- :
- CX-5
The CX-5 GT AWD is more luxury than we need or want. At least Mazda stayed true to Zoom-Zoom with Sky-Activ. Otherwise we'd be driving a RAV-4.
How Close is the Cx-5 to your previous LUXURY CAR!?
- Thread starter Visuals
- Start date
From a fit and finish's perspective, the Australasian top spec facelift CX5 is very comparable with the top spec Accord Euro Tourer (sold as Acura TSX sport wagon in the U.S.) That is if you consider the Acura TSX as entry level premium. Compared with the Lexus LS460, it is a notch below. Bottom line is a top spec CX5 is very good unless you are a brand snob.
I wish our Mazda dealer was like that. The Acura dealer that I used to take my cars to (2006 RL, 2007 TSX, 2002 RSX-S, 2012 TL SH-AWD 6MT Tech, and now my wife's 09 MDX) is awesome. Oil changes were in and out in 20 minutes for $30 WITHOUT an appointment, and they always had cookies or donuts that were fresh every day and this awesome machine that made all kinds of coffees, teas and hot cocoas. That place is the best. The Mazda dealer USED to be co-located with them, and then more people around here started buying Acruas and Mazdas both, so they outgrew the building. Acura got to stay, being the "luxury" nameplate, and Mazda was moved in to the Ford dealership. (rant)
The Ford dealership is full of much more slimy sales people (just the demeanor of them, the way they flock to you when you come in the door, etc.). The Mazda dealer is physically separated by a wall and they each kinda get their own side of the building, but the WORST part is that they share a service department. Fords break. A lot. And they're always full of broken ones. What was a 20 minute oil change for $30 at the Acura dealer is no more. My first oil change was "free," (and I use that in quotes because time is worth money)... I ended up sitting and waiting for 2 hours while they did it. And yes, I had an appointment. Cookies, teas, coffees and cocoas? Nope. Warm bottles of water and stale popcorn. Greeeeeeaaaaatttt.... I'll never go back there for an oil change again.
So yeah - here anyway, the dealership experience is awful.
The 2016 CX5 GT itself though, is nice. It has everything my TL had minus power (and that awesome 6 speed Honda manual). Interior build quality I wouldn't say was any worse than the TL, which is the most expensive car I've owned. When you step to a "luxury" small CUV from a loaded CX5, you're basically gaining power and not really that much else. RDX is more power, but interior I think is worse on the RDX, and it has a similar AWD system (since they took out the awesome SH-AWD and replaced it with the CRV's AWD system on this latest generation). Audi Q5 is more powerful and has better AWD, but nobody wants to own an Audi out of warranty. Lexus NX is hot, but comparably loaded is more than $10K more. Etc. The only thing I wish the CX5 had was some more power, other than that I'm completely satisfied with it, especially for the price.
Last edited:
The Skyactiv Diesel 2.2 (twin turbo) that is available on some market (including Australasia) is awesome. Torque is especially good on the diesel. There were a few (quite serious issues) with the diesel which I believe (and hope) have been resolved in the facelift model. Never the less, US does not usually warm up to diesel engine and it does not look like Mazda is going to bring the diesel to the US.
Last edited:
Switched from a 2012 Infiniti G37x Sedan with Premium and Nav packages to a loaded 2016 GT AWD (GT Tech, i-ActiveSense, MMS etc) last weekend. I guess the G37x would be fairly described as an entry level luxury car while the CX-5 GT with all the bells and whistles is on the high end of the mainstream. As such there are both similarities and tradeoffs.
- The Mazda is of course way down on power - 330hp V6 vs 185hp 4 banger is no comparison at all. Other than merging onto interstates I don't really miss the extra ponies to be honest. If I feel the need for real speed then I have a Kawasaki Concours C14 which beats the pants off anything this side of a Lamborghini while getting 35-40mpg. My red light racer days are long since behind me, and there are only limited opportunities to use the power of a G37-type engine without physical or financial penalties.
- The flip side of that is that the Mazda is rated at 24/30mpg on regular while I was lucky to get 21-22mpg combined on premium from the Infiniti. It's early days but I'm right around an indicated 26mpg in mostly city / errand conditions so far. If that holds steady then that's $30 per month saved on gas. I saw an indicated 32.1mpg on one late night 15-16 mile trip with no traffic and radar cruise control engaged. That was astounding to me for a CUV.
- Internal space is a no contest hands down win for the Mazda, but then it's CUV vs sedan so more of an apples to refrigerators comparison. What's surprising is that as a very tall man (6' 6" with a 36-38" inseam) I don't actually need the seat all the way back in the Mazda. Rear seat legroom is a considerable improvement compared to the cruel joke that was the Infiniti's rear seats. This is the first car that I've owned that can still comfortably accommodate 4 adult passengers with my lanky frame driving. Our 10 year old, who is also all legs, is in love with her new found space already.
- The gizmos and gadgets category is also a win for the Mazda. It has blind spot monitoring, lane departure warning, radar cruise control, adaptive LED headlights, rain sensing wipers, remote start from my phone, and of course SBCS/SBS. The Infiniti had none of those. I do miss the ability to rip CDs to a hard drive in the Infiniti. The Mazda's BT audio mostly makes up for that though, something I could never get to work properly in the Infiniti. The nav in the Infiniti was more polished, far easier to program, and had live traffic and weather. On the other hand the Infiniti couldn't read text messages to me which I think is a GREAT safety and convenience feature in the Mazda. Both the Mazda and Infiniti came with Bose audio, and now that I've fiddled with the Mazda's settings I can't tell the difference between systems. Neither are the best in-car audio that I've heard, however I'm no audiophile and they both produce acceptable sound.
- Interior fit and finish is really close. I prefer the Mazda's leather, steering wheel, and the "sparse" look dashboard really works for me. The Infiniti had beautiful wood accents, more soft touch materials, and their signature analog clock which I do miss. Of all the stupid things, both my girlfriend and I really appreciate the fact that the Mazda's cup holders will hold 2 large coffees without any problem. The Infiniti's wouldn't, at least not without wedging them in at opposing angles. More first world problems! Cabin noise is a coin toss. I gather that Mazda improved the sound insulation for the 2016 model, and if so, they did a darn good job of it. Going at 50-60mph on the late night trip, with cruise engaged, tire noise was the loudest sound the Mazda made. Very impressive.
- Handling is obviously a win for a sedan vs a CUV. It's truly not as much of a difference as I thought though, Mazda did a phenomenal job in making the suspension taut but not harsh. I have driven other CUVs that felt sloppy in the twisty bits with noticeable body roll, but I have yet to feel anything like that from the Mazda.
- Other considerations: we pay property taxes on vehicles at the rate of $30 per $1,000 value, so long term there will be savings there. At least until we escape from RI to NH anyway! The Mazda is also cheaper to insure and was cheaper to buy. Overall I believe the savings in gas / insurance / taxes / monthly payment will be close to $100 per month. I honestly don't feel as though we've given up anything other than power, and in exchange we've gained a lot of convenience and safety features.
Now if we could just get rear seat A/C vents (I know about the under-seat ones, and they are wholly inadequate) plus a remote tailgate release it would be about perfect. What were you thinking Mazda? (stooges)
- The Mazda is of course way down on power - 330hp V6 vs 185hp 4 banger is no comparison at all. Other than merging onto interstates I don't really miss the extra ponies to be honest. If I feel the need for real speed then I have a Kawasaki Concours C14 which beats the pants off anything this side of a Lamborghini while getting 35-40mpg. My red light racer days are long since behind me, and there are only limited opportunities to use the power of a G37-type engine without physical or financial penalties.
- The flip side of that is that the Mazda is rated at 24/30mpg on regular while I was lucky to get 21-22mpg combined on premium from the Infiniti. It's early days but I'm right around an indicated 26mpg in mostly city / errand conditions so far. If that holds steady then that's $30 per month saved on gas. I saw an indicated 32.1mpg on one late night 15-16 mile trip with no traffic and radar cruise control engaged. That was astounding to me for a CUV.
- Internal space is a no contest hands down win for the Mazda, but then it's CUV vs sedan so more of an apples to refrigerators comparison. What's surprising is that as a very tall man (6' 6" with a 36-38" inseam) I don't actually need the seat all the way back in the Mazda. Rear seat legroom is a considerable improvement compared to the cruel joke that was the Infiniti's rear seats. This is the first car that I've owned that can still comfortably accommodate 4 adult passengers with my lanky frame driving. Our 10 year old, who is also all legs, is in love with her new found space already.
- The gizmos and gadgets category is also a win for the Mazda. It has blind spot monitoring, lane departure warning, radar cruise control, adaptive LED headlights, rain sensing wipers, remote start from my phone, and of course SBCS/SBS. The Infiniti had none of those. I do miss the ability to rip CDs to a hard drive in the Infiniti. The Mazda's BT audio mostly makes up for that though, something I could never get to work properly in the Infiniti. The nav in the Infiniti was more polished, far easier to program, and had live traffic and weather. On the other hand the Infiniti couldn't read text messages to me which I think is a GREAT safety and convenience feature in the Mazda. Both the Mazda and Infiniti came with Bose audio, and now that I've fiddled with the Mazda's settings I can't tell the difference between systems. Neither are the best in-car audio that I've heard, however I'm no audiophile and they both produce acceptable sound.
- Interior fit and finish is really close. I prefer the Mazda's leather, steering wheel, and the "sparse" look dashboard really works for me. The Infiniti had beautiful wood accents, more soft touch materials, and their signature analog clock which I do miss. Of all the stupid things, both my girlfriend and I really appreciate the fact that the Mazda's cup holders will hold 2 large coffees without any problem. The Infiniti's wouldn't, at least not without wedging them in at opposing angles. More first world problems! Cabin noise is a coin toss. I gather that Mazda improved the sound insulation for the 2016 model, and if so, they did a darn good job of it. Going at 50-60mph on the late night trip, with cruise engaged, tire noise was the loudest sound the Mazda made. Very impressive.
- Handling is obviously a win for a sedan vs a CUV. It's truly not as much of a difference as I thought though, Mazda did a phenomenal job in making the suspension taut but not harsh. I have driven other CUVs that felt sloppy in the twisty bits with noticeable body roll, but I have yet to feel anything like that from the Mazda.
- Other considerations: we pay property taxes on vehicles at the rate of $30 per $1,000 value, so long term there will be savings there. At least until we escape from RI to NH anyway! The Mazda is also cheaper to insure and was cheaper to buy. Overall I believe the savings in gas / insurance / taxes / monthly payment will be close to $100 per month. I honestly don't feel as though we've given up anything other than power, and in exchange we've gained a lot of convenience and safety features.
Now if we could just get rear seat A/C vents (I know about the under-seat ones, and they are wholly inadequate) plus a remote tailgate release it would be about perfect. What were you thinking Mazda? (stooges)
Last edited:
I traded in a 2012 Grand Cherokee Laredo X for my 2016 GT w/tech. Obviously two different classes of vehicles, and there are pluses and minuses to each. Obviously the Jeep had much more power, 360hp vs 185hp. It was nice to be able to stomp that peddle and hear the Hemi roar, but it sucked seeing the fuel needle dive closer to empty. The Hemi required mid grade fuel (and lots of it). I was averaging 16mpg of mid grade, where as now I am at 25ish on regular. I do a lot of driving for work, and get reimbursed for mileage, so the CX5 is more profitable for me. I prefer the infotainment system and GPS in the jeep, but the Mazda system isnt bad at all. The jeep was definitely more comfortable as it was bigger, and it felt more luxurious. It had the rear sent vents that everyone clamors for, but I could care less - I never have passengers. The materials although quite nice on the CX5, pale in comparison. The interior door panels feel very cheap and not very solid. The area where the pocket is feels like it will break at any moment - too thin IMO. The same with the exterior sheet metal. If I lean on the exterior, I can feel it move inward.
So, the CX5 is definitely not on par with more luxurious vehicles, but thats not a bad thing. FOr the price paid new, you get a lot of car for the money, its comfortable enough, and its stylish. Also, it has great gas mileage and is fun to drive. The only thing I would ask for is a little bit more power and speed, but I can live without those.
So, the CX5 is definitely not on par with more luxurious vehicles, but thats not a bad thing. FOr the price paid new, you get a lot of car for the money, its comfortable enough, and its stylish. Also, it has great gas mileage and is fun to drive. The only thing I would ask for is a little bit more power and speed, but I can live without those.
Jester7677
Member
- :
- CX-5
I've had 2 Audi's, '00 S4 and the last one was an '04 S4. Took 9.5 qts of oil during a change (which I did myself) and I didn't need to top it off between intervals. It was an amazing car, no punishment here. Just saying.
No, the CX-5 is the nicest of the Compact SUV's that I found, but they are not luxury vehicles. Fit, Finish, features, seats, .... were better in the luxury car. With all that came the price tag though and a higher concern for the car, which I don't miss at all. I'll buy an Audi again (probably a Q5) after driving this for the next 4 years, then give it to the kids. At least that's the plan...
A couple of weeks ago I did a track day sponsored by a local Porsche dealer. During one of the lapping sessions the instructor drove a twin turbo Macan and he set a pace us amateurs driving sports cars had a hard time keeping up with. If money were no object, the Macan would be my choice in a compact SUV. A lot of the twin turbo Macans list for $80K+ and Porsche maintenance is not cheap. For the kind of boring daily driving I do, the '16 CX-5 serves me just fine. Seat memory would be nice as would a power lift gate. But all in all, I think I got more car than I deserved at the CX-5's price point.
