You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
CX-5 16 vs. 17 Side Profile Black
- Thread starter m8te
- Start date
Sorry I don't have side view photos of the 2 stock CX-5s. You should still be able to compare the body lines and design of the 2 vehicles. It shouldn't make any difference. Feel free to post stock photos if anyone has any please. Perhaps I can post up my old gen. Anyone got a new gen side photo?
- :
- RDX Aspec Adv.
This is stupid. Just show these pictures with the stock cars. Not these thing. Honestly, they look basically the same.
What they look like to me is Mazda said "To hell with Kodo, let's cheapen this s***!" and took secondary angles out of the panels, streamlined the process, and made lines on a car that look KILLER on a Grand Jeep Cherokee or Explorer Sport, but like absolute crap on the CX5, which was meant to be "swoopy", and now just looks confused AF.
NelsonLewis
Banned
- :
- 16.5 CX-5 GT AWD w/Tech BRMica
This is stupid. Just show these pictures with the stock cars. Not these thing. Honestly, they look basically the same.
They look nowhere near the same. The 17 even looks like a much bigger car
NelsonLewis
Banned
- :
- 16.5 CX-5 GT AWD w/Tech BRMica
What they look like to me is Mazda said "To hell with Kodo, let's cheapen this s***!" and took secondary angles out of the panels, streamlined the process, and made lines on a car that look KILLER on a Grand Jeep Cherokee or Explorer Sport, but like absolute crap on the CX5, which was meant to be "swoopy", and now just looks confused AF.
Pretty much...
IMO, the front end on the '17 is going to drive a lot of sales. I know my dealer thinks so as well. They can't keep the GT model in stock - apparently they are selling like hotcakes. Only deals in my area are on Touring & base models. Looks very distinctive and elegant - like nothing else in its class. However, my issue is with the back end. Looks disjointed - at best. And the way it sticks out like a Vietnamese pot-bellied pig (yuck). I know about the design philosophy and why they decided to go that route, but big mistake. The '16 may look slightly more pedestrian, but the whole car looks seamless.
Anyway, I really want to buy a 17 for the raft of improvements, but having a hard time getting over the rear.
Anyway, I really want to buy a 17 for the raft of improvements, but having a hard time getting over the rear.
To each their own. The 17 looks more taut, athletic, refined. The 16 looks bubbly and playful. Different strokes for different folks.
The 2017 CX-5 appeals to me because it shares characteristics with Audi's Q5 or Porsche's Macan. The 2017 CX-5 is expensively styled, IMO
Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
The 2017 CX-5 appeals to me because it shares characteristics with Audi's Q5 or Porsche's Macan. The 2017 CX-5 is expensively styled, IMO
Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
To each their own. The 17 looks more taut, athletic, refined. The 16 looks bubbly and playful. Different strokes for different folks.
The 2017 CX-5 appeals to me because it shares characteristics with Audi's Q5 or Porsche's Macan. The 2017 CX-5 is expensively styled, IMO
Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
They are trying to target low end Euros
From the side, I prefer the '17. The old model is good looking, but a bit over-styled and slightly pinched in the middle. I prefer the headlights on the '17, not just from the front but also from the side. On the front, I also like that they eliminated the fake intakes around the fog lights, and integrated the fog lights into the lower air intake in a horizontal line, it makes the front end look more carlike and less ute. I have mixed opinions about the new grille. I like the fact that they got away from using generic looking horizontal stripes on the grille. But I don't like the "beak" on the '17. From the rear, it's a toss-up. I like that the '17 looks a bit lower and wider, but I not such a fan of the bulging arc over the license plate holder. That part of the old model looks better.
Overall, the sum adds to more than the parts. When looking at both cars in person, back to back at the dealer, the '17 looked a lot better to me. The old design, which was really fresh a few years ago, is starting to look a little generic now. It's a little too rounded and "cute". It also makes the car look narrow and tall. The new model looks wider and lower, even though the dimensions are about the same. It looks more mature and more masculine and aggressive.
Overall, the sum adds to more than the parts. When looking at both cars in person, back to back at the dealer, the '17 looked a lot better to me. The old design, which was really fresh a few years ago, is starting to look a little generic now. It's a little too rounded and "cute". It also makes the car look narrow and tall. The new model looks wider and lower, even though the dimensions are about the same. It looks more mature and more masculine and aggressive.
To each their own. The 17 looks more taut, athletic, refined. The 16 looks bubbly and playful. Different strokes for different folks.
The 2017 CX-5 appeals to me because it shares characteristics with Audi's Q5 or Porsche's Macan. The 2017 CX-5 is expensively styled, IMO
Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
I hear you there. Agree with what you said. Though the 17 is more refined, the 16 was revolutionary in terms of the first iteration of the KODO design language evident by the fact it won numerous design awards. It still is unique and one of a kind and will go down as a classic. The 17 won't win design awards not helped by the fact it was refined and carried over from the previous gen and not revolutionary but still unique in its own way and modern all the same.
The old design, which was really fresh a few years ago, is starting to look a little generic now. It's a little too rounded and "cute". It also makes the car look narrow and tall. The new model looks wider and lower, even though the dimensions are about the same. It looks more mature and more masculine and aggressive.
This is a good way to sum each car up.
NelsonLewis
Banned
- :
- 16.5 CX-5 GT AWD w/Tech BRMica
This is a good way to sum each car up.
I don't think so, along with a handful of others, however, they're both great vehicles for sure...
To each their own. The 17 looks more taut, athletic, refined. The 16 looks bubbly and playful. Different strokes for different folks.
The 2017 CX-5 appeals to me because it shares characteristics with Audi's Q5 or Porsche's Macan. The 2017 CX-5 is expensively styled, IMO
Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
Agreed. We have a '17 Audi A4, and we will be getting a '17 CX-5 because it looks European inside and out and IMO is styled better than the new Q5.
I don't think so, along with a handful of others, however, they're both great vehicles for sure...
Each to their own I suppose. I agree with Red MC's last half statement
NelsonLewis
Banned
- :
- 16.5 CX-5 GT AWD w/Tech BRMica
Each to their own I suppose. I agree with Red MC's last half statement
Definitely each to their own, I see the exact opposite, the 16 looks more aggressive and planted to the floor like a Rally Car begging to be driven hard, as the 17 looks somewhat like this, but if you go to push it real hard, you will regret it. I'm Just saying of course...
- :
- 2014 QX70 AWD
While I agree the 2017 seems more refined, no other makes or models can match the gen 1s lines.
- :
- 2005 Mazda3
I think the 2016 looks a little-bit more ricer-ish, the 2017 looks more mature. They both look good in their own way but if I had to pick one I would choose the 2016.
boandlkramer
US Specs in Europe
- :
- '17 CX-5 GT AWD; '18 BMW X3
I have to say..even though I purchased a 2017, I would have preferred BLACK chrome accents. Obviously its not a show stopper for me, but I think it would have looked better. They could have at least made it a GT feature.
I also think that the 2017 is a mature evolution of the 2016, more elegant and sophisticated looking.
I also think that the 2017 is a mature evolution of the 2016, more elegant and sophisticated looking.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 21
- Views
- 2K
