Official 2017 2nd-Gen CX-5 EPA Fuel Economy Ratings Are Out

15,000 miles a year, 30 mpg, $4/gallon gas = $2,000
15,000 miles a year, 34 mpg, $4/gallon gas = $1,765

Joy of driving a CX-5? PRICELESS!
 
They are both compact SUV's within a few thousand dollars of each other. Just because you think that the CX-5 "feels sportier" (even though the numbers and tests show the CR-V to be the more agile), does not mean it's "apples to oranges". These two are DIRECTLY going head to head for sales.

Same price segment but they are very different. Something tells me that you did zero research before buying cx5. Ford Kuga would have been a better fit for you.
 
Same price segment but they are very different. Something tells me that you did zero research before buying cx5. Ford Kuga would have been a better fit for you.

And you would be 100% correct. Uno has stated several times that he showed up to a dealer that had a cx5 on a lot and he bought it with having done very little research.
 
I personally would not buy the new CR-V this year.

1) I am done buying new cars.
2) I would like to know if that new engine is any good long term or not. At least let a few get out there with 50K miles on 'em.

the 1.5T has been in the highly rated civic for the pass 2 years? Great engine, and has great potential as seen here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VILKSKJm5qM&feature=youtu.be

once some of those flashes and mods make it to the crv, its going to be a fun car
 
I see lots of talk about the CR-V and how it compares to the CX-5. It doesn't... but in the vaguest way: They're both automobiles but the comparison is like apples to oranges.
-
IMO.

Wht are you CX5 owners thinking that they don't compare? same class, same price range. If the CX5 doesnt compete with the CRV, you best not think it competes with the RAV4 or Ford Escape. Are you guys that pretentious, you feel the almighty CX5 can only compare to the likes of the ACURA RDX or BMW 1 SERIES lol. come on now.

Same price segment but they are very different. Something tells me that you did zero research before buying cx5. Ford Kuga would have been a better fit for you.

how are they "VERY DIFFERENT"? its the same class. I'm going to have to repeat Unobtanium . These go head to head. Mazda rushed this new cx5 and did not realize honda was bringing so much to the table. Read the reviews. The new CRV is actually more sportier and handles better, and brakes better than the cx5. and looks like it already beat the cx5 in mpg. on top of the loads of great features.

im sure Unobtanium did research. when you research cx5 or crv. the 2 will always cross paths ALONG with the ford escape, and the rav4.

mazda just dropped the ball and only focused on the exterior.
 
Last edited:
The CX-5 and CR-V absolutely do compete but they appeal to different buyers within the segment IMO. CR-V the more left brained option, practical above all else. CX-5 buyer wants something a bit different, more engaging, maybe doesn't need all the space, practicality and value the CR-V provides. Unob- I'm telling you there's ZERO chance I'd drive the new CR-V as aggressively as my CX-5 with the 'better handling', 'faster' attributes you like to cite over and over again per very slightly better performance numbers. Why? It doesn't 'want' to, its just not at home doing it, its not nearly as gratifying to drive briskly- from hard acceleration feel to throwing it into a corner you know its an appliance- it works- is it fun? Nope- its a better mousetrap- still boring, still practical, still a great value if you don't go all the way up the ladder. For me (former CR-V owner, few BMWs, MR2, etc) the CX-5 was/is an epiphany- I get my practical ride (albeit somewhat less so) and still get to have some fun while driving.
 
Last edited:
"a bit different"...Yep..That describes me. That's why I drive a Mazda not a Jeep...Or a Honda.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
 
I get my practical ride (albeit somewhat less so) and still get to have some fun while driving.

Bingo! No other vehicle in this class of CUVs will achieve this. Some like every gadget, feature, and wood trim. I need an CUV that is awd(let's not all forget how advanced the Mazda system is compared to the reactive system found in Honda), practical, and still really fun. That's why imo the CX5 still beats even the new CRV.
 
I find it humorous when people start talking about driving a 184HP SUV 'aggressively'. LOL as if these sub-200 HP SUV's are M3's or something. Back when I got my 05 Mazda3 several years ago, I saw the same kind of stuff posted online about this car on Mazda3 forums. By the way some people were talking about their Mazda3 you would think they take their cars out to the track every week.
 
I find it humorous when people start talking about driving a 184HP SUV 'aggressively'. LOL as if these sub-200 HP SUV's are M3's or something. Back when I got my 05 Mazda3 several years ago, I saw the same kind of stuff posted online about this car on Mazda3 forums. By the way some people were talking about their Mazda3 you would think they take their cars out to the track every week.

The fact that you chose a CRV, explains that you don't have the same thinking many of us have as CX5 owners. Which is totally fine. I don't expect you to understand. You prefer to have your wood trim, light up buttons, and extra space. Nothing wrong with that. We like a car that is fun to drive, great awd, great transmission, and CAN be driven aggressively when desired.

Btw, I find it hilarious that you define horsepower as a deciding factor as to whether a vehicle can be driven aggressively or not. The 155hp MX-5 has a word for you. Once again, proving that you clearly lack the driving spirit and understanding that many of us have here. Yes, it's an SUV but I know you're driving home the whole hp point.

Here, I'll help you out. Click here--->http://www.crvownersclub.com/forums/
 
redturboeclipse said:
how are they "VERY DIFFERENT"? its the same class. I'm going to have to repeat Unobtanium . These go head to head. Mazda rushed this new cx5 and did not realize honda was bringing so much to the table. Read the reviews. The new CRV is actually more sportier and handles better, and brakes better than the cx5.

Lol. So you are bringing a CVT to compete with Mazda cx5 transmission? Which is the best in this class and the next? ($ 45k luxury segment)

Alex on autos : cx5 over NX 200t for a drivers cuv. That's the Lexus NX 200t.
Many reviewers: cx5 is best handling cuv under 40k.

Listen, even the juke and kia soul are priced similar... Has similar cargo - but target audience is different.


Mazda is driver oriented, CR-V is cargo and passenger. Its that simple. Generic buyers trying to maximize value should buy CR-V over cx-5.
Alex summed it up best: CR-V, Rav4 and rogue appeal to my practical side, cx5 appeals to the emotional. Alex rocks.
 
I find it humorous when people start talking about driving a 184HP SUV 'aggressively'. LOL as if these sub-200 HP SUV's are M3's or something. Back when I got my 05 Mazda3 several years ago, I saw the same kind of stuff posted online about this car on Mazda3 forums. By the way some people were talking about their Mazda3 you would think they take their cars out to the track every week.
I find it humorous you keep beating this point to death. Have you driven them both? I have. I bought the one I liked driving better. No...Not a race car driver...But when I popped that thing into Sport and blew past the car in front of me like he was standing still? Sold.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
 
Same price segment but they are very different. Something tells me that you did zero research before buying cx5. Ford Kuga would have been a better fit for you.

What's a Kuga?

That said, no, I didn't do any* research. But I'm very happy with my CX-5, it's a great appliance.



*I randomly Googled SUV's a few years back, and off and on out of curiosity while I had my Jeep Grand Cherokee, and noted that the CX5 kept doing well in CR for reliability and when my Jeep finally pissed me off for the last time, at 5am, I pulled up Autotrader and typed "50mi radius, AWD, SUV, NAV, 2013+, <45,000mi, $25,000 max" and went and bought the closest one to me that came up. It happened to be a CX5 2.5L AWD Touring.

Sadly, I have to pay another $500 if I actually WANT the NAV feature, lol! I'm used to domestics, where if it has nave...bro...IT HAS NAV!
 
Last edited:
I find it humorous you keep beating this point to death. Have you driven them both? I have. I bought the one I liked driving better. No...Not a race car driver...But when I popped that thing into Sport and blew past the car in front of me like he was standing still? Sold.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Oh sweet Jesus.

This is worse than the Civic owners when I was in highschool (VTEC, YO! has been replaced with "SPORT MODE, YO!" Except VTEC actually did something to make the vehicle faster.).

This thing barely breaks into the 15's and won't even trap 90mph in the quarter.

You might as well tell us how sold you are on boxing after knocking a 2 year old down at the supermarket with "a single massive punch!" ROFL!
 
Lol. So you are bringing a CVT to compete with Mazda cx5 transmission? Which is the best in this class and the next? ($ 45k luxury segment)

Alex on autos : cx5 over NX 200t for a drivers cuv. That's the Lexus NX 200t.
Many reviewers: cx5 is best handling cuv under 40k.

Listen, even the juke and kia soul are priced similar... Has similar cargo - but target audience is different.


Mazda is driver oriented, CR-V is cargo and passenger. Its that simple. Generic buyers trying to maximize value should buy CR-V over cx-5.
Alex summed it up best: CR-V, Rav4 and rogue appeal to my practical side, cx5 appeals to the emotional. Alex rocks.

This is true, but also consider that a Mercedes C63 AMG is going to beat the everloving crap out of a Dodge Challenger. I guess the Challenger is "a better driver's car..." though? Kindof the same thing here CR-V vs. CX-5, except the disparity is more like "razor thin".
 
The CX-5 and CR-V absolutely do compete but they appeal to different buyers within the segment IMO. CR-V the more left brained option, practical above all else. CX-5 buyer wants something a bit different, more engaging, maybe doesn't need all the space, practicality and value the CR-V provides. Unob- I'm telling you there's ZERO chance I'd drive the new CR-V as aggressively as my CX-5 with the 'better handling', 'faster' attributes you like to cite over and over again per very slightly better performance numbers. Why? It doesn't 'want' to, its just not at home doing it, its not nearly as gratifying to drive briskly- from hard acceleration feel to throwing it into a corner you know its an appliance- it works- is it fun? Nope- its a better mousetrap- still boring, still practical, still a great value if you don't go all the way up the ladder. For me (former CR-V owner, few BMWs, MR2, etc) the CX-5 was/is an epiphany- I get my practical ride (albeit somewhat less so) and still get to have some fun while driving.

I do freely admit that I like the "feel" of the CX-5. It does very well at what you say. This said, that had nothing to do with why I bought it, and is simply a by-product of chance. Nor would it sell me on it again, over another vehicle, if the other vehicle was proven to be more reliable or was more well equipped or cheaper in the correct proportions.
 
Ford Escape is kuga internationally.

except the disparity is more like "razor thin".
[\QUOTE]
Ok, never knew you test drove the CRV.
I didn't have to. I can look at the specs and tell you how they perform. I'm not talking about "feel", I'm talking about performance.

The Escape is a POS. It's very unreliable based on the numbers, it's slow, it has low capacity, it has poor economy, its...why would I ever buy that!?

I think the Forester 2.0XT would have been better suited to my wants, but I didn't feel like spending the money, and my CX-5 has done everything I wanted it to do, I just feel no connection to it. I have no emotions at all regarding it unless it were to break (kindof like a refrigerator or hot water heater).
 
Back