New 2017 CX-5 Revealed

[ALafya]

If CVT was superior, all the luxury and high performance vehicles would already be using it, not going to happen! CVT transmissions can't take the abuse, and rubber bands don't outlast gears!

Except for maybe a scooter or an ATV no car uses a rubber band in a CVT.
It is correct that Nissan had quality issues with theirs, but Subaru has been using CVTs since 2010 and Honda and Toyota are producing mass quantities of vehicles with CVTs. They are not expected to be any less reliable.

Enthusiasts, which prefer manuals anyway, don't like CVTs, though they have been getting better and normal people prefer the smoothness of the transmission when driving in parking lots or when going uphill.
Heavy duty CVTs exist in Nissan products and with Subaru products, including the WRX.

In theory, CVTs could potentially accelerate faster than a geared transmission, even a 9-speed. This is because peak engine torque can be maintained throughout the acceleration, whereas geared transmission is only momentarily at peak torque, is at 0 torque while shifting (when the car actually decelerates). CVTs do suffer from increased friction losses at high RPMs. More gears means more shifting which means more time when the car decelerates instead of accelerating. Also, at some point, with many gears, the difference in feeling to a CVT becomes minor.
In term of complexity, >6 gear transmission is extremely complex component, whereas a CVT is simple and cheaper.

Dual-clutch does shift very quickly, but is also heavier, larger and more expensive. It still is off peak torque most of the time when accelerating and still needs to shift. Robotic transmission does not shift as quickly, but perhaps feels closer to a manual.

 

[xtrailman]

Interesting post.

From what I've read manufacturers can have all three common types of autos through their ranges, some of the most powerful and expensive one can have DSG with less gears such as Audi.

Nissan xtrail CVT only has a tow limt in the UK of 1650kg with the recent 173ps engine, down on the cx-5 at 2000 kg, so no use to me really, but i am open minded with autos, this being my first ever, haveing owned 11 cars in the past all manual.

Except for maybe a scooter or an ATV no car uses a rubber band in a CVT.
It is correct that Nissan had quality issues with theirs, but Subaru has been using CVTs since 2010 and Honda and Toyota are producing mass quantities of vehicles with CVTs. They are not expected to be any less reliable.

Enthusiasts, which prefer manuals anyway, don't like CVTs, though they have been getting better and normal people prefer the smoothness of the transmission when driving in parking lots or when going uphill.
Heavy duty CVTs exist in Nissan products and with Subaru products, including the WRX.

In theory, CVTs could potentially accelerate faster than a geared transmission, even a 9-speed. This is because peak engine torque can be maintained throughout the acceleration, whereas geared transmission is only momentarily at peak torque, is at 0 torque while shifting (when the car actually decelerates). CVTs do suffer from increased friction losses at high RPMs. More gears means more shifting which means more time when the car decelerates instead of accelerating. Also, at some point, with many gears, the difference in feeling to a CVT becomes minor.
In term of complexity, >6 gear transmission is extremely complex component, whereas a CVT is simple and cheaper.

Dual-clutch does shift very quickly, but is also heavier, larger and more expensive. It still is off peak torque most of the time when accelerating and still needs to shift. Robotic transmission does not shift as quickly, but perhaps feels closer to a manual.

 

[festus]

Here is a youtube video of how a CVT belt is put together (from WeberAuto)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PiwRUfFEc5k

 

[Mark12345]

New CX-5 looks really good outside and inside.
Given Mazda's history, I'm sure Mazda didn't compromise the CX-5's handling for mature, upscale quality feel.

 

[boandlkramer]

I spoke too soon. My wife is really excited about the new CX5. So I may be selling hers 2016 and getting this when it hits showrooms.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[blackcx5]

yeah, it's starting to grow on me, it does look good, can't stand the wheel design though, I hope that's not the top of the line wheel ,

it looks like a giant asterisk * or a 5 petal flower that belongs on a VW Beetle to me.

tweeters and defrosting vents in windshield column is a definite upgrade, and it looks like they put back the cigarette socket in front of the shifter

 

[Rarebit]

This forum went batshit crazy when I said sound deadening would be good.

I was waiting to see if anyone would catch the irony. Nope! Well done! ;-)

The improvements that would make the most difference to me are 1) better sound system, and 2) better noise reduction. I'd opt for electronic (active noise cancellation) rather than hauling around 200 lb of high density foam. The most disappointing feature of my 2015 is the engine noise when you step on it. It sounds wimpy. And even if it IS wimpy, I don't need it to sound like it.

 

[ScrubbyD]

Mazda starts production of all new CX-5:
http://insidemazda.mazdausa.com/press-release/mazda-starts-production-of-all-new-cx-5/

Short Teaser Video of new car at plant:
https://vimeo.com/193473796

 

[DannyBoone]

I think its a beautiful car. I love the upgrades and i would probably chose this over the 2016.5. However i wouldn't pay the premium it will command for the first year or so. I think this car is going to sell like hotcakes and dealers are going to take advantage of that by not discounting. I'm happy I bought my 2016.5 when I did for the price I paid, but when I see these driving around I'll feel just a tinge of jealousy, especially if its in this new red.

 

[LarryB78]

I think its a beautiful car. I love the upgrades and i would probably chose this over the 2016.5. However i wouldn't pay the premium it will command for the first year or so. I think this car is going to sell like hotcakes and dealers are going to take advantage of that by not discounting. I'm happy I bought my 2016.5 when I did for the price I paid, but when I see these driving around I'll feel just a tinge of jealousy, especially if its in this new red.

call me crazy but i like the look of the 2016.5 a little better - this 2017 design feels more like a baby cx-9 to me...ironically this is now my 2nd mazda purchase right as they released a new design (bought an '09 3 just before the smiley face '10 came out) and both times i've liked the older look better

 

[Unobtanium]

I was waiting to see if anyone would catch the irony. Nope! Well done! ;-)

The improvements that would make the most difference to me are 1) better sound system, and 2) better noise reduction. I'd opt for electronic (active noise cancellation) rather than hauling around 200 lb of high density foam. The most disappointing feature of my 2015 is the engine noise when you step on it. It sounds wimpy. And even if it IS wimpy, I don't need it to sound like it.

Yeah, pretty much. You know all that stuff I said Mazda should do a year ago when I joined?
They did almost all of it in the 2017. Regardless of what the other geniuses on this forum claimed about a few pounds of sound deadening "ruining the driving experience". So much derp on this forum sometimes, but that's just people in general, really.

ETA: Sound deadening. I doubt it's anywhere near 200#. In fact, Mazda lists the same 7.7 0-60 time that it's always done. Either that's a lie, or it didn't add anywhere near 200# when everything was taken into account. Based on the aftermarket products I see being put into vehicles, I'd say it added 20-30# in the extreme most over the 2016.

Realistically, the 2017 looks like a great vehicle, inside and out, but it's not enough of a change to make me want to get rid of my 2015. I think it will make a lot of sales to owners replacing older CUV's, or getting a first CUV, though. It offers a lot. I honestly don't feel like this is a class of vehicle that anyone with common sense gets rid of to upgrade to the next year model for. There is just no sense in it. Now when they have another generation change, sure, maybe, but really I view this vehicle as a "beater" class car that you buy because it's cheap, reliable, a bit more fun than the other competitors on the market, and either you are the type that keeps it until the wheels fall off, or you trade before the 75k mile maintenance comes up or you need a third set of tires, or whatever. Just my .02, but I could be wrong about that one. I think this forum presents a HUGE outlier class in that people (many) on here modify it and fetishise it. To that end, I can link you to a Ford Contour forum, too. Fetishes exist for every vehicle. The VAST majority of CX-5 owners went with it simply because they needed or wanted the utility, and "why not a CX-5?" vs. it being any kind of passion-purchase like a Corvette, Mustang, Mercedes, etc.

I joined to learn if there are any quirks, maintenance tips, etc. to get the most out of my appliance. I am an outlier HERE. But never make the mistake of thinking the members and those like them on this forum make up Mazda's main target for this CUV. I think this is born out by the fact that nearly every improvement that I said would make the appliance better, was implemented for 2017...and guess what wasn't? Turbos and other crap.

I will go ahead and predict now that Sport Mode may have been tamed a bit to make it more sensible. Let's see if the reviews and experiences back that up...

 

[DannyBoone]

call me crazy but i like the look of the 2016.5 a little better - this 2017 design feels more like a baby cx-9 to me...ironically this is now my 2nd mazda purchase right as they released a new design (bought an '09 3 just before the smiley face '10 came out) and both times i've liked the older look better

While I do love the design of the 2016.5, I think the design of the 2017 elevates the brand to looking like it's competing with Mercedes, Lexus, BMW. The 2017 design is miles ahead of Toyota, Nissan, and Honda, which are its actual competitors. Mazda has done a great job of targeting value and driving dynamics buyers; I think with this redesign they're going after the buyer who cares primarily about the luxury brand aesthetic.

To each his own however! I agree with you about the 09 vs 10 Mazda 3. I had an 07 Mazdaspeed 3 and I hated the redesign of the next generation.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[dougal]

While I do love the design of the 2016.5, I think the design of the 2017 elevates the brand to looking like it's competing with Mercedes, Lexus, BMW. The 2017 design is miles ahead of Toyota, Nissan, and Honda, which are its actual competitors. Mazda has done a great job of targeting value and driving dynamics buyers; I think with this redesign they're going after the buyer who cares primarily about the luxury brand aesthetic.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think people think too much of their cars. They did not turn the CX-5 into a BMW beater. It was refreshed to stay competitive with the CR-V, the Rouge, and the Rav-4. That is all. Hopefully sales remain what they are or increase as the CX-5 is what drives Mazda.

 

[DannyBoone]

I think people think too much of their cars. They did not turn the CX-5 into a BMW beater. It was refreshed to stay competitive with the CR-V, the Rouge, and the Rav-4. That is all. Hopefully sales remain what they are or increase as the CX-5 is what drives Mazda.

No it doesn't actually compete with the BMW. I think you missed the point of what I was saying.

I said it looks like and competes with luxury cars in terms of design, and in the process wipes the floor with its actual competition, which is the CRV, RAV4, and Rogue. In terms of design...




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[CX-5um]

"The CX-9 ......53 pounds of sound-deadening material in the floor. (For comparisons sake, the CX-5 has just five pounds of the stuff in its floor.)"
http://www.caranddriver.com/news/2016-mazda-cx-9-official-photos-and-info-news

In all I think the new CX-9 has about 60lbs of sound deadening. I can assure folks that 2013-2016.5 CX-5's have no more than 15lbs total in the entire car. Very thin and amounts was used sparingly. I would expect the 2017 CX-5 to have no more than 40lbs of sound deadening or less.

 

[Kaps]

No it doesn't actually compete with the BMW. I think you missed the point of what I was saying.

I said it looks like and competes with luxury cars in terms of design, and in the process wipes the floor with its actual competition, which is the CRV, RAV4, and Rogue. In terms of design...

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree with this 200%, 16.5 is not bad looking, 2017 though is in a league of its own. Rogue / CRV / Rav4 are like the ugly step sisters and CX 5 is Cinderella. 2017 is a home run on looks - a generation ahead and this is a big reason why I predict 16.5 resale will tank to an extent. Not a biggie as this is the cycle of cars now a days.

 

[ALafya]

After looking at it for a while, the external design of the 17 is a tad worse than previous years, where as the internal materials and design look better.
Of course, it is all subjective opinion. It would not make a big difference in my theoretical purchase decision. I am definitely not going to trade my current vehicle for a few years more.

Regarding the competition, the Rogue's external and internal design looks very good to me, except that it is a sub-standard in the driving enjoyment department.
The brand new CR-V is much better looking than 2016 MY CR-Vs. For years, I could not put my self to consider one because of how it looked. Now, it will most likely become a top contender with excellent fuel economy, more power & torque and more passenger and cargo volume.
The RAV-4 definitely lags in many respects with just OKish looks as well as internal design and materials.

 

[minnesotaart]

I like it so far. Interesting that the pics show a compass in the instrument cluster and near the seat heater buttons is one for steering wheel heat. Nice additions.

 

[craigo]

Looks great. I would totally buy this car again. Although I plan on keeping mine another 4 years or so, probably until the next generation comes out.

 

[Unobtanium]

"The CX-9 ......53 pounds of sound-deadening material in the floor. (For comparison’s sake, the CX-5 has just five pounds of the stuff in its floor.)"
http://www.caranddriver.com/news/2016-mazda-cx-9-official-photos-and-info-news

In all I think the new CX-9 has about 60lbs of sound deadening. I can assure folks that 2013-2016.5 CX-5's have no more than 15lbs total in the entire car. Very thin and amounts was used sparingly. I would expect the 2017 CX-5 to have no more than 40lbs of sound deadening or less.

A sensible extrapolation, but when I personally suggested this exact thing with nearly the exact numbers, look how this forum reacted:

https://www.mazdas247.com/forum/sho...pressions-questions&highlight=sound+deadening

I suggest something and "oh no, Mazda knows better. You'd ruin it.", then Mazda does that EXACT TO THE LETTER thing I suggest, and "oh, so upgrade. Much nice. Trade mine for the new one!"

Just read all of that swill where they dogpiled on about adding 50# of sound deadening and how I was such a terrible person for it, lol!

This forum makes me laugh. I'm glad Mazda doesn't take their cues from it.