2014 CX-5 GT vs 2013 CX-5 T vs 2013 RAV4

[lfkmazda]

All that said, I don't think the peppier engine is really all that important to us (and the extra 1-2mpg of the lower-HP engine might be nice), so another thought would be for me to look into a used or leftover 2013 CX-5 Touring. Anyone have any idea how much we might save on a new 2013 Touring vs a 2014 Touring?

If you're willing to drive stick, a whole lot. You should get more than $2000 off the difference in a comparable 2013 sport. I think you can get bluetooth as an option on the base sport CX-5. But no power seat.

If the power-seat is the breaker, I think the middle-trim 2013 Rav4 (if it has power-seat) is better value over the CX-5. However, you should get the vehicle you like most, not just something because it's a good value. Because the initial value is not going to matter very much over span of normal ownership (where total cost of ownership and driving experience matter much more).

For our decision, the options we valued most were the blind-spot and true keyless entry. That lead us to the top trims, where the CX-5 has more. The Rav4 does have a power-liftgate, though. It also easily looks the best and has better mpg. Toyota also wanted MSRP for the new Rav4 (wtf?) and Costco helped us negotiate $1000 under invoice even before loyalty on the Mazda.

 

[ALafya]

So we're left with styling and sitting up high. I actually don't appreciate the latter (my wife does). I actually prefer being low to the ground. But this will primarily be my wife's car, so I have to sell her on everything.

Selling point is less weight and body roll in turns (feel), better stability in emergency maneuvers (safety) and better fuel economy (save money). With today's new cars you can easily get 30~32 Average MPG vs. 18 MPG of a 4Runner which is $972 / year @ 10K Miles/year and $4/Gallon.

I think she wouldn't be interested in a used RAV4, since it seems like they've been making them bigger and bigger with each iteration, and she still felt like this latest one seemed a bit small.

The new 2013 RAV4 is about the same internal size as previous gen and they are essentially the largest you can get in small cross-overs. Definitely bigger than the Escape and CX-5 and about the same size as a CR-V. The only down sides IMHO are the spare on hinged rear door and 4 speed AT, which is pretty smooth.
Note you can't have it all - large vehicles are harder to park as it will have more blind spots.

Another used option I've considered (which gets us features and MPG) is a used Lexus 400h. I've seen some used ones in the $24k range. I do worry a little about the long-term reliability aspects of Hybrids, but the people on the Lexus forums seem to be pretty happy with them.

Unless you really like the amenities, why not get the FWD RAV4 for less, get the same reliability, reduced maintenance cost and about same fuel economy as this hybrid?

 

[Dimcorner]

I thought the 2013 rav4 ditched the hinged spare and got a 6sp auto?

 

[ALafya]

True, the discussion is about a used RAV4. Those also have a higher ceiling I believe, and with no moon roof will feel more roomy.
For new, my choice is a CX-5.

 

[GEARHEAD_ENG]

I thought the 2013 rav4 ditched the hinged spare and got a 6sp auto?

Correct, believe he's referring to the previous gen Rav4 (2012 and prior)?

 

[New CX-5]

I just purchased a 2014 CX-5 GT without tech package. Got an insane deal, and in reality I would never use the nav system in the car when I use waze on my phone religiously. I got a insane deal on the car, about $4500 under msrp, found a hungry 22 year old looking for a sale and my boss was neighbors and best friends with the owner of the dealership. While I would have liked some of the tech package features, the GT came with moonroof, leather, lcd screen and all the other bells and whistles I wanted, and the only tech package GT was an ugly green. Anyway, after test driving the 2014 CX-5 the answer became very clear to me, this was the car I wanted. I just could not see myself driving a Toyota Rav4 (a car I used to make fun of when I was younger) or a Ford (still cant see myself buying an American automobile, but I'm getting closer.) I would have considered a CRV but they are so boring looking, and features that I wanted cost too much.

 

[Scott R]

Thanks for the comments/replies from others in regards to getting a new (or used) SUV to replace my wife's '07 CX-7. Just to respond to a couple of suggestions noted...
- Power seats seem to be a must for her, which unfortunately means a higher end model, with the CX-5 Touring offering the lowest price compared to a RAV4 Limited or CR-V EX-L. Of course, a previously-owned higher end model (with power seats) is another option.
- Sitting up high is important to my wife. No use trying to convince me about the benefits of a car that is lower to the ground. You're preaching to the choir there. I like to be low, my wife likes to be higher up. The car is primarily my wife's.
- Don't bother suggesting FWD. It must be AWD.
- Don't bother suggesting manual transmission. I love MT, but my wife wants auto.

Right now, we're still in a holding pattern as we wait to hear back from Carfax about correcting the incorrect info on our CX-7's report. While we wait...what's a realistic deal that we should expect to be able to score on a CX-5 Touring AWD? I'm seeing $26.7K on their website. Also, I'd like to take advantage of the 0.9% financing they're currently offering. And it looks like there's a current promo for a $500 owner loyalty discount. As far as options, I think the only thing we care about are the roof rails (for a couple of kayaks). Will I do better by requesting these as part of the original sale? If they're super-easy to install myself, should I just buy them myself later?

 

[rcs914]

Thanks for the comments/replies from others in regards to getting a new (or used) SUV to replace my wife's '07 CX-7. Just to respond to a couple of suggestions noted...
- Power seats seem to be a must for her, which unfortunately means a higher end model, with the CX-5 Touring offering the lowest price compared to a RAV4 Limited or CR-V EX-L. Of course, a previously-owned higher end model (with power seats) is another option.
- Sitting up high is important to my wife. No use trying to convince me about the benefits of a car that is lower to the ground. You're preaching to the choir there. I like to be low, my wife likes to be higher up. The car is primarily my wife's.
- Don't bother suggesting FWD. It must be AWD.
- Don't bother suggesting manual transmission. I love MT, but my wife wants auto.

Right now, we're still in a holding pattern as we wait to hear back from Carfax about correcting the incorrect info on our CX-7's report. While we wait...what's a realistic deal that we should expect to be able to score on a CX-5 Touring AWD? I'm seeing $26.7K on their website. Also, I'd like to take advantage of the 0.9% financing they're currently offering. And it looks like there's a current promo for a $500 owner loyalty discount. As far as options, I think the only thing we care about are the roof rails (for a couple of kayaks). Will I do better by requesting these as part of the original sale? If they're super-easy to install myself, should I just buy them myself later?

I didn't consider the "extras" like roof rack and wheel locks in my offer - I would make any offer based as if they were not there. At least here in AZ every single CX-5 I've seen has the roof rack installed at the dealer already. Obviously you need to go for what is important to you - for me the additional cost of having the GT with tech was absolutely worth it, for items I use on a daily basis. The dual cooling is phenomenal - I can have mine set at 72, and my wife has her's at 83. The bi-xenons are fantastic, the fully keyless entry is amazing, and I like having the leather seats. However I don't use the sunroof that often, automatic wipers aren't that important in AZ, and the navigation system is a bit of a joke. The Bose system is fairly decent for not having a sub, but it would be nice if the head unit actually resumed MP3's from a USB stick correctly. I am happy with my Baby.

 

[New CX-5]

For me the GT was the perfect choice, I got the leather seats, heated seats, moonroof, the dual zone climate control, lane assist, etc. I came in wanting only AWD, and was looking at the touring with tech to get it, but decided that an amazing (and I mean amazing) deal on a GT without tech gave me literally everything I wanted. I will never use the stock Nav, it has terrible reviews and I already use my phone for everything.

 

[Scott R]

Well, I got an email back from Carfax today and they removed the reference to the "airbag deployment", so that's good. Not perfect, because they still noted that there was an accident with "damage" to the right rear bumper, even though there really wasn't any "damage" (just a scuff/scratch). Unfortunately, the police report had a section titled "Parts of vehicle damaged" and the cop noted "Right rear bumper" without any added detail indicating that any "damage" was minor/insignificant. I suppose we could try to track down the cop and see if he might agree to put something on letterhead indicating that there was just a scratch, but he might not even remember the incident and, in the end, I don't think Carfax would remove the "damage reported" notation, so it probably wouldn't make any significant improvement to the trade-in value. Hopefully getting the "airbag deployment" off of there, does improve the trade-in value, though.

So I guess I should post this in the CX-7 forum, but in case anyone here has any thoughts...generally speaking, how much should I be reasonably expect to be able to get for our car, in comparison to the KBB value? I just ran through the KBB wizard and it looks like it should be worth about $10k. That's what Carmax offered us a few months back (maybe as much as 6 months ago). I think the Mazda dealer offered us $7500 with the "airbag deployment" on the Carfax, and was non-committal about how much more they would offer us if we got that removed from the Carfax. Initially, the salesman threw out a ballpark number of "at least $2000 more" but when we later tried to nail them down, I think they came up with a lower number. In any case, now that the "airbag deployment" is off the record, we can now bring it to a few other places (and maybe Carmax again) and get a better idea.

 

[KenMO]

So I guess I should post this in the CX-7 forum, but in case anyone here has any thoughts...generally speaking, how much should I be reasonably expect to be able to get for our car, in comparison to the KBB value? I just ran through the KBB wizard and it looks like it should be worth about $10k. That's what Carmax offered us a few months back (maybe as much as 6 months ago). I think the Mazda dealer offered us $7500 with the "airbag deployment" on the Carfax, and was non-committal about how much more they would offer us if we got that removed from the Carfax. Initially, the salesman threw out a ballpark number of "at least $2000 more" but when we later tried to nail them down, I think they came up with a lower number. In any case, now that the "airbag deployment" is off the record, we can now bring it to a few other places (and maybe Carmax again) and get a better idea.

Dealers will always try to low-ball you on your trade-in. That's where they make most of their profit on a sale. On our CX-5 we bought last weekend, the dealer's initial offer was to sell their CX-5 for $200 above invoice, and to buy our RAV-4 for $6,500. KBB said our RAV was worth $8,700 on a trade-in. After about 30 mins, we got the dealer up to $8,000 for the RAV and some all-weather floor mats.

 

[aperture_shot]

For me the GT was the perfect choice, I got the leather seats, heated seats, moonroof, the dual zone climate control, lane assist, etc. I came in wanting only AWD, and was looking at the touring with tech to get it, but decided that an amazing (and I mean amazing) deal on a GT without tech gave me literally everything I wanted. I will never use the stock Nav, it has terrible reviews and I already use my phone for everything.

This is how I got mine. If you decide to get the nav in the future it's an easy install and would cost around $400-$500. The only thing I really wanted from the tech package was the advanced keyless entry which is not an easy install.

 

[New CX-5]

This is how I got mine. If you decide to get the nav in the future it's an easy install and would cost around $400-$500. The only thing I really wanted from the tech package was the advanced keyless entry which is not an easy install.

I know right? The nav sysytem sucks too. Another guy on the forums and I are working on finding an android box that can take the place of the nav unit. It would stream apps and video from your phone to the lcd screen. Would be awesome

 

[frz]

Thanks OP for this review. I too went out and test-drove a 2012 Rav4 LTD, 2013 Rav4 LTD, Mitsubishi RVR, 2014 CX-5 GT. Didn't bother with the gutless CX-5 or CR-V, nor the CVT Rogue/Murano twins.

First I drove the least likely suspect, RVR. Gutless and droning, designed for midgets.

Then to Toyota: the 2012 LTD had plenty of power with a V6 but the tailgate (wtf) and joyless drive killed it. The 2013 LTD was nicer, more fun to drive, and I nearly made the purchase. I was ready to live with the weirdo frankenstein stitched dash and full pleather seats. JBL audio in the LTD is lovely. The 6-spd trans has 2 useful modes, also nice.

Then I drove the 2014 CX-5 GT. More $$, WAY more fun to drive. I bought it.

The only features I would grab from the RAV4 would be a taller tailgate lift - this one wants to cave my head in every time it's used - and the adjustable rear seats.

 

[STE92VE]

Didn't bother with the gutless CX-5

The only features I would grab from the RAV4 would be a taller tailgate lift - this one wants to cave my head in every time it's used .

if you would have driven the 2.0L, you might have found out it isn't gutless, but adequate for around town duty.

As for the tailgate lift height, you must be over 6' tall if you have issue with it.

 

[sukispeed]

Autoguide.com 2014 Mazda CX-5 vs 2013 Toyota RAV4 full article,

 

[Scott R]

Just thought I'd post back here to thank you all for answering my questions. Unfortunately, we did not end up getting a CX-5 after all (we ended up buying a used/certified 2010 Toyota Highlander Limited). It was a tough choice, and there was a lot that we liked about the CX-5. Ultimately, I think it came down to: a) The Mazda dealer wasn't close to our house which would have made getting it serviced regularly more of a hassle, b) Our previous not-so-great experience with our CX-7, and c) The Mazda reps didn't ever call us back or act like they wanted our business. Anyways, thanks again, and I hope you all have great luck with your CX-5's!

 

[CX-SV]

Scott - Thanks for reporting back. The CPO Highlander should give years of reliable service and maybe you can use the extra space inside.

 

[Bombadil]

Autoguide.com 2014 Mazda CX-5 vs 2013 Toyota RAV4 full article,

It is hard to believe that they felt the RAV4 looked nicer. I think it looks like a hacked up Ford Escape. I don't think it is attractive at all. To me the outgoing 2012 RAV4 looks better.

 

[MATR6]

It is hard to believe that they felt the RAV4 looked nicer. I think it looks like a hacked up Ford Escape. I don't think it is attractive at all. To me the outgoing 2012 RAV4 looks better.

Same here, and the interior is so fugly. Motorweek named the '13 RAV4 best in class. Guess Mazda didn't give them a '14 to test drive.