2016 CX5 better "driving machine" over 2017

[dougal]

Perhaps I am reading your comment wrong(please let me know if so) but that's exactly what I am talking about. You 17 owners think nothing is wrong with your car. You guys are so defensive when anyone mentions anything remotely negative or what things on the 17 needs to be improved. Every. single. car. has things that needs to be improved. Don't be so sensitive. We're having a legitimate conversation. Your precious purchase isn't somehow made worse if we discuss what needs to be improved for 2018. Jeez.

Like I said before, engine performance and mpg hopefully increase again. At least one of them.

But what is the beef? The CX-5 is too slow? Handles poorly? Nobody is really saying that. Are there other cars better? Sure. People should buy what they want. We are a Honda family with a Civic and a Odyssey in the driveway. Good solid cars. My 14 CX-5 replaced my CR-V. I liked my CR-V but at the time, the CX-5 was very different than my CR-V is ride and handling. I bought the CX-5 because of the ride, handling and the fuel economy. If the other cars meet to needs of the buying public, they should buy it. This is a free market economy. I don't think people think the CX-5 is perfect without flaws. I think the constant negativity is draining on people.

Mazda wants to change. They don't want to be the Mazda of old. That is good and that is bad. I have test driven the new 17 (as well as the CX-3, Mazda 3 and the Miata!) and honestly, it drives pretty much like my 14 CX-5 and the inside is very similar to the CX-3 and Mazda 3. It actually feels faster driving around but otherwise very similar. It is quieter - you can tell just by playing the radio and standing outside of the car. That is a big improvement. Otherwise, it is an incremental improvement to stay competitive and build upon. Personally, I think this car with the Diesel will rock.

 

[jhu8]

But what is the beef? The CX-5 is too slow? Handles poorly? Nobody is really saying that. Are there other cars better? Sure. People should buy what they want. We are a Honda family with a Civic and a Odyssey in the driveway. Good solid cars. My 14 CX-5 replaced my CR-V. I liked my CR-V but at the time, the CX-5 was very different than my CR-V is ride and handling. I bought the CX-5 because of the ride, handling and the fuel economy. If the other cars meet to needs of the buying public, they should buy it. This is a free market economy. I don't think people think the CX-5 is perfect without flaws. I think the constant negativity is draining on people.

Mazda wants to change. They don't want to be the Mazda of old. That is good and that is bad. I have test driven the new 17 (as well as the CX-3, Mazda 3 and the Miata!) and honestly, it drives pretty much like my 14 CX-5 and the inside is very similar to the CX-3 and Mazda 3. It actually feels faster driving around but otherwise very similar. It is quieter - you can tell just by playing the radio and standing outside of the car. That is a big improvement. Otherwise, it is an incremental improvement to stay competitive and build upon. Personally, I think this car with the Diesel will rock.

There is none? My feeling is just anytime the 17 cx5 is discussed in a negative light, the 17 owners are right there sensitive and all. Not sure why. Guessing because most just dropped over $30k and want to feel they made the right decision. Which despite the 17 cx5 shortcomings, they still made a great decision. So as far as I am concerned, there is no beef.

Mazda wants to change? That i definitely disagree with that. Plastered right on the home screen of the Mazda USA is "Inspired craftsmanship for inspired drivers". I am willing to bet the majority of CUV buyers are not inspired drivers. They just need a vehicle with great storage capacity, with good gas mileage, and something with awd(for some). I think Mazda is definitely still going after that "driver type".

 

[Monterra]

I got behind in my reading here and just read the entire thread so apologies for the late response to your thought but I think you might be on to a portion of the speed decrease. I know what you're saying about wheel/tire weight. I drop 13 lbs per corner when I put on my winter tires/wheels (59 lbs vs. 46 ibs) and that makes a big difference! Now I know there's not that big a difference in the wheels/tires on the 2017 vs the 2016, but Tire Rack says the Toyo A36's are a pound heavier then the A23's they replaced. If the new wheels are heavier too it might explain a small portion of the slower times.

Anyone with 2017 want to weigh a wheel/tire?

It was VERY noticeable when i added just ~3lbs to the oe 19s with 235/55 scorpion verdes..i thought id dropped anchor..so maybe Mazda let a few pounds of wt weight pile on and exacerbate the issue..love to hear from a 17 gt owner on this..

 

[ColoradoDriver]

There seems to be quite a few new 17 owners showing up on the cx5 club page. I've noticed, from the things they talk about that the buyers seem more interested in ameneties/gimmicks than more traditional mazda virtues. I would say that the thread title is accurate and it's really been following the trend since the 2.5L (2013) intoduction.

Fully agree. I pop in here and some of these threads make it look more like a Honda forum in here than a Mazda forum.

 

[Roman]

So before I plopped down a pretty good chunk of change for the 2017 GT premium, I really took the time to see what the segment offers and drove everything available in its price range even including a 2015 and a 16.5 CX-5.

Basically, when I sit inside the fully loaded CX-5 I smile. It's gorgeous, I feel like I'm in a legitimately premium vehicle. Everything looks and feels exactly like you'd expect a vehicle that costs anywhere near 40-50k to feel like. In terms of overall interior aesthetics and experience, the HUD is icing on the cake, really feels like the future coming from my last vehicle which was from 2002. I do love these little creature comforts and the extra care and detail that went into styling overall. If I'm being honest, makes me feel fuzzy inside lol, such a nice place to just sit and vibe and of course drive in!

Driving-wise, I find it interesting how one adapts quite quickly to most vehicles. It's apparent driving them back to back what feels better, but after sticking with one vehicle for more than a week you just meld with it in a way. The 16.5 felt to me, sportier, louder and my hands felt far more connected to what was going on road-wise. It's a weightier feeling in a way, not that it's more difficult to drive, it just feels like you really are putting in effort into steering and cornering (in a good way). Maybe most people here prefer this, and honestly I enjoyed it. The 2017 feels more effortless and more disconnected from the road. It's an extremely easy CUV to drive.

Overall though, the driving experience to me feels much more premium compared to last years model and to most of the segment. You don't notice how well it actually handles until you encounter a situation that makes you aware of it. The agility and cornering really surprises you, because none of the CUVs I drove felt anything like the CX-5 around a sharp corner. This is what I find interesting vs the 16.5... they feel the same when actually going around a twisty canyon path like I drive through frequently here in Utah. The 2017 comes alive when you need it to and then goes back to a nice blend of quiet / premium / sporty, while the 16.5 always feels a bit more alive / grounded / sporty and louder. I like the dual nature of the 2017 in this regard, it does everything right, maybe not the best in any particular area, but it's such slick blend of all the right qualities and features for the price that it was an easy buy.

 

[yrwei52]

The first thing on the list should be for the '18 CX-5 to get back on track? That would be getting rid of the always-on LED headlights!

Speak to your law makers!

No, this's nothing against US DRL regulations. 2017 DRLs should be set up just like 2016(.5) CX-5 GT with LED accent-strip Signature DRLs without low-beam headlights.

This headlights-on-all-the-time thing on 2017 CX-5 is the decision made by Mazda North American Operations for unknown reason! (notcool)

 

[Unobtanium]

There is none? My feeling is just anytime the 17 cx5 is discussed in a negative light, the 17 owners are right there sensitive and all. Not sure why. Guessing because most just dropped over $30k and want to feel they made the right decision. Which despite the 17 cx5 shortcomings, they still made a great decision. So as far as I am concerned, there is no beef.

Mazda wants to change? That i definitely disagree with that. Plastered right on the home screen of the Mazda USA is "Inspired craftsmanship for inspired drivers". I am willing to bet the majority of CUV buyers are not inspired drivers. They just need a vehicle with great storage capacity, with good gas mileage, and something with awd(for some). I think Mazda is definitely still going after that "driver type".

If so, swing and a miss. Crv will bury them. Safer, more capacity, and better economy while being much faster. Mazda should have stuck with boy racers.

 

[jhu8]

This headlights-on-all-the-time thing on 2017 CX-5 is the decision made by Mazda North American Operations for unknown reason! (notcool)

Wait, headlights on all the time?? I am confused by this.

If so, swing and a miss. Crv will bury them. Safer, more capacity, and better economy while being much faster. Mazda should have stuck with boy racers.

CRV will bury them no matter what. I think before the 17 crv, the cx5 was the better vehicle. Not by much but definitely better imo. yet it still got trampled in sales by honda. It always will. But it doesn't really matter.

But for 2017, the crv is the better vehicle. Overall. I think the interior of the crv is hideous and the outside is still meh, but those things are subjective. The things we could put straight numbers to, the crv beats the cx5 in just about all. However, you still have to drive a vehicle to get a true feeling. The cx5 still may feel better. Really whatever vehicle gives that feeling, is the cuv one should choose.

 

[Unobtanium]

Wait, headlights on all the time?? I am confused by this.



CRV will bury them no matter what. I think before the 17 crv, the cx5 was the better vehicle. Not by much but definitely better imo. yet it still got trampled in sales by honda. It always will. But it doesn't really matter.

But for 2017, the crv is the better vehicle. Overall. I think the interior of the crv is hideous and the outside is still meh, but those things are subjective. The things we could put straight numbers to, the crv beats the cx5 in just about all. However, you still have to drive a vehicle to get a true feeling. The cx5 still may feel better. Really whatever vehicle gives that feeling, is the cuv one should choose.

It got trampled, but it also offered something the CRV DIDN'T. It could handle, and it was quicker while not giving up economy. Now it's as much slower as the 2.5 is vs. the 2.0 when compared to the CRV. Let that sink in for a minute.
Oh, and it's also less frugal on gasoline. *mike drop for Honda*

What exactly...does the 2017 offer over the CRV, other than those who prefer the brand or the aesthetics? It's less safe, it's far far slower, it's less economical at the pump, it has less features. Why buy it? Sell it to me...

 

[Monterra]

^^yes but how much do numbers matter here really? 40mpg and 310 are two that resonate with me and yes to me the mazda still feels better but most would be better served by the honda that can't really be denied..my yes was to jhu8 not unob who's still putting too much emphasis on slow vs a little slower acceleration times

 

[Unobtanium]

^^yes but how much do numbers matter here really? 40mpg and 310 are two that resonate with me and yes to me the mazda still feels better but most would be better served by the honda that can't really be denied..

You know what resonates with me? All the issues diesels have had lately in America, and enjoying not seeing my service department but every oil-change.

 

[banjos-n-beer]

It got trampled, but it also offered something the CRV DIDN'T. It could handle, and it was quicker while not giving up economy. Now it's as much slower as the 2.5 is vs. the 2.0 when compared to the CRV. Let that sink in for a minute.
Oh, and it's also less frugal on gasoline. *mike drop for Honda*

What exactly...does the 2017 offer over the CRV, other than those who prefer the brand or the aesthetics? It's less safe, it's far far slower, it's less economical at the pump, it has less features. Why buy it? Sell it to me...

Traditional 6 speed auto.

 

[Monterra]

I was about to post that..actually adapted it to a song..out of cvts or good 6 speeds ill always take the ladder...-blurryface

 

[dougal]

Traditional 6 speed auto.

And I like it better. Buy what you want.

 

[Dimcorner]

It also really is quite a bit quieter inside as well. The CR-V still feels to me a little rougher on interior quality (steering wheel control is kinda messy) and definitely louder when driving and accelerating.

As far as performance maybe the wheel weight went up? I wonder how fast the GT would be with 17's instead of 19's.
Also as a note the CR-V comes with a smaller tire (235/60/18 vs 225/55/19). I'll have to pop one off my car and weigh it.

I think I would have been happy as well with CR-V. Each brings something unique to the table and it's up to you to decide if it checks your own boxes.

 

[Unobtanium]

I was about to post that..actually adapted it to a song..out of cvts or good 6 speeds ill always take the ladder...-blurryface

"Good" is beginning to be questionable, based on this forum...you been following the "good" transmission failure rates here? It's got me concerned tbh.

 

[bigtex]

There is none? My feeling is just anytime the 17 cx5 is discussed in a negative light, the 17 owners are right there sensitive and all. Not sure why. Guessing because most just dropped over $30k and want to feel they made the right decision. Which despite the 17 cx5 shortcomings, they still made a great decision. So as far as I am concerned, there is no beef.

Mazda wants to change? That i definitely disagree with that. Plastered right on the home screen of the Mazda USA is "Inspired craftsmanship for inspired drivers". I am willing to bet the majority of CUV buyers are not inspired drivers. They just need a vehicle with great storage capacity, with good gas mileage, and something with awd(for some). I think Mazda is definitely still going after that "driver type".

I don't know what else to say.
I spent reasonably close to the same amount on my 2014 GT loaded and my 2017 GT loaded. To me, they were both the best option you could get at the time for that price.
I've owned both, and there is definitely no need for any '17 owner to be sensitive about anything. It's really quite funny.

 

[Unobtanium]

I don't know what else to say.
I spent reasonably close to the same amount on my 2014 GT loaded and my 2017 GT loaded. To me, they were both the best option you could get at the time for that price.
I've owned both, and there is definitely no need for any '17 owner to be sensitive about anything. It's really quite funny.

Until they line up against a <2016 at a stop light and get ghetto-laned like a boss. Zoom-zoom b****! Back of the line!


"Let's take it to the corners"---RX8 owner that I skulldrug in my WS.6....in an area where there WERE NO CORNERS (Louisiana). But the 2017 owners can't even begin to talk about that, either, lol!


Gonna have some fun now. People bought the CX5 for zoom-zoom, and I'm gonna talk it up and trash the 2017's just like you all talked up your CX5's and trashed RAV4's and Foresters and CRV's back before you owned a slower vehicle than those. Because Zoom zoom, Mazda, fanboi, and Karma.

How many CAI, OVT tune, and exhaust combo trial/error sessions you think it will take to be as fast as a stock CX5 Gen 1?

 

[jhu8]

I don't know what else to say.
I spent reasonably close to the same amount on my 2014 GT loaded and my 2017 GT loaded. To me, they were both the best option you could get at the time for that price.
I've owned both, and there is definitely no need for any '17 owner to be sensitive about anything. It's really quite funny.

I agree there's nothing to be sensitive about. But several members seem to present otherwise. Oh well.

 

[bigtex]

Until they line up against a <2016 at a stop light and get ghetto-laned like a boss. Zoom-zoom b****! Back of the line!


"Let's take it to the corners"---RX8 owner that I skulldrug in my WS.6....in an area where there WERE NO CORNERS (Louisiana). But the 2017 owners can't even begin to talk about that, either, lol!

I would wait for a little more data to come out on some of these issues. Or is one run enough? I have not noticed any difference in performance at all, so that's what really matters to me. I had a lifetime mpg on my 2014 of 26.7 and am getting close to 29 on my 2017, so I am happy with that. Everything else is just gravy.

But I do agree with you and found a quote from one review "As a result, the 2017 Mazda CX-5 is still fun but feels more grown up. The emphasis is still on driving, but now it's about more than being a boy racer."