Questions after test driving 2017 CX-5 and CRV

Wow, so many helpful responses! Thank you!

So, it looks like the consensus is that the CRV has a bit better acceleration, but it might not be enough of a difference to be highly noticeable. I just don't want to get stressed out trying to pass cars on the interstate. I liked the 2017 Kia Sportage until I took it onto the highway.

It also sounds like the CX-5 has a little less room in the back seat, but that it probably won't matter too much for my family (I'm the tallest one at 5'9'').

One final question for the owners of these cars: How is the heat/AC? They both seemed fine on the test drive, but that's only one day. I know that the heat and AC on my 2004 Mazda3 never were great and have been really lousy for years and years, even after taking it in. My wife's 2006 CRV, on the other hand, has fantastic heat/AC.
 
The AC is ice frigging cold almost immediately. The heat is quick as well. If you can stand the lowest AC setting for more then 10 minutes, you're a better man then me.
As for passing, I am one of the aggressive drivers on here: no complaints there. Plenty of passing power. I came from a Saab...I'd be complaining if it wasn't good at that.
 
Wow, so many helpful responses! Thank you!

So, it looks like the consensus is that the CRV has a bit better acceleration, but it might not be enough of a difference to be highly noticeable. I just don't want to get stressed out trying to pass cars on the interstate. I liked the 2017 Kia Sportage until I took it onto the highway.

It also sounds like the CX-5 has a little less room in the back seat, but that it probably won't matter too much for my family (I'm the tallest one at 5'9'').

One final question for the owners of these cars: How is the heat/AC? They both seemed fine on the test drive, but that's only one day. I know that the heat and AC on my 2004 Mazda3 never were great and have been really lousy for years and years, even after taking it in. My wife's 2006 CRV, on the other hand, has fantastic heat/AC.

I live in Tucson, we just had 12 straight days in June of temps at or over 110 (bought the car in May), the CX5 AC handled it like nothing (and my car is red). Cools down the cabin quickly after it was baking in the hot sun, the dual temp settings on my car keep a comfortable temp.

Living in AZ I won't know a thing about heaters until early December.

Also I will say that in my opinion, the quality of the interior materials was noticeably higher in the CX-5 in both the back seat and front.
 
Last edited:
I have a 6'1" son and a 5'6" daughter who spend lots of time in the back seat and they have no issues. I am also 6"1 and do most of the driving so the seats are not fully forward.

Also, I agree with your 1st point. I don't find much difference between the CX-5 and the CR-V in get up and go. Drive the CR-V aggressively and you will hear the typical CVT groan. Otherwise, it is a very nice unit. Also, the CX-5 handles better but both are nice. The CR-V has tons of storage space and places for junk. It is designed for that. The CX-5 is designed to be a drivers car. Pick the one that fits your needs.
 
Last edited:
As for some that say the CR-V is much faster than CX-5 that is not true. Depending on your initial reaction at take off and other variables, one or the other could get over the line quicker than the other.

The CR-V is not superior in acceleration in any way. They are both not sports cars.

The new CR-V has finally arrived in Aus and here some of the initial review / comments on the engine and drivetrain:


Outputs are good for the class despite the small capacity, reported as 140kW at 5600rpm and 240Nm between 2000 and 5000rpm. Many rivals use a comparatively anaemic engine at base level, but the CR-V offers this unit across the board. Diesel option? Nope.
Claimed fuel consumption is a middling 7.0-7.4L/100km, though on our test we hovered around 9.0L/100km. The 0-100km/h time is 9.9 seconds, for anyone who cares.


Source: http://www.caradvice.com.au/570061/2018-honda-cr-v-review/


The engine is more than adequate for the task of a suburban family runabout. It won't win any green light grands prix, as there's a degree of initial lag away from a standstill while the turbo builds up boost and the CVT engages the right ratio according the driver's input. But, once on the move, it is nice and quiet at leisurely speeds and has a decent spread of mid-range torque to keep momentum flowing out on the open road.
The CVT has the elastic qualities that are typical of its type, flaring under heavy acceleration and lacking the instant response of a fixed-gear transmission, but it won't matter to most that simply want to drop it into D for drive and leave it to its own devices.


Source: http://www.drive.com.au/new-car-rev...170726-gxjhpf.html?trackLink=articleResults10


I think it will come down to feel and which drivetrain you prefer. Turbo + CVT or NA + Torque converter.

You Aussies pull the pants down on the CRV. No wonder Honda is still loosing share there. OP another good point on mpg: CX5 is much better for combined driving. CRV wont be able to match it. This review and 3 other USA reviews give it 21 mpg in city. Only time you will see such low mpg on cx5 is if you drive in such heavy traffic that it take two chances to cross a light.
 
Wow, so many helpful responses! Thank you!

So, it looks like the consensus is that the CRV has a bit better acceleration, but it might not be enough of a difference to be highly noticeable. I just don't want to get stressed out trying to pass cars on the interstate. I liked the 2017 Kia Sportage until I took it onto the highway.

It also sounds like the CX-5 has a little less room in the back seat, but that it probably won't matter too much for my family (I'm the tallest one at 5'9'').

One final question for the owners of these cars: How is the heat/AC? They both seemed fine on the test drive, but that's only one day. I know that the heat and AC on my 2004 Mazda3 never were great and have been really lousy for years and years, even after taking it in. My wife's 2006 CRV, on the other hand, has fantastic heat/AC.

My 2015 CX5 does decent for HVAC. It is terrible in the cold though because the car is like a plastic bubble. NO insulation, and cold air keeps coming into the cabin from outside, so it's a real PITA to warm it up.
 
Well something changed in 16 or your cars broken. I do not have that problem. I'm usually cracking a window because it's too warm...
 
Well something changed in 16 or your cars broken. I do not have that problem. I'm usually cracking a window because it's too warm...

Something changed, or you don't drive in 0f.

Or maybe your car is broken and overheating. Seriously. This" or maybe you're is broken" stuff is next level special every time someone has a differing experience.
 
Anyone else have this issue of having a hard time getting it warm in the car? Anyone? I'm going to bet no. Not one.
Trust me, pal, it gets cold in Ohio...
Your car is broken... its good natured ribbing, not anything malicious. Lighten up. and get your car checked out. :D
 
Last edited:
My 2015 CX5 does decent for HVAC. It is terrible in the cold though because the car is like a plastic bubble. NO insulation, and cold air keeps coming into the cabin from outside, so it's a real PITA to warm it up.
My heater works phenomenally. However my AC just works too damn hard to try to cool the car off. It needs service. It does not perform like it did new.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
 
I have a dark grey car and black interior and car cools down about as fast as my much smaller white Mazda3.
In contrast it takes longer to cool down the white RDX with light interior that I have. The CX-5 A/C is fine. Dunno about heat.

In fact, my 4 year old in the back sometimes complains that it's too cold but none of my other cars had rear vents before.
 
I also compared the CX5 and CRV w/1.5 Turbo. I can't speak for prices where you are, but here in Central Florida the CX5 Grand Touring is 29K, the CRV EX-L (which is the equivalent model) is 34K PLUS the dealers here add a 2K "pack", You are talking a 5K+ difference in price. For me, I thought the CX5 was the better car, more fun to drive, and 5K stayed in my pocket.
 
3 people? In one thread? From 2013. Yea, that's relevant. But you're right,... I said NOT ONE. Touche.
 
AC works fine in our 2016 in Texas. The 2017 model with the rear AC vents should work even better for all the passengers.
 
After 18 days in a row of 100+ to 112 degrees here, no problems or complaints with the A/C in our 2016.5. (crazy)
Never had a problem with our previous 2013 or 2015 either... sunshade when parked makes BIG difference!


For some, the Hondas small 1.5L engine will be a turn off, as the CX-5's engine is over 65% larger.
 
Last edited:
I also compared the CX5 and CRV w/1.5 Turbo. I can't speak for prices where you are, but here in Central Florida the CX5 Grand Touring is 29K, the CRV EX-L (which is the equivalent model) is 34K PLUS the dealers here add a 2K "pack", You are talking a 5K+ difference in price. For me, I thought the CX5 was the better car, more fun to drive, and 5K stayed in my pocket.

Maybe you compared with a loaded CRV that has wood panel finishes and 2 ton extra chrome trims on the outside and upgraded 18 inch wheels and LED Door sills, with a Honda branded first aid kit and a Honda cookie Jar for storing napkins after blowing noses in them.
 
Maybe you compared with a loaded CRV that has wood panel finishes and 2 ton extra chrome trims on the outside and upgraded 18 inch wheels and LED Door sills, with a Honda branded first aid kit and a Honda cookie Jar for storing napkins after blowing noses in them.

Don't forget the built-in espresso machine that makes coffee, tea, chai, and espresso. As a result the drivers seat does flip up to reveal a toilet, the roll is in the center console. There should be a flush button....somewhere.
 

New Threads and Articles

Back