yeah it does do alright, but the point behind my original post was that in a collection of CUVs rapidly gaining traction on the driving experience that the CX5 is so known for, Mazda can't afford to remain stagnant, and just "alright". I believe Mazda still has the driving experience down even if the numbers lag behind the rest. I just hope they continue to improve and lead(return to the leader I hesitantly say) that area. Otherwise, Mazda will become an even more difficult sell. The CX5 would still be my pick in the roundup though but imo, it's not as clear of a winner as it was when I bought my 16 CX5.
2016 CX5 better "driving machine" over 2017
- Thread starter jhu8
- Start date
yeah it does do alright, but the point behind my original post was that in a collection of CUVs rapidly gaining traction on the driving experience that the CX5 is so known for, Mazda can't afford to remain stagnant, and just "alright". I believe Mazda still has the driving experience down even if the numbers lag behind the rest. I just hope they continue to improve and lead(return to the leader I hesitantly say) that area. Otherwise, Mazda will become an even more difficult sell. The CX5 would still be my pick in the roundup though but imo, it's not as clear of a winner as it was when I bought my 16 CX5.
They maybe catching up but it's still ahead of them at this time. Well over here that is
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
I can't speak too much as I haven't driven the 2017 vehicles but based on reviews it seems the CX5 still has it, no better no worse(in most areas). While CRV has improved a great deal in the driving department(rivaling the CX5), meanwhile retaining everything else it has going for it. So there is certainly some tough competition. Which is a good thing. I think 2018/19 Mazda will really step it up. Perhaps they got a little complacent.
I have driven both 2 times from different dealers and there are pluses and minuses to both cars. However the driving department the CX-5 feels (maybe not on paper at the edges, but on normal road driving) much better. I did like the power of the boosted engine, but part of driving is how it sounds and it's much better controlled in the CX-5. Not saying the CR-V is bad (the Rouge was bad) but the CX-5 was better in that department. I do like the Honda sensing a little more (lane keep assist actually works pretty well) and Apple car play is always nice. You also get about 1 inch more or rear leg space.
Honestly if the CR-V was same price as CX-5 I might have gotten one but at the time I got the CX-5 1.8k less than what they were asking for the CR-V.
Honestly if the CR-V was same price as CX-5 I might have gotten one but at the time I got the CX-5 1.8k less than what they were asking for the CR-V.
- :
- 2021 CX-9 Sig
- :
- 2021 CX-5 GT
Yes, and I bet most of the time loss with the AWD comes from the in-ability to disable the TCS, which they always did in the past for times. In the real world, nobody turns this off (most people). That is why when you drive the 2017 CX-5, the car feels the same -if not faster than the 2014-2016.5 models. People complaining about nothing.
I didn't want to stir the pot and create more divide between the pre 2017 and 2017 model owners, but I suppose we can have a decent conversation here without anyone getting offended.
The 7.8 0-60 time for the 2017 CX-5 on Car and Drive is for a FWD model. If you look at their data for a 2016 CX-5 AWD that they tested, it has a 7.7 second 0-60 time and is faster in every performance metric compared to the 2017 FWD model. So basically, the 2016 AWD model, which is slower than a 2016 FWD model, is still faster than a 2017 FWD model. Not sure what happened, maybe it is the extra weight or the new tires, but the new model is just a bit slower than the 2016 models.
Now again, I think the new features available in the 2017 models, more than makes up for the slight loss in performance for the new CX-5. However I would like to see Mazda work on it and get it back up to speed at least compared to the 2016 models. Not to mention that the other competitors are stepping up their game. If anyone checked out the new MotorTrend comparison test, they couldn't even recommend the CX-5 because a certain competitor has caught up as far as driving dynamics/performance goes.
Edit: It always used to be, that they would recommend the CX-5 because it was a better driving car. Sadly that is not the case for 2017.
Last edited:
This is a flawed comment to me. Driving department for me has two parts
1. Handling
2. Drivertain
For 1 sure CRV has gone ahead. It has improved. But for 2 - it seems it has take a step back. From CVT and 4 banger to CVT + Turbo. Worse. You see many people praising the CRV here. But they end up buying CX-5. Only person I know who maybe got a Honda was Red turbo eclipse. But i am not 100% sure. Even yrwei is replacing his CX-5 with ..... a CX-5.
A CVT + Turbo is going to be even more awkward experience driving in real world condition. Despite being slower overall - the 17 beats CRV from the start to 30 by a good 10% margin. So the non linearity, the odd rubberband effect and turbo lag - all combined wont show up on paper - but in real world they will.
Infact we have posters praising Subaru CVT in the forester over Honda CVT.
Say what they want - pretty sure if these folks loving the new CRV here(older model onwers primarily) - wont love it once they test drive it.
- :
- Denver, CO
Fully agree. Handling sounds to have improved on the CR-V for sure, but the drivetrain? Put anyone who has any sense and awareness of fun, drive feeling, sounds, etc. (not that tropical fruit chili guy) behind the wheel, then it becomes clear that CVT and a turbo is just a terrible combo. It's basically double lag.
Last edited:
- :
- 2021 CX-9 Sig
- :
- 2021 CX-5 GT
I would argue that C&D and the other places are still recommending the CX-5 because it is a better driving car. In fact, they are saying it is a better driving car than the number would lead one to believe.
They fixed the issues on the previous model. That's what they concentrated on. The next model might be different, it should get the new hcci engine
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
I think you're right. I think they fixed what they had to. I'm okay with that. Given the limited size of Mazda compared to many other companies.
I guess that depends on how you define "better driving car" and this will be subjective for everyone. If we define it as a much quieter, softer, controlled ride, then yes it is a better driving car. Performance is a sticking point for me since I already think the CX-5 can be slow on certain situations, so to me I cannot call it a better driving car if it is slower. I'd argue that it is a better "overall" car though. It is a better family car. Rear ac vents, rear heated seats, wider opening doors, power liftgate, driver seat memory settings, etc... All those features make it a better overall car. I just don't think that makes it a better "driving" car when it accelerates slower and takes longer distances to stop. I am almost positive Mazda will resolve this issue in future models though.
I don't think most are getting offended.
However, another possible answer is that you really can't trust data from any one test.
If that were the case, we could also say that the 2017 FWD gets 39% better fuel economy than the 2016 AWD (C&D observed 32 MPG on the '17 FWD vs C&D observed 23 MPG on 2016 AWD). You forgot to mention that performance metric, lol. Hopefully, no one is basing a purchasing decision on those numbers any more than the 0-60 numbers from one test or no one would ever buy a 2016 AWD.
Either way, the numbers are so close (1.28% difference 0-60) so other than the fuel mileage, it really makes little difference.
Only 2016 FWD 0-60 numbers I could find were from Edmund's, and they got 7.9 with traction off and 8.3 with it on.
https://www.edmunds.com/mazda/cx-5/2016/road-test-specs/
So it may be possible 2017 FWD acceleration has improved even with additional weight!!!
I would like to test drive the 17 but one, I have no interest in swapping out my 16 and secondly(mainly), would hate to deal with the dealer. I don't want to give them the slightest idea that I could be interested by inquiring about test driving one.
I test drove one, and for me the throttle response was more instantaneous than it is in my current Mazda6. Could you not go to another Mazda dealer just for a test drive (scratch)
Sent from my SM-T805Y using Tapatalk
Correct me I am wrong, but I am pretty sure cars learn driving habits. My CX5 throttle response would be a lot more light than new cars that are often pushed and really tested while on test drives. Could explain while a brand new car sitting on a lot feels more sensitive and instantaneous.
I could. Don't wanna be tempted by that new car feeling lol I already have bad habits of not keeping things long, I don't need any temptation.
I believe you are correct. It should adapt to your driving.
Fair enough [emoji16]
Sent from my SM-T805Y using Tapatalk
