongition is junk.

Handling/ride/braking/steering/comfort is very good. Cargo capactiy is only adequate. Power is only adequate as expected for 155hp.

I'm very picky and own 2 sport sedans for regular back to back comparison. 1 month and over 1000 miles, I'm very happy the CX-5.

So I went to the dealer last night to get a value for my trade in and took a look at both a Black AWD Touring and Black AWD GT. I think I'm going to end up going with the Touring and have the dealer add leather for 1100 (which seemed reasonable to me). I couldn't really find a good reason to pay somewhere around 2k more for the GT for what it adds and I would also think the 17" wheels on the Touring would give a little better ride. Has anyone on here compared the Touring and the GT and ended up going with the GT and if so what tipped the scale in favor of the GT?

I drove both Touring and GT models. The ride difference was not enough to matter to me. The style and slightly sharper steering response of the 19's was a plus to me. Being used to premium luxury cars, the GT w/tech pkgs had all the equipment I wanted (leather, moonroof, nav, 19's, high end audio equipment). GT was a good value IMO.

CX-SV said:

I drove both Touring and GT models. The ride difference was not enough to matter to me. The style and slightly sharper steering response of the 19's was a plus to me. Being used to premium luxury cars, the GT w/tech pkgs had all the equipment I wanted (leather, moonroof, nav, 19's, high end audio equipment). GT was a good value IMO.

Click to expand...

THIS.

The extra $900 to have dual zone climate and heated seat is a no-brainer. Are you considering the tech package?

We ditched an Audi, and it's amazing how close in features the GT+Tech got to our old Q7.

PhoenixINX said:

THIS.

The extra $900 to have dual zone climate and heated seat is a no-brainer. Are you considering the tech package?

We ditched an Audi, and it's amazing how close in features the GT+Tech got to our old Q7.

Click to expand...

Yes, it's amazing the level of luxury and premium equipment Mazda puts into the GT w/tech pkg. I drive a Lexus and Mercedes 2 to 3 days/week and they are very similar from interior and features standpoint. (Of course the 3.5L and 3.0L V6's are very different in terms of performance and refinement)

CX-SV said:

I drove both Touring and GT models. The ride difference was not enough to matter to me. The style and slightly sharper steering response of the 19's was a plus to me. Being used to premium luxury cars, the GT w/tech pkgs had all the equipment I wanted (leather, moonroof, nav, 19's, high end audio equipment). GT was a good value IMO.

Click to expand...

I agree as well. The extra $900 - $1000 is worth it in value to what you get in the GT compared to the Touring.

It comes down to preference and budget, but I'd recommend giving the GT a feature by feature comparison against the Touring.