I bought my CX-5 in GTR trim about a month ago. Oddly enough, the seats were one of the main reason I chose it over other crossovers. I am 6'3" and 250lb and just sink into other seats and get no support. The 5's seats were comfortable, they hold me in place, but also give that support I need. The other thing I have noticed is that even with my aggressive driving I get 24 mpg city and about 29 hwy, I really feel they under rated it in an effort to not have people disappointed with the average mpg. I really agree that this is not meant for off-raod use but I love how responsive it is on the road. For someone my size there are not a lot of cars that fit, and I hate climbing down into a hole, so the CX-5 was the perfect fit for me wanting performance and comfort.
Derek Knop you must have a lot of fat protecting you from feeling how shitty these seats are. The seating area is the worst of any car I’ve ever driven. And I’ve driven many. Sorry didn’t mean to get personal but that’s the only thing that makes sense.
To me the seat firmness was not surprising. My old Acura RSX, and Jeep Grand Cherokee leather seats were equally firm... to me they just need to be adjusted for optimum ergonomics, then it feels supportive rather than hard.
Hey, Derek. You and I are same height and virtually same weight. I am in total agreement with you about the CX-5!!! Seats give me really good support. And I feel good after several hundred mile drive and getting out!
UPDATE: Got the GT Reserve in "Soul Red". Drove it from Las Vegas to LA and around LA. Thirsty compared to my previous Toyota Prius v wagon. But then most cars are thirsty compared to a Prius. This western US 91 octane "premium" gas helps with more horsepower but some real eastern 95 octane premium would be better. Anyhow this is a true luxury SUV even compared to the upscale Acura and Lexus brands. And I love spanking a 2 liter turbo Land Rover Evoque! Hell, my CX - GT Reserve is just as pretty as the Evoque, faster and far more reliable for HALF the price. AMEN Mazda!
Sorry but the first CX5 was never just a lifted car with a softer suspension. That model could out-handle many cars that came out that same year. That's the whole point of buying Mazda: sporty ride.
It should be noted before you start bashing the FWD feel of the cx-5 that it is Mazda's I-active AWD which is supposed to function primarily as a FWD, only sending power to the back wheels when necessary. It also is going to push power to those back wheels a little slower if you are starting from a complete stop because the sensors/monitors that tell it when to push power to the back are for when you are Driving (as in, already in motion). Also Mazda tends to have a stiffer suspensions in all of their vehicles because they are going for an overall sportier feel. just some things to consider :) overall awesome review
Very interesting review, Russ. Personally, I think the most appropriate application of Mazda's ubiquitous 2.5L turbo is the CX-5. The Mazda6 is also an appealing choice but the competition from the Accord's punchy 2.0L turbo and the Camry's naturally aspirated V6 is tougher in that category. As for the two-ton plus CX-9 where the competition is mainly V6's (except for the Subaru Ascent) and vehicles with MUCH more passenger and cargo space in tidier (i.e. shorter) packages it's up against some really tough competition. Want a vehicle that prioritizes performance over utility in the compact category and the CX-5 is very appealing. Want to reverse those priorities and the CR-V is an obvious choice with virtually all of the others ahead of the CX-5. More broadly, I like your categorical division among crossovers. I'd add another distinction based on size with several more categories. At the small end are the well recognized "sub-compact" crossovers. But lets save these "hatchbacks on stilts" for another time. At the other end of the scale are the "full size" SUV's or what the rest of the world refers to as Godzilla-mobiles. Let's ignore those, too. That leaves the conventional categories of "compacts" (average 180"-182" with a couple of outliers (Tiguan, Rogue) coming in about at 185" in length and the large hodgepodge of different vehicles typically called "midsize" SUV's that range from about 188" to 203 in length. That midsize category is too numerous and too varied. So lets define a "tweener" category of vehicles larger than the compact group and smaller than the larger 3 row midsize vehicles. If one takes your categories of "soft crossers" and "car crossers" and combines it with "compact" and "tweener" categories, the result is a 2x2 matrix with some interesting similarities and contrasts. Almost without exception the "compacts" are four banger mills, some turbocharged and others NA. The "tweeners" typically have standard or optional V6's, almost all naturally aspirated. Exceptions are the Edge ST turbo V6, a V8 option in the Grand Cherokee, and the Santa Fe's single option four banger turbo. The compacts and tweeners are almost all two row SUV's with the exception of the Kia Sorento in the tweener category and the Tiguan's optional third row suitable for stowing a bound and gagged hostage at the lengthy end of the compact category. As you note, both the CX-5 and the Ford Edge are "car crossers." But the CX-5 is clearly a "compact and the Edge (188") is a tweener. Similarly, with the CX-5 and the Hyundai Santa Fe. The Forester and CX-5 are near the same size but the Forester arguably falls in the "soft crosser" group and the Outback is more suitably termed a "tweener car crosser." Likewise for the Jeep Grand Cherokee while some configurations of the compact Cherokee (e.g. Trailhawk) are in the more rugged group of "soft crosser" compacts and other configurations in the "car crosser" group. I'll stop there. At least some of those who've made it this far think I've gone on far too long anyway. But I do find that Russ' categorization of crossovers' character combined with a recognition that there's a definable category of SUV's between compact and midsize to yield a useful set of comparisons and contrasts.
Compare the CX-5 Signature to the Audi G5 or BMW X1 and tell me why someone would pay $10,000 - $15,000 more. I think that's the market they're going after with the two new trim levels of the CX-5.
Audi Q5 is a superior vehicle. More comfortable sport seats with thigh extenders ( +$1450) for taller drivers, smoother driving, much better cabin and navigation. Some folks are willing to pay a premium for nicer.
I enjoy your reviews a lot! If I could suggest one minor thing... I would like if you had a little camera you could suction to the drivers window (or anywhere) that would let us see the speedo when you're doing the acceleration runs. I enjoy watching the gauges when that's happening and I think it'd be a nice addition to your reviews!
Hot Crosser. I am 6’3” and I find the CX-5 seats quite comfortable, even on long trips. This vehicle is a hoot to drive and handles surprisingly well for being an CUV. Cargo room is more than sufficient for my needs.
seat is shortish but very comfortable over a distance in my case. Mazda doesn't go out of its way to make cars that are in tune with the driver and then forget to give it supportive seats.
@@omgitsme435 Firm is good. Agreed on the shortness of them (no adjustable thigh support), but I've not experienced better seats in any other SUV on the market.
its awd works really well in chicago winter and spring rains didnt get it for off road personally so im not let down by that aspect at all but in the chicago winter during slush driving heavy packed snow downpour in spring of rain i have zero issues hitting the throttle and the car just going no spinning to squeeling nada. and i often notice a sedan or fwd crossover do a bunny hop or two at lights turning green in rain and just generally having issues in deep snow banks on turns that havent been plowed during winter storms. this winter alone in chicago i was breezing in packed snow roads no issue. good on road awd drive car works well when weather is occuring outside and generally works FWD in dry concrete conditions to preserve mpg . the g vectioring does actually make you turn alot better than you think you can at times lol. pushing the car when i first got it i was kinda amazed on some of the turns i took at speeds i was at so smoothly
Hey Ryan, perhaps consider telling us the results of the 0-60 speed test in your videos in the future, rather than just mumbling 'Oh that's fast'. Sheesh.
Irena~ Thanks. This was a good point., I noticed this too. For the CX-5, the told us, "40...50...and 60." Well, was he going 0 to 60? No clue what the starting point is or how long it took to get there if is was from 0. For all the viewer knows he could have been at 30 and then it opens to 65mph freeway.
I have been looking, though not urgently, for a new compact crossover. My lease expires in 4 months. The pricing on the Signature, honestly, is not out of line, and is actually quite reasonable given the equipment. On several others I have looked at they are more expensive with the same equipment (because you have to buy like 5 packages), or don't simply have the same equipment available. I have heard that the AWD on the Mazda is great in the snow, and apparently geared more towards that, which is a major need of mine. There is no way I can get from the main road to my house (app 1 mile up[hill with a few level spots) with most FWD cars with all-seasons - must be snow tires and then is still iffy. I know I would be very satisfied with this, and feel good about the final price (even at MSRP) IF it works well with snow, even though I am used to RWD biased suv's right now, especially with the power (specifically torque) which I don't see on other compacts. Final note: the sets, I thought, were very supportive, not hard, and I found the ride expectedly firm for an AWD, but also very quiet compared to the others I have tested so far (all regular compacts, not Acuras or BMWs or Audis etc)
Shopped this against the new Acura RDX. I really wanted to like this car more but I just felt a little cramped. If on a budget probably would chose this for the price because it was pretty nice. Overall I just felt the Acura checked more boxes for me. I do not feel disappointed at all for my choice.
The Fast Lane Car took CX-5 on a trail road it got surprisingly far. Same goes for the new CX-3 on Savagegeese. The slip test might prove something, but not much. I agree with the tires - for sure if I go with Mazda it is getting higher tires and maybe a slight lift. In Japan, all CR-V, Forester, Outlander and RAV4 comes with little engines and CVT. How is that going to work for camping in the mountains I do not know.
The real reason for big torque off idle is the tiny turbo. It spools quickly but runs out of breath by 5k rpm which makes the car slower than it should be.
Owner of Mazda cx 5 2018 2.5 awd for daily drive in city very nice car 9.8 litre per 100km comfortable seats. It's true about AWD system feels and goes like FWD but handling & cornering is good
Not sure the number of people that buy these cars and use them in a off road setting, but I have to think it is very small. Most are families that need to move kids and stuff. Having said that, the Honda CRV and Subaru forester is a better choice than the Mazda. However, if you want a crossover that is great to drive, comfortable (not sure what is this guys problem is with the seats, I love the feel), powerful, luxurious like Lexus or Acura and more than enough room for 3 adult passengers and driver (4 passengers is a little tight on long drives, the back seat is great for 2 but tight for 3 ) this is the best you can buy. The over all feel of this car is second none in this category.
He is the best engineer I've seen so far he goes into such great detail about every system on the vehicles it's never a question he can't answer. He could sell anyone a mazda.
Just got my cx5gtr two weeks ago it’s the best purchase I have made in the last 10 years regarding vehicles just a pleasure to drive it could use better tires from the factory that’s my only complaint
Hot crosser for sure. In fact, I only consider CUVs/SUVs with longitudinally mounted engines. Those Honda/Acura drivetrains that you tend to favor just don't work for me. Ford's decision to move the Explorer back to a RWD based platform was bold & brilliant. Btw, your analysis of the bifurcation of CUVs was great!
blitzbbffl You don’t want an engine mounted sideways? Me neither. My neighbor bought a used Buick Enclave. A broken rear facing spark plug required engine removal to fix. Good thing it was on warranty. Give me a Toyota 4Runner or Lexus GX or....🤔
Riyad Kalla after painfully driving our Forester for 3 years, it got turned into a CX5. The Forester seats are flat and poorly supportive. Tried the 2019 Forester and it had minor improvement but nowhere as comfortable as Mazda. You need to sit and drive all prospects the last test drive on the last Subaru was a mere ten minutes. This Mazda got a half day drive.
@@kurtgrundel4045 now if you think a Mazda seat is comfortable, try a Lexus RX350 even an 11 year old one is insanely comfortable compared to CX5 or Subaru seats
@@daniellanzotti2391 I agree, they are comfortable. I would ride passenger in a commute until my friend turned In their lease and never went back to Lexus. Before I finalized the CX5 I did try the NX and found it uncomfortable. Just not he same as RX
The moment Subaru gets their balls back and bring back new Forester XT, I’m there. For now I think I’ll hang on to my MY15 XT. Come on Subaru! Do it for the fans!
Yuan Li is right - NO DAMN CVT transmission! YEA!! (And now Mazda, how about an 8 speed transmission? Hmmmm??) For the few times I go soft roading the CX GT Reserve or Signature (not sure which I'll get) will do just fine. I ski so the snow handling is very good and hunt so the clearance is barely enough but still, it's enough for 90% of Nevada's back roads. BTW Irena, I seen 0-60 times published from 6.5 seconds to 6.2 seconds which is decently brisk but nothing to write home about.
I noticed the air intake takes 7 corners before entering the turbo.. wouldn't of been better to be more direct as possible, and that would help w/turbo lag ? oddly, I don't see any engine things in the way for them to have to take 7 corner route to get there.. very odd ?!! I got mid to upper 7's sec 0-100kms
I don't think Russ is claiming that the CX-5 and the RDX are in the "same segment." No more than that the CX-5 and Ford Edge are in the same segment. He's making a useful distinction between SUV's that want to project an off-road vibe (even if they are seldom found off-road) and those that are unabashedly aimed at on-pavement use.
I was considering an AWD turbo CX5 but torque steer on an AWD is just not acceptable. If it does that on a gravel road, it will do it on snow as well. It's not just Mazda but all AWD SUV in this segment except Subaru have this issue. Still the turbo CX5 with the white leather interior is the sexiest driver car in this segment, no doubt a great drivers car on dry pavement. Will go look at the boring but comfortable and real AWD Forester again I guess as I enjoy going off the beaten path alone in my car so I do need the slight off-road capability, cargo capacity and a comfortable ride. I also live in a northern climate with 5 months of snow.
The same Mazda Tech from this video was on Car Question and said they basically just replaced the TSC Off button with an off road button. I do own a 2019 CX-5 Signature. Does very well on light off roading with TCS Off. Drove a loaner 2020 and noticed the car was faster (new software in PCM for sure). That leads me to believe it’s possible they messed with the ABS module and or BCM mapping as well. Hard to say if the mode is exactly the same, but with the CX-5’s approach and departure angle it could do most anything it can angle on with TCS off on my 2019.
avoid the Soul Red or be prepared to deal with paint chips everywhere. Save on the paint and enjoy less chipping. I am NOT happy with our '16's Soul Red paint. The soul red is by far their weakest, least durable color. YMMV, but you've been warned.
I had a ‘18 CX-5 with the “upgraded” (upcharged) Soul Red Crystal paint, and was not happy with the chipping that started before the first oil change. Worse yet was the attempt to repaint the chipped panels; the factory paint could not be matched. Anyone getting into a fender bender is not going to be happy with the results. Do yourself a favor and choose another color. The ‘19 CX-5 with machine grey metallic has been better so far (knock on wood) at 5,000 miles with no unusual chipping.
CRV and its sloppy and cheap CVT along with 1.5t that is just too small and strained and has serious recall qualifing design flaw that Honda has no cheap way of fixing by just CPU reprogram.... Hondas reliability is way below industry average and such open recall for lot of cars would further underline Hondas problematic design and choices .
Wow. I think Bodangers asks a good question. Perhaps change the wording, How hard is it to remove the rear seats? Easily removable rear seats, one side or both would be helpful for many drivers. In one or two person trips it extends what one can buy at second hand stores, too.
Lot of twisty "recomendations" and at the end no recommendation. It is simple , CX5 AWD 2.5t is a street and on road CUV not offroader with all its design choice pros and cons . CUV very capable on Snowy and slippery roads but not for crossing a river or clay and rocks rough mountain road. So these who drive 99.9% on road ( like 99% of the car market) than you can get all pros of Mazdas direction here and there is no better choice in this class. Oh and very importantly you van get 2.5t with AWD for 34K usd OTD these days so way way less than anything else from already established as premium brands (what reflects in their price ) .
Change the oil regularly like every 5k you will be fine we have 55k on our 2015 no issues engine is quiet during idling at red lights sometimes you can’t tell it’s on.
I'm sorry, but looking at the price, it is ridiculous when you can but an Audi A4 Quatro for the same.. or a Highlander,, I don't care how good it seems up front. Having owned a Mazda before and experience their short life span, I always felt they should be cheaper until at least they built a better reputation.
