I really think you should test drive the 2.5L Cx5 and the 28i X1 for an apples to apples comparison. If you're within 8k for a 35i the 28i MSRP comes in at $6000 less, so you are looking at a $2000 difference between the Cx5 and 28i X1. 50+ HP/Torque is a pretty significant upgrade, even if it isn't the full 300HP.
CX-5/ForXT/XV/X1? Others considered?
- Thread starter Monterra
- Start date
My research put the difference at about +7k for a comparably equipped X1 xDrive 28i. I didn't look at the 35i, because that was another +6k MSRP, and I was sufficiently impressed by the 28i.
I wish I knew his BMW dealership existed...maybe I'd be driving a Bimmer now
I wish I knew his BMW dealership existed...maybe I'd be driving a Bimmer now
Its a 6k spread from 28 to 35i but you're getting a lot more than motor:
pano roof, bigger brakes, xenons, power seats, 18s, wood interior standard so a lot of that gap is made up in optioning the 28 where the 35 doesn't need much. 28i AWD can be had for 32 and some change if you just add heated seats and 18s and you'll have a nice driving, pretty quick AWD wagonette with 4 years maint included, which with car prices now isn't that bad, luxurious? No, not really at all, but a well built car that feels solid yet missing many expected features/niceties at the price point.
pano roof, bigger brakes, xenons, power seats, 18s, wood interior standard so a lot of that gap is made up in optioning the 28 where the 35 doesn't need much. 28i AWD can be had for 32 and some change if you just add heated seats and 18s and you'll have a nice driving, pretty quick AWD wagonette with 4 years maint included, which with car prices now isn't that bad, luxurious? No, not really at all, but a well built car that feels solid yet missing many expected features/niceties at the price point.
I have to say that the baseline X1 s28i is around 31K and the Maxed out CX-5(AWD) is around 31K. If you can live without all those neat(and somewhat useless) accouterments then you could easily do the BMW. I would think the Mazda would be cheaper to maintain though, no? Also the CX-5 "appears" to be more spacious
The comparable baseline CX-5 version without all those "accouterments" is the Sport version. The BMW would be cheaper to maintain during the first 4 years and 50K miles.
Last edited:
I'm a car enthusiast with 2 BMW's in my stable and was very excited when the X1 was released in Europe a while back and was anxiously awaiting it's arrival on US shores. That was until 3 things happened:
1- BMW has dumped NA engines in favor of "efficient dynamic" turbos
2- The Mazda CX-5 was introduced
3- Saw the X1 in the flesh.
The CX-5 received all the check marks for what I'm looking for in an AWD CUV and I was kind of disappointed in the proportions of the X1 after actually seeing it. I think the X3 is a better looking vehicle but it's more than what I need and more than what I care to spend. I also have doubts of the longevity of turbos and since I plan on keeping cars for a while, not having the ability to get a NA engine, turned me off to BMW. Even though the 2013 CX-5 performed adequately with the 2.0L, I plan on ordering a 2014 CX-5 w/2.5L because 20% more HP & torque can't be a bad thing to an already good vehicle. I've owned Mazdas in the past and don't have any issue with reliability. They've always been innovative, anyone remember the oscillating dash vents?
As for a drive-ability, not many cars compare to the Ultimate Driving Machine with the sensation of driving on rails. However, IMHO, the CX-5 is fun to drive and tops the other competitors in this sector. Now just need to see it in Meteor Gray so I can make up my mind regarding color choices.
1- BMW has dumped NA engines in favor of "efficient dynamic" turbos
2- The Mazda CX-5 was introduced
3- Saw the X1 in the flesh.
The CX-5 received all the check marks for what I'm looking for in an AWD CUV and I was kind of disappointed in the proportions of the X1 after actually seeing it. I think the X3 is a better looking vehicle but it's more than what I need and more than what I care to spend. I also have doubts of the longevity of turbos and since I plan on keeping cars for a while, not having the ability to get a NA engine, turned me off to BMW. Even though the 2013 CX-5 performed adequately with the 2.0L, I plan on ordering a 2014 CX-5 w/2.5L because 20% more HP & torque can't be a bad thing to an already good vehicle. I've owned Mazdas in the past and don't have any issue with reliability. They've always been innovative, anyone remember the oscillating dash vents?
As for a drive-ability, not many cars compare to the Ultimate Driving Machine with the sensation of driving on rails. However, IMHO, the CX-5 is fun to drive and tops the other competitors in this sector. Now just need to see it in Meteor Gray so I can make up my mind regarding color choices.
Last edited:
^^Agreed, the X1 is awkward (being nice) looks wise, and the N20 doesn't impress me. The much rumored diesel X1 would've been a good reason to live with the awkward styling and may well have justified the price premium. Now I view as the cheapest way into a new N55, but again I do feel its overkill in this vehicle- a niche of a niche product.
Last edited:
I was interested in the base X1 also but found it too small, and AT only, kind of ugly looking. Moving from BMW to Mazda, yes you do feel the material difference and the way it drives. I was comparing base to base (wanted a stick), so I cannot justify 10K difference, 21 vs 31. btw X1 is based on the 3 series wagon, they just raised it up, that is why is kind of small. I'm sure there will be lot more aftermarket gadgets for the Bimmer. if space is not a big concern, few grand more is not that bad.
Drove the Crosstrek CVT today- some highway this time. Its not quiet or quick by any means and the interior is very basic but for some reason it just makes me happy- almost inexplicably. Ride and handling are surprisingly good, steering while a touch light has a nice progressive build w/good directness. I'd probably knock the ride height down a bit but for the $ can't go too wrong here I think. Also not the smoothest running thing but something viscerally pleasing to me about the boxer motor vs. Mazda's sky units. A small turbo and an inch whacked off the height would make it just about perfect.
