Your Best Source for Genuine Mazda Parts!
Your Best Source for Genuine Mazda Parts!
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 59

Thread: Mazda CX-5 2017 and 2016.5 US/NA Spec Comparison

  1. #16
    ZOOOOOOOOOM ZOOOOOOOOOOOM mazdadude's Avatar

    '16.5 Mazda CX-5 Touring AWD, '09 Mazdaspeed3

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Red Bluff, CA
    Posts
    2,741
    Quote Originally Posted by Monterra View Post
    So is the touring preferred package seriously $780? Did they really botch this in the official press kit?
    Why would you think that is a wrong price?
    Mazda's I have owned over the years.
    80' Mazda GLC SPORT MT - sold
    81' Mazda 626 DX MT - sold
    81' Mazda 626 LX AT - sold
    82' Mazda 626 DX MT - sold
    82' Mazda 626 LX AT - sold
    85' Mazda 626 LX MT - sold
    87' Mazda 626 GT Turbo MT - sold
    85' Mazda RX-7 GSL-SE MT- sold
    87' Mazda RX-7 Turbo 2 MT - sold
    91' Mazda Protege LX MT - sold
    92' Mazda MX-5 Miata MT - sold
    93' Mazda MX-3 GS-V6 Special Edition MT - sold
    00' Mazda 626 LX-V6 MT - sold
    02.5' Mazda Protege5 MT - sold
    92' Mazda MX-5 Miata MT - sold
    06' Mazda 5 Touring AT - sold
    13' Mazda CX-5 Touring AT - sold
    14' Mazda 3i Grand Touring MT - sold
    15' Mazda CX-5 Touring AWD AT - sold
    03' Mazda Protege5 AT - sold
    16.5' Mazda CX-5 Touring AWD AT - current
    09' Mazda Mazdaspeed3 GT - current

  2. #17
    Registered Member yrwei52's Avatar
    Donated: $8

    2016 Mazda CX-5 GT AWD w/Tech

    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Plano, Texas, USA
    Posts
    4,745

    Arrow Mazda CX-5 2017 and 2016.5 US/NA Spec Comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by mazdadude View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Monterey View Post
    So is the touring preferred package seriously $780? Did they really botch this in the official press kit?
    Why would you think that is a wrong price?
    For 2016.5 CX-5 Touring,

    Moonroof/Bose Package (Power sliding-glass moonroof、Bose® Centerpoint® Surround Sound System with AudioPilot®、9 Speakers) is $1,130.

    Touring Technology Package (Auto On/Off LED Headlights、LED Foglights、LED Rear Combination Lights、LED Daytime Running Lights、Adaptive Front Lighting System (AFS) w/Auto Leveling、Rain-Sensing Wipers、Smart City Brake Support、Auto Dim Mirror w/Homelink®) is $1,275.

    According to press kit for 2017 CX-5 Touring,

    Touring Preferred Equipment Package (Auto-dimming Rearview Mirror with HomeLink®、Automatic On/off Headlights、Rain-sensing Variable-intermittent Windshield Wipers、Bose® 10-Speaker Audio Sound System with Centerpoint® and AudioPilot® Mazda Navigation System、Power Sliding-glass Moonroof with One-touch Open Feature and Interior Sunshade、Power Rear Liftgate) is $780.

    Touring i-ActivSense® Package (High Beam Control、Lane Departure Warning with Lane-keep Assist、Mazda Radar Cruise Control with Stop and Go、Smart Brake Support、Auto-dimming Rearview Mirror with HomeLink®、Automatic On/off Headlights、Rain-sensing Variable-intermittent Windshield Wipers) is $625.

    Grand Touring Premium Package (2-position Memory Driver’s Seat、6-way Power Adjustable Passenger Seat、Active Driving Display with Traffic Sign Recognition、Heated Rear Seats、Heated Steering Wheel、Windshield Wiper De-icer) is $1,830.

    The sales manager of my Mazda dealer checked his computer and told me the MSRP for Touring Preferred Equipment Package is $1,535 and Touring i-ActivSense Package is $945. Grand Touring Premium Package is $1,835.

    $780 for Touring Preferred Equipment Package and $625 for Touring i-ActivSense Package are too good to be true. And you can only select one package out of the two. You can't have both! I guess we'll find out for sure around tax day!

  3. #18
    Registered Member banjos-n-beer's Avatar

    2014 QX70 AWD

    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    1,034
    Somewhere, I read you can get both option packages on the 2017 Touring. Just not sure where I saw it. So there could be a few booboos out there. But if that option pricing is wrong, they should fix that asap.

  4. #19
    Registered Member

    '16 CX-5 GT

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    205
    If I was choosing based on these specs, I would go with the 2016.5. Slightly better gas, more ground clearance, more room in 2nd row, hits max hp and torq at lower numbers.

  5. #20
    Registered Member

    2013 CX-5 6MT

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    socal
    Posts
    708
    Quote Originally Posted by Scythe024 View Post
    If I was choosing based on these specs, I would go with the 2016.5. Slightly better gas, more ground clearance, more room in 2nd row, hits max hp and torq at lower numbers.
    +1

    But... the specs don't tell half the story here.
    They don't tell you how much quieter the 2017 is.. and fuel economy for most will be the same.

    I bet the AWD makes like 184lb-ft@ 3250 vs 185@ 3250 and they both make 185lb-ft at 4000.
    I also bet they both still make 184HP@5700RPM.. but instead of falling off after that they continue making more power untill the new peak of 187@6000.

    Doesn't the AWD use a different exhaust pipe than the FWD to get around the AWD system? maybe that's why there is a marginal loss in low end torque?

  6. #21
    Registered Member


    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    124
    Anyone notice the distinct decrease in MPG for the FWD version?

    EPA-estimated MPG
    2017 2016.5
    27 / 24 / 31 - FWD 29 / 26 / 33 - FWD

  7. #22
    Registered Member yrwei52's Avatar
    Donated: $8

    2016 Mazda CX-5 GT AWD w/Tech

    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Plano, Texas, USA
    Posts
    4,745

    Arrow Mazda CX-5 2017 and 2016.5 US/NA Spec Comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by banjos-n-beer View Post
    Somewhere, I read you can get both option packages on the 2017 Touring. Just not sure where I saw it. So there could be a few booboos out there. But if that option pricing is wrong, they should fix that asap.
    Here is 2017 CX-5 Line-up Dealer info provided by Ride92 used by Mazda dealers. It does say Touring "PACKAGES (CANNOT BE COMBINED)":

    Quote Originally Posted by Ride92 View Post
    I know the sales manager very well and he shouldn't give me wrong info on MSRP because he knows I'm going to bring potential customers in. He had placed many 2017 CX-5 orders and should get them by April 15th.

  8. #23
    Registered Member yrwei52's Avatar
    Donated: $8

    2016 Mazda CX-5 GT AWD w/Tech

    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Plano, Texas, USA
    Posts
    4,745

    Arrow Mazda CX-5 2017 and 2016.5 US/NA Spec Comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by xwedge View Post
    Anyone notice the distinct decrease in MPG for the FWD version?

    EPA-estimated MPG
    2017 2016.5
    27 / 24 / 31 - FWD 29 / 26 / 33 - FWD
    Yes we've noticed it and was wondering why. Both FWD and AWD gain some weight, and the gear ratios are the same. But the EPA ratings downgraded more on FWD than AWD. Even with new EPA fuel economy calculation which made 2016.5 AWD dropped from 30 to 29 mpg on highway, it didn't affect the ratings on 2016.5 FWD.

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

  9. #24
    ZOOOOOOOOOM ZOOOOOOOOOOOM mazdadude's Avatar

    '16.5 Mazda CX-5 Touring AWD, '09 Mazdaspeed3

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Red Bluff, CA
    Posts
    2,741
    There was a change in the testing procedures by the government for 2017 MODEL YEAR VEHICLES.

    Here is the link to the testing changes. https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/ratings.shtml

    Another reason why the CX-9 was a 2016 MY, and the CX-5 update was downgraded to 2016.5 MY ?

    The 2017's Have a newer piston design, a different piston shape, and they are faster revving also.
    Last edited by mazdadude; 03-20-2017 at 09:41 PM.
    Sigs are visible only in your first post on a page. To change your thread display preferences, click here and enable 'Always Show Signature'.

  10. #25
    Registered Member banjos-n-beer's Avatar

    2014 QX70 AWD

    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    1,034
    Quote Originally Posted by yrwei52 View Post
    Here is 2017 CX-5 Line-up Dealer info provided by Ride92 used by Mazda dealers. It does say Touring "PACKAGES (CANNOT BE COMBINED)":


    I know the sales manager very well and he shouldn't give me wrong info on MSRP because he knows I'm going to bring potential customers in. He had placed many 2017 CX-5 orders and should get them by April 15th.
    One of the auto mags had an update on an article about the 2017s stating they could be combined. I'll try to dig it up

    Edit- maybe I've got it backwards, and originally it was stated they could be combined. If they can't, that's odd. But maybe it's to steer you into a Grand Touring...?
    Last edited by banjos-n-beer; 03-20-2017 at 10:28 PM.

  11. #26
    Registered Member yrwei52's Avatar
    Donated: $8

    2016 Mazda CX-5 GT AWD w/Tech

    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Plano, Texas, USA
    Posts
    4,745

    Arrow Mazda CX-5 2017 and 2016.5 US/NA Spec Comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by mazdadude View Post
    There was a change in the testing procedures by the government for 2017 MODEL YEAR VEHICLES.

    Here is the link to the testing changes. https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/ratings.shtml


    Another reason why the CX-9 was a 2016 MY, and the CX-5 update was downgraded to 2016.5 MY ?

    The 2017's Have a newer piston design, a different piston shape, and they are faster revving also.
    EPA fuel economy ratings showed at fueleconomy.gov have been adjusted for older model-years to match the revised 2017 calculation. The results for 2016 CX-5's are the highway estimate for AWD downgraded from 30 to 29 mpg. The rest of estimates including FWD didn't change.

    Quote Originally Posted by fueleconomy.gov
    EPA is updating its method for calculating the fuel economy shown on new-car window stickers starting with the 2017 model year.

    EPA periodically updates its methodology to account for changes in vehicle technologies, driver behavior, and/or driving conditions. The 2008 changes (see below) were broad revisions to the entire methodology that affected every vehicle.

    The 2017 change updates some of the calculations used to estimate fuel economy. The new calculations are based on test data from model year 2011–2016 vehicles. So, they better reflect today's vehicle fleet of more fuel-efficient vehicles and advanced technologies such as hybrids and turbocharged engines.

    Most vehicles are not affected by the new calculations. Some fuel economy estimates will decrease by 1 mpg, and a small number may be 2 mpg lower.

    View old/new MPG ratings for a specific vehicle.

    Visit EPA's website for more detailed information.

    Comparing New Vehicles to Older Ones

    During the next year, you may see 2016 vehicles with the old fuel economy estimates on the window sticker along side 2017 vehicles with estimates based on the new calculations. To help you compare vehicles with new and older ratings more easily, the estimates in Find and Compare Cars have been adjusted:

    The original estimates for model year 2011–2016 vehicles have been adjusted to match the revised 2017 calculations.
    The ratings for most vehicles will be unchanged.
    Ratings changes will be small for affected vehicles. Some will go down by 1 to 2 mpg.
    Ratings for 2008–2010 model year vehicles are still based on the 2008 methodology.
    Estimates for model years 1984–2007 have been adjusted to be consistent with the 2008 methodology.

  12. #27
    Registered Member

    2014 Mazda CX-5 Touring AWD

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Posts
    960
    Quote Originally Posted by piotrek91 View Post
    +1

    But... the specs don't tell half the story here.
    They don't tell you how much quieter the 2017 is.. and fuel economy for most will be the same.

    I bet the AWD makes like 184lb-ft@ 3250 vs 185@ 3250 and they both make 185lb-ft at 4000.
    I also bet they both still make 184HP@5700RPM.. but instead of falling off after that they continue making more power untill the new peak of 187@6000.

    Doesn't the AWD use a different exhaust pipe than the FWD to get around the AWD system? maybe that's why there is a marginal loss in low end torque?
    This is really weird.
    I don't remember seeing any other car with same engine but with different torque numbers. Unless the curve is flat, 3250 vs 4000 could be significant.
    Also, why did the FWD lose fuel-economy on the highway, but not the AWD?
    It seems Mazda tweaked the engine for drivability and not for economy, retained the final drive ratio difference between FWD and AWD.

    I like that is quieter, more refined, but I was not complaining to begin with and mine is 100lb lighter, so not seeing this as a big improvement, if at all.

  13. #28
    Registered Member

    2013 VRM Mazdaspeed3, 2016 Soul Red CX-5 GT

    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Grand Prairie, TX
    Posts
    551
    The new MPG estimates for the FWD CX-5 actually match real world MPG better. I'm also curious as to how there is a different torque peak for the FWD vs the AWD version in the 2017s. I didn't see anything mentioned regarding different headers or intake manifolds for the AWD version, so maybe the difference is just with the tune of the cars?


  14. #29
    Registered Member

    '14 liquid CX-5 AWD GT tech, E84 valencia x1 sdrive msport

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    HVNY
    Posts
    588
    Quote Originally Posted by mazdadude View Post
    Why would you think that is a wrong price?
    Because that seems like an awful lot of stuff for the price- roof alone would be at least $780 I would think- everything else is a throw in? Great if true but seems too good to be.

  15. #30
    Registered Member yrwei52's Avatar
    Donated: $8

    2016 Mazda CX-5 GT AWD w/Tech

    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Plano, Texas, USA
    Posts
    4,745

    Arrow Mazda CX-5 2017 and 2016.5 US/NA Spec Comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by Scythe024 View Post
    If I was choosing based on these specs, I would go with the 2016.5. Slightly better gas, more ground clearance, more room in 2nd row, hits max hp and torq at lower numbers.
    Cargo space makes even more difference: 2016.5 is 34.1/65.4 but 2017 is 30.9/59.6 cu ft with 2nd-row seatback up/down.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Seat Covers for 2016/2017 CX-9
    By Vancouver_MTB in forum CX-9 Accessories & Appearance
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-25-2017, 01:43 AM
  2. 2017 Cherokee vs 2016.5 CX-5
    By 7eregrine in forum CX-5 Lounge
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 02-12-2017, 05:05 PM
  3. Which Would You Buy: CPO/New - 2016 or 2017
    By JKodo in forum Mazda6 Lounge
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-02-2016, 01:21 PM
  4. US Spec 2017 Mazda 3 - Video
    By trev0006 in forum Mazda3 Lounge
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-23-2016, 12:45 PM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-02-2015, 04:50 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •