- :
- 2023 CX-5 Premium; 2018 Mazda 3 GT hatch
You've been driving an Echo for all these years and you're worried about power?!(hand)
Why I chose the Honda CRV over the Mazda CX5
- Thread starter ADVWannabe
- Start date
We had a 2005 CRV tested all CUVs at time of purchase and it came down to the CRV or CX5 we went with the CX5 because of handling looks and stereo. Only regret should of waited another year to work out all the bugs that seem to be popping up with the CX5
watermelon
Member
- :
- cx5
i test drove the CR-V and Rav4 quite a bit before going with the CX-5.
The CRV had the best 'refinement' of all of 3 by far, and naturally had the price to match it. However the CRV felt and handled like an overweight truck. Sure it was smooth, but it wallows around in corners, and you REALLY feel the trucks weight in regular driving. The CRV was scratched off my list first and quickly based on how it drove.
The Rav 4 in the lower trim models incidentally, also wallowed, but the Sport model with upgraded suspension handled great. Unfortunately the Rav 4 was due for a re-design back in the 1990's, and I scratched this off my list based on the interior (splendid crap) and the 4 spd transmission (exceptional crap).
The CX-5 could use more power for sure, but it's got enough. The quality doesn't quite match the CRV, but then again it's about 4G's cheaper, and the interior doesn't feel cheap at all. Truly my only complaint is they kept the manual transmission to base model, which kept me from getting the leather steering wheel.
On the fuel consumption, looking over fuelly data, it appears for the CX-5 that city driving is netting between 28-29MPG city, and highway is netting 30-33mpg overall across all cars. The CRV ain't getting that sorry. Fuelly shows a 24-27mpg range for city and 28-30mpg for city, which is about right.
Last edited:
ADVWannabe
Member
- :
- Ford Ranger
I live and work in Atlanta and am commuting to mid-town and getting 28/29 MPG. On a 300 mile interstate run with the cruise set on 70 the entire way I got 34 MPG. On a drive through the north GA and western NC mountains with many small towns and stoplights to pass through I got 32 MPG. These are measurements I made myself without relying on the trip computer. Though in most cases the trip computer has been really close. Frankly I am confused by the lower rating of the CRV. As I mentioned, I replaced a 5 sp, 2.4L Honda Accord that got 29/35 MPG. It ran 600 RPM higher at 70 MPH than the CRV so I would expect the CRV to get good highway mileage and it does for me anyway.
I will say I am running the econ mode and I am driving fairly easily to try to get good mileage. I did run my Accord a little harder. But the CRV easily keeps up with traffic without having a lead foot so it is easy to run easy.
- :
- Mazdaspeed6
The difference between these two vehicles is pretty simple...
Honda's vehicle are like Toyotas and [now] Hyundai (Toyota chasers).
That is, they design their vehicles to sell en volume, to appeal to a wide, general consumer bse. They are great vehicles, yes. They are reliable, safe, efficient, etc. They are a sure bet.
Mazda develops their fleet to fill a niche market. They, relatively speaking, do not design their vehicles to be dominant in sales, to beat Toyota or to sell the most cars in the world. Sure, they need to stay competitive to stay alive, but their fundamentals are different. They make compromises to fulfill their goal of appealing to a narrower market. So, they inherently aren't for everybody.
Most people want the sure bet. They want the rather souless, and unspecial vehicle, because they get the complete package.
Others want something different and something that appeals to a more adaptive set of driving dynamics. Mazda is there for those who "require" something else.
It's that simple.
Honda's vehicle are like Toyotas and [now] Hyundai (Toyota chasers).
That is, they design their vehicles to sell en volume, to appeal to a wide, general consumer bse. They are great vehicles, yes. They are reliable, safe, efficient, etc. They are a sure bet.
Mazda develops their fleet to fill a niche market. They, relatively speaking, do not design their vehicles to be dominant in sales, to beat Toyota or to sell the most cars in the world. Sure, they need to stay competitive to stay alive, but their fundamentals are different. They make compromises to fulfill their goal of appealing to a narrower market. So, they inherently aren't for everybody.
Most people want the sure bet. They want the rather souless, and unspecial vehicle, because they get the complete package.
Others want something different and something that appeals to a more adaptive set of driving dynamics. Mazda is there for those who "require" something else.
It's that simple.
Last edited:
Why the confusion (CRV vs. CX-5, the topic here), the CRV is heavier, has a low compression, non-direct injected, larger displacement engine, older design 5 speed transmission. Of course the CRV gets lower gas mileage and is rated accordingly (as well as shown in testing), it also has more power and quicker acceleration too.
My parents have 2011 Honda CR-V (EU specification - Executive trim, 2.2 diesel 150 HP, 350Nm, automatic, acceleration 10.6 secs, max speed about 190 km/h). Car is very nice, offers good quality ride, no issues so far. However, it can't be compared to CX-5 for handling. CR-V is a great cruising car but definitely not for sporty drive (at least EU model). In fact it's much closer to RAV4, "neck and neck" run.
Cheers,
Miki
Cheers,
Miki
Well said!
I drove the CRV but it felt like a boat going around corners (and I go around a lot of corners). So, for me the CX-5 was a no-brainer.
well said had a 2010 CRv
the CRV has such an ugly butt. I knew there was no way I could own a butt ugly car for a long time. Why am I dropping all this money on a car I don't like seeing (or driving?). Now, I enjoy stepping into the CX-5. Sometimes I wonder if I should have gone leather, but i'm not one to take care of the interior of my car too well. That and my daughter likes kicking the back of the front seats (she's in baby chair). I didn't think I could bear the pain of her shoes digging into the new leather. That, and I didn't want the inconvenience of scorching hot black leather seats in the summer, and cold seats in the winter (although I am very impressed with the seat warmers!). Well, as much as the look of leather may have been nice, practically, the cloth seats are better for us. =) dilemma solved! =)
- :
- 2023 CX-5 Premium; 2018 Mazda 3 GT hatch
Every manufacturer does something well. I drove the CR-V and ruled it out for several reasons, but one thing that impressed the hell out of me was the engineering that went into the rear seat design. Pull the little handles on either side of the rear cargo area and the seatbacks flop forward as you would expect, but the headrests do not crash into the back of the front seats as they do on the CX-5. Instead, they automatically pivot over 90 degrees AND the seat bottoms piviot up so that the seatbacks have a hole to drop into and the resulting load floor is much flatter than the Mazda. That, my friends, is an example of the kind of bonus features you can build into your cars when they're built on the side of the Pacific where the currency is dirt cheap! BTW: I just removed the rear headrests on my CX-5 so that I don't have to deal with them (and to improve rearward vision). I shouldn't have to do that!
Yes, this class of vehicle is very competitive and all the top sellers have strengths in certain areas.
Based on how I actually use and drive my compact SUV, I'm glad Mazda put more engineering effort (with good results) into fuel efficiency, steering precision, suspension ride/handlng balance, responsive 6 speed transmission, 19" wheel/tire combo instead of expending it on a better rear seat design (that I rarely fold down) like Honda's.
Sounds like OP made the right choice for intended use and preferences.
Based on how I actually use and drive my compact SUV, I'm glad Mazda put more engineering effort (with good results) into fuel efficiency, steering precision, suspension ride/handlng balance, responsive 6 speed transmission, 19" wheel/tire combo instead of expending it on a better rear seat design (that I rarely fold down) like Honda's.
Sounds like OP made the right choice for intended use and preferences.
If it's vinyl, even better that I chose cloth. Vinyl would have cracked and ripped for sure. I've kept my cars for 10+ years, so there's no way vinyl would have survived... =)
Vinyl holds up fine, my wife has it in her Mercedes and back of front seat has been taking exact same kind of abuse for years, looks like new when cleaned with damp cloth, no rips, no stains.
The CRV is the benchmark by which all CUV's are measured because it appeals to the widest group of buyers. It offends the least amount of people and it also appeals to the widest group. Its refined, has lots of versatile cargo space, and it has one of the few 4 cylinder engines that sounds good when you rev the crap out of it. My only problem is its also boring, and other than its refined ride its like driving a well oiled appliance to work. I liked the CX5 because its truly got the soul of a sports car. The brakes are excellent, the steering it fantastic, and the corning is truly incredible for something that is 5'-5" tall. The transmission has to be the best transmission I have ever experienced and the fuel economy I'm getting between 34.5 and 38 mpg with city and highway combined with a disciplined right foot. In the end no one CUV is better than the other because even though they are both CUV's that are very different vehicles with very different driving dynamics. It all depends on the individuals likes. I say thanks for sharing your thoughts and am glade you are happy with a very nice CUV.
Last edited:
The main reason we aren't buying a CRV is the folding seat system, its not flexible enough.
Here in the UK it only splits 40/60, or something like that, so no centre hatch for my fishing rods to pass through, something i can do with my xtrail and CX5.
The CRV also folds the seat swab, so removing storage space behind the front seat floor, something we routinely do when we go caravanning, with our XT.
In fact the Xt seat swob can be removed, which is what i do.
The other reason for not buying a CRV for me was the low diesel power outputs for a 2.2, 148bhp and 258 pound feet of torque, with a relatively high co2 emissions, and here in the UK that means more road tax to pay(VED).
So the diesel versions of the CX5 are a easy choice, more power, lower emissions, more flexible rear seat setup, and in the UK considerably cheaper.
So no the CRV in the UK is anything but "the bench mark"
Here in the UK it only splits 40/60, or something like that, so no centre hatch for my fishing rods to pass through, something i can do with my xtrail and CX5.
The CRV also folds the seat swab, so removing storage space behind the front seat floor, something we routinely do when we go caravanning, with our XT.
In fact the Xt seat swob can be removed, which is what i do.
The other reason for not buying a CRV for me was the low diesel power outputs for a 2.2, 148bhp and 258 pound feet of torque, with a relatively high co2 emissions, and here in the UK that means more road tax to pay(VED).
So the diesel versions of the CX5 are a easy choice, more power, lower emissions, more flexible rear seat setup, and in the UK considerably cheaper.
So no the CRV in the UK is anything but "the bench mark"
... and the good news is thank gosh we don't all drive the same SUV's, how boring would that be!
One of the many reasons I chose the CX-5 over the CRV.. my in-laws drive a CRV. Enough said (cabpatch)
Oh and I am enjoying the waves between smugly pleased other CX-5 drivers.
One of the many reasons I chose the CX-5 over the CRV.. my in-laws drive a CRV. Enough said (cabpatch)
Oh and I am enjoying the waves between smugly pleased other CX-5 drivers.
Agree. My Volvo S70 was the family hauler and item transporter (lumber, toys, x-mas trees) for 13.5 years. When I sold her for the CX-5 the leather seat faces were in very good condition and the vinyl seat backs were perfect.
Brian
All in all I'm happy for the OP. I'm all for Honda's reputation for reliability. I owned an '03 Civic Si hatchback. I still miss that car every time I see it on the road. It was a unique car that had a product span of 4 years. So I'm a fan of Honda. But as of late I feel Hondas have become more generic and less intent on innovation. I trust the CRV is a great vehicle. But it may just boil down to taste. I'm currently shopping for a CX-5 because I feel it suits my personality better.
