April 2016 Car & Driver Road Test Digest info

L

Lbear

:
2017 CX5 AWD Touring
April 2016 Car & Driver has the Road Test Digest info:

Mazda CX5 AWD - 1/4 mile =15.8 // 0-60mph= 7.6 // 70mph-0mph = 166 feet // 0.81g
Honda CRV AWD - 1/4 mile =16.6 // 0-60mph= 8.2 // 70mph-0mph = 171 feet // 0.76g
Ford Escape AWD - 1/4 mile =16.9 // 0-60mph = 9.1 // 70mph-0mph = 174 feet // 0.81g
Chevy Trax AWD - 1/4 mile =17.5 // 0-60mph = 9.8 // 70mph-0mph = 169 feet // 0.72g
Kia Sportage AWD - 1/4 mile =17.3 // 0-60mph = 9.3 // 70mph-0mph = 179 feet // 0.79g
Subaru Forester AWD - 1/4 mile =16.7 // 0-60mph = 8.6 // 70mph-0mph = 166 feet // 0.78g

Zoom Zoom (headbang)

(I added the Subaru today)
 
Last edited:
Lbear said:
April 2016 Car & Driver has the Road Test Digest info:

Mazda CX5 AWD - 1/4 mile =15.8 // 0-60mph= 7.6 // 70mph-0mph = 166 feet // 0.81g
Honda CRV AWD - 1/4 mile =16.6 // 0-60mph= 8.2 // 70mph-0mph = 171 feet // 0.76g
Ford Escape AWD - 1/4 mile =16.9 // 0-60mph = 9.1 // 70mph-0mph = 174 feet // 0.81g
Chevy Trax AWD - 1/4 mile =17.5 // 0-60mph = 9.8 // 70mph-0mph = 169 feet // 0.72g
Kia Sportage AWD - 1/4 mile =17.3 // 0-60mph = 9.3 // 70mph-0mph = 179 feet // 0.79g

Zoom Zoom (headbang)
Click to expand...

Wow, impressive!

Car and driver also ranked the CX-5 #1 out of 32 CUV's saying "The apex-loving CX-5 is the sports car of crossovers, with an athleticism you have to experience to believe."

http://www.caranddriver.com/flipboo...ct-crossover-suv-ranked-from-worst-to-best#32
 
Goguinness said:
Why?
Click to expand...

It's got similar cargo volume, AWD, and is more car-like, which is what people lowering the CX-5 seem to be trying to achieve.

That said, I think the only thing holding Mazda's CX-5 back is Ford. Many people still remember Mazda as Ford's junk-drawer that they never actually raided for the rotary engine. The CX-5 is only less popular than the CRV and RAV due to this, I think, and Toyota and Honda's image of reliability. Because, right or wrong, people typically associate Honda and Toyota with "low maintenance" much moreso than Mazda, even today, because of Ford running them into the dirt.

I know I was not going to get a CX-5 until I read up on it and saw how well engineered it was, personally. Which really, this article is about: CUV's. I'm just saying the Impreza hauls the same amount of people/stuff, no?
 
Unobtanium said:
"Should have bought an Impreza."
Click to expand...

This is biggest hurdle I am having is with the CUV versus "car" in choosing a new vehicle.

The Impreza certainly I suppose would feel more car like, but that styling though. Don't get me wrong, I think Subarus are fantastic cars. They are reliable, well built, and tested. But to me they always seem to lag behind in the styling and tech department. Now this is a good thing to some extent, old tested tech works well. But I just cant get over the currently styling. It feels like a weird mix between Toyota and Chevrolet. I would buy a Subaru, but I WANT to buy the Mazda. The current Mazda3 is to small for me, The CX3 is just no......., We can't get the Mazda6 wagon and we probably won't see the CX4. So the CX5 is my choice over the Impreza/Forrester/Crosstrek.

Honda and Toyota also make fine cars in these segments but most reviewers seem to notice the "Zoom zoom" feel of Mazda over these.

My feeling for an interesting car however is fairly low as I currently drive an old S10.
 
silvercoat said:
This is biggest hurdle I am having is with the CUV versus "car" in choosing a new vehicle.

The Impreza certainly I suppose would feel more car like, but that styling though. Don't get me wrong, I think Subarus are fantastic cars. They are reliable, well built, and tested. But to me they always seem to lag behind in the styling and tech department. Now this is a good thing to some extent, old tested tech works well. But I just cant get over the currently styling. It feels like a weird mix between Toyota and Chevrolet. I would buy a Subaru, but I WANT to buy the Mazda. The current Mazda3 is to small for me, The CX3 is just no......., We can't get the Mazda6 wagon and we probably won't see the CX4. So the CX5 is my choice over the Impreza/Forrester/Crosstrek.

Honda and Toyota also make fine cars in these segments but most reviewers seem to notice the "Zoom zoom" feel of Mazda over these.

My feeling for an interesting car however is fairly low as I currently drive an old S10.
Click to expand...

I looked up the new Impreza, and meh. I was referring to the turbo one's of last gen, I guess. The WRX and STi. Apparently Subaru killed those.

I'd take a CX5 over anything you mentioned in "current year model" (Because I'd pick a WRX STi hatch over the CX-5, if I didn't want the clearance). A co-worker of mine has a Crosstrek and raves about the handling. I have not driven it, nor has she driven my CX-5, but the numbers suggest she is wrong. However, she does come from owning sports cars like I do, so I dunno...I'd like to drive her Crosstrek.

As to your Chevy S10...


A former co-worker of mine was talking to one of his co-workers, at a previous job about vehicles, when this (rather slow...) co-worker said "I want to get me one of them little Chevy Sio's." Everyone looked at him funny, until they figured out he meant an S10.
 
Unobtanium said:
I looked up the new Impreza, and meh. I was referring to the turbo one's of last gen, I guess. The WRX and STi. Apparently Subaru killed those.

I'd take a CX5 over anything you mentioned in "current year model" (Because I'd pick a WRX STi hatch over the CX-5, if I didn't want the clearance). A co-worker of mine has a Crosstrek and raves about the handling. I have not driven it, nor has she driven my CX-5, but the numbers suggest she is wrong. However, she does come from owning sports cars like I do, so I dunno...I'd like to drive her Crosstrek.

As to your Chevy S10...


A former co-worker of mine was talking to one of his co-workers, at a previous job about vehicles, when this (rather slow...) co-worker said "I want to get me one of them little Chevy Sio's." Everyone looked at him funny, until they figured out he meant an S10.
Click to expand...

I was a big fan of the last gen WRX & STi and completely agree. For me though in looking for a daily I had to have an auto. I just can't deal with stop and go traffic everyday with a manual. The WRX/STi looked much better than the base Impreza as well. As for the new Crosstrek, what I read is you are paying more for a higher suspension and body trim over a base Impreza. But yeh the numbers alone don't lie. Also CVT's.....

If Subaru could bring back the sportyness and comfort to one of their hatchbacks then I would be inclined.

Looking at the tech as well, suspension (independent versions torsion bars) and transmissions (CVT, CVT w/sport, Auto, Auto w/sport) is something I have been looking at.

My S10 has been great to me (I have the ZQ8 lowered package no Xtreme body kit) but I do not haul and it is time for something more fun.
 
silvercoat said:
I was a big fan of the last gen WRX & STi and completely agree. For me though in looking for a daily I had to have an auto. I just can't deal with stop and go traffic everyday with a manual. The WRX/STi looked much better than the base Impreza as well. As for the new Crosstrek, what I read is you are paying more for a higher suspension and body trim over a base Impreza. But yeh the numbers alone don't lie. Also CVT's.....

If Subaru could bring back the sportyness and comfort to one of their hatchbacks then I would be inclined.

Looking at the tech as well, suspension (independent versions torsion bars) and transmissions (CVT, CVT w/sport, Auto, Auto w/sport) is something I have been looking at.

My S10 has been great to me (I have the ZQ8 lowered package no Xtreme body kit) but I do not haul and it is time for something more fun.
Click to expand...

So why the CX5? Do you haul things/family/kids around? What is the reason you aren't getting into a Mustang GT/Corvette/Camaro/etc. or something fun, if you want fun?

For me, the CX-5 was a dirt cheap option to skew my D/I ratio so I can build a larger house, with less financial pain as well, and it met my needs of all-weather, semi-rough terrain (rocky dirt roads, wash-outs (minor), etc.), and allows me to haul friends and camping gear, for the cheapest price possible in fuel, maintenance, and initial cost, while having a very solid reputation for not taking a dump mechanically. So far, it bores me to death, but it nails every single goal I set for it.
 
Lbear said:
April 2016 Car & Driver has the Road Test Digest info:

Mazda CX5 AWD - 1/4 mile =15.8 // 0-60mph= 7.6 // 70mph-0mph = 166 feet // 0.81g
Honda CRV AWD - 1/4 mile =16.6 // 0-60mph= 8.2 // 70mph-0mph = 171 feet // 0.76g
Ford Escape AWD - 1/4 mile =16.9 // 0-60mph = 9.1 // 70mph-0mph = 174 feet // 0.81g
Chevy Trax AWD - 1/4 mile =17.5 // 0-60mph = 9.8 // 70mph-0mph = 169 feet // 0.72g
Kia Sportage AWD - 1/4 mile =17.3 // 0-60mph = 9.3 // 70mph-0mph = 179 feet // 0.79g
Subaru Forester AWD - 1/4 mile =16.7 // 0-60mph = 8.6 // 70mph-0mph = 166 feet // 0.78g

Zoom Zoom (headbang)

(I added the Subaru today)
Click to expand...

I wonder what some here would have said if CX5 would not have made it #1? Right off the bat I can say:

a) Car and Driver is NOT the de facto ...
b) What tires were used?
c) Yes, at 0 to 60 but then due to engineering excellence, blah-blah from 61 to xxx is where CX5 will out-shine, etc., etc.

What I am trying to say here - is when data is presented which is acceptable, no one argues. But where there's some dislikes, every darn argument from wind speed to distance of the moon on that fateful day is brought forward.
 
bmninada said:
I wonder what some here would have said if CX5 would not have made it #1? Right off the bat I can say:

a) Car and Driver is NOT the de facto ...
b) What tires were used?
c) Yes, at 0 to 60 but then due to engineering excellence, blah-blah from 61 to xxx is where CX5 will out-shine, etc., etc.

What I am trying to say here - is when data is presented which is acceptable, no one argues. But where there's some dislikes, every darn argument from wind speed to distance of the moon on that fateful day is brought forward.
Click to expand...

Mine would be what mileage did the Mazda have? Of all the new cars I've driven no other engine seemed to benefit more after the first oil change (or 2) then Skyactiv engines it seems. Per butt dyno of course. I wish they would test cars with 10k plus miles in these comparisons.
 
bmninada said:
What I am trying to say here - is when data is presented which is acceptable, no one argues.
Click to expand...

Ummmm....Isn't that exactly what you are trying to do with this post of yours?

I've taken exception to professional auto journalists opinions, but only when I have experience that discredits their view. Apparently, since you have no ammunition to counter the raw data, you take offense at your fellow forum members (simply because they have no reason to doubt the results)?

I can see this data greatly chaffs you but that there is nothing you can do about it (other than try to raise suspicions).
 
Unobtanium said:
So why the CX5? Do you haul things/family/kids around? What is the reason you aren't getting into a Mustang GT/Corvette/Camaro/etc. or something fun, if you want fun?

For me, the CX-5 was a dirt cheap option to skew my D/I ratio so I can build a larger house, with less financial pain as well, and it met my needs of all-weather, semi-rough terrain (rocky dirt roads, wash-outs (minor), etc.), and allows me to haul friends and camping gear, for the cheapest price possible in fuel, maintenance, and initial cost, while having a very solid reputation for not taking a dump mechanically. So far, it bores me to death, but it nails every single goal I set for it.
Click to expand...

Easy enough to answer on this one.

My next car requirements are basically this.
$19-25k
Hatch or small SUV: I don't like trunks, and I want something that can fit people with 4 doors and possible tow a small trailer for furniture or materials. I like having a car that I can treat as a tool if need be.
I don't want a large truck based SUV because I don't need that heavy of duty and I am looking for a more "car like" ride.
Good fuel mileage A good modern 4 cylinder fits this
Decent performance: A bigger 4cy + auto shift/sport mode helps, normal transmission over CVTs seem to do this
Reliable: My top choices are Mazda, Toyota, Subaru for obvious reasons. Not a fan of most American designed or anything from Europe that is affordable
Styling: The CX5 just looks fluid and does not have any of the boxy-ness plaguing other vehicles.

The more I look into it the more I like it. I really just need to test drive a newer CX5 with the 2.5L. I have only briefly driven a 2013 2.0L. My main problems were needing a little more power and the ride height was a bit higher than I had been experiencing driving a Cadillac recently.
 
bmninada said:
I wonder what some here would have said if CX5 would not have made it #1? Right off the bat I can say:

a) Car and Driver is NOT the de facto ...
b) What tires were used?
c) Yes, at 0 to 60 but then due to engineering excellence, blah-blah from 61 to xxx is where CX5 will out-shine, etc., etc.

What I am trying to say here - is when data is presented which is acceptable, no one argues. But where there's some dislikes, every darn argument from wind speed to distance of the moon on that fateful day is brought forward.
Click to expand...

Have you reported this data to the insurance companies yet? It may be quicker than they thought, and a rate hike may be necessary...
 
Please log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

H
DO YOU NEED A PICKME UP? Here is a list of cars that we can beat 1/4 mile!!
2 3
Replies
47
Views
27K
THE Phen
T

Latest posts

Back