Good to hear!
2017 Impressions, Noise Comparison and Our New 2016 GT
- Thread starter Werechull
- Start date
Good to hear!
iheartmypitbull
Member
- :
- 2016.5 Mazda CX-5 Touring
I dropped off my 2016.5 CX-5 Touring at the dealer today to get the paint protector applied and they gave me a 2017 CX-5 Touring as a loaner car. When he pulled it up, I was so excited that I'd get to drive the 2017! As I drove to work I became even more excited to discover that I actually prefer my 2016.5 over the 2017. Here are some reasons why:
1. As a 5'1" woman who had always owned lower cars, I chose the CX-5 in order to be a little higher up and actually be able to see over the hood of my car. I have been loving that added visibility. However, for me, the 2017 doesn't offer that! The vehicle feels lower (and wider) and I'm not sure if it's because it's lower or if it's because the seat doesn't go as high or the dash is higher, but I can't see as well over the hood. Big minus for me since that was the whole point of getting a CX-5.
2. The pleatherette is fugly and feels weirdly greasy. Much prefer my cloth seats.
3. The LCD screen seems smaller and it looks like one of those that flip up instead of being a permanent feature. This just bothered me. I prefer how the screen in the 2016 is set into the dash.
4. The 2017 feels more "boaty" and less sporty. It feels lower and wider which I guess might be a plus for some, but I prefer the way the 2016 feels because it seems more nimble.
5. The 2017, while more luxurious, seems to have lost some of the utility of the first gen.
6. Again, personal preferemce, but I like the exterior of the first gen better. The 2017 looks kind of dumpy to me and also looks like a whale shark.
The 2017 braking felt more responsive and some of the interior finishes looked more luxurious, but overall I FAR prefer my 2016.5 thank goodness.
1. As a 5'1" woman who had always owned lower cars, I chose the CX-5 in order to be a little higher up and actually be able to see over the hood of my car. I have been loving that added visibility. However, for me, the 2017 doesn't offer that! The vehicle feels lower (and wider) and I'm not sure if it's because it's lower or if it's because the seat doesn't go as high or the dash is higher, but I can't see as well over the hood. Big minus for me since that was the whole point of getting a CX-5.
2. The pleatherette is fugly and feels weirdly greasy. Much prefer my cloth seats.
3. The LCD screen seems smaller and it looks like one of those that flip up instead of being a permanent feature. This just bothered me. I prefer how the screen in the 2016 is set into the dash.
4. The 2017 feels more "boaty" and less sporty. It feels lower and wider which I guess might be a plus for some, but I prefer the way the 2016 feels because it seems more nimble.
5. The 2017, while more luxurious, seems to have lost some of the utility of the first gen.
6. Again, personal preferemce, but I like the exterior of the first gen better. The 2017 looks kind of dumpy to me and also looks like a whale shark.
The 2017 braking felt more responsive and some of the interior finishes looked more luxurious, but overall I FAR prefer my 2016.5 thank goodness.
boandlkramer
US Specs in Europe
- :
- '17 CX-5 GT AWD; '18 BMW X3
This thread is pretty amusing... while we're all guilty of it at some time or other of course, it's a textbook example of confirmation bias(I'll be doing the same when the 2018 comes out no doubt!)
This^^
These are all great vehicles! Are we really splitting hairs about the CX-5?
Here I thought it was bad in the Cayman forums! Or in the M4 forums with people saying they really don't like the GTS and their M4 is better!
[emoji23]Sent from my iPhone 7+ using Tapatalk
boandlkramer
US Specs in Europe
- :
- '17 CX-5 GT AWD; '18 BMW X3
I'm just upgrading for the HUD. [emoji23][emoji6]
Sent from my iPhone 7+ using Tapatalk
[emoji23][emoji6]Sent from my iPhone 7+ using Tapatalk
- :
- 2014 QX70 AWD
Lol. My brother's neighbor hates his Cayenne GTS... $5k for tires was the latest irritant.
boandlkramer
US Specs in Europe
- :
- '17 CX-5 GT AWD; '18 BMW X3
That's nuts! 20"?
I was referring to the M4GTS, but all the same
I plan on 1200 for Pilot Sport 4S next spring. $5k seems excessive
Sent from my iPhone 7+ using Tapatalk
- :
- 2014 QX70 AWD
Pretty sure they were 20's. Might have been bigger but I only observed it from next door.
I knew you were referencing a different vehicle, but its basically the same ballpark.
boandlkramer
US Specs in Europe
- :
- '17 CX-5 GT AWD; '18 BMW X3
But seriously, I was going to get a grand touring anyways. Something I should have done when I purchased the 2016. But nooooo, Mrs Boandlkramer wanted to cut corners, and then when she rode in my car she was like "why don't I have heated leather seats and HUD?"
[emoji23]Sent from my iPhone 7+ using Tapatalk
1. The new CX-5 is 35mm (3.5cm, 1.38inches) shorter in height than the previous model. Should not make that much of a difference but maybe you couldn't adjust the seat as high as you wanted to?
2. Agree with leatherette. I prefer full leather interior
3. MZD screen? Same size as before. Only difference is how it now sits on the dash instead of in it.
4. All reviews I have read have said it is still sporty and nimble with 15% more rigidity in the chassis.
5. They are targetting low end X1s, Mercs etc. Hence they step up in class
Each to their own though
iheartmypitbull
Member
- :
- 2016.5 Mazda CX-5 Touring
1. The new CX-5 is 35mm (3.5cm, 1.38inches) shorter in height than the previous model. Should not make that much of a difference but maybe you couldn't adjust the seat as high as you wanted to?
2. Agree with leatherette. I prefer full leather interior
3. MZD screen? Same size as before. Only difference is how it now sits on the dash instead of in it.
4. All reviews I have read have said it is still sporty and nimble with 15% more rigidity in the chassis.
5. They are targetting low end X1s, Mercs etc. Hence they step up in class
Each to their own though
1. I think you're right about the seat not going up as high. Whatever it was, to this short little lady it made a HUGE difference.
2. The cloth seats are better than the fugly leatherette in my opinion. It feels and even smells weird. No thanks!
3. The way the screen sits on the dash instead of in it is what bothered me. I get they're going for luxury with this generation, but I felt that looked cheap, like a screen that pops up on way older cars.
4. Definitely still sporty and nimble, it is a great car! But it felt wider and more "boaty" to me.
5. Yes, I get they're targeting a more high-end market and they've done a fantastic job. But it's simply my personal opinion that I prefer the first generation for its more sporty feel and look. For example, all the chrome on the 2017? Bleh.
Both generations are fantastic vehicles! I love them both, but personally I love the first generation more. Mainly for the visibility issues because that difference was striking to me.
Everyone has their own view points and personal preference and that is perfectly fine
Late to the game on this one, but yesterday I compared the 2017 Touring with the 2017 Grand Touring. Here are my personal observations:
- Grand Touring noise was 2 decibels higher than the Touring at highway speeds. Both were remarkably quieter than my '06 Element
- The Touring was a much smoother ride compared to the GT in my opinion. We have crappy roads here so I significantly enjoyed the Touring better than the GT.
- The seats in the Touring are slightly more comfortable than the GT. The GT has more adjustment options, but sitting alone is slightly better on the leatherette/suede compared to the leather. Also, my 10 year old co-pilot kept sliding on the GT during turns.
If comfort is an important factor, which is for me, then I would opt for the Touring trim even with fewer seat configurations.
Three items available for the GT that I wish I could transfer to the Touring include:
(1) 2-position driver seat memory
(2) Heated mirrors (very nice for the ice storms here)
(3) The digital display gauge (gauge on the right with Fuel indicator and other info) is much easier to read on the GT. The Touring model is dimly lit and designed differently, making it more difficult to ascertain the metrics.
I enjoyed the Mazda CX-5 over the following 2017 models with some of the reasons listed:
Ford Escape: Bounced up and down the highway, felt like pac-man.
Nissan Rogue: The CVT was stuck over 4,000 RPM on the highway.
Toyota RAV4: Didn't like the CVT and the delay from 0.
Honda CRV: Still considering it as it comes with remote start and has more room and is quite comfy. Not a huge fan of the CVT, but it's better than the Rav4. The display is not nearly as nice as the Mazda.
Jeep Cherokee Limited: Awesome seats, but the vehicle felt heavy and slow to move. Also not a fan of the 9-speed.
Hyundai Santa Fe Sport: Much softer ride than I anticipated, but the seats are much too firm for my taste.
At any rate, my two cents and good luck to car buyers out there.
- Grand Touring noise was 2 decibels higher than the Touring at highway speeds. Both were remarkably quieter than my '06 Element
- The Touring was a much smoother ride compared to the GT in my opinion. We have crappy roads here so I significantly enjoyed the Touring better than the GT.
- The seats in the Touring are slightly more comfortable than the GT. The GT has more adjustment options, but sitting alone is slightly better on the leatherette/suede compared to the leather. Also, my 10 year old co-pilot kept sliding on the GT during turns.
If comfort is an important factor, which is for me, then I would opt for the Touring trim even with fewer seat configurations.
Three items available for the GT that I wish I could transfer to the Touring include:
(1) 2-position driver seat memory
(2) Heated mirrors (very nice for the ice storms here)
(3) The digital display gauge (gauge on the right with Fuel indicator and other info) is much easier to read on the GT. The Touring model is dimly lit and designed differently, making it more difficult to ascertain the metrics.
I enjoyed the Mazda CX-5 over the following 2017 models with some of the reasons listed:
Ford Escape: Bounced up and down the highway, felt like pac-man.
Nissan Rogue: The CVT was stuck over 4,000 RPM on the highway.
Toyota RAV4: Didn't like the CVT and the delay from 0.
Honda CRV: Still considering it as it comes with remote start and has more room and is quite comfy. Not a huge fan of the CVT, but it's better than the Rav4. The display is not nearly as nice as the Mazda.
Jeep Cherokee Limited: Awesome seats, but the vehicle felt heavy and slow to move. Also not a fan of the 9-speed.
Hyundai Santa Fe Sport: Much softer ride than I anticipated, but the seats are much too firm for my taste.
At any rate, my two cents and good luck to car buyers out there.
Late to the game on this one, but yesterday I compared the 2017 Touring with the 2017 Grand Touring. Here are my personal observations:
- Grand Touring noise was 2 decibels higher than the Touring at highway speeds. Both were remarkably quieter than my '06 Element
Only thing that would make the Touring slightly quieter is it's 17" rims
Again because the Touring is on 17" rims
BTW - nice review
Late to the game on this one, but yesterday I compared the 2017 Touring with the 2017 Grand Touring. Here are my personal observations:
- Grand Touring noise was 2 decibels higher than the Touring at highway speeds. Both were remarkably quieter than my '06 Element
- The Touring was a much smoother ride compared to the GT in my opinion. We have crappy roads here so I significantly enjoyed the Touring better than the GT.
- The seats in the Touring are slightly more comfortable than the GT. The GT has more adjustment options, but sitting alone is slightly better on the leatherette/suede compared to the leather. Also, my 10 year old co-pilot kept sliding on the GT during turns.
If comfort is an important factor, which is for me, then I would opt for the Touring trim even with fewer seat configurations.
.
To add to this. I believe the center and sides interior of the GT trim are leather padded. On the touring its plastic so its not as comfortable to rest your knee/leg against the side.
Rav4 is 6 speed not CVT. Rav4 hybrid is CVT.Late to the game on this one, but yesterday I compared the 2017 Touring with the 2017 Grand Touring. Here are my personal observations:
- Grand Touring noise was 2 decibels higher than the Touring at highway speeds. Both were remarkably quieter than my '06 Element
- The Touring was a much smoother ride compared to the GT in my opinion. We have crappy roads here so I significantly enjoyed the Touring better than the GT.
- The seats in the Touring are slightly more comfortable than the GT. The GT has more adjustment options, but sitting alone is slightly better on the leatherette/suede compared to the leather. Also, my 10 year old co-pilot kept sliding on the GT during turns.
If comfort is an important factor, which is for me, then I would opt for the Touring trim even with fewer seat configurations.
Three items available for the GT that I wish I could transfer to the Touring include:
(1) 2-position driver seat memory
(2) Heated mirrors (very nice for the ice storms here)
(3) The digital display gauge (gauge on the right with Fuel indicator and other info) is much easier to read on the GT. The Touring model is dimly lit and designed differently, making it more difficult to ascertain the metrics.
I enjoyed the Mazda CX-5 over the following 2017 models with some of the reasons listed:
Ford Escape: Bounced up and down the highway, felt like pac-man.
Nissan Rogue: The CVT was stuck over 4,000 RPM on the highway.
Toyota RAV4: Didn't like the CVT and the delay from 0.
Honda CRV: Still considering it as it comes with remote start and has more room and is quite comfy. Not a huge fan of the CVT, but it's better than the Rav4. The display is not nearly as nice as the Mazda.
Jeep Cherokee Limited: Awesome seats, but the vehicle felt heavy and slow to move. Also not a fan of the 9-speed.
Hyundai Santa Fe Sport: Much softer ride than I anticipated, but the seats are much too firm for my taste.
At any rate, my two cents and good luck to car buyers out there.
I believe this is correct. Reserved for top spec model(s)
- :
- Plano, Texas, USA
For a while I thought Toyota has changed its heart too and go for the CVT on all RAV4's ⋯
And 2017 Honda CR-V uses 9-speed auto in Europe - go figure ⋯ (uhm)
- :
- 2016.5 Touring FWD
The leather padding on the side of the center console has no give based on my experience. It is very firm. Almost the same as resting the knee against plastic. Looks good though but it has reduced the leg/knee room I think.
