Cabin room compared to mazda 3

[npannu]

Hi there, although the CX-5 is raised higher than the Mazda 3. Is it in fact bigger while sitting in the cabin? I sat in a CX-5 last week and haven't been in a mazda 3 for awhile but it felt identical. just higher up.

Anyone know the dimensions or can speak to this?

Cheers,

 

[Mountkeen]

The CX-5 is wider than the 3. It's identical to the Mazda 6 in terms of width.

All three cars are based on the same platform though.

 

[paris1]

You should find the rear seat much more habitable in the CX-5.

 

[JOE MAMA]

We have both a CX-5 and a 3 and the CX-5 is definitely more comfortable, though the interior specs on the Mazda website have the two very close as far as headroom, shoulder, hip and legroom are concerned. Passenger volume for the CX-5 is 103.8cu ft while the 3 is 96.3cu ft.

 

[paris1]

We have both a CX-5 and a 3 and the CX-5 is definitely more comfortable, though the interior specs on the Mazda website have the two very close as far as headroom, shoulder, hip and legroom are concerned. Passenger volume for the CX-5 is 103.8cu ft while the 3 is 96.3cu ft.

I would imagine the main difference you notice is in rear seat legroom?

 

[robertmazda]

Anyone know the dimensions or can speak to this?

Cheers,

Easy. Right there on the Mazda website. The specs for all of their cars are listed.
www.mazdausa.com

 

[JOE MAMA]

I would imagine the main difference you notice is in rear seat legroom?

According to the Mazda website, the difference in rear legroom is minimal, though the CX-5 does in fact appear to have more....not sure how Mazda calculates their dimensions.

 

[paris1]

According to the Mazda website, the difference in rear legroom is minimal, though the CX-5 does in fact appear to have more....not sure how Mazda calculates their dimensions.

When I was car shopping in late 2012, it seemed to me the main difference in any crossover/5-door hatch comparison, regardless of car line, was rear seat comfort. The one possible exception was Subaru, whose Imprezza seemed about as roomy in the back seat as the Forester. It just seems like when there's more interior volume to play with, manufacturers find a way to position the rear seat so that passengers don't feel as cramped as they do in lower profile hatches. This was certainly true with the CX-5/Mazda 3 and the Ford Focus/Escape, which were my main considerations along with the Subarus.

 

[craigo]

When I was car shopping in late 2012, it seemed to me the main difference in any crossover/5-door hatch comparison, regardless of car line, was rear seat comfort. The one possible exception was Subaru, whose Imprezza seemed about as roomy in the back seat as the Forester. It just seems like when there's more interior volume to play with, manufacturers find a way to position the rear seat so that passengers don't feel as cramped as they do in lower profile hatches. This was certainly true with the CX-5/Mazda 3 and the Ford Focus/Escape, which were my main considerations along with the Subarus.

The back seat can be moved some when there's less headroom lost to the slope of the roof. The different head profile will also improve the overall feel of space, even if the raw numbers are pretty close.

I always take those numbers with a pinch of salt. Some cars have more on paper (like the CR-V), but it's not always more useful or better. You just have to sit in both.