Help me decide between CX-5 and Sportage

[jaypdx]

I've test driven both the CX-5 GT and the Sportage SX. Here's my take on the major differences:

- CX-5 was a bit quieter. I was hearing more tire/road noise in the Sportage - maybe due to the wider tires on the Kia. Both had 19" wheels.
- Kia was obviously faster - there's some turbo lag, but it hauls pretty good once it gets going.
- The rear seats felt more cramped on the CX-5.
- The infotainment on the Kia is certainly better than the CX-5, plus it has Android Auto/Carplay (though I didn't test it)
- I didn't focus much on the audio, but I preferred the Bose in the MX-5 over the HK in the Kia (I listened to a little jazz and classical in each)

Handling seemed similar between them, though I didn't really push it during the test drive.

I've been researching here and on one of the Kia sites and, FWIW, there seem to be more problems reported with the Kia. However, Kia has an awesome 5yr/60K mile warranty.

Pricing is in the same ballpark for each. I guess I'm trying to get a sense of how each will age and how others who drove both made their decision.

 

[boandlkramer]

It’s a Kia....nuff said

 

[Xeler8ing]

It’s a Kia....nuff said

Indeed.

Over here it's reputation is still not that good. They do provide a 7yr/unlimited warranty but that leads to many people thinking why are they offering this (uhm) Are they hiding something that hopefully if it rears it's head they can cover the it (scratch)

Putting the above aside, the CX-5 is a newer vehicle life-cycle wise.

 

[CX-5um]

I "heard" people getting pushback from warranty work for Kias and Hyundai dealerships. Haven't seen widespread warranty pushback from Mazda dealerships.

 

[Xeler8ing]

I "heard" people getting pushback from warranty work for Kias and Hyundai dealerships. Haven't seen widespread warranty pushback from Mazda dealerships.

The price one pays for having belief that the long warranty covers everything

 

[ColoradoDriver]

Eh.

Test drove a Kia Sportage back in 2013 before buying this. Was not impressed.

Infotainment system was confusing and clunky (maybe it's better now?)
Styling is much worse imo.
Worst of all, I tried to gun it going on a highway on-ramp and it just lagged hard. Was immediately crossed off my list at that moment.

Edit: I don't think it was a turbo back then. I thought it was a 2.4L. Not sure what they have now, but that's what they had then and was not impressed, was definitely slower than my CX-5.

 

[dougal]

Personally, I find the Kia to be a rather UGLY car. That front end is hard to look at. But if you like it and the ride the car provides, go for it.

The Fuelly average for the Turbo is 22.43 with a 0.25 MPG margin of error while the CX-5 is 25.73 with a 0.32 MPG margin of error. Basically 22 MPG or 26 MPG.

 

[Kaps]

"Kia is Hyundai for people with bad credit. Hyundai goes after people with average credit." - this was a quote on Jalopnik from a buyer who wanted to buy the Stinger - his Kia Dealer told him this.
Kia and Mazda similarly spec'd out and 15% apart in price might compete. With the same price - errrm no not so much.
If you are looking at fully loaded Mazda for 33K and you get same Kia for 28K - that might work. Else you are going to eat too much depreciation and have to live with a substandard product.
Also - note a universal truth about small displacement turbo's when in comes to city mpg - all the mileage of a v6 without the reliability.
Good luck.

 

[Xeler8ing]

Have heard from a few mechanics here that Kia's still don't have a good reputation for reliability

 

[Sailingeric]

We had a rental Kia earlier this year in Mississippi. I am sure it was the middle line but it was not bad. Not as nice inside as my 2016.5 CX-5 but for the price it is a good choice other than the front end is ugly unless it is in black. But I suspect price savings will be lost come resale time. The rental we had did have a weird whistling sound above 70 mph that I think was coming from the fog light area. Not sure if happens on all of them or if it something was loose causing the whistle. It did help convince my wife that having a CUV can drive nice, unlike the beast of an SUV I had when I had a 2007 Xterra.

 

[Dee0121]

Personally, I find the Kia to be a rather UGLY car. That front end is hard to look at. But if you like it and the ride the car provides, go for it.

What he said ^ ^

 

[dougal]

"Kia is Hyundai for people with bad credit. Hyundai goes after people with average credit." - this was a quote on Jalopnik from a buyer who wanted to buy the Stinger - his Kia Dealer told him this.
Kia and Mazda similarly spec'd out and 15% apart in price might compete. With the same price - errrm no not so much.
If you are looking at fully loaded Mazda for 33K and you get same Kia for 28K - that might work. Else you are going to eat too much depreciation and have to live with a substandard product.
Also - note a universal truth about small displacement turbo's when in comes to city mpg - all the mileage of a v6 without the reliability.
Good luck.

Er, the fully loaded Kia will actually have a MSRP higher than the CX-5.

 

[GP 2004]

Er, the fully loaded Kia will actually have a MSRP higher than the CX-5.

I think that he means that one needs to get the Kia for 28K to offset the reduced resale value. At least that is what I get from it.

 

[Monterra]

I drove the non-turbo also i kinda like its funky style but driving it left me longing to get in my cx5 and high tail it outta there. Much more impressive on the kia lot imo was the Sorrento (with wife in mind) but I drove a loaded version priced well into the 40s..ie pass but thanks.

 

[GJ-Molestor]

is this a serious thread? this cant be a serious thread.

obviously the mazda, unless you're simply not interested in the better quality/driving dynamics...

 

[Sailingeric]

is this a serious thread? this cant be a serious thread.

obviously the mazda, unless you're simply not interested in the better quality/driving dynamics...

Waste of electrons in your response. The OP asked a question and you throw this in?? Really??

 

[Kaps]

I think that he means that one needs to get the Kia for 28K to offset the reduced resale value. At least that is what I get from it.

GP 2004 > dougal.

 

[TinyTires]

Waste of electrons in your response. The OP asked a question and you throw this in?? Really??

The REAL WASTE is asking the Mazda Forum which brand they think is better...!
It's "F"ing crazy.

 

[Xeler8ing]

The Kia's interior is IMHO 1 or 2 levels below the CX-5's

 

[jhu8]

id go for a new Tucson over a sportage any day. They actually look really nice.