CX-5 Off Road Question

[velocityc6]

Thanks, all - the roads approximate the photos that Bluegrass provided - with some occasional ruts and grades. And, it would be only a few times a year. And, the snow we get here that would make higher ground clearance comes in only a few times a year. So, I don't really need AWD and ground clearance - it's more the satisfaction of knowing that I could if I needed to. What informed your choice of the CX over another vehicle?

Heres my opinion as I've owned both.

The CX5 is more capable/utility but if you have no need for the extra capabilities Mazda 6 is a solid choice.

After owning both a 2016 6 GT and now CX5's (2 in the family) I enjoy the benefits of the extra cargo space and AWD system too much to go back to the 6.

Just today I loaded up a bunch of lifeproof plank flooring in the CX5, we've taken the CX5 on 2000 mile road trips with everything needed fitting inside.

I can't think of anything I "miss" about the 6 versus our current CX5's. The 6 had slightly better gas mileage BUT had the I-eloop system assisting it which featured a unique battery costing $500 and last only about 3 years....that effectively wipes out the gas savings when that battery fails.
In poor weather the 6 had issues in snowy conditions with the oem tires, the AWD CX5's have been confidence inspiring and done wonderfully.

IMO these CX5's are so good there isn't a compelling reason to purchase a sedan anymore....the market agrees which is why sedans are becoming a niche vehicle.

 

[bluegrass]

I can't think of anything I "miss" about the 6 versus our current CX5's.
IMO these CX5's are so good there isn't a compelling reason to purchase a sedan anymore...

I don't know what the OP's priorities are, but here are a few reasons...
- Lighter
- Lower center of gravity
- Better handling
- Faster
- Less expensive
- Better gas mileage
- Quieter

If you care about cost, efficiency, driving dynamics and performance, the sedan/wagon/hatchback format will nearly always be better (apples-to-apples) than the SUV variant.

Remember, most of these mainstream SUV's are just a higher-riding version of the car, as they are built on the same car-based platform.

U.S. consumers are in love with SUVs because they offer a higher seating position and the feeling they can "go anywhere/conquer anything". And since wagons/hatchbacks are largely dead here, and minivans are increasingly out of style, families pick them for the ability to haul more stuff.

 

[MyFirstMazda]

I wouldn't go for a joy ride on an off road trail with my CX-5. I would go on gravel roads with minimal ruts and rocks to get to a fishing hole or exploring. The CX-5 has ridged low mud flaps, a low plastic nose, thin sheet metal. It isn't an off road SUV. It will go fine off road but expect to lose plastic parts, break sound insulating parts, get scratches and dinks. Who wants to mess up such a nice car like that. I chose AWD because I get snow in the winter and AWD helps a lot. I won't get stuck and stranded. AWD adds some weight, which I like, but is more expensive. It still gets terrific fuel economy.

 

[sm1ke]

I don't know what the OP's priorities are, but here are a few reasons...
- Lighter
- Lower center of gravity
- Better handling
- Faster
- Less expensive
- Better gas mileage
- Quieter

If you care about cost, efficiency, driving dynamics and performance, the sedan/wagon/hatchback format will nearly always be better (apples-to-apples) than the SUV variant.

Remember, most of these mainstream SUV's are just a higher-riding version of the car, as they are built on the same car-based platform.

U.S. consumers are in love with SUVs because they offer a higher seating position and the feeling they can "go anywhere/conquer anything". And since wagons/hatchbacks are largely dead here, and minivans are increasingly out of style, families pick them for the ability to haul more stuff.

I tend to agree. I love my CX-9 for the versatility, but I really miss my old 99 Accord and 08 IS250. Smaller cars are also easier to park in densely populated urban areas, but backup/360 cams help in that regard.

If I had a second vehicle for people/cargo hauling, or if I knew I would never really use the extra cargo space, I'd be in a sedan or coupe.

 

[GTA-CX9]

OP mentioned a previous Camry. I had a 2014 Camry and 11 CX7 at same time. I was always impressed by how many camping bins and duffle bags the camry held. 6 would be similar, nice big trunk to keep things out of view and more secure. I never like the piling stuff on top layer after layer, and the 6 will have nice trunk floor space to spread things out. Never directly did a # of bags comparo, but the cx7 was also bigger than cx5.

Could a camry or 6 carry a dresser like a cx5? Maybe. A long dresser, not to tall,across the passenger seat. I've done it. Benches too. With a second car being an SUV, i think a case for the 6 can be made. Cargo capacity depends on what you want to carry, and the cx5 raked rear windshield would cut into that capability a bit. Don't just look at cu ft.

For reference, I have a cx9 that has rejected certain shapes of dressers. Which then fit in my CRV. The cargo capacity of SUVs is a strangely particular thing. And TBH the cx5 isn't the most cavernous.

I'd lean to 6 since OP already has the Liberty for IKEA duty.

 

[GTA-CX9]

I tend to agree. I love my CX-9 for the versatility, but I really miss my old 99 Accord and 08 IS250. Smaller cars are also easier to park in densely populated urban areas, but backup/360 cams help in that regard.

If I had a second vehicle for people/cargo hauling, or if I knew I would never really use the extra cargo space, I'd be in a sedan or coupe.

I AAAAALMOST pulled trigger on Accord coupe to go with SUV. Now it's gone, only 4 door, and I have regrets.

 

[Mazdiod2]

One reason I don't plan on going back to sedans is their ultra low ground clearance.
Older cars used to have about 6", compared to a pickups' 8 inches but now they are around 5 inches.

The ride height is a real comfort point, not just a 'feel good' thing.

I think crossovers, which some people wouldn't consider to be genuine SUVs, are an ideal compromise between economy and utility.

 

[bluegrass]

I tend to agree. I love my CX-9 for the versatility, but I really miss my old 99 Accord and 08 IS250.

If I had a second vehicle for people/cargo hauling, or if I knew I would never really use the extra cargo space, I'd be in a sedan or coupe.

Me too.
Of all the vehicles I've owned, my Acura Integra hatchback was my favorite by far. It was a blast to drive and surprisingly practical.

As much as I like my CX-5, I'd have picked something else, had I known I would now own a Honda Ridgeline.
Instead of the CX-5, I would have bought a Mazda 6, Honda Accord Sport or Honda Civic Sport....more fun to drive, more efficient and less expensive.

 

[sm1ke]

One reason I don't plan on going back to sedans is their ultra low ground clearance.
Older cars used to have about 6", compared to a pickups' 8 inches but now they are around 5 inches.

The ride height is a real comfort point, not just a 'feel good' thing.

I think crossovers, which some people wouldn't consider to be genuine SUVs, are an ideal compromise between economy and utility.

Excellent points, I agree. Another selling point for crossovers/SUVs/CUVs is the height of ingress/egress. I'm one of those crazies who likes lowering his cars on aftermarket suspension, and my Lexus was especially low to the ground (I want to say maybe 2-3" clearance). I had no issues getting in and out of it and probably wouldn't have any issues now, but as I get older, that would probably change. Plus car seat removal, lifting a child out of the car, removing groceries and stuff is just easier on the back.

Me too.
Of all the vehicles I've owned, my Acura Integra hatchback was my favorite by far. It was a blast to drive and surprisingly practical.

Loved the Integra, such a great car.

 

[Donutman]

Thanks all. The remaining hang ups I have between the 6 and the CX is the low profile tires on the 6 - concern about tire damage with lo-pro tires - but then with AWD there is the “replace all four” issue - it just seems that short of swapping out rims on the 6 each presents an undesirable tire issue.

 

[jjm86m]

Thanks all. The remaining hang ups I have between the 6 and the CX is the low profile tires on the 6 - concern about tire damage with lo-pro tires - but then with AWD there is the “replace all four” issue - it just seems that short of swapping out rims on the 6 each presents an undesirable tire issue.

That's not how tire replacement is supposed to work for any drive system. You should be rotating your tires regularly enough that they all wear evenly. Even if you have uneven wear you should be replacing them all at the same time.

Also, keep in mind the CX5 doesn't spin all 4 tires all the time. It is designed to be on demand.

If you're only going on roads like Bluegrass posted the low profile tires shouldn't be a concern.

My suggestion would be to go rent both for a day or two and go out to some of these roads you wanna try out.

 

[hal2]

Heres my opinion as I've owned both.

The CX5 is more capable/utility but if you have no need for the extra capabilities Mazda 6 is a solid choice.

IMO these CX5's are so good there isn't a compelling reason to purchase a sedan anymore....the market agrees which is why sedans are becoming a niche vehicle.

^This

I love (not) the comments when Yahoo or someone has a story on SUV's, cross-overs, etc.,... "they're stupid" "They're never off road" "worse gas mileage" - you've heard all the haters. Truth is, they're the near perfect DD. Rav4, CVR, CX-5 all have their place for their customers. Without going down the to the next size smaller (C-HR, HR-V, CX30) The CX-5 is the about the smallest in it's class which is fine for me and the GF. - compact, maneuverable, can haul stuff, AWD if needed. TBH, I see it the other way - I can't see having a sedan if it were my only car, too limiting in it's usefulness. So I got 2 cars - none sedans, the 2011 Miata GT PRHT and the new CX-5. 2 perfect cars for what they were intended