- :
- RDX Aspec Adv.
Considering I AVERAGE 22.5mpg in my CX-5 highway and city, I'm completely on board with that CRV data!
Official 2017 2nd-Gen CX-5 EPA Fuel Economy Ratings Are Out
- Thread starter yrwei52
- Start date
Considering I AVERAGE 22.5mpg in my CX-5 highway and city, I'm completely on board with that CRV data!
7eregrine
The man, the myth, the legend
- :
- Land of Cleve
- :
- 2016.5 CX5
- :
- Plano, Texas, USA
MSRP Comparison
No, if you read my post, I was simply trying to correct the false statement made by Kaps. He was initially saying top-of-line Honda CR-V Touring AWD (with no more factory options to select) is $4,000 more than top-of-line CX-5 GT AWD with Tech and i-ActivSense Packages! He then changed to $3,500 after I made the first correction. But he started saying mid-trim CR-V EX is $2,000 more expensive than CX-5 mid-trim Touring. The fact of the matter it's not and mid-trim CR-V EX actually offers unbelievably more features than CX-5 Touring! Yeah we can talk trash to Honda CR-V here, but we shouldn't keep posting false information to the board!
- :
- Plano, Texas, USA
MSRP Comparison
Can you read the fine print then make the comment? That 19" wheels are dealer-installed accessory available on all trim levels for 2017 Honda CR-V. It's silly to add those dealer-installed accessories into the price comparison! Besides, what's wrong with stock 18" wheels for CR-V Touring? Why do you need 19" wheels? I bet not many people can tell the difference between 18" and 19" wheels sizewise. Not to mention you have a lot more selections with cheaper price on 18" replacement tires!
Again, please be a responsible poster! Lowering your number from $4,000 to $3,500 is not good enough.The fact is MSRP for the top-of-line 2017 Honda CR-V Touring AWD is $33,695 and the top-of-line 2017 Mazda CX-5 GT AWD with Premium Package is $32,525. The difference is $1,070! Not to mention CR-V has factory cargo cover and roof rails, whereas you have to pay $575 MSRP for them on CX-5!
$2,000 more on middle trim? 2017 Honda CR-V EX FWD is $26,696 and 2017 Mazda CX-5 Touring FWD is $25,915. CR-V EX has a lot more amenities than CX-5 such as Remote Engine Start、18" Alloy Wheels、Multi-angle Rearview Camera with Dynamic Guidelines、Honda Sensing Suite、Auto-on/off Headlights w/Auto High-beam、One-touch Power Moonroof、Foglights、Heated Side Mirrors、Retractable Cargo Cover、Power Windows w/Illuminated Switches & One-touch Auto-up/down on both Front Windows、12-way Power Driver's Seat、Apple CarPlay & Android Auto. BTW Honda Sensing Suite is like Mazda's i-ActivSense Package with the following features:
Now with $781 more you get these many more features on Honda CR-V mid-trim EX, which one is the better buy?!
- LaneWatch Display
- Blind Spot Indicator
- Multi-Angle Rearview Camera
- Collision Mitigation Braking System
- Lane Departure Warning
- Forward Collision Warning
- Lane Keeping Assist System
- Rear Cross Traffic Monitor
- Adaptive Cruise Control
- Road Departure Mitigation System
And everybody knows CR-V is one of the compact CUVs with the best resale value:
2017 Best Resale Value Awards: Compact Suv/Crossover
Still not conclusive which is the better buy.
The Honda CR-V EX FWD is $26,696 and the CR-V mid-trim EX is $27477
CX-5 Touring $25,915 has a six-way power drivers seat, leatherette seating surfaces with Lux Suede inserts, Blind Spot Monitoring with Rear Cross-Traffic Alert, heated front seats, rear privacy glass, auto-leveling LED headlights, a six-speaker audio system, Mazda Advanced Keyless Entry, leather-wrapped steering wheel and shifter handle, illuminated vanity mirrors, a rear center armrest, rear HVAC vents, dual-zone climate control, rear USB ports and a reclining rear bench seat.
Further building on CX-5 Touring is the Preferred Equipment Package $780, which includes a BOSE 10-speaker audio system with CenterPoint 2 and AudioPilot 2, a power glass moonroof, power liftgate, navigation, auto-dimming mirrors with Homelink and auto on/off headlights. Customers can also opt for the Touring i-ACTIVSENSE Package $625, adding High Beam Control, Lane-Departure Warning, Lane-Keep Assist, Mazda Radar Cruise Control and Smart Brake Support.
The Mazda CX-5 Touring with the above packages is $26,540.
Now knowing you, you will probably probably list some feature the CR-V has that the CX-5 doesn't. Care to list the features the CX-5 has that the CR-V doesn't or are you going to say the CR-V has everything that the CX-5 has got to offer? Really? The CR-V has a 10 speaker Bose Audio System, reclining rear bench seat or auto-levelling LED headlights? Maybe some but not all.
Point of the matter is, everything is pretty much relative depending on an individual's needs. To blatantly declare the CR-V is a better buy is false. Some may feel having 19" rims are more important than having illuminated window switches.
- :
- Plano, Texas, USA
I bet you simply just copy shaendra's comment and didn't know that 19" wheels are dealer installed accessories! We compare MSRP's but not dealer installed accessories! Besides, why do we need $2,265 dealer-installed 19" wheels when we have perfectly fine stock 18" wheels? Not to mention we can have more and cheaper selections on 18" replacement tires when there's a need. ADD HUD? Wait until you have a broken windshield and from CX-5's track record and NHTSA's data, chances are our CX-5's windshield will break at certain point!Not to mention, CX5 comes with 19s, Honda charges 2500 for it. Please add that - also as stated CX5s HUD has more info than a BMW M4
But there are two huge penalties you pay even if features even out yrwei - its a CVT. ITS A CVT!!!!!!
With that tiny turbo and CVT - you can kiss that 30 mpg combined good bye - so in effect its about 1~2 mpg less than CX5 for suburban drivers (Costs about $1400 over 10 years) - so the resale as I stated has to be about $1000 (MSRP difference) + $2500 (wheels) + $1400 xtra Fuel = $4900 more than 10 year old CX5 which is not happening.
So you have actually convinced me that CR-V over 10 years top trim will be $4900 more expensive than CX-5. Ofcourse i have not added any CVT tax to this which is about $120 a year so your total is $6100. I dont think your 10 year old CR-V will outsell a 10 year old CX-5 with 6100 dollars. Not happening.
Summary : You will pay $6100 extra driving a CR-V over 10 years and might recoup $700 or so more in resale. Net is 5400 loss
How do you know Honda CR-V 1.5T can't have better gas mileage than your Mazda CX-5? Even from many people here preferred Fuelly data shows 2017 CR-V with 1.5L turbo has better combined gas mileage (28.19 mpg) than 2016 CX-5 (26.06 mpg from dougal's post):
So all of your calculation of paying "$6100 extra driving a CR-V over 10 years and might recoup $700 or so more in resale" is simply baseless and silly!
Hey, just saying if I pick the 19" wheels, the price goes up by $2.2k... Wanna pick all options on the CRV that are on the GT,
gotta pick up the 19" wheels.
- :
- Plano, Texas, USA
MSRP Comparison
The long list in my previous post are the features from mid-trim 2017 Honda CR-V EX but not on mid-trim 2017 CX-5 Touring. Of course CX-5 Touring does have a couple of features, such as Auto-leveling LED Headlights and Leather-wrapped Steering Wheel & Shift Knob, that's about it! Basically 2017 CX-5 Touring has to add both Preferred Equipment Package and i-ActivSense Package to make it compatible with CR-V EX and an advantage of Bose system! But that'll make the price of Touring suddenly became $29,320 MSRP! This's so obvious that CR-V EX is a better buy than CX-5 Touring no matter how you look at it!
Yeah, I do agree everything is relative depending on an individual's needs and preference. Some may feel having 19" rims are more important than having illuminated window switches. If you read my previous posts I simply was trying to correct MSRP differential between CX-5 and CR-V posted by others. No other purpose intended.
Ha, I was just about to say Santa Claus is coming in March? (whistle) We're not going to get Touring Preferred Equipment Package for $780 and Touring i-ActivSense Package for $625! These simply a misprint and they should be $1,780 and $1,625 respectively!
The long list in my previous post are the features from mid-trim 2017 Honda CR-V EX but not on mid-trim 2017 CX-5 Touring. Of course CX-5 Touring does have a couple of features, such as Auto-leveling LED Headlights and Leather-wrapped Steering Wheel & Shift Knob, that's about it! Basically 2017 CX-5 Touring has to add both Preferred Equipment Package and i-ActivSense Package to make it compatible with CR-V EX and an advantage of Bose system! But that'll make the price of Touring suddenly became $29,320 MSRP! This's so obvious that CR-V EX is a better buy than CX-5 Touring no matter how you look at it!
Yeah, I do agree everything is relative depending on an individual's needs and preference. Some may feel having 19" rims are more important than having illuminated window switches. If you read my previous posts I simply was trying to correct MSRP differential between CX-5 and CR-V posted by others. No other purpose intended.
- :
- Plano, Texas, USA
You difinitely don't know the difference between factory options and dealer-installed accessories. You can pick up any aftermarket 19" wheels with a lot cheaper price! How much difference between stock 18" wheel and 19" wheel? 1 inch in diameter! I bet you can't tell the difference even if they lay side by side!
Ha, I was just about to say Santa Claus is coming in March? (whistle) We're not going to get Touring Preferred Equipment Package for $780 and Touring i-ActivSense Package for $625! These simply a misprint and they should be $1,780 and $1,625 respectively!
The long list in my previous post are the features from mid-trim 2017 Honda CR-V EX but not on mid-trim 2017 CX-5 Touring. Of course CX-5 Touring does have a couple of features, such as Auto-leveling LED Headlights and Leather-wrapped Steering Wheel & Shift Knob, that's about it! Basically 2017 CX-5 Touring has to add both Preferred Equipment Package and i-ActivSense Package to make it compatible with CR-V EX and an advantage of Bose system! But that'll make the price of Touring suddenly became $29,320 MSRP! This's so obvious that CR-V EX is a better buy than CX-5 Touring no matter how you look at it!
Yeah, I do agree everything is relative depending on an individual's needs and preference. Some may feel having 19" rims are more important than having illuminated window switches. If you read my previous posts I simply was trying to correct MSRP differential between CX-5 and CR-V posted by others. No other purpose intended.
Where does it say the listed prices are a misprint and now listed with the correct prices? I'm interested to know since Mazda USA press release figures are a mistake according to you.
Even if it were the case, how do you quantify that the CR-V is a better buy? Does the CR-V have G-Vectoring technology or Stop-Start engine technology? So how do you quantify all this? What price do you put on each feature? We can debate on how much each feature is worth over the other till the cows come home.
For your information, my wife won't even look at the CR-V no matter how many more features it has over the CX-5 which is debatable. It's ugly in her eyes. It looks like a mini-van with that short bonnet. The fact that the CX-5 would put a smile on my face when I drive it and admire the the styling of it is priceless! To us that is the better buy. Quantify that. You won't convince me otherwise.
Seems like you have some sort of agenda because you seem to be quick to dismiss the features the CX-5 has over CR-V. I find HUD tech to be pretty cool and better than say a one-touch moon roof on/off switch and it's another safety tech which many other competitors don't but of course you have to shoot it down because the glass manufacturing must be the same as the previous gen CX-5 right? How about all the tech the CR-V supposedly have over the CX-5, what if those break down? Gonna cost a lot to fix it hey? Or are you saying the CR-V is bullet proof? So if I join the CR-V forum I will find that their cars don't have no issues what so ever?
You could say the same for every other comparable feature. 19s are obviously a more expensive option. If they are not, then stick with the 17s on the CX-5 it will even save you less on tires than the 18s!
It's not up to you to say why someone need 19" rims or not. You seem to fight the cause for a CR-V strongly here for reasons unknown. BTW I sure as hell can tell the difference between 18 and 19 inch wheels.
I will try to continue to talk about the CX-5 since this the forum it belongs to and try to avoid talking too much about the CR-V acknowledging the fact it is a good package, not necessarily better but it's not for me.
Last edited:
Yrwei you have more than enough automotive knowledge to understand why a tiny 1.5 turbo will find it hard to hit city EPA estimates. So far there are three reviews that have this as their city mpg:
Car n driver 21.1
Jalopnik 23 (combined not even city)
Another one 20.1 (Google 17 crv real world mpg one of the first rssults).
Besides CR-V has a decade of underperforming mpg. I never knew 2016s did 23 combined pitiful.
Plus I can quote what you said about Volvo S60 when I was looking for options for my 2nd car: if you want reliability stay away from turbo.
Now what happened to that advice?
If you are driving 65 mph on hwy and use cruise - by all means CR-V will be economical. The moment you ask for more from that engine you will get mpg of a V6.
No i did not copy his comments, btw have you seen the stock Honda wheels? If not I urge you not to Google them. Its a necessity to replace them for a fair comparison.
Honda is so far behind in the looks department that the wheels needed parity. Hence i included them.
Otherwise along with CVT tax, we have to add the ugly duckling tax which still means its net negative 5400.
I assume the CR-V 1.5T and CX-5 2.5 both take regular unleaded fuel?
- :
- RDX Aspec Adv.
Exactly. I need a vehicle that on those days, I can count on. A perfect example is this year. I went to bed at 65*F. I woke up to 24*F and ice all over the roads. I had to make it work. My CX-5 and the tires I chose to have on it, made it happen.
- :
- RDX Aspec Adv.
87 octane/92 RON/85 MON. I specify, because of regional differences, and I have no CLUE what AUS is labelled as.
- :
- RDX Aspec Adv.
But that highway mileage more than makes up for it. I only get 22-23 combined in my CX5 when I do a lot of highway (60/40 ish), and this Honda would boost me above that. Great touring ride. You need to decide what kind of driving you do. NYC? Get the CX-5. Texas? Get the Honda.
1
123373
Well I would gladly give up a few MPG if the CX 5 was able to merge in highway traffic without having to say "I think I can, I think I can". We never got more than 24.5 in 4 years of owning ours.
