1
123373
Did they remove the cigarette style power outlet on the 2016's? There should be on in the little cuby hole in the front of the center console under the dash.
2016 Mazda CX-5 - What do you not like?
- Thread starter bagelboy1
- Start date
Really? I had 2003 and 2012 CRVs and find the rear storage space in the CX-5 larger and more useful. For one thing the rear hatch doesn't intrude in the storage space as much as the CRV which tapers towards the front.
The new configuration has two USB ports in the front and the cigarette style outlet in the center console. The two in the front shut off with the car. I had not checked the cigarette style yet, but that's good so you can recharge while the car is off. As long as you know it. ;-)
- :
- Plano, Texas, USA
The navigation system SD card slot is also moved from left side to center front cubby hole next to 2 USB ports for 2016. It'd be nice to have the third 12V power outlet at front next to USB ports and provide some lighting in that area!
- :
- Plano, Texas, USA
Our 1998 170+K-mile Honda CR-V has more cargo space when the rear seat is folded. With rear seat up, the cargo space is more squarish and taller hence is more useful. Honda CR-V has always been having one of the largest cargo capacities in the class. And Honda is always good to fully utilize the interior space with lots of storage areas such as a drawer underneath the passenger seat, a little swing open drawer on left dash, many hidden storage boxes in rear cargo area. Here are the comparison numbers on cargo space:
Cargo volume (cu ft) with rear seatback up / rear seatback folded:
2015 Mazda CX-5: 34.1 / 64.8 (S) or 65.4 (T or GT)
2015 Honda CR-V: 35.3 / 70.9
2012 Honda CR-V: 37.2 / 70.9
2003 Honda CR-V: 33.5 / 72.0
1998 Honda CR-V: 29.6 / 67.0
I used to like Honda's products. But Honda has been lagging behind on engineering and innovations for recent years. Even their quality and reliability are suffering as the Consumer Reports rated Mazda CX-5 has better predicted reliability than Honda CR-V! The use of CVT on 2015 CR-V simply just turns me off. CVT, like turbo engine. can be easier to manipulate the EPA MPG's which has predefined criteria with proper software programming. Therefore there is a big jump on EPA fuel economy ratings for 2015 CR-V with 26-27/33-34 mpg up from 22-23/30-31 mpg (AWD-FWD; city/hwy) for MY 2014. But in the real world the MPG will be worse, just like the Turbo engine. Motor Trend which selected 2015 Honda CR-V as the SUV of the Year, has shown the real-world MPG of 21/29 with 24 mpg combined on an AWD CR-V during the test! CVT, again the same on turbo, has been historically suffering reliability issues. Many 2015 Honda CR-V owners are not only complaining the real-world MPG too far off from EPA rating, but also complaining the vibration caused by CVT during idle. One I saw even says he owns a 2015 Honda CR-Vibrator!
Thanks for the comments guys. Good to hear what you think. This is the source where I read about the change in dash / lcd screen placement:
http://motoringcrunch.com/news/new-...lift-planting-the-screen-on-the-dash/1007906/
"The Japanese carmaker also confirmed that this will be how the Facelift’s interior will appear like when it makes its debut next year."
Last edited:
I think the CR-V vibrations with the new "Earth-Dreams" + CVT are actually caused by the engine itself, not the transmission.
What Honda did, which seems smart only that it created this problem is to have the cylinders be off-center with respect to the crankshaft. This way, when it the work cycle the rod is straight for a longer time thus increasing efficiency.
Note that Fuelly shows about the same average mpg for 2015 and 2014 CR-V @ 26.3 / 26.2, though it is still early in the year.
What Honda did, which seems smart only that it created this problem is to have the cylinders be off-center with respect to the crankshaft. This way, when it the work cycle the rod is straight for a longer time thus increasing efficiency.
Note that Fuelly shows about the same average mpg for 2015 and 2014 CR-V @ 26.3 / 26.2, though it is still early in the year.
Not to try to start an argument here, but I think the writer of the article is getting the CX-5 and the CX-3 confused. He/she referred to the vehicle that Mazda brought to the LA auto show having a screen mounted on top of the dash. The CX-5 at the show was essentially a pre-production 2016 CX-5 and looks nearly identical to what is currently for sale. The dash of the CX-3 at the show, however, is completely different, with a screen mounted on the dash.
Not to try to start an argument here, but I think the writer of the article is getting the CX-5 and the CX-3 confused. He/she referred to the vehicle that Mazda brought to the LA auto show having a screen mounted on top of the dash. The CX-5 at the show was essentially a pre-production 2016 CX-5 and looks nearly identical to what is currently for sale. The dash of the CX-3 at the show, however, is completely different, with a screen mounted on the dash.
Hmm. Maybe that's correct. I'll see if the author can be contacted. Still, good to know ppls thoughts. I was willing to wait, if they did update it with similar styling.
Can the USB ports also charge your cell phone when plugged in?
Yep, that's what I use them for (since I have Sirius).
That is definitely not a 2016 CX-5 interior...
- :
- Plano, Texas, USA
CR-V owners believing that the vibration is caused by the CVT is because if they shift the gear from Drive to Neutral during idle, most of time the vibration disappears.
This seems proving that the CVT is not as fuel efficient as EPA rating in the real world.
- :
- Plano, Texas, USA
The article definitely provided wrong information on CX-5 interior. I also don't believe CX-5 will get another face-lifted interior and make its debut next year like the article said. The "concept model", as mentioned in the article, at the LA Auto Show is not a CX-5. These so called "concept model" actually consists of 2016 CX-5, CX-3 and MX-5! The writer got confused thinking that the new CX-3 is a "concept model" of the future CX-5!
Nope, just showing an image of the CX-3 concept at the show. If you google image search the LA auto show 2016 CX-5 it is identical (as far as I can tell) to the production model.
Agreed.
I have driven the car for a few weeks now and just noticed this reflection yesterday and yes, once you notice it, it is bad.
I have yet to purchase my cx-5 but a few things ive noticed
1) armrests attached to the side of the seats that fold up out of the way or back down for a comfortable rest are not there. Instead is a oddly shaped middle box department to accomedate that.
2) the dealer told me blind spot warning doesnt activate 40 km/h or slower. Why the heck not? So when I change lanes I have to first check my speed, then for the monitoring light on the side mirror, then the rest of the side mirror, and then my blind spot, and then switch lanes. I wish it would tell me my blind spot regardless of my speed. Is this true? Is this only with Mazda?
3) Although overall everything considered a cx-5 is a better performing and efficient car, a top trim Nissan Rogue SL in black looks very sharp on the exterior, has technology package in it, led lighting that looks superb at night, chrome sides, has a much better sunroof, has 4 way camera spotter and is 1 grand less than a cx-5 GS+Leather package+remote start.
4) No power tailgate. That would be nice when hands are full to close it either with a button on the car or on the fob
1) armrests attached to the side of the seats that fold up out of the way or back down for a comfortable rest are not there. Instead is a oddly shaped middle box department to accomedate that.
2) the dealer told me blind spot warning doesnt activate 40 km/h or slower. Why the heck not? So when I change lanes I have to first check my speed, then for the monitoring light on the side mirror, then the rest of the side mirror, and then my blind spot, and then switch lanes. I wish it would tell me my blind spot regardless of my speed. Is this true? Is this only with Mazda?
3) Although overall everything considered a cx-5 is a better performing and efficient car, a top trim Nissan Rogue SL in black looks very sharp on the exterior, has technology package in it, led lighting that looks superb at night, chrome sides, has a much better sunroof, has 4 way camera spotter and is 1 grand less than a cx-5 GS+Leather package+remote start.
4) No power tailgate. That would be nice when hands are full to close it either with a button on the car or on the fob
Last edited:
The Rogue does have some nice features, especially that sunroof. But the interior just does not compare to the CX-5. I have been in the CX-5 but not the Rogue so I'm just going off of pictures for the Rogue. I will have to test drive one but I think the CX-5 will still offer the better driving experience.
You should be checking your blind spot no matter what the little light is or isn't doing. I'm not convinced that Blind spot monitoring is all that great of a thing. There as been recent articles about how it fails to "see" some vehicles from time to time. Especially motorcycles. As a rider my self it's a bit scary to be thinking that people are going to be just be relying on a little light to know whether or not to change lanes. I think we are starting to dumb down cars to much.
I would love to have the radar controlled cruise control, that seems nice, but that system gets bundled with blind spot monitoring it seems, does anyone know if it can be turned off? Little lights blinking everytime a car comes up would drive me bonkers I think.
Bob-Loblaw
Member
- :
- 2016 CX-5 GT
I never check my blind spot anymore. At first it took me a while to trust the tech but you get used to it pretty quick. I like to think I'm pretty aware of my surroundings while driving and it's not as if I'm not looking in the mirror at all. Motorcycles can sneak up on you quick though so I can see the need there. As for the blinking light being distracting, I don't even notice it anymore unless I'm looking in the mirror.
