Help Me Decide: CX-5 vs. CR-V

Status
Not open for further replies.
About the sound difference between your ears and your DB meter. Not all folks perceive sound the same way. Some are sensitive to specific frequencies that fail to annoy the bulk of the population. Where you disagree with the meter both may be correct as something is being registered by the meter that is being ignored by you. Go with your ears.

Personal example. Furnace blower motor replaced. It's in the basement but I can't have a quiet read in the living room because of the noise that no one else in the family hears. Dealer replaces the motor with another of the same make/model. Same only-I-have problem. Delare replaces motor with one by another manufacturer and problem solved.

Trust your ears - we own these things for years.

Brian
 
Re noise..I'm not a scientist but I'm pretty sure we shouldn't put too much effort into analyzing results from a downloaded phone app with data fed to it from a tiny microphone. Sorry if i offended anyone with my .02 on the CVA. But if you're into those horrible soul sucking weapons of mass fun destruction I think the CRV is a good fit for you.
Continuous Vaginal Abortion..stop the killing!!
 
mangoconchile said:
Thank you for your input. Also keep in mind the CRV has better fuel economy, more cargo space, low priced extended warranties, and will have better resale value as well, not to mention Apple CarPlay/Android Auto. My neighbor just got a new X3(to replace his 98 CRV) last week and he has already gotten 2 offers for it despite not evening putting up for sale yet. I own the new CRV and have taken it on several road trips, I love how quiet and smooth the ride is. It also won AutoGuide SUV of the year.

http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/...de-com-utility-vehicle-of-the-year-award.html

Here's mine...

Click the photo below to see it in full size
Click to expand...

Much nicer rims than the octopus wheels standard on the Touring. Rims aside, Honda has done a nice job making the CR-V more visually appealing.

I didn't try the prior generation CVT but the current CVT was not a distraction to me on the test drive. It did well making the most of the 1.5T without droning or seeming buzzy on hard acceleration.

If I'd needed more interior space, I would have bought the Honda, period. My other car is a Ford Expedition XL so space ultimately wasn't a factor.

I think you get so much car for your money with either the Mazda or the Honda and it came down to the Mazda brand speaking to me more than Honda. IMO, both are great cars. Buy either one that checks the most boxes for you and don't sweat the decision.






Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Ziggity said:
That looks good mango. my cousin just bought one, in Singapore.

What engine do you have? the UK models are all 1.5ltr and I worry about low power/torque (i only have the 148bhp diesel CX-5, so I don't need a Veyron)
Click to expand...


It uses the 1.5 Turbo motor. More than than enough power for my needs.
 
Unobtanium said:
One thing I will bring up...accessories...

The 1.5L CRV is a small motor, getting its power from boost. This may mean that the AC and other accessories are being under-driven to help it cope with traffic speeds in the city and not bog the motor too bad. A friend of mine had a Chevy Cruze (small motor, turbo, just like the CX5), and the AC didn't work for s*** unless he was on the freeway turning some decent rpm.

Just something to consider that no magazine review will ever cover, and you won't learn about maybe for another few months in your AO.
Click to expand...

No magazine will cover it because it's not an issue. AC blows ice cold not just at traffic speeds but with 4 people inside.
 
Red MC said:
The accuracy of iPhone sound level meters is pretty abysmal, so I wouldn't trust the absolute numbers or try to compare your numbers with somebody else's measurements. But they can still be useful for relative comparisons.
Click to expand...

I agree. I don't think mine is accurate, but, they should work for relative comparisons. It's was 44 on a hike, 61 idling, 84 under acceleration, so it's at least a baseline for the various cars.

I'd also think, but I've never driven on one, that a track is likely to be more consistent than a freeway and/or they measure in a better/smarter way than I did. So, the pros would almost certainly get more consistent, maybe even lower results. Kind of like real world gas mileage.
 
dyingquail said:
The CRV was faster. The Turbo kicked in and it merged on the freeway, well, better than the Mazda did when I had to punch it. It also wanted to drive at 75 much more easily than the Mazda did, which I'm not certain is a benefit. These aren't perfect tests, I don't know the 0-60 times but the Honda was the faster vehicle for what I did and I think it was quieter at speed than the Mazda.

The CVT seemed absolutely fine to me. In fact, I liked it. I liked it better than the Mazda 6-speed.
Click to expand...
Your observations are correct, but I have few points to make.
The Mazda will be faster off the line - 0-30 is 2.5 for CRV its 2.8
If you are in traffic at 40mph and you want to pull into a different lane and overtake quickly - Mazda will be faster to 50-55 whichever speed you need. This is due to two things - CVT downshifts are slow linear, turbo is another lag contributing factor. This is where Mazda 6 speed comes in - it is the best 6 AT for any vehicle under 45000 USD. I have seen many reviewers say this exact point.(ofcourse except mazda 6 and 3 which is same drivetrain)

On the highway comment - Mazda is more FE around 50 mph. I think its a decision they made based on what most folks driving speed is. It is in 5th gear @ 30 mph (which is truly best FE but who drives at 30 mph) - if you are doing a lot of highway driving DONT DONT DONT DONT Get the MAZDA - its a wrong choice 100 times over. Get a wagon / CRV over it.
Conversely - you really need to see how the CRV turbo works in stop n go city traffic - all 3 reviews I have seen give it 21 mpg. Yes 21 - I will have to keep my Mazda in sport mode and drive like a prick to get 21 in city.
CRV is a small turbo - its going to gulp more fuel - its FE is primarily due to CVT which will do well under light loads. At ideal conditions - 60-65 mph with 1 passenger and flat road CRV will be much more FE. But add weight or uphill drives etc. - the 1.5 will be spinning the turbo more and your FE will hurt.

Like I said - if you do a lot of highway driving (50% or more) - you will curse yourself for getting a Mazda CX-5.

*FE = fuel efficient.
 
Kaps said:
Like I said - if you do a lot of highway driving (50% or more) - you will curse yourself for getting a Mazda CX-5.
Click to expand...

Could you expand on that comment?
Being a retired Canadian, I/we spend our winters in Florida.
We drive there.
I need a good highway cruiser, to make the trip comfortable and stress free (as much as possible) when driving the interstates.
We also take a fair bit if stuff with us, so even though there is only the two of us, I'll have a full load in the back.
If the CX5 struggles on the highway, then I'll look elsewhere.
BTW, what would it be revving when cruising at say 70mph? Thanks.
 
Buzzman12 said:
Could you expand on that comment?
Being a retired Canadian, I/we spend our winters in Florida.
We drive there.
I need a good highway cruiser, to make the trip comfortable and stress free (as much as possible) when driving the interstates.
We also take a fair bit if stuff with us, so even though there is only the two of us, I'll have a full load in the back.
If the CX5 struggles on the highway, then I'll look elsewhere.
BTW, what would it be revving when cruising at say 70mph? Thanks.
Click to expand...

My comment was for daily highway commuters avoiding CX-5 or CUVs in general. If you are doing the Florida trip ensure your tires are at 36 psi and it will be fine. With load+wind+ slight uphill climb you will feel less power. For e.g. going from 75- 80/85 with a loaded CX-5 can be slow. If you are mostly 70-75 you should be good. At 70 it revs between 2000-2500 under normal loads. I do city at 1500 RPMs and get really good economy.
 
I don't understand when people say their CX-5 is no good on the highway. Mine is great lol. Hell was driving it 100+ through I-80 in Wyoming. I don't find that I'm fighting the car to maintain fast highway speeds. In fact, I find myself going too fast often and have to slow myself down a bit. I'm talking going 80+ in a 65 without even realizing it.

I really have never understood all you CX-5 owners that apparently can't handle highway speeds.

As for the fuel economy, yeah it suffers 75+, the sweet spot is definitely around 65-ish. I have no problems getting 30+ MPG.
 
Buzzman12 said:
Could you expand on that comment?
Being a retired Canadian, I/we spend our winters in Florida.
We drive there.
I need a good highway cruiser, to make the trip comfortable and stress free (as much as possible) when driving the interstates.
We also take a fair bit if stuff with us, so even though there is only the two of us, I'll have a full load in the back.
If the CX5 struggles on the highway, then I'll look elsewhere.
BTW, what would it be revving when cruising at say 70mph? Thanks.
Click to expand...

It never struggles on highway. Its just not as punchy as its under 60mph. With 2+cargo you are actually going to be lighter than 4 passengers and cargo. So it shouldn't be an issue. It's a mazda6 engine on a taller CUVs-not that aerodynamic.
 
Kaps said:
It never struggles on highway. Its just not as punchy as its under 60mph. With 2+cargo you are actually going to be lighter than 4 passengers and cargo. So it shouldn't be an issue. It's a mazda6 engine on a taller CUVs-not that aerodynamic.
Click to expand...

Oh that makes more sense. I misunderstood.
 
Kaps said:
It never struggles on highway. Its just not as punchy as its under 60mph. With 2+cargo you are actually going to be lighter than 4 passengers and cargo. So it shouldn't be an issue. It's a mazda6 engine on a taller CUVs-not that aerodynamic.
Click to expand...

Ok. Thanks.
I have some time before deciding, so I'm still looking around.
My current vehicles are getting older, and I'm not comfortable taking them to Florida next winter.
I can't even decide if I really want a CUV, or a larger sedan. Sigh.
 
mangoconchile said:
It also won AutoGuide SUV of the year.

http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/...de-com-utility-vehicle-of-the-year-award.html
Click to expand...

The new CRV is certainly a good car. Its appeal is primarily targeted for the North American market although it does appeal to folks outside the U.S. Hence its the #1 selling car in the U.S. The CX-5 since 2012 has won Car of the Year in numerous regions worldwide (Asia, NZ, Europe, North America) giving it more of an international appeal than it gets credit for in the US. The 2016 Mazda6 and CX-5 did win the Car and Driver's Editor's Choice awards but then again its a more driver-centric magazine vs representing what the general US public wants.

So if anyone wants something intended a bit more for the domestic market, more space, hauls a lot of stuff, has a comfy seat, creature comfort features, if you are okay with CVT, prefer a soft and quiet ride for long highway trips I'd highly recommend the CRV.

Anyone whom wants to have interior/exterior designs that stand out from the crowd of SUVs, a more engaging drive, driver centric features, refuses to drive a CVT, capable in the snow, and does mainly city driving I'd recommend the CX-5.
 
ColoradoDriver said:
Well, I'd say definitely check out a Touring or GT trim for a fairer comparison.

That said sounds like you should go with the Honda.

Uno will say its being a luddite, but I've never driven a CVT that didn't sound like it was falling apart or contained a dying cat when I've gunned it from a stop light. Not saying the Honda CVT in the 2017 is doing that, but still something I just don't want.

But if you prefer a CVT, then just get the Honda.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Hell, the old Ford Freestyle CVT sounded just fine to me back in the day. Many Subaru owners love them. Buddy of mine has a CL63AMG Renntech as a DD, and a Subaru as a company car (he owns the company and chose it to send a quirky image in-line with his unique company), and he loves the 2.0XT Forester. CVT and all. His kids actually prefer riding in it vs. the 11-low12 second AMG car, lol!
 
Buzzman12 said:
Ok. Thanks.
I have some time before deciding, so I'm still looking around.
My current vehicles are getting older, and I'm not comfortable taking them to Florida next winter.
I can't even decide if I really want a CUV, or a larger sedan. Sigh.
Click to expand...

If you don't need an SUV for the ground clearance, I think the compact ones are stupid. They offer literally NO advantages over a larger sedan or a wagon aside from ground clearance.
 
Unobtanium said:
If you don't need an SUV for the ground clearance, I think the compact ones are stupid. They offer literally NO advantages over a larger sedan or a wagon aside from ground clearance.
Click to expand...

I don't need ground clearance.

I need a reasonably priced, reliable, efficient vehicle to haul my family's stuff on road trip vacations, camping/fishing trips, and carting around bagged mulch/gravel, furniture, ect. I also need it to fit into my relatively small garage and last 12+ years and 150K+ miles with minimal maintenance.

A larger wagon or hatchback that would fit my needs are few and far between in the US.
- Higher end vehicles (Audi, BMW, Benz, Volvo, ect) are too expensive.
- Lower end vehicles (Honda Fit, Ford Fiesta/Focus, Mazda 3, ect) are too small.
- The VW Golf Sportwagen, would work, but VW's are historically unreliable and expensive to repair,

This only leaves the various Subaru wagon/SUV models.
Am I missing something?
 
Help Me Decide: CX-5 vs. CR-V

bluegrass said:
⋯ Am I missing something?
Click to expand...
No you aren't missing anything. I think the compact CUV still suit your needs! Just test drive both with the trim level you want back-to-back and see which one you like the most! If you like more features them get the CR-V; but if you're going to keep a car for very long time then get CX-5 with naturally aspirated engine and more traditional 6-speed transmission.

Other than higher ground clearance, most full-sized sedan and station wagon don't offer AWD. And ingress and egress are easier for older people and sitting high on driver seat is nice too on a compact CUV.
 
bluegrass said:
I don't need ground clearance.

I need a reasonably priced, reliable, efficient vehicle to haul my family's stuff on road trip vacations, camping/fishing trips, and carting around bagged mulch/gravel, furniture, ect. I also need it to fit into my relatively small garage and last 12+ years and 150K+ miles with minimal maintenance.

This only leaves the various Subaru wagon/SUV models.
Am I missing something?
Click to expand...
You dont need ground clearance and want it to last 10 years with good cargo - Rav4 it screams Rav4 all over it. 6.9" ground clearance.
No CVT. Will last 400k miles if you dont abuse it. 2 Year free maintenance.
Cargo that cargo man - big really big.
Its interior imo is better than many.

You should test drive the Rav4, added bonus is dealer availability. Subaru wagoner or that wagon whatever it is - is ok as well. But it looks s****.
 
Unobtanium said:
If you don't need an SUV for the ground clearance, I think the compact ones are stupid. They offer literally NO advantages over a larger sedan or a wagon aside from ground clearance.
Click to expand...

I disagree with this but not sure if you're considering CX-5 as a compact one or not- CX-3 size ones then yeah those are kinda stupid- but those in snow belt- no kids or empty nesters, don't want or need a big car but want awd those are typically the value proposition for those ppl.

I have an X5 35i for a loaner and I happen to think its very stupid ($ mostly) but really other than I guess a nicer interior (although still had pleather fn seats!) I found myself saying I'd rather be driving a well appointed CX-9 vs this thing on this windy road- regardless of that extra 20k in pocket! Just devoid of any sportiness, god awful steering- joyless to drive.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

C
    • Like
    • Wow
Choices and thoughts on a 2024 CX-5 purchase
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
Antoine
Antoine
J
New Member here, about to purchase CX-5
Replies
15
Views
876
ceric
ceric
Chocolate
    • Like
Consumer Reports New Car Issue 2024
2
Replies
36
Views
4K
N7turbo
N7turbo

Latest posts

Back