Super dissatisfied with the CX-5 2.5 Turbo Part 2

[Unobtanium]

Meh...why is anyone so concerned about resale and buying a new car in a few years even buying in the first place?

Well, you're out looking at new CX5's, and have a 4 year old model, yeah? Would you like the dealer to write you a check for $3500 when you trade, or no? because that's kindof the equivalent of the issue I'm discussing.

See, I'd like to trade out of a vehicle every 5 years or so when I have around 200K miles on it. That keeps me in a reliable ride. Over 20 years, that adds up to about $10-15K. Kinda meaningful. Since these are just appliances to me (really, it's not a fun vehicle, I'm sorry. It's fun...for what it is. But stand-alone? No way.), and I'd like t o spend as little as possible and still have a reliable way to get to work. That's what makes the new RAV4 still super appealing to me, regardless of the acceleration and handling (although I am a bit let down, I won't lie).

 

[ColoradoDriver]

Not really. It lost ground clearance. Lost acceleration. But it sure is quiet and rides softer...

Yep. It may be more upscale than the standard appliance, but gen 2 definitely moves the CX-5 to being more appliance like than Gen 1.

IMO.

 

[STE92VE]

I own my mazdas because to me

1) looks sexy
2) handles very well
3) pricing is very reasonable

I agree with all that was said but what is most important in this statement is "because to me"

 

[ColoradoDriver]

Well, you're out looking at new CX5's, and have a 4 year old model, yeah? Would you like the dealer to write you a check for $3500 when you trade, or no? because that's kindof the equivalent of the issue I'm discussing.

I'm not looking. I was just curious to try the turbo.

But I'm not buying anything for a very long time. If I do it will be as a second car, not a replacement. But that car would likely be a used beater

EDIT: And technically my CX-5 turns 6 next month. Gen 1 had screwed up model years relative to the actual year until the Gen 2 2017 came out.

But still...its only got 76k on it. I'm not looking to replace.

 

[jthj]

Yep. It may be more upscale than the standard appliance, but gen 2 definitely moves the CX-5 to being more appliance like than Gen 1.

IMO.

I find it to be opposite and the gen 2 is looking to have stronger resale.

If you cant get more than 3500 out of a 4 year old CX-5 you suck at negotiating or something is wrong with it. I got more than that for a 7 year old Ford Fiesta!

 

[ColoradoDriver]

I find it to be opposite and the gen 2 is looking to have stronger resale.

If you cant get more than 3500 out of a 4 year old CX-5 you suck at negotiating or something is wrong with it. I got more than that for a 7 year old Ford Fiesta!

I agree. I don't know where Uno is getting this 3500 number from. Could be his mileage. Don't you have like 120k Uno?

That said, I agree Gen 2 is more upscale, but that wasn't my point. It is totally more of an appliance than gen 1. Uno is right. Less ground clearance, less performance (2.5L), etc.

 

[dougal]

I agree. I don't know where Uno is getting this 3500 number from. Could be his mileage. Don't you have like 120k Uno?

That said, I agree Gen 2 is more upscale, but that wasn't my point. It is totally more of an appliance than gen 1. Uno is right. Less ground clearance, less performance (2.5L), etc.

I have a 2014 GT and close to 120K miles. I was offered $9000 in trade for a CX-5 Signature (at 36.5K with appearance package, hitch).

CD, have you had a chance to test drive the CX-5 2.5T?

 

[FRED48]

I have a 2014 GT and close to 120K miles. I was offered $9000 in trade for a CX-5 Signature (at 36.5K with appearance package, hitch).

CD, have you had a chance to test drive the CX-5 2.5T?

or even the gen 2 NA?

 

[Sideswipe]

Yep. It may be more upscale than the standard appliance, but gen 2 definitely moves the CX-5 to being more appliance like than Gen 1.

IMO.

Appliance is in the eye of the beholder.

The gen1 was noisier/buzzier with cheaper feeling interior and a less sophisticated design.
I liked the vehicle for sure and would likely have bought one if gen2 wasn't right around the corner when I was buying.

But for me an "appliance" vehicle is one that I care little about and don't particularly enjoying driving and owning. IMO the changes and upgrades gen2 got move it farther away from being considered an appliance vs gen1.

 

[boandlkramer]

Not really. It lost ground clearance. Lost acceleration. But it sure is quiet and rides softer...

Ive had a 14, 16.5, and still have a 17. Its clearly different, and more to my liking.

 

[boandlkramer]

Meh...why is anyone so concerned about resale and buying a new car in a few years even buying in the first place?

100%

Who buys a new car with sloppy seconds in mind?

 

[sm1ke]

And yet another thread that has devolved into 1G vs. 2G CX-5.

People have differing opinions about what the term "appliance-like" means and what they value in a car. What one person likes may not be what others like, and that's ok. The sooner we realize that, the sooner we'll stop going in circles. It's not up to anyone to change someone else's mind. Live and let live, and all that.

I'm trying to turn over a new leaf and stepping away from trying to change other's minds on things that don't really matter (in the grand scheme of things). I fully admit that I've been guilty of trying to convince others that my car is the best option in the segment, but why? All that matters is that it's the best for me.

 

[sm1ke]

100%

Who buys a new car with sloppy seconds in mind?

I was going to ask why Unob doesn't just lease, but it makes sense to buy and sell if you're putting that many miles on the vehicle in that span of time (200k in 5 years).

Unob, might be worth driving the Mazda into the ground at this point. You may be able to squeeze more out of this car paying for whatever repairs may come vs. taking the hit on the trade-in/sale and buying new again. The Skyactiv-G motor seems to be pretty reliable.

 

[jthj]

And if youre just trying to avoid depreciation loss you should never buy a car new regardless of brand. Just stick to the 3 year old lease returns.

 

[Young-nyc]

Agree in all aspects...
You can't change someone's mind or perspective but hopefully they are intelligent enough to compare and contrast.

And yet another thread that has devolved into 1G vs. 2G CX-5.

People have differing opinions about what the term "appliance-like" means and what they value in a car. What one person likes may not be what others like, and that's ok. The sooner we realize that, the sooner we'll stop going in circles. It's not up to anyone to change someone else's mind. Live and let live, and all that.

I'm trying to turn over a new leaf and stepping away from trying to change other's minds on things that don't really matter (in the grand scheme of things). I fully admit that I've been guilty of trying to convince others that my car is the best option in the segment, but why? All that matters is that it's the best for me.

 

[Sideswipe]

People can sometimes feel the need to defend their current "thing", whatever that might be, when a newer version of that thing is available and people are enjoying it. I think that's in our nature. Some take it too far by tearing down the new thing, and those people can be tough to ignore.

I am more than a little jealous of those folks getting the new turbo model... One thing I really want out of my cx-5 is more power. If I wanted to be a dick about it I could say "enjoy the mildly worse fuel economy bwahaha!"... But secretly would take it for the extra power

 

[7eregrine]

I don*t think the new RAV 4 is all that like so many here.

Meh...why is anyone so concerned about resale and buying a new car in a few years even buying in the first place?

A) When did Unobtanium become "everyone". He is LITERALLY the only one here that ever brings up or complains about resale. He's also the only one that LOVES the RAV4, I think Ywrei likes it a little too.

Well, you're out looking at new CX5's, and have a 4 year old model, yeah? Would you like the dealer to write you a check for $3500 when you trade, or no? because that's kind of the equivalent of the issue I'm discussing.

B) CX5 resale isn't the s*** show you say it is.
C) It's only getting better.
D) Yes, it is worse, but we're not talking 50% worse. So you only get $3,500 for your CX5. The guy with a similar CRV gets $4,275. Worth $750 to drive that? No.
Now if you were trading in a low mileage 3 year old car every year, I might agree with you (I still wouldn't).
E) I've posted this once before because you being this up like every 3 months. https://www.nydailynews.com/autos/b...ns-people-buy-specific-cars-article-1.2552707 Yes, it's almost 3 years old now but I doubt much has changed.
I'll save ya' a click: Top 10 Reasons people buy specific cars
10.) 4WD/AWD
9.) Quality of Workmanship
8a.) Fuel Economy (in a tie with Safety)
8b.) Safety (in a tie with Fuel Economy)
6.) Price/Payment
5.) Ride and Handling
4.) Reputation/Reviews
3.) Previous Experience with Brand/Model
2.) Exterior Styling
1.) Expected Reliability

Resale...didn't even make the list. So not only is Unob 5% of Mazda buyers, he's also a small tiny percentage of normal car buyers.

Appliance is in the eye of the beholder.
But for me an "appliance" vehicle is one that I care little about and don't particularly enjoying driving and owning. IMO the changes and upgrades gen2 got move it farther away from being considered an appliance vs gen1.

Totally agree with this. The first time he called it an appliance I didn't even understand what he meant. I actually Googled it.
Honestly, I'm still not 100% sure. I really wouldn't call any car an appliance. And IMO it's kind of rude to do so.
My niece loves her POS 2004 Honda Civic because it runs well and gets her from A to B. She LOVES that thing. Like, as much as I loved my first Saab. I would never insult her by saying "nice appliance".
If MPG is your #1 thing and you buy a Prius because of that, is that an appliance?
If you buy the cheapest car on the lot because you don't like to spend money on cars, or you're broke... is that an appliance?
Do you buy a Crosstrek because you don't care about fun to drive, you just want to have a car you can put your dog in and go down to the national forest: is that an appliance?
I buy a smoking fast Mustang that does 0-60 in 2 seconds... that's NOT an appliance... because it's fast?
What's the appliance criteria here?

100%
Who buys a new car with sloppy seconds in mind?

Hardly anyone: see above.

 

[jthj]

I am more than a little jealous of those folks getting the new turbo model... One thing I really want out of my cx-5 is more power. If I wanted to be a dick about it I could say "enjoy the mildly worse fuel economy bwahaha!"... But secretly would take it for the extra power

Im in the same boat. They addressed my two biggest complaints with the car which are lack of CarPlay and lack of power. Ive addressed the former already but Im not sure the latter is worth what that would cost. Wife is perfectly happy with the power and shes the one who daily drives it anyway.

 

[jthj]

I thinks Unob is the definition of over simplification which extends to thinking others feel the way he does.

 

[ColoradoDriver]

I have a 2014 GT and close to 120K miles. I was offered $9000 in trade for a CX-5 Signature (at 36.5K with appearance package, hitch).

CD, have you had a chance to test drive the CX-5 2.5T?

Not yet. I stopped by the dealer Friday and they told me to come back around Jan/Feb to test drive a turbo.

They had a couple Signatures still in plastic and my guess already sold, hence no test drive available. No GT-Rs yet.