Mazda want more CX-5 sales in the USA?. Make it a bit wider and longer
- Thread starter Mazdauser100
- Start date
NelsonLewis
Banned
- :
- 16.5 CX-5 GT AWD w/Tech BRMica
The middle won*t work, it*s worse than the passenger side because you have to adjust the driver*s seat forward too. No way I could drive...
I*d love to have the seat in the middle, but I*d have to sell the CX-5 to do so. Just is what it is, and I*ll live with it for awhile longer...
For the record, I*m comfy and perfectly fine riding in the back seat of the CX-5. This is a definite must have to be able to check off while buying...
Maybe seat differences. The one we have, convertible, is rounded so the sides dont come forward as far. As a result it fits better in the middle and still touches the fronts on the sides. I could probably go to a side if I moved the seat all the way up.
- :
- 2018 CX-5 Sport
If the CX-5 was larger I wouldn't have bought it.
See this is kind of where Im at as well. But you cant make everyone happy. Unless you have 19 different SUV models...... [emoji849]
The CX-7 was bigger outside but smaller inside.
Cx5Funtime
Member
Same here. Really wanted sub compact SUV but Cx-3 had too little storage and everything else in the class was meh.
- :
- Denver, CO
Agreed.
- :
- 2014 CX-5 Touring
Yep, ditto for us! We actually test drove a brand new CX-3 after I had seen them at a local auto show and thought they looked nice. But after driving we realized that it would be just too small. Then we went looking for a couple years old CX-5, found one, test drove that one and loved it!
7eregrine
The man, the myth, the legend
- :
- Land of Cleve
- :
- 2016.5 CX5
This exactly. I see it with phone fan boys too.
I get it. You LOVE Mazda. Or Pixel. Or Samsung. It's the same old song and dance.
"They should do xx". No... they shouldn't. If you need x, buy a product that has x.
Stop being a fan boy.
I'm (clearly) a Mazda fanboy because the product I bought was everything I wanted and more and exceeded my expectation. Now with the turbo GT, it still is. Even though I love Mazda, if it didn't have x feature I want... I'd buy something else.
They don't need to be wider to get more sales.
And to be completely honest if they became a #1 seller like Honda or Toyota overnight, they would lose some of the appeal to me. I prefer smaller nichey brands.
Just sell enough to keep the lights on Mazda. That's all I want.
Last edited:
Agree. I driven the CX-9. Its huge for a SUV. If they can stretch the CX-5 about 5-6" inches longer, it would be perfect (similar to the RDX).
- :
- Denver, CO
Yikes. All this talk about widening and lengthening, pretty soon this version of a CX-5 you all want wouldn't even fit in my garage anymore.
I'm of the opinion the CX-5 should stay the way it is in terms of it's overall dimensions. If there is enough demand for a size slotted between the CX-5 and CX-9, then Mazda should just revive the CX-7 moniker for an SUV sized between the 2. Make both camps happy.
Exactly! One of the things I liked about the CX-5 is actually that it wasnt too big. Things like turning radius and park ability would suffer. Thats why I was surprised to see CX-30 not CX-7 (more Edge sized).
But like I said you cant make everyone happy.
- :
- Central Virginia
- :
- 2019 CX-5 Reserve
Lots of conversations regarding the seats.
I'm convinced it has less to do with size and more to do with seating position preferences & habits. We did a "TMI" thread where folks posted weight/height, and there seemed to be no correlation to comfort.
But I've measured the CX-5 seats and compared them to my 2005 Canyon. They are way narrower and way shallower and the bolsters are way higher and way firmer. They do seem to be crafted more for the Japanese shape.
I did not know that Mazda only had one style that shipped globally as CX-5um said. With all the different options I see folks talk about in non-North America models, I would have thought there would also be other variations.
I'm convinced it has less to do with size and more to do with seating position preferences & habits. We did a "TMI" thread where folks posted weight/height, and there seemed to be no correlation to comfort.
But I've measured the CX-5 seats and compared them to my 2005 Canyon. They are way narrower and way shallower and the bolsters are way higher and way firmer. They do seem to be crafted more for the Japanese shape.
I did not know that Mazda only had one style that shipped globally as CX-5um said. With all the different options I see folks talk about in non-North America models, I would have thought there would also be other variations.
- :
- 2016.5 Touring FWD
How about the same size as Subaru Forester but not change the height? (naughty)
I agree Mazda would be smart to introduce another slightly larger crossover and leave the 5 alone.
However, I don*t think we*re talking a substantially larger vehicle. A couple inches of width would match the Q5 exactly and give the car a much sportier stance.
- :
- 2016.5 Touring FWD
When I tried out the front seats of 2017 and up it felt like i was gonna slide forward from seat. Plus, don't like how lateral side of my right knee and shin are rubbing on the center console padding. They added thick padding without increasing the lateral space (width) and now the knee rubs on the padding (hard btw) by default. Hopefully by the time I get ready for an upgrade in a couple of years they make some real improvements.
I don't know how they would fit a new model in between the CX-5 and CX-9. Although the CX-9 seems a lot bigger from the outside, it's not that much bigger on the inside. The driver and front passenger have about the same amount of room as in the CX-5. The second row seat is only about 2 inches wider, and has the same legroom and headroom as the CX-5. If you're trying to fit three children in the second row, the extra width may be appreciated. But otherwise you probably wouldn't notice. The cargo area is slightly wider at its widest point, but the wheel housings encroach more, so the usable width for large items is actually a bit less than in the CX-5. The load floor is pretty high, so the height of the cargo area is also less than in the CX-5. With the third row folded, the length of the cargo area is nearly a foot longer than CX-5, which is the only place I can think of where you see a real benefit from the larger body.
I think Mazda made a design mistake with the CX-9. It's too compact inside for most buyers who need a third row, and too compact inside considering the exterior dimensions.
I think Mazda made a design mistake with the CX-9. It's too compact inside for most buyers who need a third row, and too compact inside considering the exterior dimensions.
