Mazda 5 size

cburrell

Member
:
2013 CX-5 Touring, 2016 Mazda 6 Sport
I recently parked next to a 1998 Honda Odyssey and was surprised at the size of it. I know that it is 14 years old, but it was almost the size of the 5. It was about 3 inches longer than the 5, and had about the same trunk space as the 5. It was maybe 2 inches wider than the 5. Really the only difference between the 5 and the Odyssey was that there was a little more legroom in between the 2nd and 3rd row, and it was a couple of inches wider. Most people just don't realize how big mini-vans and SUV's have gotten in the last decade, until you are looking at an much older model of the same vehicle. What's funny is that back in 98, people thought that the size of the Odyssey, Previa, and MPV where acceptable sizes for mini-vans, and know most mini-van owners would scoff at the size of those vans now because they scoff at the size of the 5. It is just crazy how big vehicles have become in the last decade, and we wonder why fuel economy is no better than it was a decade ago even though car technology has vastly improved.
 
It is important to note, though, that the 1st gen Odyssey was derided for being too small. It was based on the Accord the way the original Chrysler minivans were based on the K-car. By this time though, the Caravan/Voyager/T&C had already reached their living-room proportions, and the competition was learning that Chrysler nailed it with American tastes.

I parked next to a mid-70s orange microbus, and its x,y dimensions were nearly identical to the Mx5, although it was well over a foot taller.
 
Agreed, but my sister has a 2003 Sienna and yes it is a tad bit bigger than the 5, but a lot smaller than the current sienna. Actually the 04 Sienna is 40% bigger than the 03, I had a Toyota salesman tell me that, and the current Sienna is even bigger than that . So, yes maybe the odyssey was on the smaller size in 98, but there is no denying that mini-vans have gotten a lot bigger in the last decade. Just look at the MPV which is a tad bit bigger than the 5, it was pretty close to the size of toyota and honda, up until 2003, then toyota and honda came out with their next generations which were bigger, and then the MPV was consider small for it's size. Mini-vans have become very bloated as of late.
 
I much prefer the size of the Premacy to the newer crop of vans. If I could have found a first gen Odyssey that was clean, I would have bought one. The current gen Odyssey in Japan is still close in dimensions to the original too.
 
yes they are absurdly big, How big of a vehicle do we need in this country? Americans are just lucky they have wide roads, because most of the vehicles sold in the U.S. wouldn't fly on most roads in most other countries. That is why most american's could care less about driving dynamics, they have huge straight roads to drive on.
 
It is important to note, though, that the 1st gen Odyssey was derided for being too small. It was based on the Accord the way the original Chrysler minivans were based on the K-car. By this time though, the Caravan/Voyager/T&C had already reached their living-room proportions, and the competition was learning that Chrysler nailed it with American tastes.

I parked next to a mid-70s orange microbus, and its x,y dimensions were nearly identical to the Mx5, although it was well over a foot taller.
If the Mz5 has the same dimensions as the older Oddy and Caravan, why isn't it recognized as a minivan? Just bc today's standards for a minivan is bigger, doesn't take away from the fact that older Oddy and Caravan are minivans (Devil's advocate).
 
If the Mz5 has the same dimensions as the older Oddy and Caravan, why isn't it recognized as a minivan? Just bc today's standards for a minivan is bigger, doesn't take away from the fact that older Oddy and Caravan are minivans (Devil's advocate).

It's not a minivan?! I'm taking this thing back! ;)

It's funny the salesman kept correctng me calling it a crossover wagon every time I called it a van. I said, "it's got to be a van, it's got sliding doors!"
 
It's not a minivan?! I'm taking this thing back! ;)

It's funny the salesman kept correctng me calling it a crossover wagon every time I called it a van. I said, "it's got to be a van, it's got sliding doors!"
You should mod the rear sliders to lambo doors. Automatic upgrade to sports car, err, sports van? :D


Back to topic, I do like the overall interior and exterior dimension of this car. The greatest attribute is its tight turn radius. However, I find there is NOT enough trunk space if three rows are used. I think Mazda could have lowered the floor panel a bit to increase interior space and allow the 3rd row to slide/tilt (even a little) to free up more trunk space. You got kids, you’re lugging junk in your trunk. Sure some passengers will be uncomfortable but if you are after comfort or long trips with a full load, this is not the right car for you. The rear section was designed with ‘stadium’ seating in mind but really this just takes away precious interior volume. Also I much prefer the shorter JDM rear bumper –parallel parking win!
 
It actually has to be classified as a minivan in the U.S. because of the sliding doors, regardless of other people try to classify it as.
 
Im pretty sure it is classified as a wagon, and not a van.

Minivans can have rear tint from the factory, but the 5 does not since it is a wagon.
 
Every car site from Edmunds to Car and Driver, even Kelley Blue Book all classify the 5 as a mini-van, I can't find a car related site that refers to the 5 as a wagon. Even on Mazda's U.S.A. site they have a quote from Edmunds where they are calling it a van. Mazda doesn't come right out and say it is a van directly, but neither do they correct the quotes on their own website that call it a van. It is a mini-mini-van. It has sliding doors that requires it to be classified as a van. Even my local Mazda's dealership spec sheet on the new 5's windows classifies it as a van.
 
the epa calls it a minivan...

but im not sure why it doesnt come with tint on the rear windows like suvs and other minivans.

i do agree though, sliding doors make it a van.
 
Mazda's never called it a "mini-van"... they call it a wagon (but no one else does). Some call it a "sports activity vehicle". In Europe they're known as "people haulers" for the extra seating. Here in the US, however, everyone calls it a mini-van (or the mini mini-van).... mostly because of the sliding doors. It's been a long running debate (even on this forum). I think of it as the mini-van for those who don't like mini-vans. And lets face it... what the others sell as "mini" vans are by my calculations, have evolved into regular size vans (and are way bigger than anything I need).

As far as the window tint thing... I'm pretty sure it's a cost thing for Mazda and nothing else. Mazda want's to keep it at a certain price point, and tinted windows cost extra. On mine the dealer had already tinted the windows before we bought it.
 
Last edited:
Back