Pros and cons of the CX-5

M

MRM

New member here. Will be in the market for another vehicle soon. Really leaning toward getting a SUV/CUV, probably not one of the large ones.

I really like the look of the CX-5. We had a new auto show in town a few months ago and was impressed with how it seated, visibility, layout of the dash, etc. In researching it, I found it only comes in a 4-cylinder. But since, I have read the 2.5L is almost as quick, or quicker, than the Hyundai Santa Fes with the 2.0 turbo or the V-6. Are these that quick?

Aside from the first question, what are some pros and cons of it? I'm mainly wondering about some common issues. Nissan has some issues with their transmissions in the Pathfinder and Kias have cheap plastic interiors, things like that. Any feedback is appreciated.
 
Most vehicles I have had, I can replicate magazine acceleration times by just flooring them. Not so, with the CX-5. Yes, it is plenty fast for daily use, but the magazines are very deceptive. Here is a REAL WORLD 0-80 without any torque braking or neutral drop or other absurdities in a 2.5L AWD CX-5. Will this meet your needs, or not? The magazines say I should get a 0-60 of 7.8 seconds. Well, not quite.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=outSnH3bYaM

Also, I have looked into the CX-5's durability, and it APPEARS to have no known issues. The transmissions did have a few bad solenoids, but it was a flaw in the supply, not design. Easily remedied under warranty, and should not re-occur, as it's not a design flaw. Other than that, and a few torque converter recalls on the '15's, as I understand, I literally cannot FIND anything that breaks on these. Not even on the internet.
 
Honestly, the only cons with my '15 CX-5 are: minor transmission issue (I dislike how it vibrates and revs down so sharply when getting off the highway), only one light in the cargo area, unusually thin windshield, and the infotainment.

Other than that, I love how it looks, drives, and feels.
 
The 0-60 of 7.8 seconds number is for CX-5 2.5L with FWD.
Adding AWD adds weight and more importantly more centrifugal weight in the drivetrain.
Also if you have the bigger rim size, this adds even more centrifugal weight.
 
I own both a 2015.5 CX5 and a 2014 Hyundai Santa Fe Sport.

Wife drives the Santa Fe and I drive the CX5.

I have to say the Santa Fe has a more lively engine, faster than my 2.0 CX5.
The Santa Fe is bigger too and all in all a very nice car for the money. ZERO issues with it so far.
It's the standard 4 banger too, no turbos for me! Had an Audi with issues and the Kia's have turbo issues. NOT WORTH IT.

My CX is 2 month old and it does all that I need it to do. I had a 2011 Kia Sportage before and I can't say I miss it at all. I didn't want a big SUV. I wanted a great handling, good MPG, good looking CUV. The CX reminds me of a Porsche Cayanne. I got mine in the Soul Red, tinted the front windows and love it. Only thing I would have done different is get the bigger engine, the 2.0 can be a dog a times....but I am getting about 29mpg from her, so I can't complain. test drive both and decide for yourself.
 
Wife and I have a '14 GT w/tech

We love driving the car. It's a blast. If you can swing it, I recommend the tech package with the xenon headlights and auto-dimming rearview mirror. Very few cars in this class offer those features, and none for this low of a price.

Only issue so far has been a faulty Bluetooth unit, which was replaced under warranty.

Items to nitpick:

-no memory seats
-no power passenger seat
-only one weak light in the cargo area
-navigation system is slow and the voice-command is worthless
 
phabsch said:
I noticed that the dash indicates that you are not in 'sport' mode. Would this have changed anything?
Click to expand...

Sport mode not available pre '16. Until I see different numbers I am of the opinion that full pedal to the floor acceleration is not going to be much different between years of the 2.5L. Perhaps the added weight of the '16 might even throw it off a tenth. Just personal conjecture though..
 
Last edited:
socalcx-5 said:
Wife and I have a '14 GT w/tech

We love driving the car. It's a blast. If you can swing it, I recommend the tech package with the xenon headlights and auto-dimming rearview mirror. Very few cars in this class offer those features, and none for this low of a price.

Only issue so far has been a faulty Bluetooth unit, which was replaced under warranty.

Items to nitpick:

-no memory seats
-no power passenger seat
-only one weak light in the cargo area
-navigation system is slow and the voice-command is worthless
Click to expand...

I agree with most of your points, but have found the voice command on the nav system quite useful once you understand its dumb rules. Had to laugh after a week of frustration that using the abbreviation "BC" for British Columbia (common usage in Canada) found addresses in Quebec, a French language province 2500 miles East of BC. Once I started using "British Columbia" instead of "BC", voice nav has worked fine 90% of the time.
 
Kedis82ZE8 said:
Sport mode not available pre '16. Until I see a different numbers I am of the opinion that full pedal to the floor acceleration is not going to be much different between years of the 2.5L. Perhaps the added weight of the '16 might even throw it off a tenth. Just personal conjecture though..
Click to expand...

All tests I have seen by the magazines range from 7.6 to 7.8 seconds 0-60 for 2014, 2015 and 2016. There is zero difference. My personal experience is a 0-60 of around 9-ish seconds. This is a MASSIVE gap between expectation and reality. I am disappointed from a "numbers" standpoint, but in actual use, the vehicle is sufficient.
 
acceleration is fine for me. i really like my CX-5 GT AWD with Tech. some minor things: 1) still a bit of wind noise especially on highway driving (but if you have music/podcast on, you won't notice), 2) you may notice the reflection of the chrome lining of vents in your sideview mirrors (i have black interior so that may make a difference), 3) no power liftgate (but u know that before u buy it), 4) backseats don't recline at all , and 5) no rearseat vents. obviously the last two don't bother the driver, but i do have kids so i have to think about stuff like that. but otherwise, the new interior, Nav/infotainment, sporty handling, LED package, and fuel efficiency make me a satisfied customer.
 
Not really any "Cons" that I can think of. I'm missing having a temp gauge, I like to see the engine warm up in the winter. I required a cargo cover with my purchase, so passer bys can't see in the back. Other than those could minor things, can't think of anything else bad.

Also, I guess, a negative is they can't get the text/email to speech feature of the infotainment to keep working. But, I didn't buy it for that, so, it's not a biggy, still, it'd be nice if everything would work as advertised.
 
Last edited:
cybercruiser said:
Not really any "Cons" that I can think of. I'm missing having a temp gauge, I like to see the engine warm up in the winter. I required a cargo cover with my purchase, so passer bys can't see in the back. Other than those could minor things, can't think of anything else bad.

Also, I guess, a negative is they can't get the text/email to speech feature of the infotainment to keep working. But, I didn't buy it for that, so, it's not a biggy, still, it'd be nice if everything would work as advertised.
Click to expand...

I have a blue...thingy...that lights up...I assume that this is equivalent? Most temp and oil pressure gauges in most vehicles are just idiot lights, anyways.
 
You could always utilize an OBD app on your phone to get temp stats. Not sure on oil pressure... I haven't connected my OBD readers to the CX. I was going to see what data I can pull in the next few days. Many apps let you create your own gauge sets.
 
Kedis82ZE8 said:
What elevation did you test at? I've never tested with a gauge but seat of the pants makes me think around 8 in mine. A little slower than my old ~6.8 second '02 Maxima. Obviously a lot slower than my ~5.7 second G35X.

My normal operational levels are from sea level to 5K feet.
Click to expand...

Around 1200ft
 
MRM said:
New member here. Will be in the market for another vehicle soon. Really leaning toward getting a SUV/CUV, probably not one of the large ones.
I really like the look of the CX-5. We had a new auto show in town a few months ago and was impressed with how it seated, visibility, layout of the dash, etc. In researching it, I found it only comes in a 4-cylinder. But since, I have read the 2.5L is almost as quick, or quicker, than the Hyundai Santa Fes with the 2.0 turbo or the V-6. Are these that quick?
Aside from the first question, what are some pros and cons of it? I'm mainly wondering about some common issues. Nissan has some issues with their transmissions in the Pathfinder and Kias have cheap plastic interiors, things like that. Any feedback is appreciated.
Click to expand...
Mazda CX-5

Pros:
1. No CVT
2. No turbo
3. SkyActiv Technology with 13:1 high compression engine and excellent fuel economy
4. Automatic Transmission uses torque converter only at speed under 5 mph
5. Best handling CUV
6. Electric parking brake
7. Available LED Lighting with AFS - LED almost everything

Cons:
1. No memory seat
2. Color selection and coordination are poor, especially interior
3. No remote liftgate release on key fob and inside of cabin near driver seat
4. No rear AC vents

If I were you, I'll consider a 2016 CX-5 GT AWD/FWD with Tech Package. i-ActivSense Package is your choice to have. I'd avoid CUV's with timing belt (Honda Pilot, Acura RDX/MDX), turbo (BMW X Series, VW Tiguan, Audi Q3/Q5, Volvo XC60/XC70/XC90, Lexus NX 200t), CVT (Honda CR-V, Nissan Rogue, Subaru Forester/Outback) if possible if you care more on long-term reliability!
 
yrwei52 said:
Mazda CX-5

Pros:
1. No CVT
2. No turbo
3. SkyActiv Technology with 13:1 high compression engine and excellent fuel economy
4. Automatic Transmission uses torque converter only at speed under 5 mph
5. Best handling CUV
6. Electric parking brake I hope mine isn't. The 2015's aren't, right?
7. Available LED Lighting with AFS - LED almost everything

Cons:
1. No memory seat
2. Color selection and coordination are poor, especially interior I'm a fan of black. If you're not...ouch.
3. No remote liftgate release on key fob and inside of cabin near driver seat
4. No rear AC vents

If I were you, I'll consider a 2016 CX-5 GT AWD/FWD with Tech Package. i-ActivSense Package is your choice to have. I'd avoid CUV's with timing belt (Honda Pilot, Acura RDX/MDX), turbo (BMW X Series, VW Tiguan, Audi Q3/Q5, Volvo XC60/XC70/XC90, Lexus NX 200t), CVT (Honda CR-V, Nissan Rogue, Subaru Forester/Outback) if possible if you care more on long-term reliability!
Click to expand...

Timing belts are bad, mkay! 110% agreement!!!!

I remember going back into a MOPAR garage and seeing tons of mangled heads/valves from PT Cruisers because people ignored the timing belt service interval due to the cost/convenience of it. Ouch. I'm not sure which motors you listed are/are not interference motors, though.

A timing belt is literally a deal-breaker for me. I have never, and will never knowingly own a vehicle with one.
 
Please log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
New Member here, about to purchase a CX-5
Replies
16
Views
1K
7eregrine
7eregrine
C
    • Like
    • Wow
Choices and thoughts on a 2024 CX-5 purchase
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
Antoine
Antoine
S
    • Like
Sales of CX-5 vs CX-50 in US
2
Replies
27
Views
5K
chickdr
C

Latest posts

Back