mmcartalk
Expert
- Messages
- 4,158
- Reactions
- 2,675
MM Condensed-Review: 2016 Mazda CX-5
A Condensed-Review of the 2016 Mazda CX-5
http://www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/disp...ehicleCode=CX5
IN A NUTSHELL: Competent and athletic by compact SUV standards, but not as athletic as a Mazda sedan.
CLOSEST AMERICAN-MARKET COMPETITORS: Toyota RAV-4, Honda CR-V, Nissan Rogue, Kia Sportage, Hyundai Tuscon, Ford Escape, Dodge Journey (the Journey is comparably-priced but slightly larger), Chevrolet Equinox, GMC Terrrain, VW Tiguan, Subaru Forester. Mitsubishi Outlander.
;
;
;
;
;
;
OVERVIEW:
Lately I've seen a lot of interest, both on and off auto forums, in the compact Mazda CX-5 SUV/CUV (a newer, smaller, subcompact CX-3 CUV is also now available). So, even though I did not receive a specific request for an MM Review, I was out shopping today at J.C. Penney's (long one of my long-favorite stores for Men's Big and Tall clothing), and there were a couple of Mazda shops nearby (one of them huge and almost brand-new). So, after finding exactly the long pants and pocketed knit-shirt I was looking for (at a half-sale price and additional coupon-discount), I headed on over to the big Mazda shop to check out the CX-5. While I had no reason to do a long, detailed Full-Review, I figured I'd at least familiarize myself with it and do a shortened, Condensed-Review. I had, of course, seen it at the January D.C. Auto Show, but didn't spend much time looking at it, since I had other priorities then.
Until Ford sold off the company, Mazda, long known as the "Poor Man's BMW" and for offering driver-centered vehicles with a well-engineered chassis, was pretty much hamstrung by its Ford ownership as to what kind of vehicles they could offer, and what source/platforms those vehicles came from. This, of course, limited the first Mazda SUV, the Navajo, to being a cookie-cutter rebadged 2-door Ford Explorer Sport, the square-box Mazda Tribute SUV to being an (almost) cookie-cutter rebadge of the Ford Escape, and the Mazda CX-9 and CX-7, while not rebadges per se, to being sourced from Ford platforms. The Navajo and Tribute, of course, are long gone, the CX-7 was discontinued to make room for the newer CX-5, and and the latest version of the CX-9 is now, for 2016, an all-Mazda platform/design. With the newer designs, free from Ford influence, come more traditional Mazda driving characteristics.
Which, of course, includes the compact CX-5 (the CX-9 is considered a mid-size SUV, and the former CX-7 an odd in-between size). For 2016, in the American market, the CX-5 comes in three trim levels, similar to other Mazdas.....Sport ($21,795), Touring ($25,215), and Grand Touring ($28,570). All three versions come with a choice of FWD or AWD. Low-line Sport FWD models get a 2.0L non-turbo in-line four of 155 HP and 150 ft-lbs. of torque and a traditional 6-speed manual transmission. All other versions get a non-turbo 2.5L in-line four of 184 HP and 185 ft-lbs.of torque. The 2.5L four was added after first-year CX-5 complaints of low power, and that is why the 2.0L is restricted to only FWD and the manual-shift on the base Sport version, which put less drag on the engine. The other versions, FWD or AWD, also get a standard 6-speed Sport-Shift automatic transmission. One question Mazda may need to answer, though, is why the 6-speed manual transmission is not available with the larger engine...this, in a (supposedly) driver-centered vehicle. I was very impressed, though, with the way Mazda, on its web-site, designed and configured the CX-5's current Build-Your-Own feature (as of the end of March, 2016). IMO, it is one of the best I've seen in years, so, unlike with most reviews, I also posted it here so you all can try it for yourself and see how nice it is.
http://www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/conf...rom=&zip=22182
As usual (when possible), for the review, I sampled several different interiors and, for the test-drive, chose an AWD Touring model, as I felt that many would be probably sold that way, and it struck a good balance between the base and high-zoot versions.
In fact, while I was at the dealership, I might (?) have saved one of the CX-5's there from being stolen. A white Sport (base) model was sitting out on the back part of the lot, unlocked, so I used that one to check out the base interior. I noticed something odd about the under-dash cubbyhole, and when I looked closer, somebody had left the electronic ignition-fob sitting in it. As all CX-5s have push-button start, some unscrupulous or dishonest person could have got right in, and (assuming it had gas in it) started it right up and driven off (a number of new vehicles, are, in fact, stolen from dealerships every year...it is a significant problem). So, I put the fob in my pocket, examined a Touring interior on one that was also unlocked (and also a red Grand Touring CX-5 in the showroom), then walked into the sales managers's office, handed him the fob, and explained where I found it. He was embarrassed, but grateful, and offered me an extra discount, over and above the norm, right there, on the spot, for any vehicle in the lot...including even a high-demand/short-supply manual-transmission Miata. I, of course, thanked him but declined...my business, there, at the time, was checking to a CX-5.
MODEL REVIEWED: 2016 Mazda CX-5 Touring AWD
BASE PRICE: $26,515
OPTIONS:
Crystal White Pearl Paint: $200
DESTINATION/FREIGHT: $900 (about average for a vehicle this size)
LIST PRICE AS REVIEWED: $27,615
DRIVETRAIN: AWD, Transversely-mounted N/A 2.5L in-line four, 184 HP @ 5700 RPM, Torque 185 Ft-lbs. @ 3250 RPM, 6-speed Sport-Shift transmission.
EPA MILEAGE RATING: 24 City, 30 Highway, 26 Combined
EXTERIOR COLOR: Crystal White Pearl
INTERIOR: Sand (Beige) Cloth
PLUSSES:
Excellent Build-Your-Own feature on the web site.
No more Ford influence...a straight Mazda machine.
Reasonably-priced, along with most of its competitors.
Surprisingly strong torque from the 2.5L four in Sport mode.
Smooth refined automatic transmission.
Well-done brakes and brake pedal location.
Decent ride comfort for the class.
Generally good underhood layout for DIY'ers.
Good interior headroom and space efficiency.
Generally comfortable seats.
Decent interior material-quality and hardware.
Roomy cargo area.
MINUSES:
Manual transmission not available with the larger 2.5L four.
Manual prop-rod for the hood.
Rather dull, Ho-Hum paint-color choice.
Unimpressive extra-cost paint job.
Moderate (but not obtrusive) road noise.
No body-side moulding for parking-lot protection.
No gauge for engine-temperature (idiot lights instead).
Dash video-screen somewhat complex.
Manual-shift-mode pattern opposite that of most other vehicles.
EXTERIOR:
Mazda SUV afficionados who are long-accustomed to the classic wedge-shapes of the CX-9 and CX-7 will probably not immediately recognize the CX-5 somewhat different body shape (or that of the smaller CX-3) as part of the Mazda SUV family, though the CX-5's grille and headlights do bear a resemblance to Mazda sedans. The generally boxy, more traditional shape of the CX-5 means good interior space efficiency (more on that later). Most of the trim and materials outside seemed of good quality, especially the solid-feel door-handles. Sheet-metal grade/solidness seemed about average for the class, and I wasn't terribly impressed with the optional White Pearl paint job...to my eyes, it looked more like the basic white on kitchen appliances than something Mazda would charge $200 extra for. There is the usual array of silver/white/gray/black/blue/red that everybody and their brother is painting vehicles nowadays. There are no body-side moldings to protect from parking-lot dings.
UNDERHOOD:
Open the fairly solid and heavy hood, and you prop it up with a manual-rod. IMO, hood-struts or springs should be standard, at least with heavy steel hoods...lighter aluminum or plastic hoods can get by with the manual rod. Under the hood is a nice large insulation pad, but it has only limited effectiveness. The basic general layout under the hood is decent for do-it-yourselfers. The transversely-mounted 2.5L in-line four fits in quite well, though there is substantially more space behind the engine block to work (harder to reach for short people) than in front of the block, where it is tighter. A large plastic engine cover blocks top-access, but things can generally be reached down the sides. The battery is to the right, in the rear, uncovered, and generally easy to reach unless you are short in stature. As usual, the dipsticks, fluid-reservoirs, and filler-caps are generally easy to reach.
INTERIOR:
The interior, in general, is not bad at all for the class, with some good attention to detail and trim/hardware quality that is as good or better than most of its competitors. As usual, IMO,the two-tone interior looks better than the dark monotone. I'd like to see a wood-tone trim-option, but there is none that I could find. In general, the leather seats feel somewhat more comfortable than the cloth, though the bolsters on the leather seats could be an inch or so wider to accommodate big frames like mine. Without a sunroof, there is plenty of headroom, both front and rear, for 6' 2" guys my size, even with caps on (I don't recall sampling one with a sunroof). The two primary gauges are quite clear and easy-to-read...the smaller bar-graph gas gauge, somewhat less-so. The steering wheel is quite well-designed, with the usual buttons, and has a nice feel to its leather cover. The sun visors are thinly-covered in ivory fabric, and the headliner is a similar very thin fabric with a hard feel. The buttons/controls are mostly easy to use, except for playing with the video-screen, and the big chrome-ringed climate-control rotary-knobs have a nice slick motion to them. Legroom is generally adequate in back, but, of course, depends on where the drone seats are adjusted. I found that, even with the front seat bolsters all the way down for headroom, you sit up very high in this vehicle and look out over the hood in front of you. The glove box latch has a light, tinny feel and sound to it, but actually catches solidly, and securely holds the lid closed.
Interior gripes? Yes, here are a couple. The bean-counters managed to slip in small, hard-to-see idiot lights instead of an (IMO) proper engine-temperature gauge...blue light for cold-engine (under 140 degrees F) and red light for overheating. The stereo sound quality was OK, but nothing to write home about. The video-screen (as in many vehicles) could have been less-complex. And the (- / +) pattern for the automatic transmission's manual bump-shift feature, like that in older BMWs, is opposite the pattern most drivers in other vehicles are accustomed to. So, until you get used to it, care has to be taken that you are actually shifting the way you intend, and that it won't overspeed or cause a major shift-shock to the drive-train. Some purists, BTW, actually claim that the Mazda/BMW pattern is correct per racing specs......I'm not getting involved in that argument, since this is not a racing vehicle.
CARGO COMPARTMENT/TRUNK:
Open the generally solid liftgate, and, because of the body-shape and seat-design, you are treated to a quite roomy cargo compartment that can accommodate tall items. The rear seats, of course, fold down to expand the already generous cargo area. The floor of the cargo area has a thin black fabric covering; the walls, black plastic........not terribly plush, but then again, this not a luxury-class vehicle. Under the floor is the usual temporary spare tire and jacking tools.
ON THE ROAD:
Start up the 2.5L four with an ignition button (some vehicles in this price-range stll use a conventional key/switch), and the four comes to life with a noticeable amount of noise, though it is more of an audible purr rather than a harsh unrefined sound. The parking-brake is released with an electronic switch, rather than a foot-pedal or yank-handle. On the road, in normal driving mode, the engine will get out of its own way, but is clearly not a drag-racer. Hitting the console-mounted SPORT mode-button makes a big change in the engine's power-mapping and torque-curve, also delaying the transmissions full-automatic shift-points......you get pushed back significant into your seat in the lower gears. (Score one for Mazda's Zoom-Zoom advertising). My opinion is that, in the sport mode, the engine is actually running more than 185 ft.lbs. of torque, regardless of the official specs....it actually feels more like the low 200s, even with the weight and drag of AWD. The 6-speed automatic transmission performed smoothly and seamlessly (bumpy, clunky shifts, especially first-gear downshifts, used to be a Mazda problem years ago), although one must take care to use the aforementioned opposite-pattern manual-mode correctly.
The steering/chassis is generally (but not totally) traditional Mazda. Steering response is rather quick, but the high center of gravity and boxy shape allow noticeable body roll with quick steering inputs. Ride quality, like most Mazda products, is on the firm side of comfortable, but there is enough compliance to take most bumps without harshness....and if you want a smoother ride, with slower steering response, get a Honda CR-V. Wind noise was generally well-controlled, but road noise (like on other Mazda products), while not obtrusive, is noticeable, especially on porous road surfaces. The brakes are generally quite well-done.....not only effective but with a well-located brake pedal that didn't snag my big, size-15 circus-clown shoes when going from gas to brake.
THE VERDICT:
With the CX-5, Mazda has produced a well-designed compact SUV that not only competes well against its competitors, while also preserving some of the traditional Mazda driver-centered characteristics. In sport mode, the engine delivers, and steering response is generally quick, though some body roll, a non-Mazda feature, is present. The interior is space-efficient, has a pleasant enough look, and is made of generally good materials. Best of all, the price tag, except perhaps for loaded top-dog Grand Touring versions, is quite reasonable and affordable for what you get. Consumer Reports gives it a very good reliability rating...substantially better than average.
But it's not perfect.....though, compared to some vehicles, I didn't really find that much to complain about. The first thing I'd do is toss the present gauge-panel and add conventional fuel and temperature gauges. Then I'd add a little more sound-insulation in the wheel wells. But all other stuff is quite minor, and some, like body-side moldings, can be added aftermarket. But, folks, if you want a good compact car-based crossover SUV at an affordable price.....this is definitely one of the good possibilities.
And, as always......Happy car-shopping.
MM
A Condensed-Review of the 2016 Mazda CX-5
http://www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/disp...ehicleCode=CX5
IN A NUTSHELL: Competent and athletic by compact SUV standards, but not as athletic as a Mazda sedan.
CLOSEST AMERICAN-MARKET COMPETITORS: Toyota RAV-4, Honda CR-V, Nissan Rogue, Kia Sportage, Hyundai Tuscon, Ford Escape, Dodge Journey (the Journey is comparably-priced but slightly larger), Chevrolet Equinox, GMC Terrrain, VW Tiguan, Subaru Forester. Mitsubishi Outlander.
;
;
;
;
;
OVERVIEW:
Lately I've seen a lot of interest, both on and off auto forums, in the compact Mazda CX-5 SUV/CUV (a newer, smaller, subcompact CX-3 CUV is also now available). So, even though I did not receive a specific request for an MM Review, I was out shopping today at J.C. Penney's (long one of my long-favorite stores for Men's Big and Tall clothing), and there were a couple of Mazda shops nearby (one of them huge and almost brand-new). So, after finding exactly the long pants and pocketed knit-shirt I was looking for (at a half-sale price and additional coupon-discount), I headed on over to the big Mazda shop to check out the CX-5. While I had no reason to do a long, detailed Full-Review, I figured I'd at least familiarize myself with it and do a shortened, Condensed-Review. I had, of course, seen it at the January D.C. Auto Show, but didn't spend much time looking at it, since I had other priorities then.
Until Ford sold off the company, Mazda, long known as the "Poor Man's BMW" and for offering driver-centered vehicles with a well-engineered chassis, was pretty much hamstrung by its Ford ownership as to what kind of vehicles they could offer, and what source/platforms those vehicles came from. This, of course, limited the first Mazda SUV, the Navajo, to being a cookie-cutter rebadged 2-door Ford Explorer Sport, the square-box Mazda Tribute SUV to being an (almost) cookie-cutter rebadge of the Ford Escape, and the Mazda CX-9 and CX-7, while not rebadges per se, to being sourced from Ford platforms. The Navajo and Tribute, of course, are long gone, the CX-7 was discontinued to make room for the newer CX-5, and and the latest version of the CX-9 is now, for 2016, an all-Mazda platform/design. With the newer designs, free from Ford influence, come more traditional Mazda driving characteristics.
Which, of course, includes the compact CX-5 (the CX-9 is considered a mid-size SUV, and the former CX-7 an odd in-between size). For 2016, in the American market, the CX-5 comes in three trim levels, similar to other Mazdas.....Sport ($21,795), Touring ($25,215), and Grand Touring ($28,570). All three versions come with a choice of FWD or AWD. Low-line Sport FWD models get a 2.0L non-turbo in-line four of 155 HP and 150 ft-lbs. of torque and a traditional 6-speed manual transmission. All other versions get a non-turbo 2.5L in-line four of 184 HP and 185 ft-lbs.of torque. The 2.5L four was added after first-year CX-5 complaints of low power, and that is why the 2.0L is restricted to only FWD and the manual-shift on the base Sport version, which put less drag on the engine. The other versions, FWD or AWD, also get a standard 6-speed Sport-Shift automatic transmission. One question Mazda may need to answer, though, is why the 6-speed manual transmission is not available with the larger engine...this, in a (supposedly) driver-centered vehicle. I was very impressed, though, with the way Mazda, on its web-site, designed and configured the CX-5's current Build-Your-Own feature (as of the end of March, 2016). IMO, it is one of the best I've seen in years, so, unlike with most reviews, I also posted it here so you all can try it for yourself and see how nice it is.
http://www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/conf...rom=&zip=22182
As usual (when possible), for the review, I sampled several different interiors and, for the test-drive, chose an AWD Touring model, as I felt that many would be probably sold that way, and it struck a good balance between the base and high-zoot versions.
In fact, while I was at the dealership, I might (?) have saved one of the CX-5's there from being stolen. A white Sport (base) model was sitting out on the back part of the lot, unlocked, so I used that one to check out the base interior. I noticed something odd about the under-dash cubbyhole, and when I looked closer, somebody had left the electronic ignition-fob sitting in it. As all CX-5s have push-button start, some unscrupulous or dishonest person could have got right in, and (assuming it had gas in it) started it right up and driven off (a number of new vehicles, are, in fact, stolen from dealerships every year...it is a significant problem). So, I put the fob in my pocket, examined a Touring interior on one that was also unlocked (and also a red Grand Touring CX-5 in the showroom), then walked into the sales managers's office, handed him the fob, and explained where I found it. He was embarrassed, but grateful, and offered me an extra discount, over and above the norm, right there, on the spot, for any vehicle in the lot...including even a high-demand/short-supply manual-transmission Miata. I, of course, thanked him but declined...my business, there, at the time, was checking to a CX-5.
MODEL REVIEWED: 2016 Mazda CX-5 Touring AWD
BASE PRICE: $26,515
OPTIONS:
Crystal White Pearl Paint: $200
DESTINATION/FREIGHT: $900 (about average for a vehicle this size)
LIST PRICE AS REVIEWED: $27,615
DRIVETRAIN: AWD, Transversely-mounted N/A 2.5L in-line four, 184 HP @ 5700 RPM, Torque 185 Ft-lbs. @ 3250 RPM, 6-speed Sport-Shift transmission.
EPA MILEAGE RATING: 24 City, 30 Highway, 26 Combined
EXTERIOR COLOR: Crystal White Pearl
INTERIOR: Sand (Beige) Cloth
PLUSSES:
Excellent Build-Your-Own feature on the web site.
No more Ford influence...a straight Mazda machine.
Reasonably-priced, along with most of its competitors.
Surprisingly strong torque from the 2.5L four in Sport mode.
Smooth refined automatic transmission.
Well-done brakes and brake pedal location.
Decent ride comfort for the class.
Generally good underhood layout for DIY'ers.
Good interior headroom and space efficiency.
Generally comfortable seats.
Decent interior material-quality and hardware.
Roomy cargo area.
MINUSES:
Manual transmission not available with the larger 2.5L four.
Manual prop-rod for the hood.
Rather dull, Ho-Hum paint-color choice.
Unimpressive extra-cost paint job.
Moderate (but not obtrusive) road noise.
No body-side moulding for parking-lot protection.
No gauge for engine-temperature (idiot lights instead).
Dash video-screen somewhat complex.
Manual-shift-mode pattern opposite that of most other vehicles.
EXTERIOR:
Mazda SUV afficionados who are long-accustomed to the classic wedge-shapes of the CX-9 and CX-7 will probably not immediately recognize the CX-5 somewhat different body shape (or that of the smaller CX-3) as part of the Mazda SUV family, though the CX-5's grille and headlights do bear a resemblance to Mazda sedans. The generally boxy, more traditional shape of the CX-5 means good interior space efficiency (more on that later). Most of the trim and materials outside seemed of good quality, especially the solid-feel door-handles. Sheet-metal grade/solidness seemed about average for the class, and I wasn't terribly impressed with the optional White Pearl paint job...to my eyes, it looked more like the basic white on kitchen appliances than something Mazda would charge $200 extra for. There is the usual array of silver/white/gray/black/blue/red that everybody and their brother is painting vehicles nowadays. There are no body-side moldings to protect from parking-lot dings.
UNDERHOOD:
Open the fairly solid and heavy hood, and you prop it up with a manual-rod. IMO, hood-struts or springs should be standard, at least with heavy steel hoods...lighter aluminum or plastic hoods can get by with the manual rod. Under the hood is a nice large insulation pad, but it has only limited effectiveness. The basic general layout under the hood is decent for do-it-yourselfers. The transversely-mounted 2.5L in-line four fits in quite well, though there is substantially more space behind the engine block to work (harder to reach for short people) than in front of the block, where it is tighter. A large plastic engine cover blocks top-access, but things can generally be reached down the sides. The battery is to the right, in the rear, uncovered, and generally easy to reach unless you are short in stature. As usual, the dipsticks, fluid-reservoirs, and filler-caps are generally easy to reach.
INTERIOR:
The interior, in general, is not bad at all for the class, with some good attention to detail and trim/hardware quality that is as good or better than most of its competitors. As usual, IMO,the two-tone interior looks better than the dark monotone. I'd like to see a wood-tone trim-option, but there is none that I could find. In general, the leather seats feel somewhat more comfortable than the cloth, though the bolsters on the leather seats could be an inch or so wider to accommodate big frames like mine. Without a sunroof, there is plenty of headroom, both front and rear, for 6' 2" guys my size, even with caps on (I don't recall sampling one with a sunroof). The two primary gauges are quite clear and easy-to-read...the smaller bar-graph gas gauge, somewhat less-so. The steering wheel is quite well-designed, with the usual buttons, and has a nice feel to its leather cover. The sun visors are thinly-covered in ivory fabric, and the headliner is a similar very thin fabric with a hard feel. The buttons/controls are mostly easy to use, except for playing with the video-screen, and the big chrome-ringed climate-control rotary-knobs have a nice slick motion to them. Legroom is generally adequate in back, but, of course, depends on where the drone seats are adjusted. I found that, even with the front seat bolsters all the way down for headroom, you sit up very high in this vehicle and look out over the hood in front of you. The glove box latch has a light, tinny feel and sound to it, but actually catches solidly, and securely holds the lid closed.
Interior gripes? Yes, here are a couple. The bean-counters managed to slip in small, hard-to-see idiot lights instead of an (IMO) proper engine-temperature gauge...blue light for cold-engine (under 140 degrees F) and red light for overheating. The stereo sound quality was OK, but nothing to write home about. The video-screen (as in many vehicles) could have been less-complex. And the (- / +) pattern for the automatic transmission's manual bump-shift feature, like that in older BMWs, is opposite the pattern most drivers in other vehicles are accustomed to. So, until you get used to it, care has to be taken that you are actually shifting the way you intend, and that it won't overspeed or cause a major shift-shock to the drive-train. Some purists, BTW, actually claim that the Mazda/BMW pattern is correct per racing specs......I'm not getting involved in that argument, since this is not a racing vehicle.
CARGO COMPARTMENT/TRUNK:
Open the generally solid liftgate, and, because of the body-shape and seat-design, you are treated to a quite roomy cargo compartment that can accommodate tall items. The rear seats, of course, fold down to expand the already generous cargo area. The floor of the cargo area has a thin black fabric covering; the walls, black plastic........not terribly plush, but then again, this not a luxury-class vehicle. Under the floor is the usual temporary spare tire and jacking tools.
ON THE ROAD:
Start up the 2.5L four with an ignition button (some vehicles in this price-range stll use a conventional key/switch), and the four comes to life with a noticeable amount of noise, though it is more of an audible purr rather than a harsh unrefined sound. The parking-brake is released with an electronic switch, rather than a foot-pedal or yank-handle. On the road, in normal driving mode, the engine will get out of its own way, but is clearly not a drag-racer. Hitting the console-mounted SPORT mode-button makes a big change in the engine's power-mapping and torque-curve, also delaying the transmissions full-automatic shift-points......you get pushed back significant into your seat in the lower gears. (Score one for Mazda's Zoom-Zoom advertising). My opinion is that, in the sport mode, the engine is actually running more than 185 ft.lbs. of torque, regardless of the official specs....it actually feels more like the low 200s, even with the weight and drag of AWD. The 6-speed automatic transmission performed smoothly and seamlessly (bumpy, clunky shifts, especially first-gear downshifts, used to be a Mazda problem years ago), although one must take care to use the aforementioned opposite-pattern manual-mode correctly.
The steering/chassis is generally (but not totally) traditional Mazda. Steering response is rather quick, but the high center of gravity and boxy shape allow noticeable body roll with quick steering inputs. Ride quality, like most Mazda products, is on the firm side of comfortable, but there is enough compliance to take most bumps without harshness....and if you want a smoother ride, with slower steering response, get a Honda CR-V. Wind noise was generally well-controlled, but road noise (like on other Mazda products), while not obtrusive, is noticeable, especially on porous road surfaces. The brakes are generally quite well-done.....not only effective but with a well-located brake pedal that didn't snag my big, size-15 circus-clown shoes when going from gas to brake.
THE VERDICT:
With the CX-5, Mazda has produced a well-designed compact SUV that not only competes well against its competitors, while also preserving some of the traditional Mazda driver-centered characteristics. In sport mode, the engine delivers, and steering response is generally quick, though some body roll, a non-Mazda feature, is present. The interior is space-efficient, has a pleasant enough look, and is made of generally good materials. Best of all, the price tag, except perhaps for loaded top-dog Grand Touring versions, is quite reasonable and affordable for what you get. Consumer Reports gives it a very good reliability rating...substantially better than average.
But it's not perfect.....though, compared to some vehicles, I didn't really find that much to complain about. The first thing I'd do is toss the present gauge-panel and add conventional fuel and temperature gauges. Then I'd add a little more sound-insulation in the wheel wells. But all other stuff is quite minor, and some, like body-side moldings, can be added aftermarket. But, folks, if you want a good compact car-based crossover SUV at an affordable price.....this is definitely one of the good possibilities.
And, as always......Happy car-shopping.
MM
Last edited:
