http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2014/07/mazda5-nissan-longer-recommended-consumer-reports.html
F Mazda! We trusted you.
F Mazda! We trusted you.
Mazda5 No Longer Recommended by Consumer Reports!
- Thread starter fanbanlo
- Start date
FYI, Mazda5 is rated pretty much the WORST car in the "small car" category: http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/v/class-summary/small-cars
Mazda should be ashamed of themselves selling such unsafe car to new families. (notcool)
Mazda should be ashamed of themselves selling such unsafe car to new families. (notcool)
Last edited:
F Canadians.
That's uncalled for. What's wrong with you?
Yeah, kinda spammy, you did already post the same info elsewhere, but also have a thicker skin, I am pretty sure that was a joke, dude. Why do you get to say F Mazda and he can't say F Canada? How mad did you get at the South Park movie?
(as I posted in the other thread and will spam here, lol) pretty much all vehicles not specifically designed with this new SOL test in mind will do poorly, it is a very new and very demanding test.
The side impact is disappointing.
(as I posted in the other thread and will spam here, lol) pretty much all vehicles not specifically designed with this new SOL test in mind will do poorly, it is a very new and very demanding test.
The side impact is disappointing.
I believe this piece of news is important enough that all Mazda5 owners deserve to know. Therefore I post it here as a new thread.
The reason I post onto the other thread that I started because I want the existing members who participated in that thread can get a notification for the news.
As for the test results, I don't have high expectation for the SOL test, but the rest of the test scores are just quite disappointing. I "F Mazda" because I think Mazda knows this all along, and they lucked out and kept selling Mazda5 without improving its safety because no one conducted any test on it so Mazda just kept carrying over an old design year after year. Looking at all the new models Mazda has worked on, they should know a thing or two about building a safe car. It is just very disappointing that Mazda does not proactively bring any of those newer, safer technology to Mazda5 just because there were no crash test, and kept selling Mazda5 as is.
If IIHS have tested the mazda5 sooner, say @ 2012, we should have a safer 2014 model by now.
This concludes my frustration to the situation, and Mazda has failed as a responsible car manufacturer for neglecting the safety of new families by not improving their family van in the absence of IIHS or any 3rd party crash testing party holding them accountable.
The reason I post onto the other thread that I started because I want the existing members who participated in that thread can get a notification for the news.
As for the test results, I don't have high expectation for the SOL test, but the rest of the test scores are just quite disappointing. I "F Mazda" because I think Mazda knows this all along, and they lucked out and kept selling Mazda5 without improving its safety because no one conducted any test on it so Mazda just kept carrying over an old design year after year. Looking at all the new models Mazda has worked on, they should know a thing or two about building a safe car. It is just very disappointing that Mazda does not proactively bring any of those newer, safer technology to Mazda5 just because there were no crash test, and kept selling Mazda5 as is.
If IIHS have tested the mazda5 sooner, say @ 2012, we should have a safer 2014 model by now.
This concludes my frustration to the situation, and Mazda has failed as a responsible car manufacturer for neglecting the safety of new families by not improving their family van in the absence of IIHS or any 3rd party crash testing party holding them accountable.
Last edited:
So what you're saying is that you want them to go back in time and make it better? Don't hold your breath.
Every new car has been great, look at the new 3's results, all are nearly perfect.
You can't bring a newer safer technology to the frame of a car without redesigning the car, they've done the 6, cx5, and 3... mx5 reveal is this fall then expect a cx9 redesign and the 5. They can't make miracles happen, even though the new 3 is REALLY good.
A new test on an old platform is catching a lot of manufacturers off guard.
Every new car has been great, look at the new 3's results, all are nearly perfect.
You can't bring a newer safer technology to the frame of a car without redesigning the car, they've done the 6, cx5, and 3... mx5 reveal is this fall then expect a cx9 redesign and the 5. They can't make miracles happen, even though the new 3 is REALLY good.
A new test on an old platform is catching a lot of manufacturers off guard.
Yes, but the thing is... other than the 1st test, the rest of the tests (e.g. side impact test) AFAIK are not new.
Mazda should go back to the drawing board for the next Mazda5.
Last edited:
Somewhat OT to the Mazda 5..
I notice CX-5 was marginal on front small overlap for 2013 and went to good on the '14s.
http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/vehicle/v/mazda/cx-5
Click on Other Model Years
I lucked out with my '07 G35x it got good on front moderate overlap and acceptable on front small overlap.
http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/vehicle/v/infiniti/g
I notice CX-5 was marginal on front small overlap for 2013 and went to good on the '14s.
http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/vehicle/v/mazda/cx-5
Click on Other Model Years
I lucked out with my '07 G35x it got good on front moderate overlap and acceptable on front small overlap.
http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/vehicle/v/infiniti/g
Where is the "like" button for brandini's comment? +1 to that.
fanbanlo, OEMs don't produce vehicles "hoping" that IIHS or NHTSA won't test them, they aren't trying to pull wool over anyone's eyes. The 5 was never marketed like a Volvo as the safest vehicle on the planet. It's an old platform, plain and simple. Mazda knows (mostly) how a vehicle will perform in these tests (because they've done them themselves), and decide based on 1000 variables if it needs updating. To make the current 5 perform well in the tests will required time, money, and weight. We would be bitching about the car weighing too much and costing too much if they had updated it - there's always a compromise.
Agreed, makes the quote, "The most survivable type of accident is the one you don't have" that much more relevant.
fanbanlo, OEMs don't produce vehicles "hoping" that IIHS or NHTSA won't test them, they aren't trying to pull wool over anyone's eyes. The 5 was never marketed like a Volvo as the safest vehicle on the planet. It's an old platform, plain and simple. Mazda knows (mostly) how a vehicle will perform in these tests (because they've done them themselves), and decide based on 1000 variables if it needs updating. To make the current 5 perform well in the tests will required time, money, and weight. We would be bitching about the car weighing too much and costing too much if they had updated it - there's always a compromise.
I will solve this with a big brake kit and good tires
Agreed, makes the quote, "The most survivable type of accident is the one you don't have" that much more relevant.
I don't run red lights and don't really speed through yellow lights or drive at odd hours of the night so I don't put myself in a situation where someone can impact the side of my car at that rate of speed. I also keep an eye on cross traffic while approaching intersections to minimize those potential situations. Your car can't do everything, it's also up to you as a driver.
My parents had GM N-bodies and Chrysler K-cars when I was growing up, I sat in the front seat with just a lap belt and survived just fine. The cars nowadays are much safer so I'm not too concerned about an insurance institute that continues to make crash tests that are impossible for companies to pass, and when they pass it they just make newer tougher ones.
My parents had GM N-bodies and Chrysler K-cars when I was growing up, I sat in the front seat with just a lap belt and survived just fine. The cars nowadays are much safer so I'm not too concerned about an insurance institute that continues to make crash tests that are impossible for companies to pass, and when they pass it they just make newer tougher ones.
- :
- 2008 Mazda5 GT
First thing that crossed my mind upon seeing this was if I can use this to get a dirty cheap replacement if/when they close out the current run (I still detest the look but new car means less maintenance)! Honesty, it doesn't look bad at all. It is not fantastic but if you read the captions that go along with the pics, the issue is intrusion. Car is simply not big -irony. If you want a "safe" car per IIHS, your buying criteria should be GVWR and massive interior volume.
Alert driving will do you much more good than having a "safe" car. I sense you are not a car enthusiast so I'm going to guess you are shopping on value if you are looking at Mazda. If you really fear for your safety, dump the car now. Not worth the hassle and spend for something bigger/safer. OR, drive alert which you should be doing. A defensive driving class (not from one of those DMV hawks but from an actual performance driving academy) would also serve you well. Now to go out there and jaywalk because I live on the edge!
Alert driving will do you much more good than having a "safe" car. I sense you are not a car enthusiast so I'm going to guess you are shopping on value if you are looking at Mazda. If you really fear for your safety, dump the car now. Not worth the hassle and spend for something bigger/safer. OR, drive alert which you should be doing. A defensive driving class (not from one of those DMV hawks but from an actual performance driving academy) would also serve you well. Now to go out there and jaywalk because I live on the edge!
You can't avoid every nutjob out there driving recklessly, but attentive and defensive driving can go a long way. No doubt I would rather have a vehicle that performs better rather than worse in that side impact test.
But on the other hand, I'm willing to bet that a LARGE percentage of people who get broadsided like that either 1. were the at-fault party, or 2. rolled right out into that intersection when the light turned green, without clearing the intersection visually first. I'm just pulling numbers out of my butt, but I wouldn't be surprised if the above two behaviors account for half or two-thirds of T-bone accidents.
If you remember and drive like the green light means that you are ALLOWED to go, not SAFE to go, your odds of getting hit like that will reduce dramatically.
But on the other hand, I'm willing to bet that a LARGE percentage of people who get broadsided like that either 1. were the at-fault party, or 2. rolled right out into that intersection when the light turned green, without clearing the intersection visually first. I'm just pulling numbers out of my butt, but I wouldn't be surprised if the above two behaviors account for half or two-thirds of T-bone accidents.
If you remember and drive like the green light means that you are ALLOWED to go, not SAFE to go, your odds of getting hit like that will reduce dramatically.
Indelibility
Member
I was in a front impact collision in my 5 and no one was injured (internal leak in the master cylinder)... just saying. Insurance fixed the 5 and we still drive it.
+billions
Numbers of crashes have increased due to complacency in training and reliance on safety features vs safe methods. I was lucky enough to have a really good driver's ed teacher along with having a healthy love for cars leading me to a few autocrosses, training is the best investment, safety the second.
Want to have fewer crashes? Don't cause any.
