My Day with a Jeep Cherokee Latitude and how it compares to a CX-5

You guys know something funny - this is what dealers told me. Many here know I did extensive research. So, the dealer was a bit more candid with me, since he knew I have already settled on CX5. He said, time and again, if a potential buyer come to them AFTER they have test driven the RAV4 or CRV, they tend to buy CX5, purely they get awed by the driving dynamics, even women. BUT, if they see CX5 first and then try the others, mostly they select the others, purely because they forget the dynamics and get awed by the super interior amenities instead. So, the sales guy encourages others to NOT test drive but rather come back and test drive. They ENCOURAGE potential buyers to go test the competitors 1st. and come back.
If you honestly ask me, the only things I miss after having bought the GT version is "reclinable" rear with rear seat warmers and some USB ports @ rear. 2nd.: the bloody switches could have been lighted in the door. But its a small price to pay for awesome handling.
Exactly. Vehicle buyers are TYPICALLY very fickle, and easily swayed. Driving dynamics is an intangible. A cup holder and a NAV that doesn't suck, is tangible. Again, I'm not saying that driving dynamics don't matter. I'm just saying that I only had ONE CUSTOMER that cared about them, in the entire time I sold vehicles (honestly only a year, but this is longer than most people have sold vehicles, and it was hella fun for a 19 year old!), and then, his only question was "Will this thing beat my buddy's lightly modded LS1?" I didn't lie, I told him "it will be close, but not stock" (2005 mustang GT. Yes, my honesty cost me the sale, no, I wouldn't go back and lie to the man to keep the sale.)
 
Great review!

I definitely agree that the lack of interior features is a little disappointing in the CX5. Adjustable back seats would be very nice, and I never thought of having the passenger seat fold down but that would be awesome as well. Theres a few other trivial but nice additions that I would love such as one touch windows and sunroof, auto folding mirrors, etc. As for the interior lighting, I remember the first time I took my new car out at night, and was disappointed in how dark it was in the cabin. I decided then to add interior accent lighting to the footwells, center cubby, and even the cupholders. I am halfway done! Going to add another 12v and hopefully a 110v outlet in the process.

All in all, I agree I would rather take the car that is focused on actually driving rather than the point A to B with fancy lights any day. What Mike pointed out is very true, I had to swerve off the road the other day and was very happy in how the CX5 handled at speed on a loose dirt shoulder, while evasively driving. It never felt out of control or disconnected, and helped save me from a head on 70 vs 70 mph collision.
 
Great review!

I definitely agree that the lack of interior features is a little disappointing in the CX5. Adjustable back seats would be very nice, and I never thought of having the passenger seat fold down but that would be awesome as well. Theres a few other trivial but nice additions that I would love such as one touch windows and sunroof, auto folding mirrors, etc. As for the interior lighting, I remember the first time I took my new car out at night, and was disappointed in how dark it was in the cabin. I decided then to add interior accent lighting to the footwells, center cubby, and even the cupholders. I am halfway done! Going to add another 12v and hopefully a 110v outlet in the process.

All in all, I agree I would rather take the car that is focused on actually driving rather than the point A to B with fancy lights any day. What Mike pointed out is very true, I had to swerve off the road the other day and was very happy in how the CX5 handled at speed on a loose dirt shoulder, while evasively driving. It never felt out of control or disconnected, and helped save me from a head on 70 vs 70 mph collision.

Of note, when I bought my Grand Jeep Cherokee, the shocks and struts were shot. Even braking from highway speed was a scary thing, as it floated/bounced/pulled to the side. I feel that in a "moose avoidance test", it would have performed a barrel roll, lol! I promptly changed the struts and shocks and it was glued to the road ever since.

As to my CX-5, I did dodge a tree branch in the road yesterday morning that presented right after a turn. It performed competently. No aftermarket mods required.

That said, some soccer mom had happily carted her family around in my Jeep for 68,XXX miles before I bought it. All on the OEM tires, too, I might add, lol! What I am saying is, you bought a CX-5 because you are different, and a niche person. Most people don't even THINK about stuff like avoiding a head-on during test drives. Of the hundreds of test drives I took a customer on, not one of them did any driving that would clue them in to how a vehicle might handle such a situation, at any speed.

The CX-5 is unique, and does offer advantages, but they are lost on almost all CUV customers but a very few.

Also, yes, OP, great review, and it mirrors a lot of what I read about the Jeep Cherokee as well, in magazines. You could have copied and pasted it out of a magazine, for how closely it mirrored them. It sounds like you did a solid eval of the thing! Props.
 
It's when you compare other SUVs that you see how the CX-5 has an advantage in driving. Before switching to my second CX-5, I tried a few others and… well nitpicking aside on some features none really felt "right" to me. It may be due to being used to the CX-5, but the others did not "wow" me in any way really. Now, I only have two big dogs to carry around, no kids/wife yet, so some things may not be as important to me as others… and having no money for a sports car I'd happily settle for the most enjoyable of the bunch.

But, for most people, a bland Toyota will do. Even if Mazda sells pretty well in my area and in Canada in general AFAIK… but we're a much smaller country in population.
 
I will NEVER EVER get a or park a jeep in my driveway again. Had a grand Cherokee for 2 year and it spent more time at the dealer to repairs than we drove it. We had enough took it to the Honda dealership took a loss but my girl got a CRV instead.
 
It's when you compare other SUVs that you see how the CX-5 has an advantage in driving. Before switching to my second CX-5, I tried a few others and… well nitpicking aside on some features none really felt "right" to me. It may be due to being used to the CX-5, but the others did not "wow" me in any way really. Now, I only have two big dogs to carry around, no kids/wife yet, so some things may not be as important to me as others… and having no money for a sports car I'd happily settle for the most enjoyable of the bunch.

But, for most people, a bland Toyota will do. Even if Mazda sells pretty well in my area and in Canada in general AFAIK… but we're a much smaller country in population.

Mazda is much more popular in Canada and Australia than in the USA that's for sure.
 
I looked at a CRV and thought it seemed like the mom jeans and sensible shoes of cars.
 
You guys know something funny - this is what dealers told me. Many here know I did extensive research. So, the dealer was a bit more candid with me, since he knew I have already settled on CX5. He said, time and again, if a potential buyer come to them AFTER they have test driven the RAV4 or CRV, they tend to buy CX5, purely they get awed by the driving dynamics, even women. BUT, if they see CX5 first and then try the others, mostly they select the others, purely because they forget the dynamics and get awed by the super interior amenities instead. So, the sales guy encourages others to NOT test drive but rather come back and test drive. They ENCOURAGE potential buyers to go test the competitors 1st. and come back.
If you honestly ask me, the only things I miss after having bought the GT version is "reclinable" rear with rear seat warmers and some USB ports @ rear. 2nd.: the bloody switches could have been lighted in the door. But its a small price to pay for awesome handling.

I had a very similar experience, actually almost ended up with a Hyundai SF sport because of the nice looks/interior/space (buying an inherently boring CUV after all) but somehow I 'forgot' just how good the Mazda's steering and handling were until I came back- this time testing a GT- first drive was touring I believe and found the cloth seats uncomfortable (shoulders) and ride seemed notably worse and louder on the 17s- likely due to overinflated tires. So yes after ruling out RAV, CR-V (I was replacing 07 that was better IMO), X1 due to poor trade in offer, plus I still had a 128 at the time so it seemed a little redundant/snobby. GTs Leather seats were nice, mirror still shook but was later (mostly) fixed, ride/handling/steering felt just right (I was opposed to the 19s) and only driving the Hyundai and Mazda back to back truly revealed it. I was so lucky I didn't cave on the aggressive deal Hyundai made because the Mazda is sooo much better to drive and I've owned RWD sporty cars pretty much from 17 on. 83 Celica then Supra, 91 MR2 turbo (all manuals) were the cars of my youth. I had previously ruled out the 2013 CX-5 due to lack of power and even though the 2.5 still is no speed demon its a very good fit for the vehicle- good mileage, torquey down low and just enough punch to never make you say damn this thing is slooow.

So, even though this had nothing to do w/Jeep (which I wouldn't touch w/a pole), point of reference is critical in discovering just how poor (or surprisingly well) vehicles not only perform but how they feel while performing. For me the Mazda didn't really wow with features nor does it beg to be flogged like a sports car but it is a very well rounded, surprisingly fun to drive CUV that hasn't lost any luster w/time- good driving vehicles tend to have that benefit whereas creature/feature allure typically wears off.
 
Last edited:
I looked at a CRV and thought it seemed like the mom jeans and sensible shoes of cars.

happy-smileys-emoticons9.gif
 
Mazda is much more popular in Canada and Australia than in the USA that's for sure.

That's a very good point!

It's very short-sighted to think that driving dynamics simply don't matter to car sales and that the USA is the epicenter of all things automotive. Mazda is a global manufacturer and the CX-5 is their most profitable model worldwide. The CX-5 is the best selling SUV in Australia:

http://performancedrive.com.au/2015-mazda-cx-5-maxx-sport-2-5l-review-video-1021/

Without the CX-5's class topping driving dynamics it would just be another second rate, albeit reliable and efficient, SUV. People DO care about driving dynamics and bland American preferences are not what determines Mazda's global profits. Thank God that every offering out there is not a mushy, overburdened pig of a vehicle!
 
That's a very good point!

It's very short-sighted to think that driving dynamics simply don't matter to car sales and that the USA is the epicenter of all things automotive. Mazda is a global manufacturer and the CX-5 is their most profitable model worldwide. The CX-5 is the best selling SUV in Australia:

http://performancedrive.com.au/2015-mazda-cx-5-maxx-sport-2-5l-review-video-1021/

Without the CX-5's class topping driving dynamics it would just be another second rate, albeit reliable and efficient, SUV. People DO care about driving dynamics and bland American preferences are not what determines Mazda's global profits. Thank God that every offering out there is not a mushy, overburdened pig of a vehicle!

Canadian Car of the year in 2014 was the Mazda6.
 
That's a very good point!

It's very short-sighted to think that driving dynamics simply don't matter to car sales and that the USA is the epicenter of all things automotive. Mazda is a global manufacturer and the CX-5 is their most profitable model worldwide. The CX-5 is the best selling SUV in Australia:

http://performancedrive.com.au/2015-mazda-cx-5-maxx-sport-2-5l-review-video-1021/

Without the CX-5's class topping driving dynamics it would just be another second rate, albeit reliable and efficient, SUV. People DO care about driving dynamics and bland American preferences are not what determines Mazda's global profits. Thank God that every offering out there is not a mushy, overburdened pig of a vehicle!

Ignoring price-point, which CUV you'd say compares to CX-5 in driving dynamics?
 
That's a very good point!

It's very short-sighted to think that driving dynamics simply don't matter to car sales and that the USA is the epicenter of all things automotive. Mazda is a global manufacturer and the CX-5 is their most profitable model worldwide. The CX-5 is the best selling SUV in Australia:

http://performancedrive.com.au/2015-mazda-cx-5-maxx-sport-2-5l-review-video-1021/

Without the CX-5's class topping driving dynamics it would just be another second rate, albeit reliable and efficient, SUV. People DO care about driving dynamics and bland American preferences are not what determines Mazda's global profits. Thank God that every offering out there is not a mushy, overburdened pig of a vehicle!

Mazda is where GM was in the 90's. Great performance and a killer motor, "meh" interior, great value for the money.

Just my .02

They get that interior squared away, and the CX-5 would rocket in sales, (even though it already has).
 
Mazda is where GM was in the 90's. Great performance and a killer motor, "meh" interior, great value for the money.

Just my .02

They get that interior squared away, and the CX-5 would rocket in sales, (even though it already has).

I like the minimalist BMW circa early 2000's look but I get what you're getting at in terms of appeasing the masses.

Chrome trim, wood grain trim, colored leather seats and vinyl dashes/doors, floor well lighting, ect. can be had as needed.
 
Last edited:
I like the minimalist BMW circa early 2000's look but I get what you're getting at in terms of appeasing the masses.

Chrome trim, wood grain trim, colored leather seats and vinyl dashes/doors, floor well lighting, ect. can be had as needed.

A NAV and user interface upgrade is sorely needed, if my 2015 is any indication. It's about a decade behind. Functional, yes, but far from keeping pace. Subaru is the only company that seems to be competing for crappiest NAV/interface with Mazda, lol. Other than that...I am quite happy with the interior.
 
A NAV and user interface upgrade is sorely needed, if my 2015 is any indication. It's about a decade behind. Functional, yes, but far from keeping pace. Subaru is the only company that seems to be competing for crappiest NAV/interface with Mazda, lol. Other than that...I am quite happy with the interior.

16 and up use an entirely different system. One of the nicer ones I've used too.

If one was inclined, you might even be able to update the earlier years to it. Physically it should fit, not sure about harnesses and body control.
 
Last edited:
Back