CX-5 compared to mid size sedans ?

[DG_1234]

If you have experienced significant drive time comparing a CX-5 to mid size sedan, such as the Honda Accord, Toyota Camry, Mazda 6 etc.... Please share your opinion of how the CX-5 differs from a sedan, especially with regards to long distance road trip type cruising.
Thanks in advance for any replies.

 

[Oldengineer]

I no longer own a mid-size sedan, my last one being a 06 Jaguar S-Type VDP. However, I've driven them for years for business - Dodges, Plymouths, Chryslers, and a Saturn Aura. I now own 2 little SUVs - A CX-5 Touring AWD and a M-B GLK 350 4Matic. To me, the CX-5 drives and handles very much like a decent European Sedan - it very much reminds me of a 2003 Jaguar X-Type 2.5 automatic with AWD that I used to own. I find the CX-5 very comfortable on long trips: its ride is a little firmer than most sedans but I like it that way: visibility is better because you're sitting up higher; The CX-5's AWD setup gives you superior foul weather capability; The CX-5 gets slightly worse fuel economy than most of the sedans I've owned, but, It's not that bad. I like the performance of the Mazda 2.5 engine over similar sized normally aspirated engines that the other manufactures are using in their sedans it has more grunt. My last trip in the CX-5 (last week) was a 450 interstate run to Louisville, KY and back, mostly at 75 MPH on cruise, with 4 of us aboard, and, a load of luggage in the back. Everyone was quite comfortable, and, the Mazda got 26.5 MPG for the round trip.

Regards:
Oldengineer

 

[DG_1234]

I no longer own a mid-size sedan, my last one being a 06 Jaguar S-Type VDP. However, I've driven them for years for business - Dodges, Plymouths, Chryslers, and a Saturn Aura. I now own 2 little SUVs - A CX-5 Touring AWD and a M-B GLK 350 4Matic. To me, the CX-5 drives and handles very much like a decent European Sedan - it very much reminds me of a 2003 Jaguar X-Type 2.5 automatic with AWD that I used to own. I find the CX-5 very comfortable on long trips: its ride is a little firmer than most sedans but I like it that way: visibility is better because you're sitting up higher; The CX-5's AWD setup gives you superior foul weather capability; The CX-5 gets slightly worse fuel economy than most of the sedans I've owned, but, It's not that bad. I like the performance of the Mazda 2.5 engine over similar sized normally aspirated engines that the other manufactures are using in their sedans it has more grunt. My last trip in the CX-5 (last week) was a 450 interstate run to Louisville, KY and back, mostly at 75 MPH on cruise, with 4 of us aboard, and, a load of luggage in the back. Everyone was quite comfortable, and, the Mazda got 26.5 MPG for the round trip.

Regards:
Oldengineer

Thanks for the reply Oldengineer. One other consideration I have is that as the months and years pass by, more and more SUV's are present. So, from a visibility perspective , on the roads and highways the sedans are often behind several SUV's and have a limited type forward view. In this regard I feel like it may be a "if you can't beat them, join them" situation.

 

[jcpharm]

i prefer the high driving position of the CX-5 (and any SUV for that matter) especially for long drives. also depending on the sedan, i think SUVs absorb the road irregularities (bumps) slightly better (although a CX-5 on 19" wheels may not be so much better than a camry/accord type).

 

[Sekmor]

Before the CX5, we had a Nissan Altima. It was a nice car for the long road trips, quiet, comfy, cushy ride. Didn't have that "fun to drive" feel. Four adults in the car made it feel over weight.
The CX5 rides more firm and you will feel more of the bumps (but that's how its supposed to ride). We too like the higher driving position. Not just the ground clearance but the actual seating you sit up more instead of stretching out behind the wheel. And our mileage is actually better with the CX5 than the Alti, both in town and hwy. We've taken a few road trips in the CX5 and no complaints here.

 

[yrwei52]

...And our mileage is actually better with the CX5 than the Alti, both in town and hwy.

Interestingly, a friend of mine bought a FWD CX-5 Touring last year replacing his old Honda Accord 4-cylinder. He said the same thing: the gas mileage on his new CX-5 is better than his old Honda Accord 4-cylinder!

 

[rjdee]

Prior to the Cx-5 I drove a 07 Mazda 6s hatch. The 6s handled much better and had more highway passing power along with slightly less road noise. Honestly if it was available I would've bought a new 6 wagon. I do find the CX5 is easier to park. It is shorter and more maneuverable than the old 6 or older v70. The CX5 has less of a sport sedan feel like the 6 but I found it much better than the competition. I looked at a VW Sportwagon TDI and like the size but it felt too cushy and I was nervous about the reliability.
As a traveling sales rep I frequently overloaded the 6s or had to switch to my Suburban to accommodate my work needs. The CX-5 (2.0 fwd, manual) gets much better mileage (29-30 w/ a roof box) and don't have to load up the Suburban nearly as often. My overall cost to own is much lower.
Everyone complains about the CX5 2.0 being underpowered and yes it has to be floored often but I rarely find myself wishing for more power. If I need to get ahead of anyone, being attentive and downshifting early does the job.

 

[DG_1234]

Gentlemen, thank you all for the replies. I am thinking hard about what type of vehicle to buy, CX-5 or sedan, and your experienced opinions are very helpful.
At this time I am undecided between a Honda Accord V6 or a CX-5. The CX-5 I have had the chance to drive a little bit because about a week ago my wife bought a 2016 white CX-5.. The Accord I am interested in for two primary reasons; the power of a V6 and that it is an iconic car model.

 

[Chris_Top_Her]

I wanted the cuv for the seating position interior volume, awd and hitch capability. Don't need the ride height so I lowered it and made the suspension more sporty to get it to meet my desires.

 

[yrwei52]

...The Accord I am interested in for two primary reasons; the power of a V6 and that it is an iconic car model.

Honda Accord used to be an iconic car and often battles for the title of top-selling passenger car in the U.S. with Toyota Camry. Not recently unfortunately. Accord sales in first quarter this year have fallen to their lowest point in recent years, and for the first time Ford Fusion, the best-selling domestic passenger car, sales have surpassed those of Accord! Here is U.S. passenger car sales[SUB][/SUB] number in first quarter of 2015:

1. Toyota Camry Sales: 100,505 Vs. 2014: +6.6%
2. Toyota Corolla Sales: 90,728 Vs. 2014: +16.7%
3. Nissan Altima Sales: 86,875 Vs. 2014: -2.7%
4. Ford Fusion Sales: 71,470 Vs. 2014: -7.9%
5. Honda Accord Sales: 68,645 Vs. 2014: -13.3%

Notice that Camry outsold Accord almost 50% this quarter! The best selling model for Honda is no longer Accord, it's CR-V which sold 73,127 in the first quarter.

Honda has problems. They used to be the leading car company on engineering design but no longer. They can't improve the looks of the cars either like Mazda or even Toyota did recently. They spent money for design and development to the wrong areas, such as Variable Cylinder Management (VCM, a proven useless cylinder de-activation system) but not replacing the problematic timing belt with the timing chain which is the maintenance headache on V6. They didn't try to implement direct injection on their V6 either. They decided to use crappy and unreliable CVT on all 4-cylinders which hurts their reputation due to the vibration issue. I used to like Honda a lot but not anymore!

If you really consider a Accord V6, be ready to replace the expensive timing belt at certain point. And nobody knows when the timing belt will break although Honda's history of not breaking, comparing to VW or Audi, is pretty good. Well, at least Accord V6 has a 6-speed auto, not the CVT!

 

[DG_1234]

Honda Accord used to be an iconic car and often battles for the title of top-selling passenger car in the U.S. with Toyota Camry. Not recently unfortunately. Accord sales in first quarter this year have fallen to their lowest point in recent years, and for the first time Ford Fusion, the best-selling domestic passenger car, sales have surpassed those of Accord! Here is U.S. passenger car sales[SUB][/SUB] number in first quarter of 2015:

1. Toyota Camry Sales: 100,505 Vs. 2014: +6.6%
2. Toyota Corolla Sales: 90,728 Vs. 2014: +16.7%
3. Nissan Altima Sales: 86,875 Vs. 2014: -2.7%
4. Ford Fusion Sales: 71,470 Vs. 2014: -7.9%
5. Honda Accord Sales: 68,645 Vs. 2014: -13.3%

Notice that Camry outsold Accord almost 50% this quarter! The best selling model for Honda is no longer Accord, it's CR-V which sold 73,127 in the first quarter.

Honda has problems. They used to be the leading car company on engineering design but no longer. They can't improve the looks of the cars either like Mazda or even Toyota did recently. They spent money for design and development to the wrong areas, such as Variable Cylinder Management (VCM, a proven useless cylinder de-activation system) but not replacing the problematic timing belt with the timing chain which is the maintenance headache on V6. They didn't try to implement direct injection on their V6 either. They decided to use crappy and unreliable CVT on all 4-cylinders which hurts their reputation due to the vibration issue. I used to like Honda a lot but not anymore!

If you really consider a Accord V6, be ready to replace the expensive timing belt at certain point. And nobody knows when the timing belt will break although Honda's history of not breaking, comparing to VW or Audi, is pretty good. Well, at least Accord V6 has a 6-speed auto, not the CVT!

I did do back to back test drives of the 2015 model Camry V6 and Rav4 V4. Between those two I liked he higher seating position, roomy interior height
of the Rav4.
I also drove a Taurus and Fusion back to back, but did not care for the interior styling of either car.

 

[dragonteeth]

iconic car model

lol

 

[yrwei52]

iconic car model.

lol

Mazda was having problems before too. Their rotary engine, although an excellent design in theory, had suffered the reliability issue big time. Since Ford sold their major stack of Mazda, Mazda has become a relatively small car company and has to survive. Their SkyActiv Technology is a simple buy effective way to improve the car efficiency by having an unprecedented 13:1 (14:1 outside US) high compression gasoline engine (and an excellent diesel engine we just couldn't get) and an automatic with lock-up clutch in every gear. Increasing the compression ratio is a classic way to squeeze more work out of the pistons power stroke. Mazda is passing on todays popular trend of downsized, turbocharged engines but SkyAcriv is a much better way than adding turbo charger and using CVT as both of them will have long term reliability issues; although they can give false impression on good EPA fuel economy number. And adding a turbo charger and an intercooler is quite a pricey proposition for Mazda. That's why I gave up on Honda CR-V and bought a 2016 Mazda CX-5 GT AWd with Tech Package in March all because Mazda's SkyActiv got me sold. So far the MPG is improving and up to 25.8 with all city driving.

 

[V8toilet]

I dunno, I think the V6 Accord is a better vehicle (although not the best choice depending on your needs) than a Mazda CX5 but its not an apples to apples comparison. Major pros in favor of the v6 accord are big power gain (o-60 in 6 seconds vs 7.8 for AWD) and quieter than CX5 (Honda has made improvements with the last redesign). Major pros for the CX5 are available AWD and mmmm, well, ahh, maybe hatch design I guess. I cant drive most of today's sedans because unfortunately for me my tall frame just doesn't fit in them with their low roof lines.

 

[ALafya]

I owned a 4-cyl Accord (one before previous gen) before getting the CX-5. I did like the car very much, though the trunk was not as usable as a CX-5. It drove very nicely, though the brakes could have been better. I liked the 5-speed AT, as it was almost always doing exactly what was needed. Back seat was more comfortable. Infotainment was AM/FM radio and CD player .

The CX-5 is a compromise vehicle for me. It has AWD, which is very important to me, higher ground clearance, very good utility and same fuel-economy as the Accord. It handles best for its class and ride quality is pretty good, slightly stiff, which is better than spongy for me. The transmission resists downshifts, which is sometimes annoying, but is otherwise very good.
I do not prefer the higher seating position which implies increased fuel consumption, increased weight, higher center of gravity and reduced handling capability. If a 6 Wagon AWD was available in the US, I would buy one today.

The Accord V6 is pretty quick and has the best fuel-economy of any V6 sold today, I believe. Despite that, you could probably get better MPG on a CX-5. It has no AWD and the trunk is less useful. I did not drive it, but believe it would have better handling and have better noise isolation and better back seat.

 

[DG_1234]

I owned a 4-cyl Accord (one before previous gen) before getting the CX-5. I did like the car very much, though the trunk was not as usable as a CX-5. It drove very nicely, though the brakes could have been better. I liked the 5-speed AT, as it was almost always doing exactly what was needed. Back seat was more comfortable. Infotainment was AM/FM radio and CD player .

The CX-5 is a compromise vehicle for me. It has AWD, which is very important to me, higher ground clearance, very good utility and same fuel-economy as the Accord. It handles best for its class and ride quality is pretty good, slightly stiff, which is better than spongy for me. The transmission resists downshifts, which is sometimes annoying, but is otherwise very good.
I do not prefer the higher seating position which implies increased fuel consumption, increased weight, higher center of gravity and reduced handling capability. If a 6 Wagon AWD was available in the US, I would buy one today.

The Accord V6 is pretty quick and has the best fuel-economy of any V6 sold today, I believe. Despite that, you could probably get better MPG on a CX-5. It has no AWD and the trunk is less useful. I did not drive it, but believe it would have better handling and have better noise isolation and better back seat.

I took the opportunity to test drive a V6 Accord today. I liked the way it handled, but did not care for the interior styling, and the seating felt a little too soft. I actually prefer the seating of my mom's base model 2010 Civic, which feels more firm than the 2015 Accord I test drove today.