New CX-5 Turbo Premium Owner

[cx5bayarea]

Hello everyone, I helped my 70 year old mom buy a CX-5 Turbo Premium recently in the San Francisco Bay Area. I have a Jaguary F-Type and a FJ Cruiser, and she recently totaled a CX-50. She felt the CX-50 was too big, too wide, so we went with the CX-5 this time, driven also by 0.9% financing.

I just wanted to let everyone know that from a car guy (myself, 6 Audi's, two S4's, etc) that the CX-5 is a dramatically better car than the CX-50. Both in fit/finish, build, and driving dynamics. My mom feels it too, and she's not a car person.

Also, this was just under the Signature trim. The biggest negatives on the CX-5 are a lack of ambient lighting in the cabin, and I don't mean stupid strips of light, but footwell, map pockets, door handles, etc, especially for an older person. I wanted to point out though that the spec sheet - see attached from Mazda - is a bit off regarding the Turbo Premium vs Signature.

For example, the Turbo Premium seems to have LED lighting throughout the cabin, just no footwell lights. The map lights, mirror lights, etc are all LED, including the Tailgate light. It also has the "Signature Unique Overhead Console" in black with a single LED downlight - "ambient lighting" - could be just the final year quirks.

Anyway, the car is QUICK, solid, and really premium feeling. A truly great car that doesn't really show its age.

 

[Lazy2.5]

I can tell you that Skyactiv Mazda's are better than any luxury brand out there, as far as reliability and real driving feel/engagement goes.

There are Skyactiv owners out there with NA engines, both auto and manual transmissions hitting 700,000KM with standard maintenance. I can send links to anyone curious.

Something like a Mazda 3, 6 with the NA engine, tune and manual transmission is a blast to drive, and with some basic suspension modifications as well as lighter wheels, performance tires will out-maneuver any luxury sports sedan due to weighing hundreds of pounds less.

The only thing that attracts me to certain luxury car brands would be RWD and an inline-6..

If you're willing to live with FWD or AWD, These Mazda's are superior in every category except for brand prestige, gimmicky luxury features and outright acceleration.

 

[Greg]

Hello everyone, I helped my 70 year old mom buy a CX-5 Turbo Premium recently in the San Francisco Bay Area. I have a Jaguary F-Type and a FJ Cruiser, and she recently totaled a CX-50. She felt the CX-50 was too big, too wide, so we went with the CX-5 this time, driven also by 0.9% financing.

I just wanted to let everyone know that from a car guy (myself, 6 Audi's, two S4's, etc) that the CX-5 is a dramatically better car than the CX-50. Both in fit/finish, build, and driving dynamics. My mom feels it too, and she's not a car person.

Also, this was just under the Signature trim. The biggest negatives on the CX-5 are a lack of ambient lighting in the cabin, and I don't mean stupid strips of light, but footwell, map pockets, door handles, etc, especially for an older person. I wanted to point out though that the spec sheet - see attached from Mazda - is a bit off regarding the Turbo Premium vs Signature.

For example, the Turbo Premium seems to have LED lighting throughout the cabin, just no footwell lights. The map lights, mirror lights, etc are all LED, including the Tailgate light. It also has the "Signature Unique Overhead Console" in black with a single LED downlight - "ambient lighting" - could be just the final year quirks.

Anyway, the car is QUICK, solid, and really premium feeling. A truly great car that doesn't really show its age.

Hmm? I also got turbo premium in December. Top console is the black one you mentioned with LED displays. Maybe because my is black on black. The other signature stuff is exactly what I don't want...
I have both now 25 T PR and 25 NA PF.
Turbo so far is awesome...

 

[zx10guy]

I love the F-Type. Too bad it got killed off.

Anyways, in regards to interior lighting, you can update/add interior lighting with a factory accessories kit.

https://parts.mazdausa.com/p/Mazda_2025_CX-5/Interior-Lighting-Kit/109224971/KB7WV7050A.html?partner=featuredAccessories

 

[wlong01]

Wish they would illuminate the active garage door buttons on the homelite mirror. They only have a little light in the middle and it's a pain trying to select the proper button with no lighting. I have multiple doors programmed and when I pull in at night I usually hit the wrong one.

 

[a69mach1377]

It's all very dark inside...in the daytime, opening the skylight helps a bit.

 

[ceric]

To OP.
I am in Bay Area. I got TWO 2025 Premium Plus in my garage. Diff colors to tell...
Love CX5. It is the whole package.
I personally would avoid CX-30/50 due to their suspension.
CX-50 is lower and wider than a CX-5. It does feel smaller inside.. not sure why.
I sat in one several times at nearby dealership. My wife did not like it either.

My '22 Turbo was totaled last year due to a rear end collision (the other party's fault).
Replaced it with a '25 Premium Plus soon after.

 

[Lazy2.5]

To OP.
I am in Bay Area. I got TWO 2025 Premium Plus in my garage. Diff colors to tell...
Love CX5. It is the whole package.
I personally would avoid CX-30/50 due to their suspension.
CX-50 is lower and wider than a CX-5. It does feel smaller inside.. not sure why.
I sat in one several times at nearby dealership. My wife did not like it either.

My '22 Turbo was totaled last year due to a rear end collision (the other party's fault).
Replaced it with a '25 Premium Plus soon after.

What's different about the suspension on the cx30/50?

 

[zx10guy]

I haven't looked into the CX-50 that closely as the sales guys at my dealer steered me away from it. But from what I've read and seen, the CX-50's ride quality is more harsh than the CX-5. I also seem to recall, the CX-50 has a torsion beam rear suspension instead of the independent multilink suspension in the CX-5.

The CX-30 is much the same as the CX-50. The suspension is tuned to be tighter so more road feel and harsher over bumps and imperfections. The CX-30 also has a torsion beam rear suspension. I test drove the CX-30 first before the sales guys steered me over to the CX-5. The CX-30 is definitely more harsh and tighter. The lower roof height helps minimize any body roll compared to the CX-5. The CX-5 definitely reminds you it's a bigger car when in corners with more body roll. I decided against the CX-30 because of the limited interior passenger and cargo space. And the cost to go up to the CX-5 was only about $3000 more.

 

[a69mach1377]

First thing I noticed about the cx5 and other suvs is, since you sit higher off the ground, I perceived more body roll than what was probably happening. Big change from a sedan like we used to have or the mustang like I have.

 

[N7turbo]

Same. The lowering springs fixed a lot of that for me.

 

[docKiwi75]

Hello everyone, I helped my 70 year old mom buy a CX-5 Turbo Premium recently in the San Francisco Bay Area. I have a Jaguary F-Type and a FJ Cruiser, and she recently totaled a CX-50. She felt the CX-50 was too big, too wide, so we went with the CX-5 this time, driven also by 0.9% financing.

I just wanted to let everyone know that from a car guy (myself, 6 Audi's, two S4's, etc) that the CX-5 is a dramatically better car than the CX-50. Both in fit/finish, build, and driving dynamics. My mom feels it too, and she's not a car person.

Also, this was just under the Signature trim. The biggest negatives on the CX-5 are a lack of ambient lighting in the cabin, and I don't mean stupid strips of light, but footwell, map pockets, door handles, etc, especially for an older person. I wanted to point out though that the spec sheet - see attached from Mazda - is a bit off regarding the Turbo Premium vs Signature.

For example, the Turbo Premium seems to have LED lighting throughout the cabin, just no footwell lights. The map lights, mirror lights, etc are all LED, including the Tailgate light. It also has the "Signature Unique Overhead Console" in black with a single LED downlight - "ambient lighting" - could be just the final year quirks.

Anyway, the car is QUICK, solid, and really premium feeling. A truly great car that doesn't really show its age.

The CX-5 turbo is a great car, the non-tubo version is a very good car. I've had both and am getting ready to trade in my 21 CX-5 Sig. This version has great, no, excellent interior lighting.
Last summer I had the valve seals replaced under warranty and was given a CX-50 non turbo loaner for 3 days. My impressions over ~50 miles regarding "fit/finish, build and driving dynamic" mirror yours. Although very nice, the CX-50 is a notch below in all respects. I'm not including acceleration impressions as I knew what to expect from owning a prior 2016 NA version. The 21 Sig is the best vehicle I've ever owned. Holding my breath, thinking about looking at the CX-5 in 3-4 years after they gets things sorted out. That's when I'll be considering them again.