Go on...
JD power rating for mazda cx5 is LOW !!!!!
- Thread starter sangs
- Start date
Go on...
For me Mazda has been awesome. Driving Toyota scion etc. This is a poor man's Porsche. All other misgivings are forgiven.
I see myself buying an electric next in 3-5 years, if Mazda ever did an e6 wagon with 140 miles electric range and a generator with 2 gallons for emergency I will pay sticker for it.
I see myself buying an electric next in 3-5 years, if Mazda ever did an e6 wagon with 140 miles electric range and a generator with 2 gallons for emergency I will pay sticker for it.
- :
- RDX Aspec Adv.
Nothing about this vehicle reminds me of any of the Porsches I have ever been around. They are expensive, and nice. This is cheap, and adequate.
Huh?
- :
- San Antonio, Texas
- :
- '15 CX-5 Miata AWD
Mirage?
- :
- San Antonio, Texas
- :
- '15 CX-5 Miata AWD
A lot of that stuff doesn't matter to me, as long as the systems work. Driving is an experience for me and I prefer to feel/hear the car suspension and road to maximize it all.
Never owned a Porsche but Mazda does mimic BMW in some ways. The 2.5L skyactiv has near identical liter size, HP, and TQ numbers as the E46 2.5L engines from the early 2000's. The steering wheel design as well as dash layout is also reminiscent of BMW's of that era. If BMW was to make a FWD car it would likely handle similar to a Mazda. Then look at the naming convention. Mazda3 Mazda6, ect. BMW 3 series BMW 6 series, ect. The halo-like style DRLs as opposed to Audi style slashes. The heating controls. The push button location for some BMW are set next to vents and others higher up near the infotainment screen. Mazda followed that in the CX-5 near a vent and my Mazda6 is set high up next to infotainment screen. As a matter of fact a Mazda designer left to go to BMW and then came back in 2013.
http://www.autoblog.com/2013/10/30/mazda-creative-director-kevin-rice/
Truedat.
I read a reviewer somewhere or saw it on youtube and his verdict was
"This is the best driving CUV under $40K USD". I have to agree with it, only CUV that can outdo it right now could be an Infinity and with reliability issues with Nissan in general - I would still stick with Mazda.
As far as fit and finish - I got the mid level trim which is the best value trim in the CX5 imo. I dont have the stiffer 19s nor the leather, just wished they allowed tech without moon roof and that would have been the one I would have bought.
Just coming out of a bitter cold week here in Dallas and today was surprised to see my mpg 32ish - lots of accelerations and traffic lights with mild traffic. Fantastic.
They killed the lancer and lancer evo - so they are betting big on Mirage.
- :
- RDX Aspec Adv.
Not shabby! I averaged 24.7mpg to San Antonio, and 22.XXmpg on the way back (From NWA). I have the AWD model though, and it did snow on the way back. I also drive 5 over the speed limit, which, FYI, the CX5 gets 14.7mpg doing 90mph. Doing 85, it gets 16.8mpg. Pretty bad. I'm over the "good mileage" this thing promised and failed to deliver. It does great around town, but for a road car, it's dogballs.
I think the survey results reflect the average of CX-5 buyers. Being a mid-range vehicle, you have on the one hand buyers upgrading from relatively crappy hatchbacks and CUVs and on the other you have people downgrading from luxury vehicles, re the purported number of ex BMW owners that now drive Mazdas. The survey results reflect the simple average of these very different buyers' experience. The CX-5 is a giant leap forward for many buyers who are upgrading from hand-me-downs and econo-cars while it may disappoint or not meet the expectations of an upscale or luxury car owner.
Personally, I give my 2016.5 CX-5 GT low initial ownership marks for a few important qualities such as: body & interior quality - mechanical (rattles, thin plastics, tinny body, noise, anemic climate control); features and accessories quality - design (no seat memory, steering wheel button placement, no traffic on nav, infotainment interface oversights, dome lights), however, I find it to be a great value.
Personally, I give my 2016.5 CX-5 GT low initial ownership marks for a few important qualities such as: body & interior quality - mechanical (rattles, thin plastics, tinny body, noise, anemic climate control); features and accessories quality - design (no seat memory, steering wheel button placement, no traffic on nav, infotainment interface oversights, dome lights), however, I find it to be a great value.
Last edited:
In Performance/Design....JD placed the CX-5 tied for 3rd place. High marks for design and performance. Low marks for instrument panel and features like AC. The CRV got even lower marks than the CX-5 in instrument panel and features despite being more robust.
You are right on the money. I was part of the latter category, hoping to save some money since we were expecting our first child. I was very disappointed with the CX-5 after the first several months of ownership, but it has grown on me and it's fine for what it is. Great value, like you mentioned. I'm just hoping I can drive this for another 4-5 years before upgrading to a Jaguar F-Pace, which will happen at some point in the future.
- :
- RDX Aspec Adv.
I agree. I came from a $40K SUV to a $25K SUV. I did not expect it to have as nice an interior or features even as my 5 year old (compared to it) SUV. And it didn't. It has done what I bought it to do, though...work reliably.