Official 2017 2nd-Gen CX-5 EPA Fuel Economy Ratings Are Out

"The 2017 model’s 0-30 mph acceleration time of 2.8 seconds is noticeably improved over a 2016 CR-V Touring’s 3.3-second time, but not as quick as the 2016 CX-5’s 2.5-second time. To 60, the CX-5 is good for a 7.8-second time, the 2016 CR-V comes in at 8.3 seconds, and the turbocharged 2017 CR-V at 7.5 seconds."

Summary: differences are largely negligible.

"The 2017 CR-V feels light on its feet and although it’s still no CX-5 on a winding road, the Honda holds its own"

Summary: Slight edge to CX5

"The 2017 CR-V Touring AWD turned in Real MPG of 21.9/34.2 mpg city/highway, and 26.1 mpg combined, or underperforming its EPA rating in the city, and exceeding the highway estimate."

Summary: CX5 gets better city MPG, Honda wins highway MPG. And I get ~27.5 real world combined MPG in my CX5, which beats the 26.1 noted above.


But hey, they added a freakin' volume knob to the 2017 CRV... so the apocalypse is held at bay, for now.

http://www.motortrend.com/cars/honda/cr-v/2017/2017-honda-cr-v-touring-awd-first-test-review/
 
Last edited:
banjos-n-beer said:
I was comparing our 2015 CRV with our 2016 CX5.

I've yet to come across anything stating Honda reworked their AWD system for the new 2017 model. New engine, but nothing about improving AWD software/hardware. If there is such literature, then I will be happy to read it.

Until then, I will go by my real world experience using my 500 ft driveway in multiple snow/ice storms.
Click to expand...


The last CR-V’s all-wheel drive system used a fixed 60:40 (front/rear) torque split when engaged and could only send power rearward if it detected wheel slip on the front axle. The new CR-V ditches this old-style system for a far more-sophisticated setup. The new CR-V’s system now calculates the torque needed and where it should be distributed based on factors like acceleration, throttle position, yaw and steering wheel angle. Unlike the old system, this new one can send torque rearward on dry pavement to aid handling. The new system should be far better on snowy roads too because it can send 57-percent more torque rearward than the old one. If those front wheels are stuck on a sheet of ice, Nagadome says the system can route 100 percent of the available torque to the rear wheels.

Read more: http://autoweek.com/article/car-reviews/first-drive-2017-honda-cr-v#ixzz4arby9AwG


Like I mentioned earlier, completely new vehicle. Nothing carried over from the previous generation like the CX-5.
 
mangoconchile said:
The last CR-V’s all-wheel drive system used a fixed 60:40 (front/rear) torque split when engaged and could only send power rearward if it detected wheel slip on the front axle. The new CR-V ditches this old-style system for a far more-sophisticated setup. The new CR-V’s system now calculates the torque needed and where it should be distributed based on factors like acceleration, throttle position, yaw and steering wheel angle. Unlike the old system, this new one can send torque rearward on dry pavement to aid handling. The new system should be far better on snowy roads too because it can send 57-percent more torque rearward than the old one. If those front wheels are stuck on a sheet of ice, Nagadome says the system can route 100 percent of the available torque to the rear wheels.

Read more: http://autoweek.com/article/car-reviews/first-drive-2017-honda-cr-v#ixzz4arby9AwG


Like I mentioned earlier, completely new vehicle. Nothing carried over from the previous generation like the CX-5.
Click to expand...

Thanks! The previous CRV AWD system is just meh. No comparison.

But I'm not sure why you think Mazda rushed the 2017 CX5 release. They've had calendars available that quote when refreshes and redesigns are coming out. I haven't seen them deviate much from that in the past few years.

http://www.autonews.com/Assets/pdf/future/japan2_2014.pdf
 
Last edited:
banjos-n-beer said:
"The 2017 CR-V Touring AWD turned in Real MPG of 21.9/34.2 mpg city/highway, and 26.1 mpg combined, or underperforming its EPA rating in the city, and exceeding the highway estimate."
Click to expand...
21 city mpg is pretty much ripe for a lawsuit - since this is not a domestic I dont think it will receive the same flak as Ford did with its Fusion Hybrid.
I have read another review for a FWD which says 20 City.
This is what happens when people dont do research and buy based on paper numbers, from what it looks like Honda realized its target audience (boring drivers of older age) and gave them a car which when babied will give good mpg, else it will be 3 or 4 mpg below EPA.
 
It's not that hard to choose between the two. If you really care about driving, and admittedly, some people here don't, but if you are one of those people who cares about driving, the answer is simple; you get the one without the CVT.

As far as Apple Carplay/Android Auto goes, I don't really care about them. Maybe if Apple allowed Waze to work on Carplay, I might take a second look. As it is right now, I put a much higher value on the adaptive front lighting system on the Mazdas over Apple Carplay/Android Auto. What does Apple Carplay/Android Auto add to the driving experience that your phone cannot give you? Other than maybe a bigger screen to mess with? Besides, when driving, we're really supposed to be focused on driving and not on our phones, lives are at stake otherwise. If you really need to mess with your phone, pull over and get it done without endangering other people on the road.

I have noticed that this forum, while still a Mazda forum has attracted quite a number of "regular" drivers. By that I mean, people who see their cars as an appliance, as opposed to people who relish the drive more than the destination. This is I guess a side effect of the beautiful designs that Mazda has been putting out and the CX-5 being Mazda's best seller. I'm used to Mazda forums where everyone has a "zoom-zoom" mindset and the occasional #becauseRacecar mentality. That's not exactly how it is in this forum which is a little sad. However, the "regular" drivers/people need to understand, the Mazda core demographic has always been people who love driving their cars, not people who love their appliances. I hope people open their minds a little with regards to how the CX-5, even if it is a crossover, can be a really fun sporty drive for their owners. I certainly don't find it absurd to take corners relatively quickly with our CX-5. I drive our CX-5 just like I drive my Mazdaspeed3; I take corners as fast as the CX-5 is able to. If you ask why, well my answer is, because I can and it is fun.
 
Last edited:
Stopped reading a few pages back. Checked back in to see if it's over. Sigh.
Nice post Finch. Agree.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
 
finch204 said:
It's not that hard to choose between the two. If you really care about driving, and admittedly, some people here don't, but if you are one of those people who cares about driving, the answer is simple; you get the one without the CVT.

As far as Apple Carplay/Android Auto goes, I don't really care about them. Maybe if Apple allowed Waze to work on Carplay, I might take a second look. As it is right now, I put a much higher value on the adaptive front lighting system on the Mazdas over Apple Carplay/Android Auto. What does Apple Carplay/Android Auto add to the driving experience that your phone cannot give you? Other than maybe a bigger screen to mess with? Besides, when driving, we're really supposed to be focused on driving and not on our phones, lives are at stake otherwise. If you really need to mess with your phone, pull over and get it done without endangering other people on the road.

I have noticed that this forum, while still a Mazda forum has attracted quite a number of "regular" drivers. By that I mean, people who see their cars as an appliance, as opposed to people who relish the drive more than the destination. This is I guess a side effect of the beautiful designs that Mazda has been putting out and the CX-5 being Mazda's best seller. I'm used to Mazda forums where everyone has a "zoom-zoom" mindset and the occasional #becauseRacecar mentality. That's not exactly how it is in this forum which is a little sad. However, the "regular" drivers/people need to understand, the Mazda core demographic has always been people who love driving their cars, not people who love their appliances. I hope people open their minds a little with regards to how the CX-5, even if it is a crossover, can be a really fun sporty drive for their owners. I certainly don't find it absurd to take corners relatively quickly with our CX-5. I drive our CX-5 just like I drive my Mazdaspeed3; I take corners as fast as the CX-5 is able to. If you ask why, well my answer is, because I can and it is fun.
Click to expand...

Sigh. I don't know how many times we have to explain this to the CR-V fanboys, they just don't get it. They keep comparing all the numbers and features, while what matters most to us Mazda drivers are the fun in driving. Mazda's philosophy is "zoom-zoom" and "driving matters". I don't even know what Honda's philosophy is, but it's definitely not the same. The CR-V people try to argue (and sway us toward accepting a "defeat"?), and just like us can't convince them how driving matters, they probably won't stop arguing because they can't understand that driving matters :)
 
mangoconchile said:
Style is subjective, so it's pointless to talk about it. Who cares of it's fake? Would it make a difference if it was real wood? People don't get in my car and point it out or even care about it, much like people are not going to point out the fake leather stitching on your dash. If it were so ugly, it wouldn't be the #1 selling SUV in the country.

It gets worse gas milage because it is a heavier vehicle due to the extra sound deadening they added and increasing the HP by a whole 2HP. Regarding tech, when is Mazda planning on adding CarPlay or Android Auto? Pretty big features that many people want in their vehicles. No one wants to be stuck with a crappy OEM Nav system for the duration of their time owning the vehicle.
Click to expand...

MangoConChile, is this you with a brand new 2017 CR-V?
http://www.crvownersclub.com/forums/search.php?searchid=34823857

Did you just have a buyer remorse and found something you don't like about the CR-V? Anyway, if bashing the CX-5 can make you feel better or superior about your brand new CR-V, by all mean we can take it if that can help. Congrat on the new ride, anyway!
 
finch204 said:
It's not that hard to choose between the two. If you really care about driving, and admittedly, some people here don't, but if you are one of those people who cares about driving, the answer is simple; you get the one without the CVT.

As far as Apple Carplay/Android Auto goes, I don't really care about them. Maybe if Apple allowed Waze to work on Carplay, I might take a second look. As it is right now, I put a much higher value on the adaptive front lighting system on the Mazdas over Apple Carplay/Android Auto. What does Apple Carplay/Android Auto add to the driving experience that your phone cannot give you? Other than maybe a bigger screen to mess with? Besides, when driving, we're really supposed to be focused on driving and not on our phones, lives are at stake otherwise. If you really need to mess with your phone, pull over and get it done without endangering other people on the road.

I have noticed that this forum, while still a Mazda forum has attracted quite a number of "regular" drivers. By that I mean, people who see their cars as an appliance, as opposed to people who relish the drive more than the destination. This is I guess a side effect of the beautiful designs that Mazda has been putting out and the CX-5 being Mazda's best seller. I'm used to Mazda forums where everyone has a "zoom-zoom" mindset and the occasional #becauseRacecar mentality. That's not exactly how it is in this forum which is a little sad. However, the "regular" drivers/people need to understand, the Mazda core demographic has always been people who love driving their cars, not people who love their appliances. I hope people open their minds a little with regards to how the CX-5, even if it is a crossover, can be a really fun sporty drive for their owners. I certainly don't find it absurd to take corners relatively quickly with our CX-5. I drive our CX-5 just like I drive my Mazdaspeed3; I take corners as fast as the CX-5 is able to. If you ask why, well my answer is, because I can and it is fun.
Click to expand...

Thank you. This is exactly how I feel.

I don't give a rat's ass about gizardry (as someone else coined). The CX-5 is fun to drive and looks beautiful. Period.
 
Last edited:
finch204 said:
It's not that hard to choose between the two. If you really care about driving, and admittedly, some people here don't, but if you are one of those people who cares about driving, the answer is simple; you get the one without the CVT.

As far as Apple Carplay/Android Auto goes, I don't really care about them. Maybe if Apple allowed Waze to work on Carplay, I might take a second look. As it is right now, I put a much higher value on the adaptive front lighting system on the Mazdas over Apple Carplay/Android Auto. What does Apple Carplay/Android Auto add to the driving experience that your phone cannot give you? Other than maybe a bigger screen to mess with? Besides, when driving, we're really supposed to be focused on driving and not on our phones, lives are at stake otherwise. If you really need to mess with your phone, pull over and get it done without endangering other people on the road.

I have noticed that this forum, while still a Mazda forum has attracted quite a number of "regular" drivers. By that I mean, people who see their cars as an appliance, as opposed to people who relish the drive more than the destination. This is I guess a side effect of the beautiful designs that Mazda has been putting out and the CX-5 being Mazda's best seller. I'm used to Mazda forums where everyone has a "zoom-zoom" mindset and the occasional #becauseRacecar mentality. That's not exactly how it is in this forum which is a little sad. However, the "regular" drivers/people need to understand, the Mazda core demographic has always been people who love driving their cars, not people who love their appliances. I hope people open their minds a little with regards to how the CX-5, even if it is a crossover, can be a really fun sporty drive for their owners. I certainly don't find it absurd to take corners relatively quickly with our CX-5. I drive our CX-5 just like I drive my Mazdaspeed3; I take corners as fast as the CX-5 is able to. If you ask why, well my answer is, because I can and it is fun.
Click to expand...



What attracted me to the cx5 was reliability. That is what's getting people like me who drive sports cars for fun, and appliances for convenience, to the Mazda world. They are no longer a joke. They work well and hold up well. So now we are getting our grocery getters from here, and we just don't know why you guys won't buy a miata or corvette or something and insist on extolling the racing aspect of an appliance. Sure, it can be driven sportily, anything can. The fact that it's dog slow and has low limits of adhesion and is top heavy just makes us wonder why you bought it if you really meant to have a miata.
 
Last edited:
Please log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
    • Like
CX-5 Fuel efficiency, comfort and handling
Replies
12
Views
3K
sonny1
S
shadonoz
Autoblog reports turbo fuel economy
Replies
14
Views
2K
Unobtanium
U
1
    • Like
MPG - Into the Weeds
Replies
3
Views
2K
shooter357
S

Latest posts

Back