Car and Driver 2019 CX5 article.

Yea 8 is probably about the sweet spot. Close 1-6 and then 7 and 8 for higher speed cruising.

To be fair, these SkyActiv 6As have really really done a solid. The fluid appears to truly be lifetime based on wear data and 300K miles being considered lifetime in my book, and not many issues from them. Also very good programming. Id like an 8A, but this slushbox is far from a problem.
 
Yea I would agree its a pretty good auto. Not the fastest or the smoothest out there. But its really well programmed imo and quick to downshift without making you mash the throttle. In other words its just usually in the right gear and I like the direct feeling. Almost like a dual clutch.

Edit: wouldnt call it rough or slow either. Just isnt ZF seamless.
 
Last edited:
Having just said goodbye to my X1 w/ZF-8 I honestly didn't think it was far superior or even smoother- quicker yes but all that's missing for me in the Mazda is paddles, maybe a 7th for highway cruise but I think I may actually prefer 6 to 8 honestly- 8 is more efficient but also more busy. Rear wheel drive is the main thing I miss about it...H/K stereo was alot better than Bose.
 
Yea I would agree it*s a pretty good auto. Not the fastest or the smoothest out there. But it*s really well programmed imo and quick to downshift without making you mash the throttle. In other words it*s just usually in the right gear and I like the direct feeling. Almost like a dual clutch.

Edit: wouldn*t call it rough or slow either. Just isn*t ZF seamless.

I like it. it's very WOT blip friendly if you time it correctly /don't rev into fuel cutoff from momentum. No experience with a ZF though to compare.
 
Having just said goodbye to my X1 w/ZF-8 I honestly didn't think it was far superior or even smoother- quicker yes but all that's missing for me in the Mazda is paddles, maybe a 7th for highway cruise but I think I may actually prefer 6 to 8 honestly- 8 is more efficient but also more busy. Rear wheel drive is the main thing I miss about it...H/K stereo was alot better than Bose.

I agree with the the 6A being less busy. Shifts take time and time cost acceleration. I wish the AWD system was predominately RWD with the front engaging only when needed. This would give the CX5 much better driver characteristics.
 
A couple extra gears would be nice - I found on my extended test drive of the Signature that I found myself in the "wrong" gear a few times b/c the gearing wasn't quite right for the situation. Whereas the 10 speed in the RDX I also drove had enough gears that it was easy to find the right spot (it also felt awesome ripping off a bundle of shifts on hard acceleration).
 
A couple extra gears would be nice - I found on my extended test drive of the Signature that I found myself in the "wrong" gear a few times b/c the gearing wasn't quite right for the situation. Whereas the 10 speed in the RDX I also drove had enough gears that it was easy to find the right spot (it also felt awesome ripping off a bundle of shifts on hard acceleration).

Test drove the RDX after the 5 and the RDX wasnt in the same zip code for us. After test drive we politely declined to even run numbers cause the answer was clearly no.
 
Test drove the RDX after the 5 and the RDX wasnt in the same zip code for us. After test drive we politely declined to even run numbers cause the answer was clearly no.

What was it for you? I had the RDX A-Spec for 3 hours and then the CX-5 for an overnight and I generally prefer the RDX - it's sportier, roomier, and more luxurious. I'm not sure it's worth the extra $10K in Canadian dollars so the wife and I are giving it some deep thought.
 
2 things I want to point out:

1: 6.2 is impressive given the CX-5's programming is set to provide smooth power delivery. In other words not not even performance oriented "speed" model. You'd get sub 6 numbers easily after even after a light tune. Otherwise Stock, Mazda isn't trying to be the 0-60 king in its class but it just is without even really trying.

2: Tires Tires tires. This thing is faster to 60 than the Mazda6 which is lighter. Just proves how much grip makes a meaningful difference. In this case AWD helps make better use of 300lbs tq. An AWD Mazda6t with summer tires should be in the mid 5's.
 
What was it for you? I had the RDX A-Spec for 3 hours and then the CX-5 for an overnight and I generally prefer the RDX - it's sportier, roomier, and more luxurious. I'm not sure it's worth the extra $10K in Canadian dollars so the wife and I are giving it some deep thought.

We didn*t drive the A-Spec but tbh right off the top my wife hated the styling, mostly the Acura triangle grill. I just thought the drive was blah. The 5 made me want to drive it more, still does, my wife was shocked I decided to take it out in the rain last night after just picking it up that morning.
 
Having just said goodbye to my X1 w/ZF-8 I honestly didn't think it was far superior or even smoother- quicker yes but all that's missing for me in the Mazda is paddles, maybe a 7th for highway cruise but I think I may actually prefer 6 to 8 honestly- 8 is more efficient but also more busy. Rear wheel drive is the main thing I miss about it...H/K stereo was alot better than Bose.

Quicker and more efficient matters a lot...

What do you mean by "busy"? I don't understand. It's not like you're shifting it or doing anything to affect it, especially without paddles in the Mazda product.
 
2 things I want to point out:

1: 6.2 is impressive given the CX-5's programming is set to provide smooth power delivery. In other words not not even performance oriented "speed" model. You'd get sub 6 numbers easily after even after a light tune. Otherwise Stock, Mazda isn't trying to be the 0-60 king in its class but it just is without even really trying.

2: Tires Tires tires. This thing is faster to 60 than the Mazda6 which is lighter. Just proves how much grip makes a meaningful difference. In this case AWD helps make better use of 300lbs tq. An AWD Mazda6t with summer tires should be in the mid 5's.

Like I said all along...250hp is 250hp, I don't care what RPM it happens at. Also justifies why I thought the turbo 6 I drove was a dog, and for the same reasons. It couldn't put any power down.
 
I agree with the the 6A being less busy. Shifts take time and time cost acceleration. I wish the AWD system was predominately RWD with the front engaging only when needed. This would give the CX5 much better driver characteristics.

A few milliseconds...and you gain so much area under the curve.
 
And also my GTI has a DSG which is faster than any torque converter auto and very smooth so I do notice in the CX-5. But I have to be fair to it. There is nothing wrong with that transmission.
 
Yeap, ZF doesn't make an 8 speed FWD auto and the current gent X1 uses the Aisin 8 speed.

Yea and that 9 speed transverse had had a lot of issues. The ZF that gets all the praise is the longitudinal one. In lots of high performance cars like the hellcats and high powered Audis and BMWs.
 
Did C&D state whether the speed times were done with SPORT MODE on or off?

I notice in sport mode that the trans holds the gears longer and the shifts are faster than when in normal driving mode.

I also think with AWD versions, when in sport mode from a dead stop, the computer puts power both to the rear and of course front tires. This helps with preventing tire spin.
 
Did C&D state whether the speed times were done with SPORT MODE on or off?

I notice in sport mode that the trans holds the gears longer and the shifts are faster than when in normal driving mode.

I also think with AWD versions, when in sport mode from a dead stop, the computer puts power both to the rear and of course front tires. This helps with preventing tire spin.

I would think so.
 

Latest posts

Back