I'm considering buying a new (or lightly used) car. My original likely route going into this was to go with a 202x Subaru Outback XT, but the more I've researched, the more I'm leaning towards a 202x Mazda CX-5 Turbo.

I've owned three Subarus between myself and my ex-wife - WRX, Crosstrek, and Forester - and while they've been great mechanically, I'm kinda unimpressed with their "unrefined" interiors. They just feel cheap, and have lots of rattles. (It's an actual phenomenon, known online as the "Subie Rattle"...)

Whereas the CX-5 reportedly has the nicest and most comfortable interior and also the best power (with the Turbo) and handling of the various competitors, until you get up into BMW/Porsche/Audi territory.


So does anyone have experience with the latest CX-5s, Turbo or otherwise?


I know they just came out with the CX-50, which appears to be potentially headed towards being the CX-5's eventual successor. But I have no need for offroading, which seems to be the crowd at which they're aiming the CX-50 currently. Plus it's the very first year of production, and from a brand new facility too, so I don't really want to be a guinea pig/beta tester. I'm already reading about some QC issues with the CX-50s.

Whereas the CX-5 has been around in its current iteration long enough that I'm assuming all the kinks have been well and truly worked out. Plus the CX-5s seem to run ~$3k less than a comparably equipped CX-50.

I've driven a few of the non-turbo models over the years, definitely more of a driver's CUV than most of its competition.
Maybe also check out the CX-30.

I really like how the CX-50 looks, but they're quite pricey.

Had one, 2019 model IIRC. Loved it. Before that I had the non-turbo version. The turbo version was a definite improvement over the non-turbo. Liked the interior, HUD, and didn’t mind the infotainment system, which some people don’t seem to like. Gas mileage sucked for what it should have been, IMHO. The max I got on pure highway trips was around 27 mpg, not the 31 or so I think they claimed. Above 65 mph, I think that little 4 banger just revs too high, and that’s what causes the mpg to drop off at normal highway speeds of 70 of 75 mph. Other than that little annoyance, I loved it.

ETA: other annoyance was the small gas tank. 14 gal, I think.

quote:

Originally posted by P250UA5:
Maybe also check out the CX-30.

The CX-30 is too small for what I'm wanting. I need a CX-5-sized cargo area, at least. Even that is smaller than the Outback I had initially envisioned, but workable.

quote:

Originally posted by P250UA5:
I really like how the CX-50 looks, but they're quite pricey.

Yes and no. You can get into a Turbo CX-50 for about the same price as a Turbo CX-5 (~$38k). The difference is that the entry CX-5 Turbo is much better equipped for my purposes than the entry CX-50 Turbo. So to get a comparable CX-50 with the convenience stuff I'm wanting, you have to go up two entire trim levels to the CX-50 Premium. So it ends up being ~$3k more for a comparable CX-50.

I'd rather have a naturally aspirated, but the turbo engine at least doesn't suffer from the reliability problems (they are supposed to have been fixed with the very latest ones) of the Ford EgoEco-Boost fours.

quote:

Originally posted by egregore:
I'd rather have a naturally aspirated

Why's that? Is it just the gas mileage? I'm not as concerned about that. I drive about 8k miles per year in my personal vehicle. My current car averages about 25 MPG. So a 22/27 Turbo isn't too far off from my current situation, and isn't going to put me in the poorhouse keeping it filled.

The thing is, the various non-turbo CUVs I've/we've owned before - Crosstrek and Forester - were both noticeably underpowered, and frankly boring to drive. Same with driving my father's CRV or HRV (I don't recall). Which is what I'm wanting to avoid by going with a Turbo this time. I wanted a Forester XT last time, but couldn't find one at the price I wanted to pay.

Plus, the CX-5 appears to be one of the only CUVs you can find these days that doesn't have a CVT...

No experience with the turbo; I bought a new 2015 CX-5 Grand Touring in September 2014.
Absolutely love it. The handling is great. No problems whatsoever, regular maintenance done on schedule.

I'm a Mazda convert. I'm thinking of buying another CX-5 this year.

I've had two Mazdas and I'd recommend them in a heartbeat. They have a fairly nice interior and, for lack of a better term, a zippy personality. I found both of them a lot of fun to drive, and very reliable.

Just as a maybe to consider, on the bigger side, I've got a 20 Explorer Limited, just about to hit 30k.
You could easily get into a low mileage one for the same or less.
3 rows, but I keep the 3rd row down. RWD, 300hp turbo 4 & I'm averaging 23mph over the 3500 commuting miles I've put on it.

Oh, I've considered it. My agency ride is a higher end Explorer, and I love it. (No joke, of all the cars I've ever driven, this Explorer has the second most comfortable seats out of all them... I could take a nap in those!)

But I don't love the ~$50k price tag for even a used Explorer that has the features I want: AWD, heated leather seats, upgraded sound, etc. $50k+ is well more than I'm wanting to spend on a car.

I'd like to keep it ~$40k or less. For example, I can get into a new CX-5 Turbo with all the features I want for ~$38k, or a lightly used one for ~$35k-$36k.

Plus the Explorer is really bigger than I'm wanting in my personal vehicle, since I don't need/want a third row. Heck, I rarely need a second row.

So if the choice at ~$40k is between a lower tier full sized SUV, or a higher tier small SUV, the latter wins out all day long.

I would buy a Mazda product over anything else’s if the had what I was looking for. The wife had a 16’ Mazda 5 she put 170k on in 3 years and not a single problem…not 1!

quote:

[re: comment about how I'd rather have my engines NA] Why's that?

Less to go wrong. Ever seen a turbo grenade? To be fair, Mazda does seem to have fewer problems than some.

In 2020 I bought two of the '20 CX-5s, the top of the line (don't recall the model-oh yeah, the Signature) but not turbos. One for the wife and one for me. A year later, I sold mine for nearly what I paid for it and bought the Pilot. Only reason is that we needed at least one larger vehicle.

My wife's has been perfect now for nearly 3 years and there was nothing at all wrong with the one I sold save the size.

Bob

This message has been edited. Last edited by: straightshooter1,

I've got a 2016 CX-9 turbo that I took on a Corvette trade intending to sell it. It's a one owner Alabama car w/90k miles and in great shape w/documented service & good carfax. Mine is the Grand Touring trim w/nav and I like driving it so much I'm keeping it.

Turbo is great, quick with over 300lb of torque that makes it feel faster than it is. I'm keeping an eye on the CX-90 inline 6 that was just released but I'm really happy with the 2016 and very impressed by the made in Japan build quality. Pretty sure CX5 is same car w/out 3rd row seat and I'll bet it's more fun to drive. Zoom Zoom

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:
Oh, I've considered it. My agency ride is a higher end Explorer, and I love it. (No joke, of all the cars I've ever driven, this Explorer has the second most comfortable seats out of all them... I could take a nap in those!)

But I don't love the ~$50k price tag for even a used Explorer that has the features I want: AWD, heated leather seats, upgraded sound, etc. $50k+ is well more than I'm wanting to spend on a car.

I'd like to keep it ~$40k or less. For example, I can get into a new CX-5 Turbo with all the features I want for ~$38k, or a lightly used one for ~$35k-$36k.

Plus the Explorer is really bigger than I'm wanting in my personal vehicle, since I don't need/want a third row. Heck, I rarely need a second row.

So if the choice at ~$40k is between a lower tier full sized SUV, or a higher tier small SUV, the latter wins out all day long.

Mine has just about everything but AWD (not really needed in Houston). Got it with about 25k on it for under $40k.
Driver assist, B&O audio, 360 cam
Was initially looking at a Platinum, but the dealer stopped responding & I didn't really want the 21" wheels.
I went for the '20 to avoid the decontent stuff on the 21 & 22 models. Also wanted the steering wheel shifters, as the decontented models have no option for any manual shifting.

If Ford made a SWB/2 row Explorer, I'd have definitely gone for that, but don't care for the Edge. Had an Edge ST for a loaner & it's a blast for the speed, but I don't like the driving dynamics & feel like I sit on it, not in it.
My wife has an Expedition Max, so mine is the sportier model, even if she's got gobs more power.

I looked at CX9s in the past, very comfortable, but would keep the Explorer over the 9.

quote:

Originally posted by doublesharp:
Pretty sure CX5 is same car w/out 3rd row seat

Kinda. Maybe more like the CX-5 is the CX-9's little brother.

Mazda did have a CX-7, which was more like a CX-9 without the third row. But that was at least a (car) generation ago.

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:

quote:

Originally posted by doublesharp:
Pretty sure CX5 is same car w/out 3rd row seat

Kinda. Maybe more like the CX-5 is the CX-9's little brother.

Mazda did have a CX-7, which was more like a CX-9 without the third row. But that was at least a (car) generation ago.

The turbo CX7 was a quick car. 2.3T from the Mazdaspeed IIRC.
Fairly unrefined though, very plasticky.

I have a 2019 Signature, which was the top trim at the time. I bought it last September as a CPO and have been very happy with it so far. Had done a lot of comparison amongst similar things like the RAV4 and CR-V. The turbo is plenty powerful. I get around 22-24mpg, but that's almost entirely fairly short (sub 8 miles) downtown city driving with lots of stop lights. I've hit 30-31 on the highway.

I think the 2020 is just about the same with a slightly larger info screen. I believe the 2021 has many more changes including an even larger screen.

I saw a lot of complaints about the infotainment system. My only mild gripe is that it takes a moment to fully boot up when you start the car (but a lot of them are like that), the screen should be a bit larger, and it doesn't have wireless android auto. It does have Android (and Apple) Auto with a USB cable. Most of the complaints seemed to center around where the controls are. In my opinion once you get used to it they are great. While having the volume knob and controls down near the gear shift seemed off at first I'm now convinced it's about the best location. No need to lean forward and don't even need to look at it once you get used to it, just shift your hand a bit. It is a touchscreen, but that only functions below something very slow like 5mph. But that doesn't bother me much as the controls are pretty intuitive and easy to use.

The trim I have has an excellent interior with real wood and leather. It's very well put together. Mazda has been trying to position themselves as upscale for a few years now and they're doing a great job. In some comparisons the top trim CX-5 beat out some of the more entry level Lexus SUVs.

CX-5 has one numerous best in class awards over the years for good reason in my experience. I wanted a well made compact to midsized SUV with upscale features and it's fit the bill so far.

I've spent quite a bit of time driving an Acura RDX (I think it was a 2012, definitely 2nd gen with the V6) and it felt WAY more truck like and clunky then my CX-5 when it comes to handling. Great engine but the handling and ride were pretty terrible in comparison.

Is the Mazda infotainment touch screen? I want to say the Mazda6 Turbo I drove when they first came out was know based & not a touch screen.
My Mercedes was the same & you get used to it, but would prefer a touch screen.

No touchscreen on the CX-5. It has a nice 11" screen (plus a projected HUD), but it can only be controlled by the knob below the shifter, or the wheel-mounted controls.

That's a deliberate choice by Mazda, to reduce distraction. They apparently tried for a little while with a both touch and knob controls, but ended up doing away with touch altogether as of a few years ago.

Frankly, I'm good with it. I don't fiddle with my entertainment center while driving anyway. I just set it to music streaming from my phone before I set out, and then only use the wheel-mounted buttons to skip and adjust volume.

When I use navigation, it is strictly on my phone, not through the car. If you're old school and want to use in-car navigation (and pay the ridiculous $$$$ for annual updates), then I could see it being annoying trying to enter an address via the dial.

But nowadays, when your cell phone seamlessly integrates into your car system via Apple CarPlay/Android Auto, and it has free map software with free updates whose functionality blows that in-car nav system out of the water... I don't see why you ever would.