Which car to buy: 2014 Mazda CX-5 s Grand Touring or Mazda3 s Grand Touring?

Wi24

Banned
:
MX-5 1.8i Miyako
I'm really stuck between these two options, as I'd be getting the CX-5 AWD, which isn't available to substitute for the Mazda3's FWD. I'm moving up to North Carolina, so I prefer a car that is well suited for snow and mountains that still maintains a somewhat sporty feel. I know the AWD will do more than hold its own, but I'm not sure how a FWD would do up there. I've lived in South Florida all of my life, so I really don't know if the FWD will manage well. I could really use some advice.
smile.gif
 
I have a CX-5 and I like it a lot, but if the only thing pushing you to the CX-5 is the AWD then I would get the 3. I have been driving FWD since 1970 and I have had a couple of AWD cars. For on road driving in snow FWD is 3 or 4 OK 5 times as good as rear wheel drive. AWD is maybe 10% better then FWD. The best thing you can do for driving in snow is run good snow tires on all 4 wheels. In my opinion the best are Nokia Hakupleada A good handling car with Hakupleadas on it is so much fun in snow you will get up early on snow days so you can get on the roads before they are ruined by plows.
One thing to remember is you don't want to go faster and better then you can stop.
BTW some parts of NC get 50 inches of snow a year, Other parts 1 inch.
 
Well tires are important but AWD is a extra bonus for traction. Also depends on your preference if you want a compact car or a compact SUV...
 
I have a CX-5 and I like it a lot, but if the only thing pushing you to the CX-5 is the AWD then I would get the 3. I have been driving FWD since 1970 and I have had a couple of AWD cars. For on road driving in snow FWD is 3 or 4 OK 5 times as good as rear wheel drive. AWD is maybe 10% better then FWD. The best thing you can do for driving in snow is run good snow tires on all 4 wheels. In my opinion the best are Nokia Hakupleada A good handling car with Hakupleadas on it is so much fun in snow you will get up early on snow days so you can get on the roads before they are ruined by plows.
One thing to remember is you don't want to go faster and better then you can stop.
BTW some parts of NC get 50 inches of snow a year, Other parts 1 inch.

Lol @ Hakupleada ...thanks for the laugh
Probably meant Nokian hakkapeliitta

Good winter tires will do the most difference on any drivetrain (RWD, FWD or AWD)

I have been driving FWD for the last 20 years in Quebec with winter tires and Only in the worst conditions I have come close to get stuck.
I must say that it can be frustrating at times when starting from a light or stop, having the front wheels slip and try to hook up... specially when you know the driver behind you has awd, and is just waiting for you to start going.

This reason alone was enough to make me want to switch... Is it necessary? No... But i really liked the added traction this past winter... and even on wet pavement or dirt/rock roads.
 
Last edited:
Need the extra interior volume? CX-5
Mazda3's interior volume fits just fine? Mazda3
 
I was at my cottage in Quebec for 2 weeks over Christmas / New Years.....and got stuck a few times in my old Nissan Sentra. Had to get towed out twice. After that, I purchased my CX-5 AWD and negotiated a separate set of snows on rims into the deal. During our last snow storm back in early March, I watched (and laughed) as all my co-workers were spinning their wheels and getting stuck in the parking lot while I simply cruised on out. I will never get stuck again (touch wood).

Bon
 
That would be previous "GenPu" (Gen 2) Mazda3 with the early 2.0 SkyA which was under tuned and did not have the 4-2-1 headers.

The CX-5 rides on very similar underpinnings of new Gen3 Mazda3 and there aren't much advantages other than ride height, AWD, and interior volume. Don't get me wrong, the CX-5 is great at everything its supposed to do, but there are disadvantages to choosing it for things you don't need it to do.
 
Last edited:
That would be previous "GenPu" (Gen 2) Mazda3 with the early 2.0 SkyA which was under tuned and did not have the 4-2-1 headers.

The CX-5 rides on very similar underpinnings of new Gen3 Mazda3 and there aren't much advantages other than ride height, AWD, and interior volume. Don't get me wrong, the CX-5 is great at everything its supposed to do, but there are disadvantages to choosing it for things you don't need it to do.

I understand and agree. If I did not need the form factor of the CX-5 I would not have one. I love the handling of the Miata and the RX7 I have not driven the 3 but knowing Mazda I am sure it is a excellent handling car. I was just trying to say that the handling of the CX-5 takes a lot of the sting out of needing to drive a SUV. In fact, it makes it fun.

I bought my CX-5 at the end of February. I haven't bought a second set of wheels and Hakkapeliittas yet. (I will before winter.) When we had a couple of March snow storms there was no question. We took my daughters Mazda 6 FWD with 4 Hakkapeliittas. The only way to get that car stuck with those tires is to get it in heavy wet snow that is at least 3 inches higher then the cars ground clearance and come to a stop.

If the only reason I was considering a CX-5 was driving in snow then I would not buy it.That is based on 40 years of driving in snow for work and for fun.
 
The 3 has better feeling steering (though the cx-5 is VERY good for a small suv), but the cx-5 has much more ground clearance which is handy if you need to go down trails, into fields or even just steep driveways. I had a 3 before and the cx-5 is just a bit more useful in many ways, including interior room. It's really all about what you intend to do with it.
 
I bought my CX-5 at the end of February. I haven't bought a second set of wheels and Hakkapeliittas yet. (I will before winter.) When we had a couple of March snow storms there was no question. We took my daughters Mazda 6 FWD with 4 Hakkapeliittas. The only way to get that car stuck with those tires is to get it in heavy wet snow that is at least 3 inches higher then the cars ground clearance and come to a stop.

If the only reason I was considering a CX-5 was driving in snow then I would not buy it.That is based on 40 years of driving in snow for work and for fun.

Definitely understandable. The AWD ride height was useful this past (brutal) winter. It has gotten me out of a few situations where a FWD sedan with winters wouldn't. Though for the most part, FWD and winters will do just fine as you mention.
 
Definitely understandable. The AWD ride height was useful this past (brutal) winter. It has gotten me out of a few situations where a FWD sedan with winters wouldn't. Though for the most part, FWD and winters will do just fine as you mention.
(iagree) I've said for years that a FWD with winter tires will out perform an AWD with all seasons and have demonstrated that to numerous Audi & Subaru drivers while traversing Oregon's Cascade mountains in snowy conditions. Had a Volvo X-Country driver stuff it into a snow bank right in front of us and we weren't having any issues at all in our TDi.
 
I had a 2005 Mazda 3 for nine years and agonized over the 2014 3 versus CX-5. I'm 6'3. My body feels so much better in the taller CX-5. Both are great cars though, and the higher end 3's cost about the same as the middle to higher CX-5's
 
FWD with winter tires is fine. Like others have stated, the right tires can make all the difference.

But I would still suggest the CX-5. The ground clearance is something a lot of people seem to dismiss. While my Matrix XR with winter tires drove fine, it's plastic shield and side mouldings were ripped to shreds over a few winters.
 
Well, if you want the sporty handling, and the fun of AWD (torque vectoring), you can get the AWD cx-5. If you want to make it more sporty lower or change the rear sway bar. You get that extra bit of utility from the space/awd and the fun drive.
 
Even just day to day parking is made easier with extra ground clearance. You pull a little too far forward in a parking lot slot with a concrete barricade in the 3 and you'll start tearing up that pretty front end. Or your passenger swings the door open when you've parked against an unusually high curb and you hear the dreaded scrape of metal on sidewalk.

I'm coming out of a Jetta wagon and I have to say I love the sense of spaciousness in the CX-5. Despite the fact that the Jetta has similar cargo numbers, the CX-5 feels much bigger because the usable space is up higher-- no crouching down to peer into a tunnel. From what I've seen, the same would go for the 3-- although obviously you give up quite a bit more cubic inches of storage.

Now, given how most CUVs drive that alone wouldn't have been enough to win me over, but given the driving dynamics of the CX-5 the tradeoffs are not bad, IMO. The Jetta had the old 1.8 turbo with a 5 speed stick, so it was certainly a spirited drive. But with the 2.5l engine and the kick-down on the pedal, I find I can still have plenty of fun, particularly given the well tuned suspension. And, of course, I have some hope of driving this thing without ruinously expensive repairs as soon as it goes out of warranty.
 
Last edited:
I'm coming out of a Jetta wagon......

I rented a Jetta for a few days last month in Southern California...... 2013 model I think, 30k miles on it, 2.5L auto, less power but a lot lighter than the CX-5, it should have been a really nice drive. But it wasn't, it was bloody awful. Everything felt heavy, sluggish and required a huge amount of effort; the steering was unfeeling and unresponsive, and it had a terrible throttle/transmission response.

The CX-5 just feels way smaller and more nimble than its weight, and has better feeling/feedback than seems possible given its high ride height. And given the previous record-breaking winter, I can't see that I would ever go back to a FWD sedan as my primary car.
 
I was in a 2001 model, which was quite a bit more nimble and light than the current iteration. Plus that 1.8T was twice the engine of the current 2.5. Plus stick.

But yeah, they've gotten way heavier. Some people seem to like the "planted" feel of that-- the TDI is a better engine but heavier still. They're amazingly popular in the Bay Area, you see TDI wagons everywhere. I just hope all these nice young professionals who feel like they're doing the smart thing by buying into stolid, respectable German engineering are prepared for the $5,000 repair tabs coming their way. When something goes wrong on a modern VW, it goes spectacularly wrong.

It's funny, because I was really torn about getting the Mazda. I really liked the feel and road manners of the Jetta (when it was running). But when I test drove a used '12 TDI it felt like a Mercedes, and not in the good way. The over pampered, stuffy, off in your own little womb way. VWs have really nice interiors (before the parts stall falling off) and Mazda could take a few cues on that count. But I feel like the engineers at Mazda are having more fun, at this point. You know what I mean? Like they've got nothing to lose and are willing to go for broke. I seriously like that.
 
Back