I only have mirror shake when I turn the Bose stereo volume level up to 40+, but that's expected in any car.
Impressions and comparison after a week with my rav4.
- Thread starter Nodnerb
- Start date
I only have mirror shake when I turn the Bose stereo volume level up to 40+, but that's expected in any car.
One thing that I notice about the new Rav4 is that the rear section of the exhaust looks like is just dangling which probably doesn’t help the low clearance issue. It really looks like an afterthought.
That vs This:
Granted a darker image but much better design imho, and not just because I own it.
Steel Magnolia
Member
- :
- 2014 Mazda CX-5 GT Tech FWD
That vs This:
Granted a darker image but much better design imho, and not just because I own it.
I need you to do a photo session with MY CX-5.
You take beautiful photos!!Mine shakes too at high volume but that’s because I have 160 watts RMS pushing a JL Audio 8" micro-sub in the back with good old rock and roll. No road noise can compete with that!
I need you to do a photo session with MY CX-5.
Thanks!
I only used my Nexus 4 cell and slight tweaking using the in-camera software.IronMan0737
Member
- :
- 14.5 CX-5 GT AWD w/ Tech
It probably got recalled. 
Chris_Top_Her
Contributor
- :
- San Antonio, Texas
- :
- '15 CX-5 Miata AWD
Rav-4 looks lame, especially in that back shot. My awd works well and I like how it works. Imo, 50/50 lock is just a sales gimmick that will either hardly or be improperly used. If I could use it on the CX-5 I would probably only do it when flooring from stop. Prior to installing a stiffer RSB, I could use throttle on a (fast and or accelerating) sharp turn to counter the understeer through the AWD torque vectoring. Now with the RSB, I can coast a sharp curve at 80+ and control the rear just fine, where as before I used slight throttle to trigger torque vectoring to do so. Plenty of times in rain I smash the gas and even with summer tires and "detecting slip" (which is probably detected in milliseconds) the car goes straight as an arrow. Really, I'm can't even think of the meaning of "detecting slip before it happens" when something like that is measured and acted upon in milliseconds.. unless the car can predict the future LOL. However, good that you are in something that is proving reliable and trouble free compared to your last vehicle.
IronMan0737
Member
- :
- 14.5 CX-5 GT AWD w/ Tech
If they put more powerful struts in the trunk hatch it could be a double beverage catapult! Still not as cool as the old RAV's tailgate, which you could use to clothesline an unsuspecting passerby.
Here is what I mean, look at the rear tail lights, there is a shelf there:
http://image.motortrend.com/f/wot/s...59405110/2014-Toyota-RAV4-front-left-side.jpg
http://image.motortrend.com/f/wot/s...59405110/2014-Toyota-RAV4-front-left-side.jpg
Personally I think you sound desperately like you want to justify the CX-5 4x4 system.
I find it ok so far, but I can tell you that the system does not react as quick as my old 2009 xtrail.
With the xtrail I never had wheel spin on the front wheels while in auto 4wd select.
I have with the CX-5, while towing off a wet grass field, after churning up the grass a little the rear did engage, and the caravan did pull away.
The new CRV also sets off in 4wd, and is I think is a sound idea.
Unfortunately the new xtail is another 10" longer, and in the UK fitted with less powerful engines, so I don't expect to return to Nissan.
It also looks like Land Rover are going all girly looking at the new designs put forward.
Does anyone have a link to a 4WD test with the latest generation cars?
I find it ok so far, but I can tell you that the system does not react as quick as my old 2009 xtrail.
With the xtrail I never had wheel spin on the front wheels while in auto 4wd select.
I have with the CX-5, while towing off a wet grass field, after churning up the grass a little the rear did engage, and the caravan did pull away.
The new CRV also sets off in 4wd, and is I think is a sound idea.
Unfortunately the new xtail is another 10" longer, and in the UK fitted with less powerful engines, so I don't expect to return to Nissan.
It also looks like Land Rover are going all girly looking at the new designs put forward.
Does anyone have a link to a 4WD test with the latest generation cars?
IronMan0737
Member
- :
- 14.5 CX-5 GT AWD w/ Tech
[The only reason I need AWD vehicles is to get to and from work safely in wintry conditions (even with (eventually) balding tires). My employer is a 24/7/365 operator where I'm part of a crew of 8 that works 12 hour shifts. There is a lot to be lost if one of us can't make it.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CX-5's manual basically says ON-ROAD use only. It specifically states that damage may occur up to and including the airbag system (including unintended deployment). Even if there were comprehensive 4x4 tests, they wouldn't and shouldn't be geared toward the consumer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CX-5's manual basically says ON-ROAD use only. It specifically states that damage may occur up to and including the airbag system (including unintended deployment). Even if there were comprehensive 4x4 tests, they wouldn't and shouldn't be geared toward the consumer.
Your review is very much like my experience when I was test driving before purchase. Like I mentioned in another thread I had the CX-5 and RAV 4 nearly in a tie but a couple safety options and crash results as well as overall looks pushed me over to the CX-5. The CX-5 is also the only compact crossover with a fold down center armrest/seat which if you are a fisherman like me is awesome to have. I did love the reclining back seats and extra leg room in the RAV, but we are not expecting to be hauling many passengers so it was not high on the list of priorities. As for the throttle response, throttle by wire is something to get used to. There are two position indicators on the pedal, if you hit those quickly the computer / transmission will respond accordingly. But if you slowly depress and are cruising along the tranny will not downshift (for fuel economy reasons) so it will feel slow. By the way the 2014 CX-5 is the faster of the two cars, independent test have proven that, but it's not by much.
Beware of the shakers. When new 2010 Outback model came out they suffered wheel shake at hiway speeds. They have done mod's each year to try to get rid of it. The wheel shimmy was stopped at the expense of heavy steering effort. The 2009 old model is the one to get, but people know that and you will pay a lot more than blue book to get one.
Also the new model 4 cylinder Outbacks are suffering excessive oil burn. The 2006-2009 4 cylinder Outbacks suffer blown head gaskets around 100K miles and have timing belt. The 2006-2009 6 cylinder has a timing chain. The 4 cylinder turbo doesn't have head gasket problems, but has timing belt.
The Subaru has almost a cult following and a lot of good characteristics, but has its quirks.
Last edited:
you sound like a member of the cult. lol. right now, the oldest i'm willing to look at is a 2012 and only the 6-cylinder. the 2015, a new generation, was announced today. i'm in no rush, so i may wait to see if i can get a deal on a 2014.
I strongly considered a used Outback so learned a lot about them. The CX-5 won me over with best in class; handling, fuel efficiency, power, and tow rating. A new 6 cylinder Outback is $35K. Ouch! I test drove a new Outback and the CVT wasn't for me. Otherwise, nice car.
