The unreliable Mazda ?

but bro...but...it's not about numbers...it's...---All these damn CX5 owners butthurt that most minivants are faster and pull better skidpad #'s and stop faster

What are you talking on about?

A minivan is ugly as s*** so who cares? You are the only one I hear keep going on about a minivan. Are you the butthurt CX-5 owner?

Edit: Looks like you answered that question in your next post.
 
Last edited:
I have a 2000 Toyota Tacoma in my garage. It only has about 60,000 miles on it. So far the rear springs had to be replaced. The stereo quit and was replaced. The tie rod ends were recalled. The water pump started leaking and I replaced it. Just recently replaced front brakes. The truck has been garaged its entire life, and looks showroom new.
Now compare that to the 1990 Mazda 626 that I had up until 400,000 miles. None of these problems occurred on it with the exception of the water pump. I replaced that only one time and that was at 200,000 miles.
I would not put Toyota ahead of Mazda in reliability. So far the 5 Mazda's I have owned have been exceptional. However I keep working Toyotas owned by friends. A friend of mine had a 2001 tacoma. Transmission was toast at 110,000 miles. Another friend with a 2003 Camry. Starter bad at 80,000 miles. New throttle body at 100,000 miles. I just don't see how all these Toyota owners keep saying problem free. It just not happen to anyone I know.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_4037.JPG
    IMG_4037.JPG
    571.2 KB · Views: 266
  • IMG_4038.JPG
    IMG_4038.JPG
    699.7 KB · Views: 285
Last edited:
I don't know anyone who owns a Honda or Toyota. My family and friends and co-workers...have taste. 🤣
 
Reliability for each brand and model is not consistent year by year most of time. We can't say a very reliable 2000 Mazda6 indicates a very reliable 2016 CX-5. I'm concerned the dropping reliability ranking on Mazda from Consumer Reports. Unforyunatrly Mazdas reliability keeps dropping to #12 now dropped 6 spots from 2016! The brand reliability now is behind Honda、Hyundai、Nissan, the only one worse than Mazda among all Asian brands is Acura! In 2015 when we purchased our 2016 CX-5, the reliability ranking for Mazda from CR was #4!


Car Brands Reliability: How They Stack Up

Ranking the brands and showing their most and least reliable cars

attachment.php


View attachment 217979
 
Any one remember when Toyota replaced the frames on Tacoma's because of rot. I personally know of two incidents of frame replacement. Any vehicle is a personal choice, you like it or you don't.
 
Yes, mine was under the frame rust out recall. But since its been in the garage, and not driven on salted roads, its like new.
 
I'm sure this has already been said, but you really should be comparing reliability of specific make/model/year combos, not just makes.

"Reliability" is too nebulous of a concept to be turned into one ranking. Yeah it useful at the "fleet level" but you're not buying a fleet of hundreds of various vehicles, you're buying a specific model and possibly a specific year. It's entirely likely that Ford's CUV is more reliable than Honda's for certain years (I dont know, just making a point).

Also, what exactly is the reliability measuring - probability of transmission failure or Bluetooth glitches? Initial quality or long term? Is it relevant to your location and preferences? Some people care about whether their car can withstand heavy road salt and off-road use, but others live in a hot climate and mostly worry about paint fading and the cooling system.

And what's the difference between each rank; is it even statistically meaningful? Maybe the one in 10th place is so close to the one in second that you wouldn't even notice a difference?

I gave up trying to make broad-brush generalizations, which is why I'm considering a replacing a Toyota with a used Mazda despite the common belief that they're less unreliable. Even some mechanics I talked to warned me against Mazdas....but they were mentioning older models and some didn't even know for sure what a CX-5 is!
 
Even some mechanics I talked to warned me against Mazdas....but they were mentioning older models and some didn't even know for sure what a CX-5 is!
Ford Mazdas, no doubt.
 
I'm sure this has already been said, but you really should be comparing reliability of specific make/model/year combos, not just makes.

I gave up trying to make broad-brush generalizations, which is why I'm considering a replacing a Toyota with a used Mazda despite the common belief that they're less unreliable. Even some mechanics I talked to warned me against Mazdas....buit they were mentioning older models and some didn't even know for sure what a CX-5 is!
Consumer Reports brand reliability ranking I posted does list the least and the most reliable model for each brand. Tacoma, people complained here, is the least reliable model for Toyota.

Consumer Reports have been doing this way on used car reliability ratings with make、model、year for many years. It also separates problem areas into different categories. Definitely it treats problems of transmission failure and Bluetooth glitches differently.

For specific reliability rating of each year on Mazda CX-5, Consumer Reports have also down-graded the reliability rating from “Much Better than Average” to only “Average” overall for 2017 CX-5, which has dropped a big 2 notches from 2016 CX-5. Coincidentally a popular auto shop owner in Houston is also telling all of my friends there that don't buy Mazda vehicles due to reliability issues.

Consumer Reports Reliability Ratings - 2017 Model

Consumer Reports annual auto issue just landed in my mailbox. I was surprised to find the 2017 CX-5 reliability rated significantly lower than that of the 2016 CX-5. Overall, the 2017 was average and the 2016 much better than average. The 2017 was rated average for:

Climate System - blower motor, A/C compressor, condenser, evaporator, heater system, automatic climate control, refrigerant leakage, electrical failure
Noises/Leaks - squeaks or rattles, seals and/or weather stripping, air or water leaks, wind noise
Body Hardware - windows, locks and latches, tailgate, doors, mirrors, seat controls, seat belts, glass defect
In-Car Electronics - audio systems, navigation system, backup camera/sensors, communications system

whereas the 2016 was rated average only for In-Car Electronics, and better than average on everything else.

I've no complaints so far on my 2017, but can any other 2017 owners out there speculate as to what is going wrong in the categories mentioned above?
 
Is the survey for cars made this year, ie the updated car?

If so I can't see how its worth even reading as its only May.
 
What are you talking on about?

A minivan is ugly as s*** so who cares? You are the only one I hear keep going on about a minivan. Are you the butthurt CX-5 owner?

Edit: Looks like you answered that question in your next post.

Asked/answered...but not completely. In 2015, the CX5 was the best thing in its class, but people made stupid excuses for it, especially here on this forum. Then, when other CUV's outpaced it, they held on to "It's a race car". But then when it slowed and softened to the speed and handling of other CUV's, they changed to "But look how nice and quiet the interior is, and I know the number say this, but it FEELS like it's faster than them even though it's not..." It is patently absurd.

What it is, now, is a nice looking economical CUV with a decent track record and the worst resale of the batch, minus the Escape. Even Kia and Hyundai have outpaced Mazda for retained value, as best I can tell. THAT does butthurt me legitimately.

The fact that the RAV has 20hp more, an 8 speed transmission, and will get mid 30's on the highway (EPA ratings...we will see what it ACTUALLY GETS...) and looks much better to me, is just icing on the cake getting me to trade. I got those numbers from my local Toyota dealer. Normally I call BS on that, but they already had one in the show-room. Said it was a special occassion, some kid threw a party and Toyta brought the new RAV out to their dealer for him. Sounded stupid until he showed me all the pictures on his cellphone of it, and my god, there it was. 2019 RAV obviously in their showroom. Blew my mind. I'm used to all sorts of lies from my Mazda dealer (All the Diesel's are in Cali sitting on the dock. We will have them by Feb. etc. etc.) but noone ever backed it up with pictures...
 
Last edited:
Any one remember when Toyota replaced the frames on Tacoma's because of rot. I personally know of two incidents of frame replacement. Any vehicle is a personal choice, you like it or you don't.

Anyone remember when Mazda had to buy back at the owner's request, all the RX8's they had sold because they were slow as dog s*** and they had lied about how little power they actually made?

You're right, they all make mistakes. Mazda isn't somehow blemish free.
 
Wait for the 2019 RAV4 to absolutely pummel it in every measurable category from 0-60 to fuel economy to having a real AWD system that can sent torque to individual wheels. Went by the 'Yota dealership, and screw this Mazda. I'm done. s*** resale. s*** infotainment. s*** brand image. Looks I always just put up with to get decent economy on 87 with AWD and decent reliability. Meh. I just can't do it anymore. As soon as the CPO 2019's hit the used lot...it's ova for the CX5 in my case. Mazda has a good service dept, and that means a lot to me, but not enough to keep this thing. The Toyota will actually pay for itself in holding value so that it even makes sense financially vs. keep the CX5 just so it can bottom out at $1999.95 in 8 years.

OK, take care. Thanks for contributing. Please delete your profile when your gone. (hi)
 
OK, take care. Thanks for contributing. Please delete your profile when your gone. (hi)

I always do an exit post after owning the replacement vehicle for a few months to give an honest assessment of it vs. the old. I keep the profile to reply to that thread if any others have questions specifically.

Right now, I just went to KBB and calculated trade-in value. If I had a RAV4 XLE 2015 AWD with 82K miles instead of a CX5 Touring 2015 AWD, I would be looking at 12,600-14,100 in trade-in value. But I don't. I am looking at $9,400-$11,000. So, basically, $3000.

The RAV XLE AWD had an MSRP of $26,640, the CX5 Touring AWD, an MSRP of $25,795.

That right there tells you all you need to know about how the vehicles hold up, and if it doesn't, it at least makes financial cents....but again, I am not exactly mad I got into the CX5, because the dealer I traded my Jeep in to ate more negative equity than I ever dreamed they would by giving me KBB PP Retail for it while selling me the CX5 for KBB PP retail, so in my isolated case, I ain't even too mad about it.
 
Last edited:
Is the survey for cars made this year, ie the updated car?

If so I can't see how its worth even reading as its only May.
For 2018 brand reliability ranking from Consumer Reports that is "predicted". Go to the link for details. For 2017 CX-5 used car reliability ratings as "Average" overall that is from surveys where Consumer Reports have been doing from thousands of its subscribers.
 
For 2018 brand reliability ranking from Consumer Reports that is "predicted". Go to the link for details. For 2017 CX-5 used car reliability ratings as "Average" overall that is from surveys where Consumer Reports have been doing from thousands of its subscribers.

Thanks.
 
I always do an exit post after owning the replacement vehicle for a few months to give an honest assessment of it vs. the old. I keep the profile to reply to that thread if any others have questions specifically.

Right now, I just went to KBB and calculated trade-in value. If I had a RAV4 XLE 2015 AWD with 82K miles instead of a CX5 Touring 2015 AWD, I would be looking at 12,600-14,100 in trade-in value. But I don't. I am looking at $9,400-$11,000. So, basically, $3000.

The RAV XLE AWD had an MSRP of $26,640, the CX5 Touring AWD, an MSRP of $25,795.

That right there tells you all you need to know about how the vehicles hold up, and if it doesn't, it at least makes financial cents....but again, I am not exactly mad I got into the CX5, because the dealer I traded my Jeep in to ate more negative equity than I ever dreamed they would by giving me KBB PP Retail for it while selling me the CX5 for KBB PP retail, so in my isolated case, I ain't even too mad about it.

If its all about money why are you wasting it buying an SUV or what ever you want to call it, there sold at a premium.
 
If its all about money why are you wasting it buying an SUV or what ever you want to call it, there sold at a premium.

It's becoming less about money for me as I have gained the things I want in life (house, additional land, firearm collection is pretty much complete, gaming system adequate,etc.) and I'd like something dependable, aesthetically pleasing, capable, etc. and if it lasts 400K miles, that's awesome, too! Otherwise I'd buy an EVOX or something, but I also want relatively simple and long ownership. The CX5 is just buzzy, the infotainment system gives me a headache, and I never was a fan of the looks, the AWD lacks a way to lock it. That, and I think in the long run, the RAV will save enough money to be worth the initial trade.
 
I always do an exit post after owning the replacement vehicle for a few months to give an honest assessment of it vs. the old. I keep the profile to reply to that thread if any others have questions specifically.

Right now, I just went to KBB and calculated trade-in value. If I had a RAV4 XLE 2015 AWD with 82K miles instead of a CX5 Touring 2015 AWD, I would be looking at 12,600-14,100 in trade-in value. But I don't. I am looking at $9,400-$11,000. So, basically, $3000.

The RAV XLE AWD had an MSRP of $26,640, the CX5 Touring AWD, an MSRP of $25,795.

That right there tells you all you need to know about how the vehicles hold up, and if it doesn't, it at least makes financial cents....but again, I am not exactly mad I got into the CX5, because the dealer I traded my Jeep in to ate more negative equity than I ever dreamed they would by giving me KBB PP Retail for it while selling me the CX5 for KBB PP retail, so in my isolated case, I ain't even too mad about it.

No doubt Toyota cars hold their value really well. My wife traded in her 2011 Carolla for more than what she owed then bought a highlander. No one here is going to argue that Toyota holds the value better but people will argue they would rather take a bigger deprecation hit to drive something they enjoy. No one on this ******* planet let alone this forum is going to say driving the rav4 is a pleasurable experience, but a lot of Mazda drivers can say that.

I always tell my friends who are looking into a CUV to get a Honda CRV if they want the most practical CUV but to test drive the rav4 and Cx5 still.

I was willing to sacrifice some utility for owning the Cx5 because out of all he cuvs I test drove (pretty much all of them) I was happiest with the Cx5 and thats what most important to me.

Also though, I traded in my 2016 Cx5 for a 2017 and they gave me more than what I owed. Not as much of a difference the carolla but still sold as a profit
 
No doubt Toyota cars hold their value really well. My wife traded in her 2011 Carolla for more than what she owed then bought a highlander. No one here is going to argue that Toyota holds the value better but people will argue they would rather take a bigger deprecation hit to drive something they enjoy. No one on this ******* planet let alone this forum is going to say driving the rav4 is a pleasurable experience, but a lot of Mazda drivers can say that.

I always tell my friends who are looking into a CUV to get a Honda CRV if they want the most practical CUV but to test drive the rav4 and Cx5 still.

I was willing to sacrifice some utility for owning the Cx5 because out of all he cuvs I test drove (pretty much all of them) I was happiest with the Cx5 and that’s what most important to me.

Also though, I traded in my 2016 Cx5 for a 2017 and they gave me more than what I owed. Not as much of a difference the carolla but still sold as a profit

Neither the CX5 nor the RAV4 are anything anyone in their right mind is going to claim is "a driving machine". The RAV will simply get me from my house in Missouri to San Antonio on 1 tank of gas, and stomp a CX5 at a redlight, and looks like an SUV instead of a girls first college car. Those things are a "win".
 
Back