Mazda2 or CX-5? Tough choice.

[stevenvillatoro]

I'm planning to buy a new Mazda within the next few months to replace my daily driver, but am torn between two very different models. Each has its advantages, and each would be fine for my minimal needs. These are the ONLY two vehicles I'm considering. I don't want a Mazda3 (SkyActive or otherwise), or other makes/models.

Choice 1 – Mazda2: Sport with manual transmission. For $14K with zero percent financing, it would be a blast to drive, and would serve my needs fine.

Choice 2 – CX-5: Higher trim level with automatic transmission. For $25K+, I could get the latest technology with more luxury, still great economy, plenty of fun, a little more space, and great looks.

I like the idea of an econobox as fun to drive as the Mazda2. But I also like the SkyActiv setup, looks, and luxury of the CX-5, which sounds and looks like a great package.

While it'd be nice to save money, I'm more interested in finding the right vehicle. I've never had a CUV/SUV, but would expect the CX-5 to be tossable and feel compact, have good visibility, etc. It would need to have the fun factor, and yet I'd be very happy with the auto transmission because of its very impressive performance.

Part of me wants to treat myself to something upgraded. But then the practical side of me takes over, thinking that the 2 might also be more fun. Not enough info on the CX-5 yet. I've had smaller cars than the 2 before, and have enjoyed them very much. But then I wonder if the CX-5 would give me the "best of all worlds" being small, economical, semi-luxurious (for dates), and fun to drive. My recent test drive of the Mazda2 was extremely fun, BTW.

What to do??? For those of you also interested in a CX-5, why choose it over a Mazda2? For those of you with a Mazda2, same question, please.

Thanks.

 

[Red2]

Two VERY different vehicles there to make a comparison between. I love the 2 for what it is, an inexpensive, moderately well equipped, outstanding fuel economy, stupid fun to drive little car. I've never been in a CX-5, so I have nothing to go on with that. My best advice is to drive them both and buy the one that makes you grin more. The grin factor is the one thing that equipment, power, and luxury can never replace.

 

[Domii3925]

Two VERY different vehicles there to make a comparison between. I love the 2 for what it is, an inexpensive, moderately well equipped, outstanding fuel economy, stupid fun to drive little car. I've never been in a CX-5, so I have nothing to go on with that. My best advice is to drive them both and buy the one that makes you grin more. The grin factor is the one thing that equipment, power, and luxury can never replace.

+1

 

[Joker2]

Stupid fun trumps mommy-van any day! Plus you can autocross the 2. When you get bored that is. I have been commuting in mine for about 8 months and 9k miles. I camped, renovated (bathtub came home in the 2, sheet-rock and tiles came home in 2 as well as 100 year old dresser) and did a few other things! They would have all fit in the 5, but the rest of the time, the 2 has been soooo much fun. The price left money for Advan AD08s and winter tires for the stock steel wheels, and other extras soon to come (at a forum near you).

I say get the 2 Sport and enjoy spending the savings on trips and mods to personalize it to fit your lifestyle.

 

[stevenvillatoro]

Thanks for all your thoughts.

So far, among my friends and in forums, including Mazda2 owners and non-owners, have all suggested the Mazda2 over the CX-5. I agree that the 2 sounds more fun, more my type of vehicle, and much cheaper to buy and maintain. But since there's no rush, I think I'll wait just to have a look at the CX-5 (just to make sure), and by then the '12 Mazda2 should be hitting the streets maybe with a new tidbit or two.

Again, thanks.

 

[BRIAN_MP5T]

Ummm One will be good on gas... and one will not..


My Wife has hers on 2" Drop and it made it actually feel faster, it is plenty quick and she drives the s*** out of it..

I got her some 17" Rims and Better Rubber as well..

 

[dsgrey]

I agree, two different vehicles. The CX is more for hauling people but awful small compared to the competition. $25k has better choices. I know since we bought something else for the spouse in that price range.

The M2 back seats are ONLY for the rare situation you need them. Plus the M2 is a fuel sipper.

We also owned a 2009 M3 (sold to son) and while decent w/o issues, I really didn't care for it plus we could never get 30mpg highway. Still a lot different than an M2 but does have more rear seat room.

 

[Joker2]

Did you get the 5? It is a nice looking well priced car/suv. Let us know, please.

 

[stevenvillatoro]

It's apparently going to become available around February 2012. I talked to someone who drove one, though. He said that it'll be worth waiting for, and was superb. Expect 34 MPG highway, not bad for that size/category of vehicle. And I'm encouraged by the prices announced for the Mazda3 that were very competitive.

 

[SubCompactor]

I did like the CX-5 when I was waiting for my 2. I like it looks and the utilitiness that it offers. I can see that it is a very "purposeful"(does a lot of things well) little vehicle and from that aspect it "might" could be rationalized as fun. But I think having a manual transmission enhances the driving experience exponentially. IMHO, an automatic transmission makes the 2 sluggish and boring. A manual tranny (if it's even offered) takes away from the luxuriousness of the 5. Solution: 5 -speed 2 and go out and have some fun. Plus it handles really well. Even more added fun!

 

[CorkSport]

Get both of them!

-Derrick

 

[Redkills]

^This +1

 

[RenesisKing]

For what its worth, the CX-5 will have considerably more space, a bit safer and if you opt for AWD, better in just about any bad weather condition. It will cost considerably more but then again, you do get a lot more. I wish that Mazda would toss in the diesel in the CX-5 as opposed to just the Sky-G but its looks to be decent enough. What I don't get is how much less power this thing has compared to the next Escape.

 

[DeeAOne]

The Mazda 2 looks like so much fun. I scoped one out in a parking lot yesterday. The interior isn't bad at all, and I could just imagine it lowered on some nice wheels. mmm!

 

[manualist]

I suggest a middle road compromise: a 6-speed CX-5 - easier to get a good deal and save money, and more fun than the automatic. Advantages over the Mazda2: SkyActiv, interior space, and maybe comfort. Disadvantage: much more expensive, blend-in styling, and with all that extra weight I doubt it can match the driving feel of the 2. I think the CX-5 is for people who have their mind set on a CUV - maybe a majority these days.
Or another compromise solution - go test drive a hatchback SkyActiv Mazda3 i Touring with a manual, if you can find one. I bet it's more fun than the CX-5 while cheaper and more efficient.

 

[dsgrey]

I agree with many others. CX-5 has more space (though not spacious) and enough HPs for an auto-tranny. M2 really needs the stick due to low HPs, more fun to drive, anyone in the back would be crammed and it gets great MPGs. Two different purposes.

Even the CX-5 is limited on space. The spouse looked at one but we quickly ruled it out for 4 people and storage. She has a GMC Terrain instead and it isn't huge. Anytime only the two of us go somewhere, we take the M2 due to MPGs and it's more fun to drive. On nice days we take the Miata! After almost 10k miles since I bought the M2 in July, she finally drove it last week and agrees the M2 is the simpliest stick she's ever seen - smooth shifting, easy to shift without any jerkiness and zero pressure on the clutch. But she still prefers the bigger tanks that lean and have a slushbox.

 

[Replica]

$10k price difference makes this a really easy choice. Though I'd spend the extra $1k on the Touring trim Mazda2 like I did. The little differences were worth the money to me. With the extra $10k you save with the Mazda2, you could buy a Miata project car, a small truck, or whatever else amuses you.