Honda CR-V Owners Club Forums banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

Help Me Decide: CR-V vs. CX-5

68K views 239 replies 76 participants last post by  TheDarkKnight 
#1 ·
Hello. I'm new to the forum and in the market for a new vehicle. A little background:
- I buy my vehicles new and keep them for 10-14 years, so picking the right one is extremely important.
- I've owned Honda's all of my life, but I'm having a difficult time convincing myself to get the CR-V.

Vehicles Considering:
- 2017 Honda CR-V EX (2WD) -- White Diamond w/ Black Cloth ($27,635)
- 2017 Mazda CX-5 Touring (2WD) w/ I-ActivSense -- Snowflake White Pearl w/ Leatherette ($27,680)

Pros of CR-V:
1) Considerably better MPG estimates.
Can owners chime on actual fuel economy? I've read turbo engines deliver better MPG during EPA testing than real world driving.
2) Comes with several important features (moon roof, remote start, fog lights, cargo cover)
Are there any other notable features I'm overlooking? I don't care about things like heated side mirrors, ect.

Cons of CR-V:
1) It is just plain ugly, with all the cheap plastic cladding & fake chrome/wood. The CX-5 is far better looking on both the exterior and interior.
2) Comes with a CVT. I strongly prefer a traditional transmission that allows me to choose gears (especially in winter).
3) Lacks several notable features (LED headlights, auto dimming mirror w/ Homelink, faux leather seats, leather steering wheel/shifter).

Any other drawbacks to the CR-V that I'm missing?
I realize responses are going to favor the CR-V, but I'm just looking for insight into the decision making process from current owners.

Thanks.
 
See less See more
#2 ·
My wife has a 2015 CX-5 Touring. It is a very nice car but the seats feel narrower to me. I also noticed that the buttons/switches for the power windows, locks and power mirrors are not lit up at night on the CX5. The only lit button is the drivers power window button. It is just a little orange light. In my 2017 CRV, they are all lit up and clearly marked. The passenger side controls are also lit up in my CRV. The Glove compartment does not lock in the CX-5. Neither have a light in the Glove box. I know the 2017 CX-5 has been upgraded. I took a quick peak at one when I was getting my wife's oil changed. The salesman told me about some of the new features and it sounds like they have added a lot of safety equipment. similar to the CRV. Based on my personal experience, I would prefer the CRV. I think you will have to drive both and go with your gut.
 
#9 ·
I also noticed that the buttons/switches for the power windows, locks and power mirrors are not lit up at night on the CX5. The only lit button is the drivers power window button.
And with this new 2017 model those switches STILL have no lighting. Can you believe that? And Mazda is trying to market the CX-5 as 'premium' but can't add a simple feature like this that is pretty much standard on non-premium cars. It also has less power than the CRV and is missing Apple CarPlay/Android Auto but yet they're still trying to market it as 'premium'. You can even find Apple CarPlay/Android Auto in Mitsubishi's nowadays.
 
#4 ·
I looked at the CX5 when I was checking out the crossover competition. I never bothered to test drive it due to the cramped 2nd row seating and small cargo area -- both were deal breakers. IMO the 2nd row seating was only adequate for someone 5'0" or under. My niece has a 2016 CX5 and once she puts her baby stroller in the cargo area, the floor space is pretty much taken up.
 
#131 ·
Agreed. You have to do what's right for you, other people's opinions may/may-not prove helpful.

Probably not a popular thing to say on a Honda forum, but honestly, personally, if I was looking at current model year production (something I don't usually do - rapidly depreciating assets and I don't get along), I wouldn't get the CRV or the CX5 - based on value for dollar and functional practicality, I would get the lowest trim level Highlander offered with the automatic lift door... I think it's the second or third from the bottom tier trim.
 
#6 ·
I'm really want to help but in the end, it's up to you.
I can say 1001 things great about this V but not necessarily true for you.

To answer your questions based on my personal experiences,
1. 50% will say it's great, beats EPA by far. 50% will say, it's suck and not lives up of 29 MPG average. It's you to test and see how it goes.
2. Not sure if the 5 has Auto Android or not, if you ever care.

1. I would say the 5 looks better but the V is far from ugly, it's pretty sleek
2. I'm not a fan of CVT myself. Well
3. You can go up to EX-L to get those features
 
#7 ·
My best friend bought his 2016.5 CX5 about 2wks before I got my CR-V. I rode with him today on a short (2 hr) trip. While I know they have made changes to the 2017 I can only speak on his. There is nothing really wrong w/ the Mazda and has a few features I wish the Honda had. I like the way the rear cargo cover is connected to the liftgate. I like the infotainment ctr control knob in the console. Overall though the interior seemed cheaper than the Honda and I didn't care for the dash layout. The climate controls and readouts were too low in the stack which made you take eyes off road too far. It also has a Bose system w/ 9 spkrs but I thought it sounds much worse than what we've got. No power liftgate. It may not differ much on paper but the car just seems smaller. Wheels are much nicer, no Ninja throwing stars like we have. His is a Touring model but you still have to buy different pkgs. to get some things that are std on CR-V EX-L and Touring. Also, no Apple CarPlay. I have found I really like that feature, esp since the Honda won't play nice w/ my Ipod Classic.

As others have said, drive both and decide for yourself. Dollar for dollar I think we are getting more for our money w/ the CR-V over the CX 5.
 
#8 ·
For me it came down to size and function. The CRV has a tone more usable space without it being huge/sluggish. IMHO it is no CX5 in the looks department but its a reliable, functional, safe, no brainer for me. Again it all came down to the interior space.

With that said, I am super impressed with the level of effort put into quieting the cabin.
 
#27 ·
What I meant to say was I was impressed with the level of effort Mazda put into the new CX5. There's a video out there describing all the measures they took to quite the cabin... quite impressive. I will also point out they quieted the cabin without active noise cancelation, get decent mileage from a non-turbo 2.5, and still use a traditional 6spd transmission... this is all worth a lot in my book.

But again, we chose the CRV and would if given a do over. It's not perfect but it's the right choice for us. The biggest deal breaker is the interior/cargo space. CX5 just can't compete.
 
#10 ·
I have a very open mind about cars. They were my professional life and I drove so many new cars in my life I can't count. I have a certain "things" I look for in a personal vehicle that I have to pay for myself. ( I was very spoiled by years of free cars...with gas!). The vehicle has to feel right. It has to handle and steer and brake well. It has to be reliable and and most of all practical for my uses such as hauling things and such. I have sampled all the cars in this class and tried to be open minded about them. As for "style" that is a personal item and we can not always agree that what you think is best is the same as what I like. So it becomes a matter of personal tastes but most of all perceived value.

If you look at sales figures Mazda is a very small player in the US market. They don't even make the top ten list of Asian cars. Honda sells five times the cars that Mazda does. That does not make Honda a better car but it does mean there is something behind this. I tried to like the Mazda 5, I really did. But in the end I went with a CR-V in 2012 and again in 2017. But I will give anyone the same advice I gave my own son: Drive them all, find out which one suits you best and buy it. Same advice I just gave my grand daughter when she was ready to buy her first new car. I refused to tell her which one was best, I wanted her to learn to dig in, get all the facts and then drive them all before making her choice. In the end she picked the car I would have recommended but refrained from doing so. (A Honda Fit...and she loves it). I wanted it to be her choice as she was going to live with it.

The new CR-V is an excellent value and the sales numbers prove that out. The Mazda is a nice car but there are differences. If one car was "the best" the rest would go out of business in short order. Buy what suits you, not me.
 
#11 ·
I have a very open mind about cars. They were my professional life and I drove so many new cars in my life I can't count. I have a certain "things" I look for in a personal vehicle that I have to pay for myself. ( I was very spoiled by years of free cars...with gas!). The vehicle has to feel right. It has to handle and steer and brake well. It has to be reliable and and most of all practical for my uses such as hauling things and such. I have sampled all the cars in this class and tried to be open minded about them. As for "style" that is a personal item and we can not always agree that what you think is best is the same as what I like. So it becomes a matter of personal tastes but most of all perceived value.

If you look at sales figures Mazda is a very small player in the US market. They don't even make the top ten list of Asian cars. Honda sells five times the cars that Mazda does. That does not make Honda a better car but it does mean there is something behind this. I tried to like the Mazda 5, I really did. But in the end I went with a CR
 
#13 ·
i dont know about the lower trims, but top of the line touring vs top of the line cx5 model whatever it was, the CRV just had more to offer.

if you were going simply based on looks the cx5 is the clear winner. but if this is going to be your family car you really need to see everything.

CX5 both the old one and the new one, STILL NO ANDROID AUTO AND APPLE CAR PLAY that is a huge lost. i dont know how i can get a car without that now. Also NO REMOTE START, you cant even get it as an option. Mazda had that crappy mobile smart phone remote start where you pay a yearly fee lol, and its not a physical keyfob tied in to the car like all normal remote start systems, its horrible. remote start in that class and price it has to be there. Esp if they are focused on being so luxury and refined.

worse gas milage on the cx5

cx5 owners are proud of the handling aspects of the cx5. well a recent test with car and driver i believe had data to finally show that the current 17 CRV outhandles the outgoing CX5 which was like their comparison when it came to great handling CUV/SUV. Recent reviews indicate the new CX5 handles similar if not only a bit better than the outgoing CX5, so that tells you that the CRV is up there.

no handsfree liftgate on cx5

a lot less cargo room

smaller infotainment screen? cx5

no panoramic roof on cx5, its standard on canada touring models if thats where you live for the crv

horrible placement of the USB ports in 2nd row. its in the armrest in the middle, so if 3 passengers will be there, forget about accessing them.
 
#28 ·
Also NO REMOTE START, you cant even get it as an option. Mazda had that crappy mobile smart phone remote start where you pay a yearly fee lol, and its not a physical keyfob tied in to the car like all normal remote start systems, its horrible. remote start in that class and price it has to be there. Esp if they are focused on being so luxury and refined.
Had to check on this before responding. My niece has had a CX5 about a year or longer. Hers definitely has remote start -- from the Mazda remote. This is a U.S. model and I'm not sure which trim package she has.
 
#14 · (Edited)
Resale, cargo space, apple car play, seating comfort and interior quietness made me go with the CRV over the 2016 CX5 that I cross shopped. Having said that, I enjoyed the drive of the Mazda.. I owned a 2013 Speed3 for a few years and was almost reminded of that visceral like quality when I test drove it.. anywho to each their own. **edit** obviously cannot comment on the 2017 as they were not out when I purchased. They look nice.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#15 ·
Cargo on the CR-V is significantly larger, over 30%. The CR-V is lighter yet larger and more fuel efficient. The only place where gears matter is an automatic transmission. The CVT is much more maneuverable than a traditional auto where you have to live with gear hunting. The CR-V also has wider tires, and arguably 18" is better than 19". Android Auto and CarPlay on CR-V. Longer, wider, lighter, more fuel efficient, more cargo, more power early in the band and more fuel efficient.

CR-V > CX-5 all day long.
 
#17 ·
I looked at both in the sales process, and decided on the CRV as the better fit for me and the family.

i enjoyed the drive of the CX-5, but in the end the CRV had the features and value better for what I was looking for.

You have to really drive both and see which works for you.
 
#18 ·
Asking for advice in a CR-V owners forum after calling the car ugly is not the best way to get good answers.

My wife thought the front of the redesigned CX5 was ugly. I didn't like the oddly shaped front center armrest. Lack of Android Auto was a deal breaker.

There are things that aren't perfect on the CR-V as well, but if you wait for the perfect car you will have a long wait. Try them both and see which makes you happier.

You could wait a few months for the CX5 diesel and see how it drives, if gas mileage is important to you. Or even more months for a CR-V diesel.
 
#19 ·
- I buy my vehicles new and keep them for 10-14 years, so picking the right one is extremely important.
- I've owned Honda's all of my life, but I'm having a difficult time convincing myself to get the CR-V.
If you plan to keep your vehicle for at least 10 years, you really need to "love" it because you're the one who will have to live with it. I would speculate that the reason you're having this dilemma is that you may not be quite ready, or neither of the vehicles is truly a good fit at this point. If a vehicle is the right one, you won't have to convince yourself, the vehicle will do all of that for you.
 
#20 ·
Since you keep your cars a long time, you need to consider the cost and availability of parts. A high production car like a CRV will have far more parts manufactured by many different companies that drives costs down and availability up. A low production car like the CX-5 will not have that advantage and the parts will be harder to find and at a higher price. It's simply supply and demand. Also, garages will be more familiar with the CRV since there are so many of them. They will know the quirks they have and will know better how to work on them.

After driving other vehicles with a CVT, I almost didn't even drive a CRV. I did and found it very different than a typical CVT and I like it a lot. It is more like a traditional transmission, only better.
 
#22 ·
Hello. I'm new to the forum and in the market for a new vehicle. A little background:
- I buy my vehicles new and keep them for 10-14 years, so picking the right one is extremely important.
- I've owned Honda's all of my life, but I'm having a difficult time convincing myself to get the CR-V.

Vehicles Considering:
- 2017 Honda CR-V EX (2WD) -- White Diamond w/ Black Cloth ($27,635)
- 2017 Mazda CX-5 Touring (2WD) w/ I-ActivSense -- Snowflake White Pearl w/ Leatherette ($27,680)

Pros of CR-V:
1) Considerably better MPG estimates.
Can owners chime on actual fuel economy? I've read turbo engines deliver better MPG during EPA testing than real world driving.
2) Comes with several important features (moon roof, remote start, fog lights, cargo cover)
Are there any other notable features I'm overlooking? I don't care about things like heated side mirrors, ect.


Cons of CR-V:
1) It is just plain ugly, with all the cheap plastic cladding & fake chrome/wood. The CX-5 is far better looking on both the exterior and interior.
2) Comes with a CVT. I strongly prefer a traditional transmission that allows me to choose gears (especially in winter).
3) Lacks several notable features (LED headlights, auto dimming mirror w/ Homelink, faux leather seats, leather steering wheel/shifter).

Any other drawbacks to the CR-V that I'm missing?
I realize responses are going to favor the CR-V, but I'm just looking for insight into the decision making process from current owners.

Thanks.
To get led headlights you need to go to top of the line on both models- So let us say you are comparing touring crv with cx5 gt with tech package you get a couple of features more on cx5 - Led fog lights, Heads up display.
If you are not a big fan of cvt than I would go with cx5 because the acceleration is very loud on crv especially if you step on the gas. Crv has slightly more room than cx5 and I like the touch screen on crv- I believe on cx5 it is a knob to control the feature.
crv has hands free open for tailgate- I do not think cx5 has that.
 
#23 ·
I checked out the cx5 and the cx9 and agree their cargo space lacks the competition. I closely listened to a cx9 grand touring Bose stereo and it had gobs of distortion. Maybe it had production issues otherwise Mazda dropped the ball there.

I'm not sure if my local Mazda dealers are any easier to negotiate with, but I can't imagine them being any worse than Honda's.

As far as the 2017 crv's overstated chrome I tend to agree and found the lunar silver nicely hides the overwhelming chrome contrast.
 
#24 ·
As far as the 2017 crv's overstated chrome I tend to agree and found the lunar silver nicely hides the overwhelming chrome contrast.
I purchased the lunar silver EX and everything does seem to blend together better than some other colors. Saved me a bit of money, too. I hope I don't offend anyone with this opinion, because each of us has our own tastes, so please be kind. ;)

I prefer the looks of the EX model, partly because I'm not a fan of the chrome strip along the bottom of the doors. Maybe I have unrefined taste? but I see it as an attempt to add false elegance to a sporty vehicle--it almost feels like an after thought add on. It does look pretty good when you're staring at it straight-on but from an angle, the bulge of the chrome strip looks clumsy to me. The ninja star rims are okay, but I prefer the gray trimmed rims that the EX has as they seem less garish than the black and chrome.

And I'll certainly admit that I may have bought "up" to either EX-L or Touring, but I'll never again buy a vehicle with leather seats that doesn't have the cooling feature. Our spring thru fall weather is just too hot and humid for me to have the leather.
 
#25 ·
Asking if you missed any cons (or pluses) of the CR-V is fine, but why ask strangers to apply their value system to your situation, lifestyle and budget to help you make the decision?

You know what the features and benefits are. Only you can decide after driving each how much you value the positives and are bothered by the negatives to arrive at your decision.

For example, using your numbering:

Your Cons of CR-V:

1) I think it is just plain BEAUTIFUL. You don't. Am I going to convince you it is the opposite of the 'plain ugly' you think? Hardly! Do I think it's plasticy? NO! Am I bothered by the fake wood? NO! I think it looks quite real.

2) I prefer the CVI transmission..

3) I like the styling and features the CR-V has that the CX5 does not have. I don't miss anything the CX5 might have.

Only you decide what impacts you. We are not you.
 
#32 ·
Gas mileage info: Owned the car since the day it was released. I continually have 35+ highway, 29-30 around town and settle about 31 combined. I'm happy. My only current gripe has nothing to do with the car's fault. Someone threw something and hit my hood, just a little bitty crease but I see it, and Honda collision says I probably need a new hood. Depressed....
 
#33 ·
A few things to consider

-CRV has more room than CX5
-CRV has better gas mileage at 27 city / 33 hwy, CX5 is 23 city / 29 hwy.
-CRV is slightly quicker acceleration
-CRV has Car Play now
-CRV has remote start. CX5 is a dealer install add on
-To get advanced safety equip in CX5 you have to go to the top trim level. With CRV advanced safety starts at EX level
-CRV has leather seats available at mid-trim level, CX5 you have to be at top trim level (GT)
-CX5 is slightly more expensive for comparable equip. To get leather and advanced safety equip in CX5 you are at $33K. With CRV you are at $31K
-You can get LED headlights with CRV w Touring
-Auto dimming is included in CRV EX
-In regard to appearance CRV and CX5 are 2 different styles w/CX5 going for more luxury look and CRV with more sport utility look. I saw CX5 yesterday and it looks like mini CX9. I like the CX9 body style however on the CX5 the front end looks too big
-The CRV is one of the highest US manufacturing content cars. The CX5 is made in Japan....so if you want to support US.....
 
#35 ·
Former CX-5 Owner

We bought a 2013 CX-5 Touring when they first came out. It had the 2.0L engine. My wife loved the car, and it was her daily commuter until a month ago when she was rear-ended and the car was totaled. She was not injured, so that says something positive about the safety of that CX-5. Our plan was to replace it with a new CX-5, but decided to drive a CR-V just for comparison. We bought the CR-V. The new CX-5s are nice, but we found the CR-V barely beat it in a lot of categories important to us. It felt roomier and definitely has more cargo room. It has more features included, and having Apple CarPlay was a major plus. We both actually liked the CVT in the CR-V, surprisingly. Neither of us liked the tranny of the 13 CX-5, as it liked to hunt for the right gear a lot. The new one we drove seemed to do the same thing. The software in those trannies is programmed for maximum fuel efficiency, and they seem to shift a little too early sometimes. There are no worries about that in the CR-V. The drive is smooth as butter. Now that we've had the CR-V for almost 4 weeks, I can say that it gets better mileage in suburban driving than the 2.0L CX-5 did. In that CX-5, my wife typically got 26.5 to 28 MPG with her "mostly freeway, but some stop and go" commute. She's had 2 tanks in the CR-V with the same commute and got 29.6 and 29.3. Since the 2.5L in the 17 CX-5 likely is slightly worse than the 2.0L of our old 2013 model, I bet the 17 CR-V mileage would be quite a bit better than the 17 CX-5.

Lee
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top