2017 CX-5 Line-up Dealer info

What alternative facts? It is a fact that it won is it not? Who cares if it is a 2015? The 2015 and 2016 are essentially the same vehicle so its not going to win another award if its the same as the previous year. Also for 2017, keep in mind the CRV has only been out 3 months. Those other CUV's you posted have been out for a full year already, so its no surprise it didn't make the list.

One other thing to note, Car and Driver magazine awarded the 2017 Honda CRV best SUV in it's class:

http://www.caranddriver.com/features/best-compact-suv-honda-cr-v-2017-10best-trucks-and-suvs





Very unlikely the 2017 CX-5 wins any awards as its essentially the same car with a couple of extra options. That and an extra 2HP.

And who cares if the CR-V or Mazda is rated 1 or 2? Honestly, if you like the CR-V so much, go buy one and join the CR-V forums. As other have said, if your sole purpose is to bag on the CX-5 and Mazda in general, why are you here?
 
917bca9dec565441fffbb4517d106f8c.jpg


Honda CR-what? ;) Anybody who cares about styling will be buying a Mazda....

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
 
Agreed! The CX5 has styling that just stands out and when you see it coming down the road, it just makes you go wow. Every other CUV in this class is just so subpar looking. I know its subjective but the CX5 has always be commended for it's styling. I still think the 16 is better looking than the 17 but they're both better looking than any Honda or Toyota.
 
It's completely subjective, but I think the 17 CR-V's aren't much better. Lots of added chrome to distract from the squared off hatch. That's my opinion of current Honda's in general - busy and cluttered.

Agreed. I hate the chrome and the new taillights. We almost bought a 2017 CRV, but it would have been despite its appearance.
 
thats like buying a subaru for it's looks.

Its clear the only thing the 2017 CX5 has over the CRV is looks. That is the only argument most of us have in this forum. As a total package the CRV is obviously the winner.

Especially for young families and those for a complete package of driving comforts and features--not just appearances and obviously why despite what you see in this forum, the national statistics have shown that Honda is the biggest seller. And its due to overall package, not looks.

And funny how before the 2017 CX5 was close to releasing, all 1st gen owners seem to show much hate towards it. (look at the other 2017 cx5 thread) and now when the crv is blasting the competition just to be Mazda loyalist, everyone flocks to the only thing it has (subjectively) over the new CRV which is purely asthetics and looks? pathetic with the gordon ramsay accent.

Once official reviews and comparisons come out for sure that will be all it will be clamoring about. Great exterior looks but not enough to put it past the CRV or even the Rav4. Even the Hyundai Tucson has better overall package of features.
 
Its clear the only thing the 2017 CX5 has over the CRV is looks. That is the only argument most of us have in this forum. As a total package the CRV is obviously the winner.

I haven't driven the CRV but I know it probably still doesn't drive like the CX5. I know based on reviews that it has been improved, but from what I've read, it still doesn't have the same fun factor as the CX5.

Overall package, the new CRV is definitely compelling and is clearly the better option for many people. But for people who are into cars, usually like to enjoy walking up to their car and appreciate styling. Like I do with my cx5. Every time I walk up to it or walk away, I just take in the gorgeous styling. Walking up to a CRV, I know for a fact I wouldn't be happy. So take your 1990s wood interior, and slightly bigger cargo room to fit a couple extra bags of grocers, I'll keep my sexy styling and be happy every time I walk up to or walk away from my CX5.
 
And, of course it's fine, healthy even, to discuss our competitors. But trashing our cars? That's just being a troll. Some, not all of you, are acting like you just can't believe any one buys anything that's not a CR-V. Still no replies on why the smaller much less reliable Jeep is such a great seller.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

I dont thrash the car, the CX5 is a great vehicle especially the 1st gen compared to its comptition through the years. But times have changed and its shown its age. It has a lot less features then many competitors. Remember the demographics who buy this class probably wouln't be able to care or really notice the superior handling. These are new families looking for features over handling. Obviously in this forum people will argue that, but the amount of people in this forum is a minority over the overall population and what they look for.

What people, and myself, are hating on is the reaction of first gen owners to 1) how even their 1st gen is better than the upcoming 2nd gen. I mean come on, that is just reaching. If you look through this thread and the other 2017 cx5 thread it was just comedic to see how many 1st gen owners were trying to justify how theirs is still better than the upcoming 2nd gen. 2) how the 1st gen is still so much more superior than even the new versions of the competition they had been superior over from years past.. best example the 2017 CRV. The crv is a prime example of a total package CUV in that class. It has all the modern and new features one expects not just in the class but when purchasing any car at this price range, MPG, and handling that is on par with the CX5 as per official reviews. I understand this is a CX5 forum, but to see these just left me SMH. And for us potential buyers, we too have our opinion. I narrowed it down to the 17 CX5 and the 17 CRV. After the official dealer line up of the 17 CX5 I was very dissapointed that Mazda only focused on style instead of a more complete package to match the 17 CRV. Part of me liked the 17 CX5 more mainly for looks, but buying a vehicle is not all about looks.
 
When it comes to efficiency, though, the CR-V shames all compact-SUV comers. EPA-rated at 27 mpg in the city and 33 mpg on the highway, the AWD CR-V tops its peers by margins not usually seen within highly competitive segments. That’s a whopping 5 mpg better in both measures than the equivalent all-wheel-drive Escape, which also is powered by a 1.5-liter turbo, as well as the Toyota RAV4 AWD. In our real-world highway fuel-economy test, run at 75 mph, we recorded 32 mpg for the CR-V, just 1 mpg shy of its EPA highway rating.


We measured 0.82 g of grip on the skidpad, where our driver reported mild understeer. That won’t impress many in a world where some cars now routinely approach or surpass the magic 1.00-g figure, but it’s a lot more grip than the 0.75 g mustered by the last Toyota RAV4 AWD we tested, and it even tops the 0.81 g of the 2016 Mazda CX-5, long lauded as the spunkiest handler in the compact-crossover pack.

highway-results-crv-photo-676674-s-original.jpg


Highway Fuel Economy, C/D Test Results: CR-V Turbo 1.5L Inline-4

Ride, Handling, and Steering

The composed and compliant ride of the CR-V makes for pleasant commutes, long or short. In our cornering tests, the Honda actually gripped the road better than the Mazda CX-5, which we’ve praised as one of the best-handling crossovers there is. Again, what makes the CR-V so complete is that it doesn’t punish passengers with a stiff ride. Instead, it rewards drivers with a dynamic chassis and minimal body motion. Sharp steering that is eager without feeling floaty ties everything together and is a big reason why the CR-V is so excellent to drive.

cornering-crv-photo-676593-s-original.jpg


Maximum Cornering Capability, C/D Test Results

The new CRV also demolishes cx5 in braking

braking-crv-photo-676594-s-original.jpg


combined with all the great features its clear why its a winner.

The 2017 cx5 is the same thing in a different exterior package. Not like they added any new creature comforts except the ever so standard power lift gate and vents in the 2nd row. They said updated drivetrain/transmission? LEts see if that will improve mpg with that same 2.5L or if the improve braking.

source
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2017-honda-cr-v-in-depth-model-review
 
Its clear the only thing the 2017 CX5 has over the CRV is looks.

Even the most devoted Honda CRV fans would laugh at this statement.
CX5s two significant selling points are that Auto Transmission and the handling - it is indeed the best handling CUV under 40K. Not sure a CVT will out do it, so along with looks CX5 has these two as a significant selling factor.
Apart from what I mentioned earlier - CX5 feature to feature will sell for 3000 USD less than CRV, if you are a value buyer (which i think you are) - this fact should be made in your posts. Also i dont see yrwei make this point - its not asif Honda is giving you the whole LED world for 30k.

Another thing you said - most folks in city dont need CX5s handling - wrong again, try driving in city with CVTs, you will drive in two modes - a. my car does not care about my throttle input or b. i will have to slam it hard and drive like a jerk (which unfortunately a lot of nissan drivers do) - otherwise merging, changing lanes in city is not easy.
Honda may have improved it a bit for sure, but the jalop article i read went "Honda's CVT is not bad" - not bad does not equal good. Just like CRV is no longer ugly, but it does not mean it looks good.
CRV and Rav4 are fall back options for many buyers - I almost bought a Rav4, thanks to a dealer named Freeman in DFW - he allowed me to take one home and i was sold.

Finally after spelling out 4 or 5 wrong facts that you mentioned - here is another one - almost all 16 CX5 owners liked 17, one of the central theme was - you have to be physically handicapped or 70+ to really be desperate for power lift gate. 2nd was the front grille - some liked it some didnt.
 
thats like buying a subaru for it's looks.

Its clear the only thing the 2017 CX5 has over the CRV is looks. That is the only argument most of us have in this forum. As a total package the CRV is obviously the winner.

Especially for young families and those for a complete package of driving comforts and features--not just appearances and obviously why despite what you see in this forum, the national statistics have shown that Honda is the biggest seller. And its due to overall package, not looks.

And funny how before the 2017 CX5 was close to releasing, all 1st gen owners seem to show much hate towards it. (look at the other 2017 cx5 thread) and now when the crv is blasting the competition just to be Mazda loyalist, everyone flocks to the only thing it has (subjectively) over the new CRV which is purely asthetics and looks? pathetic with the gordon ramsay accent.

Once official reviews and comparisons come out for sure that will be all it will be clamoring about. Great exterior looks but not enough to put it past the CRV or even the Rav4. Even the Hyundai Tucson has better overall package of features.



No kidding, I agree the new CX-5 looks slightly better than the new CRV but as a total package the CX-5 can't really compete with the new CRV. The new CRV was completely re-done while the CX-5 just has some styling updates. Same 5 year old engine, transmission and platform and yet people will still spend top $$$ for it when one could save a ton of cash and buy a 2016.5 model as it's essential the same thing minus a few features. Plus it won't come with those ugly 'flower pedal' wheels like the new CX-5 has.
 
No kidding, I agree the new CX-5 looks slightly better than the new CRV but as a total package the CX-5 can't really compete with the new CRV. The new CRV was completely re-done while the CX-5 just has some styling updates. Same 5 year old engine, transmission and platform and yet people will still spend top $$$ for it when one could save a ton of cash and buy a 2016.5 model as it's essential the same thing minus a few features. Plus it won't come with those ugly 'flower pedal' wheels like the new CX-5 has.

Actually it tells a lot about Honda - it took them 5 years to beat the handling of the CX5 and yet they are out with a CVT - and their handling is only slightly better.
From what reports Japanese friends have - i think 17 CX5 will out handle the CRV.

And lastly on wheels - i dont think any 2017 Honda buyer (civic accord as well) - can point to any wheels and call them ugly. Its like pot call kettle.
 
Even the most devoted Honda CRV fans would laugh at this statement.
CX5s two significant selling points are that Auto Transmission and the handling - it is indeed the best handling CUV under 40K. Not sure a CVT will out do it, so along with looks CX5 has these two as a significant selling factor.
Apart from what I mentioned earlier - CX5 feature to feature will sell for 3000 USD less than CRV, if you are a value buyer (which i think you are) - this fact should be made in your posts. Also i dont see yrwei make this point - its not asif Honda is giving you the whole LED world for 30k


The target audience of these cars are young families. I highly doubt a family of 4 cares about 'good handling' or an 'automatic transmission'. They care more about cargo space, MPG, reliability, comfort, safety and features. The only people that care about 'good handling' and 'automatic transmission' are enthusiasts who are a very small percentage of customers.

And yeah you may not get a full LED package CRV under 30k but at least it is offered as an option. Much like the 2.5T found in the CX-9 should have been offered as an option.

And it's funny how people talk about 'handling' so much, you'd think these people take their CX-5s out to the track every week. And BTW I drive my CRV everyday in the city and guess what? It drives like any other car on the road. You make it sound like the CVT somehow handicaps it. This is my first CVT transmission vehicle and I don't really see a difference in driving between this car and any other car Iv'e owned with a standard transmission.
 
Actually it tells a lot about Honda - it took them 5 years to beat the handling of the CX5 and yet they are out with a CVT - and their handling is only slightly better.
From what reports Japanese friends have - i think 17 CX5 will out handle the CRV.

And lastly on wheels - i dont think any 2017 Honda buyer (civic accord as well) - can point to any wheels and call them ugly. Its like pot call kettle.

The CX5 handling was superior than most other competitors for several years. The CRV never really focused on it until now. Its only a give in a new model should be better. That is why the 2017 is a shame that for a new model nothing has changed.

Your assumptions that the 17 cx5 will out handle the new crv should be thee case because that is all the cx5 really had better for years. But I highly doubt it will be much better if any. And that is not enough to excuse the lack of the total package in the 17 cx5. no standard keyfob remote start or even an option, no hands free tail gate, no android auto or apple car play just to name a few that should be standard these days. Canada models have pano roof too.

So only now the 1st gen cx5 owners are finally rallying behind the upcoming 17 cx5 when all the reviews are crowning the new crv. Just few weeks ago I remember all the 1st gen cx5 owners trashing the 17 cx5 lol
 
I dont thrash the car, the CX5 is a great vehicle especially the 1st gen compared to its comptition through the years. But times have changed and its shown its age. It has a lot less features then many competitors. Remember the demographics who buy this class probably wouln't be able to care or really notice the superior handling. These are new families looking for features over handling. Obviously in this forum people will argue that, but the amount of people in this forum is a minority over the overall population and what they look for.

What people, and myself, are hating on is the reaction of first gen owners to 1) how even their 1st gen is better than the upcoming 2nd gen. I meain come on, that is just reaching. If you look through this thread and the other 2017 cx5 thread it was just comedic to see how many 1st gen owners were trying to justify how theirs is still better than the upcoming 2nd gen. 2) how the 1st gen is still so much more superior than even the new versions of the competition they had been superior over from years past.. best example the 2017 CRV. The crv is a prime example of a total package CUV in that class. It has all the modern and new features one expects not just in the class but when purchasing any car at this price range, MPG, and handling that is on par with the CX5 as per official reviews. I understand this is a CX5 forum, but to see these just left me SMH. And for us potential buyers, we too have our opinion. I narrowed it down to the 17 CX5 and the 17 CRV. After the official dealer line up of the 17 CX5 I was very dissapointed that Mazda only focused on style instead of a more complete package to match the 17 CRV. Part of me liked the 17 CX5 more mainly for looks, but buying a vehicle is not all about looks.
This's a fair post and I agree with you what you've said. But this's CX-5 forum and many people won't agree with your opinion here. Some people here criticize any negative comments which are based on facts, and insist CX-5 is the best looking and the best handling compact CUVs on the market and all people should like the way CX-5 designed for and buy one. Beauty is subjective and best handling is undeniable. But those people failed to understand most potential compact CUV buyers are not looking for good handling only, they want quality、reliability、fuel efficiency、and plenty of features with reasonable price. The sales volume speaks for the preference of consumers and every top 3 compact CUV sells 3 time more units than CX-5! This's a clear indication of people's preference and good looking and good handling don't get you too far in the US! Some people said new CX-5 has Mazda Active Driving Display system (HUD) where 2017 Honda CR-V doesn't have and people should prefer CX-5 because of it. Really? New 2nd-gen CX-9 has HUD where others don't and its sales is so disappointed Mazda can't sell 2017 CX-9 in March of 2017! More people want Apple CarPlay and Android Auto which Mazda refuses to support! I'm also losing confidence on long-term reliability of my CX-5 based on poor quality started to show on these interior plastic trims after two years of ownership. 2016 CX-5 has the most recalls and most complaints in top-10 compact CUVs at NHTSA that's not good either. Although I myself may still seriously consider a 2nd-gen CX-5 in a couple of years when we need another vehicle, but that's because I still have prejudice against turbo and CVT. Otherwise Honda CR-V would be the one. Mazda really needs to step up their quality and features in their vehicles, especially their top-selling CX-5. Cutting corners and offer less features to US customers is not the right way to increase your market share and customer retention rate. You're going to wrong direction and this's "penny wise, pound foolish"!
 
The target audience of these cars are young families. I highly doubt a family of 4 cares about 'good handling' or an 'automatic transmission'. They care more about cargo space, MPG, reliability, comfort, safety and features. The only people that care about 'good handling' and 'automatic transmission' are enthusiasts who are a very small percentage of customers.

And yeah you may not get a full LED package CRV under 30k but at least it is offered as an option. Much like the 2.5T found in the CX-9 should have been offered as an option.

And it's funny how people talk about 'handling' so much, you'd think these people take their CX-5s out to the track every week. And BTW I drive my CRV everyday in the city and guess what? It drives like any other car on the road. You make it sound like the CVT somehow handicaps it. This is my first CVT transmission vehicle and I don't really see a difference in driving between this car and any other car Iv'e owned with a standard transmission.

I agree, only a small percentage of customers care about handling and having a good transmission.
That small percentage of CUV shoppers are the ones that end up with a CX-5 despite the CX-5's shortcomings.

The only thing that Mazda really stands out on the Mazda is good handling (and MPG with the 2.0L)

The customers that just want cargo space, reliability, comfort, safety and features go buy a CR-V, RAV4 or one of the other 10 CUV's out there.
Some people wanting those things get a CX-5 by mistake and proceed to complain about how loud it is or how it doesn't have some stupid feature.

Good thing you bought a CR-V. All the good qualities of the Mazda would be wasted on you.
 
The target audience of these cars are young families. I highly doubt a family of 4 cares about 'good handling' or an 'automatic transmission'. They care more about cargo space, MPG, reliability, comfort, safety and features. The only people that care about 'good handling' and 'automatic transmission' are enthusiasts who are a very small percentage of customers.

And yeah you may not get a full LED package CRV under 30k but at least it is offered as an option. Much like the 2.5T found in the CX-9 should have been offered as an option.

And it's funny how people talk about 'handling' so much, you'd think these people take their CX-5s out to the track every week. And BTW I drive my CRV everyday in the city and guess what? It drives like any other car on the road. You make it sound like the CVT somehow handicaps it. This is my first CVT transmission vehicle and I don't really see a difference in driving between this car and any other car Iv'e owned with a standard transmission.

That is continuously the argument here. Now that there is another CUV in the same class that outhandles what the CX5 has always had the crown for, it's as if they feel threatened.

Honestly I'm the target audience. I always known of the Cx5s great handling reputation but I didn't care for that. I care more for the total package. I have a damn car if I wanted great handling. Ultimately that is why I waited a few years because the Ford Escape had all these cool new tech features but i didnt want a Ford. the first gen cx5 I could tell was aging when I saw it didnt even have a power lift gate or vents in the back. This was a few years ago. I was counting on the upcoming cx5 and crv for better features, and indeed the crv came up big. I really would have liked the cx5 to have similar matching features but it doesnt.

My wife test drove the 17 crv touring and the cvt didnt bother her nor myself. i mean for the most part it didnt even bother the many professional reviewers that have reviewed the crv. so i guess thats a great thing. As for handling again, shes coming from a 20 year old suv, even the worse handling cuv in this current class would have been better. its just a bonus to officially know the crv now handles just as great if not outhandles the CX5, but again not something we really cared for. We're not going to be pushing the limits of a winding road to even notice. We're not at Laguna Seca trying to shave off .08 seconds on the S Curve. The cvt argument again is one that the cx5 community will throw in to justify how it is inferior. But it did not bother myself or my wife--nor will it bother anay other soccer mom. Car and Driver calls it on of the only acceptable CVTs out there, other reviews indicated the same if not even noticing the difference. So its even hard to use the CVT as a negative unless one is being anal and simply prefers a standard no matter what...... (blondes despite the burnette looking just as good or better just because i prefer blondes)

Now you have the current cx5 owners in a rut. They dont know if they should continue to be against the 2nd gen 2017 cx5 or rally behind it against the crv, or if they should continue to try and find reasoning that the cx5 is still both superior than the new crv and the new cx5.
 
The CX5 handling was superior than most other competitors for several years. The CRV never really focused on it until now.
You do realize that it takes few years to do a full refresh? Its not like 2 months before CRV released honda thought lets make it handle better. So no, Honda did not focus on it now, it was part of the whole package when they thought about it few years ago - still fact remains it just barely bettered it.

Your assumptions that the 17 cx5 will out handle the new crv should be thee case because that is all the cx5 really had better for years. But I highly doubt it will be much better if any. And that is not enough to excuse the lack of the total package in the 17 cx5. no standard keyfob remote start or even an option, no hands free tail gate, no android auto or apple car play just to name a few that should be standard these days. Canada models have pano roof too.
In a similar vein CVT turns of certain enthusiasts, the front which looks like Mitsubishi Outlander and Toyota Highlander mix and the fake wood trim would turn few off.
So yeah the point that we should buy CRV because another 300K families did is silly - remember the average guy is risk averse and not very knowledgeable about cars. They will buy based on what their family or friends recommend - on which Honda has 2+ decades of sales and reliability.
Also note - for all those features you will be paying a premium over Mazda.

Consider this as well - Mazda is bringing a 2.2 D as well. Its going be rated as 38 mpg or so compared to gas engines. 310 lb ft of torque. All those TDI owners that want a little extra to go from A to B - will be eyeing that up.
 
CVT top trim starts about $4k more (than the 2016.5 I think?) That's not a small chunk of change.
 
Back