Hey guys, I just had to join this forum and add my own 2 cents. I was contemplating buying either the Rondo or the 5, and I decided that I'm going to buy the Rondo. I realize I might be outgunned venturing into this forum and you might figure I've already "drank the Kool-Aid" when it comes to the Rondo. The fact is, however, that I already have a Mazda3 (and the 5 shares the same platform), so I have no aversion to Mazdas.
The major reason (but not the only reason) I chose the Rondo is that I prefer the 2-3-2 seating arrangement compared to the 5's 2-2-2. I will usually be transporting five people (including driver) and, at times, I'll need the cargo space in the back. Five people can sit in the first two rows in the Rondo thus allowing me to fold down the third row for cargo space, whereas you must utilize half of the third row in the 5 for the fifth person thus cutting down on cargo space. Of course, this is my own unique need and not everyone will encounter this scenario. The fact that the Rondo can hold one more person is an added bonus.
As for evaluating the third row legroom, remember to take the second row legroom into consideration, too, since allowing more legroom in the third row means less legroom in the second row. From my own brief observations, when both rows are in use, there is more legroom in both rows in the Rondo compared to the 5. The 5, however, definitely has more headroom in the third row.
Personally, I think the Rondo looks better on the outside than the 5, but only in certain colours. Black, dark grey and red looks fine on the Rondo, but the other available colours don't (again, just my taste). The difference, really, is that the Rondo doesn't have sliding doors. When it comes to the aesthetics of sliding doors, people either love them or hate them. Personally, I don't like them. But if you have younger kids, they are worth their weight in gold. I do admit that if my kids were still pre-teens, the sliding doors would be a big draw, even though I think they are ugly as sin. But let's face facts--both vehicles aren't exactly sports cars, so saying one is better looking than the other isn't saying much.
As for the interior, the 5 looks more polished.
When it comes to performance, the 5 does handle better and is quicker off the mark than the Rondo--but for most people who are interested in this type of vehicle, I don't think performance is the primary consideration. It's definitely not for me. For what it is--a small people mover--the Rondo handles just fine. If performance is a big deal to you, you probably won't like the fact that the Rondo has an automatic tranny only.
About fuel consumption, I don't really like quoting the official numbers because it's probably more accurate if I just pulled them out of my butt. (lol2) Having said that, Kias generally have poor fuel consumption compared to other vehicles in the same class--but which class could you fairly put the Rondo in? It seems to me that the 5 and the Rondo belong in a class of their own. If you decide to look at the official numbers, for a fair comparison, compare the 5's automatic fuel consumption with the Rondo's.
As for bells and whistles, both vehicles seem to have almost the same available features. (BTW, I live in Canada, so the available features here are slightly different compared to what's available in the States.) The 5 has a rear wiper that's intermittent (not so for the Rondo) and the steering wheel is tilt and telescopic (only tilt in the Rondo). The Rondo has stability and traction control systems, whereas these two features aren't available on the 5. There are other little differences, but the big features that people want are almost the same for both.
Comparing the trims that I'm interested in (again, these are trims available in Canada), the Rondo EX Premium 7-seater is about a grand cheaper than the Mazda5 GT with automatic tranny and AC. Not a significant difference, in my mind. Obviously, resale value is much better for the 5. Since I'm planning on keeping the Rondo for the long haul, this isn't much of an issue for me.
If we're talking about long-term reliability, needless to say, Mazda has a proven track record (even though the 5 had a minor recall due to a problem of questionable significance). We all know about Kia's history. In
J.D. Power's 2006 Vehicle Dependability Study (based on feedback from vehicle owners after three years of ownership), Kia is ranked fourth from the bottom and was rock bottom in a couple of previous years. Having said that, the study also notes, "Kia has improved twice as much as any other brand in the past three years." Plus, the Kia Rio is ranked in the top three for sub-compacts. BTW, the same study shows Mazda in the middle of the pack and below the industry average.
So, yes, I admit that long-term reliability is more of a question mark for the Rondo than for the 5. And yet, the vehicle fits what I'm looking for, so I'm willing to take the "gamble." It's not really a totally new model--just like the 5, previous generations have been released under a different name outside of Canada and the US. I also have yet to read a review where the overall impression of the Rondo is negative (but it's still early
). In fact, the Rondo was in the running for
Motor Trend's 2007 Car of the Year.
There's also
this: "In fact, the Rondo rides on the basic mechanical underpinnings of the 2007 Kia Magentis [Optima] sedan. And those mechanical bits are shared with the Hyundai Sonata and Azera. I mention this because Consumer Reports says the Sonata and Azera are among the most reliable cars you can buy. This Kia is coming from what appears to be a good place." Am I just grabbing at straws? Maybe. Only time will tell.
For those wondering about the crash tests, the results are in.
The Rondo gets 4 to 5 stars on the roll-over and crash tests. According to the
Kia Canada website, the Rondo has side-impact door beams, and front and rear crumple zones. The
Kia USA website, however, doesn't mention a rear crumple zone. Like I said before, the features aren't exactly the same for US and Canadian Rondos, but this difference is a bit odd.
Although I've been trying to defend my choice of the Rondo, you can easily use my post to support why you prefer the 5. In summary, I think both vehicles are quite good, and it all depends on what you're looking for.
I'm sure the 3rd row wasn't as claustrophobic as it looks here. You can also sort of see why the 3rd row headroom is better in the 5. Anyway, you really have to see it in person. Hope it ain't too annoying to list the pics like this:
