The Future of the CX-5 - Strategic?

If the CX-5 was only available in AWD, would you have bought it? (New, not used please)

  • Yes

    Votes: 34 87.2%
  • No

    Votes: 5 12.8%

  • Total voters
    39

sm1ke

Work In Progress..
Moderator
Contributor
:
Canada
:
'18 CX-9 Signature
If I was going to stick with a Mazda product, lived in south & didn't need/want all-wheel drive and the Offroad capable, I would buy a Mazda6 fwd or a Miata rwd for less weight, more acceleration, etc.

if you want front wheel drive performance there are alot of better vehicles out there for performance, acceleration, etc. and alot of RWD vehicles as well.

Mazda probably drew the same conclusion, that those 5% of cx5 fwd owners who wanted low curb weight, more power and acceleration would trend to the mazda6 or Miata.

But neither of those cars has the cargo space that a CX-5 has. And a lot of people want to sit a little higher.
 
:
18 Mazda CX5 AW
But neither of those cars has the cargo space that a CX-5 has. And a lot of people want to sit a little higher.
Didn't think about the sitting height... thought there was internet compare that Mazda 6 had more cargo space with all seats down?
 

sm1ke

Work In Progress..
Moderator
Contributor
:
Canada
:
'18 CX-9 Signature
Didn't think about the sitting height... thought there was internet compare that Mazda 6 had more cargo space with all seats down?

Let's say that's true. The CX-5 has a cargo area that isn't hampered by the passthrough between the back seat and the trunk that the Mazda6 has. Same goes for the trunk opening. If you're loading a bunch of groceries, it might not matter whether you have the Mazda6 or the CX-5, but if you're loading larger items like an ottoman, dresser, large aquarium, BBQ grill, etc. the CX-5 can do it while the Mazda6 may not be able to. Additionally a compact SUV usually has a higher load floor, which many prefer as there is less strain to the back when loading cargo.

When we started car shopping, I wanted a sedan. My wife insisted on an SUV because she was worried about putting the kids in the car seats and the number it would have done to her lower back over time if we had gotten a sedan.

To veer back towards the topic, I think its a shame that they're ditching FWD. They will definitely lose some customers, but any price increases coupled with the number of people who buy AWD may be enough to make up those losses.
 
:
Pueblo county CO
:
CX-5 Sport 16.5 6M
Didn't think about the sitting height... thought there was internet compare that Mazda 6 had more cargo space with all seats down?
The Mazda 6 has a bit longer wheelbase so for the ping-pong ball test it might have more cubic inches. I need to carry items with larger dimensions.
 
:
2017 Mazda 6 Sport
The Mazda6 has an insane amount of cargo space. I fit a 65" TV in the trunk with the seats down. The only time the CX5 wins is if the cargo goes above the seat backs of the 2nd row
 
:
2018 AWD GT Premium Red/Black
The Mazda6 has an insane amount of cargo space. I fit a 65" TV in the trunk with the seats down. The only time the CX5 wins is if the cargo goes above the seat backs of the 2nd row
I carry an upright 32 garbage can with lid to and from collection point each week in my 2018 CX-5. Don't need to drop the rear seats.
 

bluegrass

Banned
:
SUV
Just wrong. All wheel drive is great for handling and traction in all conditions, including warm and dry. The all wheel drive CX-5 is a better vehicle in every way.
This is wrong.
There are objective, measured testing that shows the FWD version superior to the AWD version...
- Better acceleration
- Shorter braking distance
- Better fuel economy
- Lighter weight
- Lower upfront cost
- Lower complexity/maintenance/repair
 
:
18 Mazda CX5 AW
This is wrong.
There are objective, measured testing that shows the FWD version superior to the AWD version...
- Better acceleration
- Shorter braking distance
- Better fuel economy
- Lighter weight
- Lower upfront cost
- Lower complexity/maintenance/repair
This is describing a sports car.

Last time me looked cx5 is an SUV. People buy SUVs to have better traction in winter, possible offroad, higher stance/seating, etc.

It sounds like you want a Miata.
 

bluegrass

Banned
:
SUV
This is describing a sports car.
Last time me looked cx5 is an SUV. People buy SUVs to have better traction in winter, possible offroad, higher stance/seating, etc.
It sounds like you want a Miata.
What are you talking about?

I was responding to crayonbreak, who claimed...
"Just wrong. All wheel drive is great for handling and traction in all conditions, including warm and dry. The all wheel drive CX-5 is a better vehicle in every way."

I simply listed the areas in which the AWD CX-5 is NOT "a better vehicle in every way" compared to the FWD version.
 

sm1ke

Work In Progress..
Moderator
Contributor
:
Canada
:
'18 CX-9 Signature
Its probably more accurate to say that the AWD variant is more capable than the FWD variant. FWD is certainly better in some metrics, but all else equal, an AWD car will have better traction/handling in certain scenarios compared to a FWD car. If you live in or travel to areas where that better traction/handling can be utilized, then AWD is the better option for you.
 

bluegrass

Banned
:
SUV
Its probably more accurate to say that the AWD variant is more capable than the FWD variant...
in certain scenarios
Yes, it is certainly more accurate to say AWD is more capable in certain scenarios.
In the scenarios in which both versions were tested by C&D, the AWD version was NOT more capable.

And crayonbreak's assertion that "The all wheel drive CX-5 is a better vehicle in every way" is completely inaccurate.
 
:
18 Mazda CX5 AW
This is wrong.
There are objective, measured testing that shows the FWD version superior to the AWD version...
- Better acceleration
- Shorter braking distance
- Better fuel economy
- Lighter weight
- Lower upfront cost
- Lower complexity/maintenance/repair

This is wrong.
There are objective, measured testing that shows the FWD version superior to the AWD version...
- Better acceleration
Not true in all instances. Depends on the circumstance/conditions. Mazda AWD(rear biased) like RWD accelerate better and faster through turns and have more traction thru the turn and more fun to drive. Also better acceleration Offroad and in certain driving conditions.
- Shorter braking distance
Again not necessarily correct. Depends on conditions.
AWD better in snow/ice/rain...tires being equal and equipped with proper tires for the conditions.
- Better fuel economy
Yes, FWD better.
- Lighter weight
Yes, FWD better.
- Lower upfront cost
Yes, FWD lower.
- Lower complexity/maintenance/repair
Not true.
I had limited maintenance and no repair on differential or AWD drive systems on previous vehicle which owned for 16 years.
All $$ was same as any FWD vehicles... Battery, brakes, exhaust, engine oil/filter, alternator, sensors, and rusted frame repair. All the stuff that broke was the same stuff on FWD. And differential fluid doesn't need changed that often and is cheap...maybe changed it 3(three) times and spent under $100 lifetime(16 years)on differential. Maybe for the few AWD systems that break there is a added repair cost but that is probably very very few. For a majority of AWD drive owners there shouldn't be that much increased cost
 
Last edited:

bluegrass

Banned
:
SUV
Not true in all instances. Depends on the circumstance/conditions. Mazda AWD(rear biased) like RWD accelerate better and faster through turns and have more traction thru the turn and more fun to drive.
I'm talking about the repeatable, objective performance measurements that C&D uses for every vehicle they test. That is the only apples-to-apples comparison you will find, and it shows the FWD to be a better performer in those conditions.
And you are wrong, the CX-5 does NOT have a "rear biased" AWD system.

Again not necessarily correct. Depends on conditions.
AWD better in snow/ice/rain...tires being equal and equipped with proper tires for the conditions.
Yes, it is correct, according to C&D's testing.
You really think the AWD version has shorter braking distance than FWD in snow/ice/rain? How is that possible? AWD has nothing to do with stopping/braking. If anything, braking distances would be LONGER in such conditions, because it is heavier.

Not true.
I had limited maintenance
And differential fluid doesn't need changed that often and is cheap...
For a majority of AWD drive owners there shouldn't be that much increased cost
I stated there is lower complexity with FWD, which is indisputable, as the AWD system obviously adds components to the vehicle.
I also said FWD has lower maintenance, which you just confirmed, by saying you have had to change the differential fluid 3 times.
 
:
18 Mazda CX5 AW
I'm talking about the repeatable, objective performance measurements that C&D uses for every vehicle they test. That is the only apples-to-apples comparison you will find, and it shows the FWD to be a better performer in those conditions.

Just read the C& D report. Doesn't sound too objective when they are comparing the AWD with all-seasons versus a FWD with snow tires.

Also based on C&D report
"Just as it does in snow, an AWD system's ability to deliver torque four ways and feed it to four tires, rather than two, reduces any individual tire's tendency to spin when accelerating in a straight line or while powering through a corner. This means faster acceleration from rest with less burned rubber and, for expert drivers who push their cars hard, the confidence to hit the accelerator in a corner with less chance of slewing sideways or, worse, spinning out."

Do you really think you can accelerate out of mud or sand faster than an AWD ?

And you are wrong, the CX-5 does NOT have a "rear biased" AWD system.

Fair enough. There is conflicting information on websites and forums/posts concerning the AWD and whether its front or rear biased. Maybe I'm wrong. But need to know the answer. Stay tuned for response from Mazda corporate which will post here then we will all know for sure.

Yes, it is correct, according to C&D's testing.
You really think the AWD version has shorter braking distance than FWD in snow/ice/rain? How is that possible? AWD has nothing to do with stopping/braking. If anything, braking distances would be LONGER in such conditions, because it is heavier.

Again, just read the C& D report. Doesn't sound too objective when they are comparing the AWD with all-seasons versus a FWD with snow tires.

Per C&D "An AWD sedan on all-season tires has significantly less traction for turning or braking on snowy roads than a front- or rear-wheel-drive sedan does on a set of four winter (snow) tires. We proved as much in a Car and Driver winter-tire test that we conducted several years ago, "

Lets see apples to apples comparison of AWD versus FWD with the same tires for an objective report.

I stated there is lower complexity with FWD, which is indisputable, as the AWD system obviously adds components to the vehicle.
I also said FWD has lower maintenance, which you just confirmed, by saying you have had to change the differential fluid 3 times.

Ok , the AWD drive is more complex. you are correct.

But don't scare people away from an AWD vehicle by saying it is way more repairs and maintenance. To most, they envision hundreds & thousands of $$ in maintenance/repair when blanket phrase like that are made.

I just provided some real world figures... less than $ 100 over 16 years for differential oil. It was actually more like $80 total which would break down to $5 per year( less than a Starbucks)...
Even if you paid a mechanic to do it, it might add $30-50 labor per oil change...so maybe $8-10 per year.

And that was 85 % highway use with light to moderate off-roading (15%). Now of course any severe off-roader might be breaking suspensions, etc. but that's why you buy a Jeep. Or unless of course you are one of the few unlucky ones and have to repair an AWD system. Again the percentage is probably the same as those with AWD or FWD that have engine failure or powertrain/drivetrain failure, etc.

and its all covered under your warranty period (5 yr/60k new) or (7 yr/84 k CPO - preowned)
*for those who are unfamiliar with the terms, the Final drive housing is your differential.

Front/Rear drive system

  • Final Drive Housing and all internally lubricated parts
  • Manual and automatic hub (4×4)
  • Front wheel hubs and bearings (FWD Transaxles)
  • Rear axle housing and all internally lubricated parts
  • Axle/drive shafts
  • Propeller shaft (RWD and AWD only)
  • Universal joints
  • Constant velocity joints
  • Rear axle/hub bearings (RWD and AWD only)
  • Seals and gaskets
 
Last edited:

Bird-Dog

2017 CX-5 Touring 2020 CX-5 GTR
I've had both, actually still have both... a 2017 FWD and 2020 AWD. There's really little reason to prefer the FWD. Mazda will be fine going all AWD on the CX-5 and filtering customers wishing to spend less or who worry over a couple of mpgs over to the CX-30.
 

bluegrass

Banned
:
SUV
Just read the C& D report. Doesn't sound too objective when they are comparing the AWD with all-seasons versus a FWD with snow tires
Do you really think you can accelerate out of mud or sand faster than an AWD ?
You seem to be confusing yourself.
The comparison being made here is the C&D objective test results between a stock CX-5 AWD vs. FWD. I've posted the exact numbers before from their data test sheets.
Your discussion about snow tires vs. all-seasons is irrelevant.

And yes, I'm sure an AWD model can accelerate faster in mud/sand.
But again, that is completely irrelevant for 99.999% of all CX-5 use cases.

Again, just read the C& D report. Doesn't sound too objective when they are comparing the AWD with all-seasons versus a FWD with snow tires.
Lets see apples to apples comparison of AWD versus FWD with the same tires for an objective report.
Again, you are confusing yourself.
You claimed a stock CX-5 with AWD has shorter stopping distances in "snow/ice/rain" than the FWD version. This is unequivocally wrong. AWD has nothing to do with braking.
And C&D did an apples-to-apples braking distance comparison of AWD vs. FWD. The FWD stopped shorter.

Ok , the AWD drive is more complex. you are correct.
But don't scare people away from an AWD vehicle by saying it is way more repairs and maintenance.
I never once said it was "way more" in repairs/maintenance.
Go back and look at what I actually said. It was 100% accurate.
 
:
2019 CX-5 Signature
...
Fair enough. There is conflicting information on websites and forums/posts concerning the AWD and whether its front or rear biased. Maybe I'm wrong. But need to know the answer. Stay tuned for response from Mazda corporate which will post here then we will all know for sure.
...
FYI - Mazda corporate will not be here to respond. :)

Also, I have an AWD and can attest to it being FWD biased. It's quite obvious in the snow.
 
:
18 Mazda CX5 AW
FYI - Mazda corporate will not be here to respond. :)

Also, I have an AWD and can attest to it being FWD biased. It's quite obvious in the snow.
Lol. Are you Mazda corporate?

Just got it summer so haven't driven in snow yet.

Thanks for response. If that's true, I stand corrected.
 
:
18 Mazda CX5 AW
You seem to be confusing yourself.
The comparison being made here is the C&D objective test results between a stock CX-5 AWD vs. FWD. I've posted the exact numbers before from their data test sheets.
Your discussion about snow tires vs. all-seasons is irrelevant.

And yes, I'm sure an AWD model can accelerate faster in mud/sand.
But again, that is completely irrelevant for 99.999% of all CX-5 use cases.


Again, you are confusing yourself.
You claimed a stock CX-5 with AWD has shorter stopping distances in "snow/ice/rain" than the FWD version. This is unequivocally wrong. AWD has nothing to do with braking.
And C&D did an apples-to-apples braking distance comparison of AWD vs. FWD. The FWD stopped shorter.


I never once said it was "way more" in repairs/maintenance.
Go back and look at what I actually said. It was 100% accurate.
This AWD vs fwd apples to apples test you speak of is not showing up in my search engines. Can you please post link for us to see/review?
 

bluegrass

Banned
:
SUV
This AWD vs fwd apples to apples test you speak of is not showing up in my search engines. Can you please post link for us to see/review?
Search my post history and you should find them.

Here are some quotes I previously pulled from the articles...
- Our all-wheel-drive CX-5 Grand Touring test car carried an extra 141 pounds of mass compared with the front-wheel-drive CX-5 Grand Touring we recently tested.
- Despite increased launch traction, the heftier AWD model’s straight-line performance fell behind its lighter FWD kin.
- This CX-5 taking 8.1 seconds to go from zero to 60 mph, 0.3 second longer than the front-drive model.
- A bigger disappointment was the all-wheel-drive CX-5’s 70-mph-to-zero stopping distance of 182 feet—five feet longer than its front-wheel-drive counterpart.


Their instrumented testing showed the FWD version was...
- Faster in a straight line (0-60, 0-100, 5-60, 30-50, 50-70, 1/4 mile)
- Shorter braking distances (70-0 MPH)
- Identical roadholding (skidpad)
- Better gas mileage
- Lighter