Best Compact SUVs from U.S. News

[yrwei52]

Best Compact SUVs from U.S. News ranked 2016 Mazda CX-5 #3 on the list:

#1: 2016 Honda CR-V
#2: 2016 Hyundai Tucson
#3: 2016 Mazda CX-5
#4: 2016 Ford Escape
#5: 2016 GMC Terrain
#6: 2016 Chevrolet Equinox
#6: 2016 Nissan Rogue
#6: 2016 Toyota RAV4 Hybrid
#9: 2016 Kia Sportage
#10: 2016 Subaru Forester
#10: 2016 Volkswagen Tiguan
#12: 2016 Toyota RAV4
#13: 2016 Jeep Cherokee
#13: 2016 Subaru Crosstrek
#13: 2016 Subaru Crosstrek Hybrid
#16: 2016 Jeep Wrangler
#17: 2016 Mitsubishi Outlander
#18: 2016 Jeep Compass
#19: 2016 Jeep Patriot

One thing really concerned me is the reliability part. Mazda CX-5 rated 2.5 out of 5 on reliability score! This is not only much lower than those major Japanese competitors such as Honda CR-V and Toyota RAV4, or Korean Hyundai Tucson and Kia Sportage, but also lower than Ford Escape, GMC Terrain and Chevrolet Equinox! 2.5 score is actually falls with all of these Jeep products which are having bad quality and reliability reputation! 2.5 score on reliability is actually the second worst on the entire list only Subaru Forester's 2.0 is worse!

I know this is only one source for the review. But reliability is one of the major obstacles I have to convince friends and families to purchase a Mazda CX-5. If Ford is the one screwed up Mazda's quality and reliability in the past, now there's no excuse to have bad quality and reliability like U.S. News indicated!

 

[rudycx5]

Our reliability score is based on the J.D. Power and Associates Vehicle Dependability Study (VDS) rating or, if unavailable, the J.D. Power Predicted Reliability rating.

Predicted Reliability Score
2_5
Two things about that rating it comes from JD power for which I really don't care that much and it is predicted not true reliability rating.

 

[yrwei52]

Our reliability score is based on the J.D. Power and Associates Vehicle Dependability Study (VDS) rating or, if unavailable, the J.D. Power Predicted Reliability rating.

Predicted Reliability Score
2_5
Two things about that rating it comes from JD power for which I really don't care that much and it is predicted not true reliability rating.

As I said, this is based on a single source for reliability score. But J.D. Power and Associates have their Vehicle Dependability Study (VDS) rating, and you can't say 2.5 score is from prediction but not the true reliability rating. Even if it's a prediction, they always have some study or research to be based on. All other reliability scores from other cars in this article are in line with most studies, and you can't simply dismiss it only on CX-5's just because it doesn't live up to YOUR expectation for our CX-5!

In fact, this article is from a friend of mine who is in the market for a compact CUV. I suggested him checking into the CX-5 and he showed me this article for his reliability concerns. He had Mazda before and he's no longer much interested in Mazda because the rotary engine problems on his old RX-7!

 

[ALafya]

* I am surprised that the CX-5 gets 4 out of 5 stars from the NHSTA, compared with 5/5 for the CR-V and Tucson.

* The CR-V gets more points on interior mostly because it has more cargo space. At least for me (and potentially many others), it was not that important. Also, 3 cuft with seats up / 5 cuft with seats down is not a big difference. Compare it to the Tiguan -13/-10 cuft. In other aspects of the interior, the CX-5 is better than the CR-V.

* I don't agree too with the reliability section. While SkyActiv drivetrain is relatively new, so is the CVT and Earth-dreams drivetrain of the CR-V. If anything, the CVT in the CR-V is from 2015, so the risk with CR-V is higher.
Being all new, the Tucson reliability score means absolutely nothing. The chance of having something wrong on the first year of this gen is not insignificant.

* The *new* 2016 Tucson actually is a pretty good in terms of acceleration and handling, except if you get the base engine. It is quicker than the upgraded 2L Turbo engine in the Escape, despite having less HP. Except for steering feel, it is a solid pick.

* The refreshed look of the CR-V is an improvement over the 2014s, but is still way behind the CX-5 and Tucson.

 

[Kedis82ZE8]

I know a lot don't like Consumer Reports but the user submitted reliability surveys have been dead on for any cars I have owned. They typically maintain tracking for 7-8 of the last model years as well.

CX-5 scores well on their user submitted problem surveys.

Only '14 and '15s get overall 5-star from NHTSA

IIRC...something changed in regards to the front passenger airbag when looking at test data for the '16s.

JD Powers might be factoring in legacy (Mazda/Ford) reliability data as well

http://www.caranddriver.com/features/the-trouble-with-jd-powers-initial-quality-study-feature

 

[dblgoat]

You have to take reliability ratings with a grain of salt if you don't know how the ratings were taken and tabulated. I believe it was AutoBlog that had an article a few months back regarding the JD Power reliability survey--they pointed out that even JD Power doesn't even weight different types of problems -- as an example a Bluetooth connectivity issue carries the same weight as a failed transmission--so minor problems could be causing a particular car to have poor ratings while regarding important items it may be just fine.

 

[yrwei52]

* I am surprised that the CX-5 gets 4 out of 5 stars from the NHSTA, compared with 5/5 for the CR-V and Tucson.

How did Mazda drop the ball on this? 2016 essentially had no change structure wise from previous MY, and the passenger safety rating from NHTSA frontal crash test has dropped from 5 to 3 stars! I hope it was not because the cost cutting for something we don't know, but Mazda really needs to fix this because 3-star safety rating for front passenger probably is the worst rating among new vehicles.

 

[yrwei52]

You have to take reliability ratings with a grain of salt if you don't know how the ratings were taken and tabulated. I believe it was AutoBlog that had an article a few months back regarding the JD Power reliability survey--they pointed out that even JD Power doesn't even weight different types of problems -- as an example a Bluetooth connectivity issue carries the same weight as a failed transmission--so minor problems could be causing a particular car to have poor ratings while regarding important items it may be just fine.

Now you've mentioned transmission failure, I have seen many transmission failures here from 2016 CX-5 than any other MY's. And NHTSA's data confirms this as 18 out of 46 complaints for 2016 CX-5 are for failed transmission!

You think 18 is insignificant??? Honda CR-V which sold at least 3 times more than CX-5 yearly, has total of 6 complaints, none of them is failed CVT transmission! If you say Mazda was selling 2016 CX-5 earlier than 2016 CR-V, there're 283 complaints for 2015 CR-V, and 77 are powertrain related. Almost all of them are complaints for the infamous vibration issue, not the major transmission failure!

Now for Toyota RAV4, which again sold almost 3 times more yearly than CX-5, has total of 5 complaints for 2016! Of course none of them is powertrain related. There're 44 total complaints against 2015 RAV4, none of them is total transmission failure either.

Unless J.D. Power has an agenda against Mazda, I'd think their evaluation on reliability has their own base. By looking at scores for other cars with good reputation on reliability, and recent reliability issues from CX-5, I tend to believe the reliability scores from U.S. News are not too far off the mark.

 

[Pototoy]

The upcoming 2017 Honda CRV will be the big winner. Hope Honda will dump that stupid CVT!

 

[Kedis82ZE8]

http://auto.ndtv.com/news/2017-honda-cr-v-spotted-testing-ahead-of-official-debut-1250968

 

[Pototoy]

^^Lol! Most likely that's not the one.

 

[Kedis82ZE8]

Maybe that is the hearse version?

 

[inlinev]

* I am surprised that the CX-5 gets 4 out of 5 stars from the NHSTA, compared with 5/5 for the CR-V and Tucson.

* The CR-V gets more points on interior mostly because it has more cargo space. At least for me (and potentially many others), it was not that important. Also, 3 cuft with seats up / 5 cuft with seats down is not a big difference. Compare it to the Tiguan -13/-10 cuft. In other aspects of the interior, the CX-5 is better than the CR-V.

* I don't agree too with the reliability section. While SkyActiv drivetrain is relatively new, so is the CVT and Earth-dreams drivetrain of the CR-V. If anything, the CVT in the CR-V is from 2015, so the risk with CR-V is higher.
Being all new, the Tucson reliability score means absolutely nothing. The chance of having something wrong on the first year of this gen is not insignificant.

* The *new* 2016 Tucson actually is a pretty good in terms of acceleration and handling, except if you get the base engine. It is quicker than the upgraded 2L Turbo engine in the Escape, despite having less HP. Except for steering feel, it is a solid pick.

* The refreshed look of the CR-V is an improvement over the 2014s, but is still way behind the CX-5 and Tucson.

The direct injection 2.4 and CVT combo in the 2015 crv originally debuted on n the 2013 accord.

 

[purplengold]

The CRV is a gutless wonder. The CX5 is more fun times 5.

 

[Pototoy]

In my perfect world; I'll get the engine of the new CRV, transmission of the cX5, size of the outlander, price of rhe Tucson! Lol

 

[yrwei52]

In my perfect world; I'll get the engine of the new CRV, transmission of the cX5, size of the outlander, price of rhe Tucson! Lol

CX-5 does have many good virtues for a compact CUV and I don't mind to get another CX-5 as long as Mazda can improve or keep up the good work on quality, reliability and safety, no more lapses please!

 

[yrwei52]

The upcoming 2017 Honda CRV will be the big winner. Hope Honda will dump that stupid CVT!

The way Honda is handling their business for research and development in recent years, I simply don't think Honda can come out any innovations. CVT will stay for Honda to achieve better fuel economy numbers for EPA. And Honda CR-V has already been the big winner in U.S. compact CUV market for many years since it was debuted in 1997!

 

[ALafya]

If the new Civic and Accord Hybrid are any indication, the new CR-V will be very good, but perhaps external styling would not be great.

Car & Driver ranking of cross-overs have the CX-5 as #1, Escape as #2, CR-V #3 & Tucson #4.
http://www.caranddriver.com/mazda/cx-5

Also keep in mind the Tucson is really 3 different vehicles. The base Tucson has a 2L NA engine that has no benefits other than lower cost and no Turbo. The Eco, which is probably the best one to have, which is the only one that gets MPG which matches that of the CX-5, and other trims, which get lower MPG, wider tires. You need to avoid confusing these. A cheap base Tucson with Eco MPG and Limited road grip.