Considering a CX5

I'm new to the forum and in preliminary stages of searching for a new vehicle. I live in a rural area and have a 40 mile (1 way) almost daily commute. I'd like a small SUV that handles well on narrow curvy roads, has a somewhat comfortable ride and gets about 30MPG on the highway. I've owned a Honda CRV and Toyota Rav4 in the past. Both were good vehicles, but somewhat noisy. I've never owned a Mazda but I am considering a 2017 CX5.

Can anyone compare the CX5 to Rav4 and CRV? Are the service intervals similar? I believe the CX5 gets better MPG's and may offer more options at a better price but I am concerned about excessive road noise and ride comfort. I test drove a 2012 CX5 back in 2012, and it was nice but didn't wow me. Any advice?

After driving a CX5 Touring and Grand Touring, I chose the Touring with the 17 inch wheels over the 19"GT wheels because of the slightly softer and quieter ride. I am happy with my 2014 Touring with sunroof and at 31,000 miles, it has been dependable and fun to drive. Ed

Jake here are some summary points from my 7000 mile driving experience:
Mpg above 75 mph sucks
40 - 60 mph careful driving is 30+ mpg fwd
It will tackle a curve faster than Rav4 and crv. Handles way better.
Looks are distinct both inside and out.
Utility is on par with competition.
It is fun > rav4. Not sure on Honda.

2017 is miles ahead of 16.5 on features and looks. Its lower quiter and More refined. It will beat 16.5 cx5 on mpg.

One thing... Make sure you like your dealer and have backup. My first dealer experience was bad. And i am in DFW - big market.

Finally test drive it if you are peculiar about your cars. Do overnight drive. That is what sold me. I did not consider CR-V, my eyes would have never forgiven me for even test driving it(2016).

Jakealope said:

I'm new to the forum and in preliminary stages of searching for a new vehicle. I live in a rural area and have a 40 mile (1 way) almost daily commute. I'd like a small SUV that handles well on narrow curvy roads, has a somewhat comfortable ride and gets about 30MPG on the highway. I've owned a Honda CRV and Toyota Rav4 in the past. Both were good vehicles, but somewhat noisy. I've never owned a Mazda but I am considering a 2017 CX5.

Can anyone compare the CX5 to Rav4 and CRV? Are the service intervals similar? I believe the CX5 gets better MPG's and may offer more options at a better price but I am concerned about excessive road noise and ride comfort. I test drove a 2012 CX5 back in 2012, and it was nice but didn't wow me. Any advice?

Click to expand...

The only other CUV's in this price-range I would consider are the 2.0XT Forester, and the 2017 CR-V.

I have, over-all been very happy with my CX-5, except mileage is considerably worse than EPA ratings in my experience, while the other vehicles I have owned, I have manged to meet or exceed EPA ratings. YMMV

Jakealope said:

I'm new to the forum and in preliminary stages of searching for a new vehicle. I live in a rural area and have a 40 mile (1 way) almost daily commute. I'd like a small SUV that handles well on narrow curvy roads: YES!, has a somewhat comfortable ride and gets about 30MPG on the highway: YES! 30mpg is easy at under 65mph. I've owned a Honda CRV and Toyota Rav4 in the past. Both were good vehicles, but somewhat noisy. I've never owned a Mazda but I am considering a 2017 CX5.

Can anyone compare the CX5 to Rav4 and CRV? Are the service intervals similar? I believe the CX5 gets better MPG's and may offer more options at a better price but I am concerned about excessive road noise and ride comfort. I test drove a 2012 CX5 back in 2012, and it was nice but didn't wow me. Any advice?

Click to expand...

For clarity sake the CX-5 you drove in 2012 was in fact a 2013 Model, it was released by Mazda in march of 2012 however.

You should drive them all, and return here with your verdict!

The Mazda's going to be reliable and have very similar service intervals to the others you mentioned.

3yr residual % values are also on par with the other brands too. (In the above 60% range last I checked)

Agree with others on the 17 inch wheels, I enjoy the ride much better on the 17's.

Handling is Mazda's forte, and the bias will be towards a little more cabin noise and vibration/feel in the car. The other makes you mentioned are more towards comfort and isolation from the road.

Honda CR-V、Toyota RAV4、and Nissan Rogue are the top 3 compact CUVs in US market. Choose any of the three shouldn't be disappointed you too much. Mazda CX-5 is different. It concentrates on handling. It provides less amenities than others. Reliability is hit-and-miss IMO but overall it's good enough for me.

Based on your comment that you'd like "a small SUV that handles well on narrow curvy roads, has a somewhat comfortable ride and gets about 30MPG on the highway", new 2017 2nd-gen Mazda CX-5 is perfect for you! New 2017 5th-gen Honda CR-V is also almost perfect for you and you really have to drive both back-to-back to compare. New CR-V now has the best EPA fuel economy ratings among all compact CUVs. Car and Driver also got 32 mpg for 75-mph highway driving on a 2017 AWD CR-V during their test drive. For CX-5 good gas mileage only happens on FWD; CX-5 AWD lost 4 mpg on EPA highway rating comparing to its FWD. Since 2017 2nd-gen CX-5 carries over 1st-gen powertrain, yet-released 2017 EPA ratings should be similar to 2016. 4th-gen Toyato RAV4 has face-lifted in 2016 MY. If you want the best reliability and resale; or you just want a hybrid CUV, this's the one for you.

You also seemed to concern more on road noise and ride comfort. All new 2017 CR-V and CX-5 have made some effort to improve these areas as these are common issues for Japanese imports. Rogue has been the best in road noise and ride comfort among these 4 since its 2nd-gen coming out for 2014 MY. I believe this's one of the major reasons why Rouge sales shot up from 199,199 units in 2014 to 329,904 units in 2016! Rouge also face-lifted for 2017 MY. CR-V is good in these areas too and RAV4 is average. CX-5 probably is the worst among 4 in road noise and ride comfort as it's a "sport" CUV. Choosing lower-trim 17" tires should help but you then have limited options you can have. You just have to test drive 2017 CX-5 and see if you feel these areas are acceptable to you.

Service intervals? Not much different among 4. CX-5 may have shorter maintenance interval at 5,000 miles for oil change and tire rotation. But CX-5 does have a "Flexible" oil change interval which can go up to 10,000 miles or 12 months whichever comes first provided you use recommended Mazda moly oil. New 1.5L turbo on CR-V seems nice and you can use regular gas and same maintenance interval like naturally aspirated 2.4L CR-V. Honda also has "Maintenance Minder" flexible maintenance interval and every maintenance item is calculated by on-board computer and displayed on message center. CR-V's CVT also has been improved and it's one of the best CVT on the market.

Here's my observation comparing 2017 CR-V and 2017 CX-5:

I hope Mazda did some real good stuff for 2017...

Kaps said:

⋯ 2017 is miles ahead of 16.5 on features and looks. Its lower quiter and More refined. It will beat 16.5 cx5 on mpg.

Click to expand...

We don't know that yet, do we?
But with 2017 CX-5 carrying over previous-gen's drivetrain except a new ball-bearing for rear differential, I believe the EPA ratings on 2017 shouldn't be different than 2016 other than AWD ratings.

I love my CX-5 and chose it over the 2017 CRV, but the CX-5 is a relatively rough and noisy ride, though I personally like the road feel and play my music loud enough that the noise has never been an issue. But if those are concerns, test drive the Honda as it drives nearly as well, has comparable MPG (a mile or two per spec is meaningless imo), but is considerably smoother and quieter inside.

yrwei52 said:

We don't know that yet, do we?
But with 2017 CX-5 carrying over previous-gen's powertrain except a new ball-bearing for rear differential, I believe the EPA ratings on 2017 shouldn't be different than 2016 other than AWD ratings.

Click to expand...

I should have said its most likely that it will beat 16.5 on mpg.

Btw my experiment on keeping this tank mpg up was dealt a double blow - horrid traffic one workday and taking family to the mall today. But still hanging above 30. mighty impressed - this CUV is the mpg king in 40 - 60 mph range. How i wish their was an eco setting reducing throttle response.

I drove the 16 CRV, Subaru Crosstrek, Jeep Cherokee. I'm a superficial guy and like looks. I think the Jeep and Mazda look the best. They are all capable. Crosstrek, I didn't realize at the time, is a CX3 & HRV competitor. Fun to drive the Mazda and Jeep were best to me.
You really need to drive them to see. Mother in law bought the Jeep so I got to know it even better. Put that on your short list, too.

Sent from my LG V10

17 CRV was pretty impressive, rode well, isn't dangerously slow anymore, looks pretty good less the wheels and fake wood. Its also queiter and will likely cost less to own all things being equal. However, it still doesn't have the Mazda's mojo in the turns and overall feel, and that damn, damn CVT neutering basically any potential fun factor. For that reason I'm willing to pay a little more to enjoy myself as opposed to going through the motions of merely operating an appliance (albeit a nice appliance.) Given this, my 14 gt will almost certainly be replaced by a like kind 16.5 or late 17/18 depending on price of 17 and how far i think they moved the needle-which on the surface doesn't appear a hell of a lot but I'm confident they won't mess it up either.

Kaps said:

I should have said its most likely that it will beat 16.5 on mpg.

Btw my experiment on keeping this tank mpg up was dealt a double blow - horrid traffic one workday and taking family to the mall today. But still hanging above 30. mighty impressed - this CUV is the mpg king in 40 - 60 mph range. How i wish their was an eco setting reducing throttle response.

Click to expand...

I've tried those on vehicles so equipped. It improved nothing and felt no different than without.

Kaps said:

I should have said its most likely that it will beat 16.5 on mpg.

Btw my experiment on keeping this tank mpg up was dealt a double blow - horrid traffic one workday and taking family to the mall today. But still hanging above 30. mighty impressed - this CUV is the mpg king in 40 - 60 mph range. How i wish their was an eco setting reducing throttle response.

Click to expand...

I believe if you're driving a 2017 Honda CR-V 1.5L turbo FWD with the same style you're driving your CX-5 FWD right now, you'll get even better gas mileage as you basically are trying not to spin up the turbo like driving a NA 1.5L! Besides, CR-V does have an "ECO" button instead of a "Sport" switch like our CX-5!

Sport < Eco

Sent from my LG V10

Thanks to all for the helpful info. I definitely need to test drive. I'm currently driving a 2006 Toyota Highlander and getting about 21 MPG's. I'd like something a bit newer, smaller that gets better gas mileage. From online research, it seems that Ford Escape, Kia Sportage and Hyundai Tucson MPG is not much better than my Highlander. Subaru Forester or Outback, Honda CRV, Toyota Rav4, Mazda CX5 and Nissan Rogue get around 30 MPG's for driving like I do, meaning mostly 50-60 MPH country driving. I've heard a lot of good things about the Nissan Rogue, but many consumer reviews say that it's not reliable.

I'd like to get leather seats and need AWD (since it snows periodically and the roads I drive on are narrow and scary in bad weather) so that means I need to buy the upper trim levels. Part of my decision making process may be how much wiggle room a dealer allows on new car sales. Honda doesn't haggle much. I'm not sure about Nissan or Mazda. Maybe it depends on the dealer.

I guess I need to start test driving soon.

Jakealope said:

I'd like to get leather seats and need AWD (since it snows periodically and the roads I drive on are narrow and scary in bad weather) so that means I need to buy the upper trim levels.

Click to expand...

Just to repeat what has been said around here: snow tires are much more important on snow than AWD. Yes, my CX-5 with stock tires can go around in winter ok with a little slip here and there, but my wife's FWD Accord with Xi3 is a lot safer. She has never got stuck or slipped with the Xi3, and even warned me not to rotate back to stock tires too early

AWD can only give you a little push from the rear, it doesn't help with improved traction required for handling and stopping. As you can see from Mazda's Ice Academy, all of their test vehicles were on Blizzak.

Lots of 2016s on the lots. The closer to the 17 release the more they'll drop. If you can wait til a 17 I'd go that route, you'll prob pay a few thousand more tho. Im not sure they improved the sound deadening in 2016 over previous year models. It is a little lacking and I've noticed the CX5 body panels are pretty darn thin I suppose to save weight and the deadening materials is lackign in at least the 2013-2015 I know... they did improve this either in 16 or 17... Road noise is not unreasonable but it's not a BMW (saying that having driven many thousands of miles in bmws). You'll be hard pressed to find another small SUV that handles this well. You can get some great deals on a used one, CPO. Def get the GT package. You spend too much time in car not to have that luxury IMHO. YOLO

Whatever CX-5 you get, I'd definitely recommend getting the Tech package. The Bose is very good imo, and the LED lights are great (first time with LEDs for me). I was at first skeptical about spending so much on lights, but they do make a difference... and lots of extra little bonuses as well. I didn't think auto-dimming mirror was a big deal, but now I love it! I personally don't care for leather seating and I could take or leave bigger rims (tires only cost more down the road), so I went for the regular Touring, but I really would recommend the Tech package.

Agree. Cannot recommend enough. TECH PACKAGE TECH PACKAGE!

The 17 is a bit lowered closer to the road and the roof line is a bit lower as well, so it is possible that EPA numbers will be slightly better.
Even with same drivetrain it is still possible to tweak it to get ~1 MPG improvement. We'll need to wait and see.
Keep in mind that Toyota 2.5L engine is the same engine since 2008, which is just an evolution of the predecessor engine, which was around since 2000. Honda did the same with their engines, until a few years ago. If Mazda, a small automotive company, carries over the 2.5L, which was all-new in 2012, it would be a pretty common thing to do.

The CX-5 is capable of very good fuel economy, even with AWD.
In fact, take a look at fuelly data and compare it with other vehicles in its class. Look at the distribution in addition to the average.
Some will correctly tell you that fuelly mixes FWD with AWD, but if you look at the distribution you'll see that no other vehicle in this class gets any better and that the EPA gap between FWD and AWD is not really effecting real-world drivers as made obvious by the equal or better distribution.

The 2017 CR-V is a very good alternative, which IMHO, has better utility and most likely better fuel economy. It should be similar to the CX-5 in handling. It does come with a CVT, but one of the best in the industry and has Android Auto / CarPlay. For myself, I will not consider any new vehicle without Android Auto.