Honda CR-V Owners Club Forums banner
  • Hey everyone! Enter your ride HERE to be a part of this month's Ride of the Month Challenge!

1 - 20 of 256 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
741 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Over the holidays I stopped by the Mazda dealer to check out the latest CX-5 with the 2.5L Turbo engine. The engine, which was in the much larger CX-9 has been added to the two top trim levels of the CX-5. This is something that was not available when we purchased our CR-V back in 2017, so I felt I owed it to myself to check it out.

First impressions:

Exterior
1) Looks significantly smaller than the CR-V on the outside. (Specs show it's only a few inches smaller in length and height).
2) Has nice styling, very elegant, vs the CR-V tries to look a bit more rugged.
3) 19" Wheels are very attractive.
4) Low profile tires help give the CX-5 a sporty look.

Interior
1) Interior feels a lot smaller than the CR-V. Passenger volume is about the same, cargo volume is about 8 cu.ft. less.
2) The Nappa leather is really nice.
3) Layout (ergonomics) not as nice as the CR-V. For example, the location of the shifter is very traditional. I like the way Honda has very efficiently laid out the center console area.

4) Why do manufacturers all want to put gloss (piano) black finishes in a car? It scratches easily and always shows dust. Looking past that, the controls seem a bit bunched together on the center console but I do like all the buttons for the climate control. If there is one complaint I have with the CR-V, is that you need to use the touch screen to select some of the climate control settings. Honda did a much better job in the 2018 Accord.

5) I prefer the digital instrumentation in the CR-V, the CX-5 just has a digital center gauge.
6) The back seats have much less leg room than the CR-V.

Test Drive
1) Suspension is stiffer, bouncier. You can really feel that shorter wheelbase and the low profile tires. I don't mind a stiffer suspension if it means better handling. However, checking the specs on C&D, the CR-V actually beats the CX-5 in all the handling and braking tests.

2) I expected the engine to feel more powerful. The CR-V has a 1.5L Turbo, churning out 190hp, mated to a CVT. The 2019 Mazda has a 2.5L Turbo, churning out 227hp (per the window sticker) mated to a 6-speed auto. The engine did feel a bit faster but not as much as I expected, not anywhere near the feeling of power I get in my 2018 Accord 2.0T. It's interesting that C&D rates the CX-5 2.5T as having 250hp, when it was clearly printed by Mazda at 227hp on the window sticker. Mazda has had issues in the past with overstating the HP numbers, maybe they backed off on the numbers to represent what you are really getting on 87 octane fuel.

3) The controls for the Active Safety features were ambiguous, I had a difficult time knowing if I had LKAS on/off, ACC on/off.

4) Mazda's idea of LKAS assist is different than Honda's. In the Mazda, the CX-5 LKAS didn't try to keep you in the lane, instead it waited until you left the lane and would steer you back into the lane. Even though that seemed more like the RDMS, the salesperson said that's the LKAS feature. I was confused but okay, if you say so.

5) On the highway I noticed more wind noise than on our CR-V, but a bit less engine noise.
6) The ventilated seats were really nice.
7) Fuel economy isn't as good, but then again the engine has 66% more displacement. Even though the salesperson said the CX-5 has cylinder deactivation, the MPG is probably about right given the larger engine.

8) Mazda includes a HU display so you can see digital info floating in front of you out in space. It's a nice thing, Honda put it in the Accord, but it's by no means a necessity for me.

Price
The C&D as tested price on the top of the line CX-5 Signature is $39,155, compared to the CR-V Touring's $34,595, that's a difference of $4,560. For that you get the larger 2.5T engine with more power, a heated steering wheel, ventilated seats with Nappa leather, and a HU display.

Summary
For me, I couldn't see spending the extra nearly $5k for the added features and what felt like only a bit more power. Yes, C&D shows the CX-5 as being more than a second faster 0-60 but I expected the vehicle to feel like it has more power given the acceleration numbers. I liked the Nappa leather but the rest of the interior didn't seem any more upscale than the Honda. I think my 2018 Accord has a more upscale interior than the CX-5 (and it cost $8k less).

The driving dynamics felt good, however, the C&D numbers doesn't show them as being better. In fact, the braking is several feet longer on the CX-5.

In the end, we really like our CR-V, it's more roomy, quieter, and performs well enough. Sure, I wouldn't mind it if Honda put the 2.0T Accord engine in it, but they needed to save that for the 2018 Acura RDX, which reminds me, I need to test drive one of those.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
104 Posts
Just an FYI (since I'm still watching this forum but also knee deep in the CX5 forum) the 250 HP is achieved with premium (93) gas. The 227 HP is from standard (87) gas.

C&D just posted and review and they achieved 0-60 in 6.2 seconds with the 250 HP.

Too expensive for me but thought I would contribute a little here to this forum ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
165 Posts
I've ways thought I'd like a head-up display but I'm not an Air Force pilot and have never driven a vehicle with one. Still, I'm intrigued. But we love everything about our 2018 Touring - fortunately no issues at this time, my wife treats it like a car, and it somewhat mollifies my inner truck child.


Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
880 Posts
This is Mazda’s first model year with cylinder deactivation, which has been a hard thing for manufacturers to get right (Honda and GM V-6s, for example). And it seem to me at least that applying it to a 4 cylinder engine would be more challenging still. This in and of itself would make me steer clear of a 2019 MX-5.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
353 Posts
Over the holidays I stopped by the Mazda dealer to check out the latest CX-5 with the 2.5L Turbo engine. The engine, which was in the much larger CX-9 has been added to the two top trim levels of the CX-5. This is something that was not available when we purchased our CR-V back in 2017, so I felt I owed it to myself to check it out.
First impressions:
I agree with you on some points, though I'm not sure about others, and you got a few key pieces of information incorrect...

"You can really feel that shorter wheelbase"
- The CX-5 actually has a longer wheelbase than the CR-V.

"checking the specs on C&D, the CR-V actually beats the CX-5 in all the handling and braking tests."
- The CX-5 takes 7 additional feet to stop from 70 MPH.
- Skidpad results are slightly lower for the CX-5, due to "an intrusive stability-control system hampered its performance." 99% of buyers would never drive the car aggressive enough to be bothered by this.

Suspension is stiffer, bouncier. I don't mind a stiffer suspension if it means better handling. The driving dynamics felt good, however, the C&D numbers doesn't show them as being better. Didn't seem any more upscale than the Honda.
- C&D states..."It is prettier inside and out, more refined, and more engaging to drive than crossovers such as the Honda CR-V and Toyota RAV4."
- "This all adds up to a vehicle that can hardly even be considered in the same conversation as Toyotas and Hondas anymore. Frankly, the CX-5 Signature is nicer—to drive, to look at, and to sit in—than some similarly sized crossovers with full-on premium badges."


"I expected the engine to feel more powerful."
- The new CX-5 performs SIGNIFICANTLY better on ALL acceleration tests. I don't believe there is anything in this segment that even comes close to the CX-5 performance figures.

"On the highway I noticed more wind noise than on our CR-V,"

- C&D describes it as..."The CX-5 is satisfyingly hushed at speed"

"Compared to the CR-V Touring's $34,595, that's a difference of $4,560."
- Either your pricing is off or you're not comparing apples to apples.
- The CX-5 Signature AWD is $37,885. The CR-V Touring AWD is $35,145. A price difference of $2,740.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
42 Posts
S2k_Dude;15236 7) Fuel economy isn't as good said:
I think the salesperson might be mistaken, according to Mazda the base engine uses cylinder deactivation but they don't mention it in the turbo motor specs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
741 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 · (Edited)
Just an FYI (since I'm still watching this forum but also knee deep in the CX5 forum) the 250 HP is achieved with premium (93) gas. The 227 HP is from standard (87) gas.

C&D just posted and review and they achieved 0-60 in 6.2 seconds with the 250 HP.

Too expensive for me but thought I would contribute a little here to this forum ��
I wonder if the CR-V HP would also increase on premium fuel. The 2.0T Accord engine puts out another 11HP on premium fuel per Hondata. Also, I would be curious to see a dyno plot of the CX-5, Mazda has a history of overstating HP numbers on their vehicles. However, lately, Honda owners have been reporting higher than expected HP numbers when the cars are put on the dyno. I'm sure the dealer didn't put premium fuel in their test drive vehicle, and it's possible that there is a smaller difference than the numbers show. I agree, the C&D 0-60 number for the CX-5 is more than a second faster than the CR-V so I have no doubt the CX-5 should be significantly quicker to accelerate. The test drive just seemed a bit disappointing compared to my 2018 Accord which has a similar HP rating (although the Accord's engine is smaller and runs on 87 octane to achieve it's 252hp rating).


Very nice write-up S2K_Dude.
Thanks!

This is Mazda’s first model year with cylinder deactivation, which has been a hard thing for manufacturers to get right (Honda and GM V-6s, for example). And it seem to me at least that applying it to a 4 cylinder engine would be more challenging still. This in and of itself would make me steer clear of a 2019 MX-5.
If the 2.5T has cylinder deactivation, it was very seamless.

I agree with you on some points, though I'm not sure about others, and you got a few key pieces of information incorrect...

"You can really feel that shorter wheelbase"
- The CX-5 actually has a longer wheelbase than the CR-V.

"checking the specs on C&D, the CR-V actually beats the CX-5 in all the handling and braking tests."
- The CX-5 takes 7 additional feet to stop from 70 MPH.
- Skidpad results are slightly lower for the CX-5, due to "an intrusive stability-control system hampered its performance." 99% of buyers would never drive the car aggressive enough to be bothered by this.

Suspension is stiffer, bouncier. I don't mind a stiffer suspension if it means better handling. The driving dynamics felt good, however, the C&D numbers doesn't show them as being better. Didn't seem any more upscale than the Honda.
- C&D states..."It is prettier inside and out, more refined, and more engaging to drive than crossovers such as the Honda CR-V and Toyota RAV4."
- "This all adds up to a vehicle that can hardly even be considered in the same conversation as Toyotas and Hondas anymore. Frankly, the CX-5 Signature is nicer—to drive, to look at, and to sit in—than some similarly sized crossovers with full-on premium badges."


"I expected the engine to feel more powerful."
- The new CX-5 performs SIGNIFICANTLY better on ALL acceleration tests. I don't believe there is anything in this segment that even comes close to the CX-5 performance figures.

"On the highway I noticed more wind noise than on our CR-V,"

- C&D describes it as..."The CX-5 is satisfyingly hushed at speed"

"Compared to the CR-V Touring's $34,595, that's a difference of $4,560."
- Either your pricing is off or you're not comparing apples to apples.
- The CX-5 Signature AWD is $37,885. The CR-V Touring AWD is $35,145. A price difference of $2,740.
You are right, I just assumed the wheelbase is shorter based on how the CX-5 rides. So, even though the CX-5 has a longer wheelbase, there is less legroom in the cabin as well.

In a bad situation, 7 additional feet to stop could mean the difference between hitting or not hitting the car or an animal that jumps out in front you. As for 99% of owners not using a vehicle's full capability, that can certainly be said for any performance measurement.

These days, many cars in the $30k-$35k have nice interiors. I think we are getting into some very objective opinions when it comes to what looks better or feels nicer. For me, the CX-5 exterior is nice, as is the interior, but to me they are more so just different, not better or worse. I personally prefer the interior in the CR-V (and the new Accord) but I'm not saying the CX-5 is worse in any respect. Certainly the leather seats in the CX-5 are made from a nice grade of leather which certainly adds to the luxury feel of the cabin. I'm going to stand my ground on the piano black gloss finish though, all brands could loose that IMO.

Again, I agree the acceleration numbers are all better than the CR-V, I just expected more. Guess my expectations were just too high.

My pricing came from the C&D as testing pricing for both vehicles I have driven:
2019 CX-5 Signature 2.5T AWD = $39,155
2017 CR-V Touring AWD = $34,595
A difference of $4,560

Obviously, Honda has raised the price of the 2018-2019 CR-V, so if we use your number, $39,155 - $35,145 = $4,010. Still not a trivial amount to me. Anyone cross shopping the two vehicles, can decide for themselves if the extra $4k is worth it to them. Don't even get me started on how much more Mazda branded vehicles depreciate compared to Honda branded vehicles.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,852 Posts
I actually just picked one of these up this morning. Our CR-V replacement search took us all over the place. We thought we were all set with the 2019 RDX, but my wife was not all that thrilled with it. We saved several $k's and now have a vehicle that, to me, is very close in performance and luxury compared to the RDX. We got a little more than $2k off of MSRP, so ~$36k.

Here are a couple pic's:

Off Truck.jpg 2019 CX-5 Sig Day 1.jpg Dash.jpg Center Console.jpg Sig Emblem.jpg

Best of luck to all of you!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
741 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
I actually just picked one of these up this morning. Our CR-V replacement search took us all over the place. We thought we were all set with the 2019 RDX, but my wife was not all that thrilled with it. We saved several $k's and now have a vehicle that, to me, is very close in performance and luxury compared to the RDX. We got a little more than $2k off of MSRP, so ~$36k.

Best of luck to all of you!
Congrats! The 2019 with the turbo is really nice, I like your color choice too. Since it was not available when we purchased our CR-V nearly 2 years ago, I'm not 100% sure which I would have chosen. Like you, I would have liked to also compare the 2019 RDX as well, should have similar power, although I'd say the RDX has even more features, but again the CX-5 is thousands less than the RDX. From a price point of view, the CX-5 seems to fill in that gap between the CR-V Touring and the RDX, very smart of Mazda to position that model there. BTW, it does seem that Mazda is working very hard these days to be competitive with Honda and Toyota. Hope you get many happy, trouble free, miles from your new CX-5. Please keep us updated if you come across any issues.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
545 Posts
Last December we went SUV shopping with the idea that either the CX5 or Suburu Outback was going to be our choice..

And the CX5 was it.....until we drove the CR-V and then our initial first and second choices became second and third choices.

The interior, driveability and particularly the gas mileage of the CRV made it the clear choice.

Sent from my LG-H700 using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
51 Posts
I’ve been test driving multiple CX-5s the past couple of weeks (2019 GT w/ PP and GTR). Anyone who says the CR-V is as quiet as the CX-5 at high speeds is hard of hearing. Amazing what actually putting sound deafening in a vehicle can do. You’re turn Honda.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
237 Posts
I’ve been test driving multiple CX-5s the past couple of weeks (2019 GT w/ PP and GTR). Anyone who says the CR-V is as quiet as the CX-5 at high speeds is hard of hearing. Amazing what actually putting sound deafening in a vehicle can do. You’re turn Honda.
I hope Honda uses sound deadening material. That "sound deafening" stuff seems pretty scary.:Hmmmmm:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
741 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
I’ve been test driving multiple CX-5s the past couple of weeks (2019 GT w/ PP and GTR). Anyone who says the CR-V is as quiet as the CX-5 at high speeds is hard of hearing. Amazing what actually putting sound deafening in a vehicle can do. You’re turn Honda.
It's interesting that on my test drive of the CX-5, the noise level on the highway seemed louder than our CR-V, while others think it's quieter. Maybe most vehicles in this class are fairly quiet, or maybe those that complain the CR-V is louder are on the Michelin tires. There seems to be more than a few factors that make one vehicle seem louder than another on a test drive. Road surfaces, other traffic, cross winds are just a few that I can think of off hand.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
165 Posts
I have only driven the Touring version of the CR-V. It uses Automatic Noise Cancellation (ANC) technology, which emits noise cancelling sound through the loudspeaker system (especially the subwoofer). Our 2018 AWD Touring seems pretty quiet. I wonder how much difference there is between CR-V trims and whether that should be a comparison point.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,328 Posts
The best test as for as noise is to drive your test car at 70mph ..... talk to your wife and see if you both can hear each other without raising your voice. Hard to do in the CRV...you can actualy do this ins a 2019 Santa Fe
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
228 Posts
There seems to be more than a few factors that make one vehicle seem louder than another on a test drive. Road surfaces, other traffic, cross winds are just a few that I can think of off hand.
So true. In SoCal, the freeways (and many streets) are in such bad condition, they make quiet driving almost impossible in any vehicle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
741 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
One thing the CX-5 is missing is the kick-under activation of the power lift gate. Something I didn't think I cared about until we purchased our CR-V, now I find it works well and we use it all the time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
92 Posts
So true! Same with the roads here in NJ. My 2018 Crv 2018 ex-l is quiet as a church on smooth roads. It's only on the rough, pothole laden ones that I hear road noise. I have the original Bridgestone tires. Don't know if that makes a difference or not. I think the CX5's have nice paint jobs and classy interiors. However, not a fan of the body of the car. I prefer the Crv inside and out and have no complaints about it's drivability and it stops on a dime when needed. I didn't test drive the Mazda only the Rav4 which was a noisy car and the crv which was love at first test drive.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
353 Posts
My pricing came from the C&D as testing pricing for both vehicles I have driven:
2019 CX-5 Signature 2.5T AWD = $39,155
2017 CR-V Touring AWD = $34,595
A difference of $4,560

Obviously, Honda has raised the price of the 2018-2019 CR-V, so if we use your number, $39,155 - $35,145 = $4,010. Still not a trivial amount to me. Anyone cross shopping the two vehicles, can decide for themselves if the extra $4k is worth it to them. Don't even get me started on how much more Mazda branded vehicles depreciate compared to Honda branded vehicles.
Your numbers are wrong again.

The C&D article explicitly states that the CX-5 they tested was loaded up with a bunch of dealer accessories and a premium paint option.

If you build each vehicle on their websites, you will find...
- The 2019 CX-5 Signature AWD is $37,885
- The 2019 CR-V Touring AWD is $35,145

So again, the price difference is $2740, NOT $4560.
 
1 - 20 of 256 Posts
Top