No experience with owning the Mazda. I recently traded out my 2017 Subaru Forester XT Touring for a Lexus NX-350. I got out near of the top of used car pricing, and did very well in the exchange. I did shop the Mazdas and liked them. Price point on the Subaru Ascent, Mazda CX-5 and NX-350 were all within the size and price ballpark.

I've got factory Nav in my Explorer, but use AndroidAuto 99% of the time.
Never tried AA without a touchscreen

quote:

Originally posted by P250UA5:
Never tried AA without a touchscreen

You still have a touchscreen... On your phone.

AA responds very well to voice too. I won't use a handheld device driving, and don't like using the 14" touch while moving for more than a basic radio station change. I am extremely happy with the Lexus, and AA voice recognition.

No experience with the turbos, but we bought a new 2015 model when they had just come out. It was far more comfortable than the Subaru in its class, and much sportier. It’s been entirely reliable the whole time we’ve owned it. Wife’s daily driver and the family car until I got the RAM, now when we go out, we take that. I wouldn’t hesitate to recommend a CX-5.

No help here whatsoever. My sister has the smaller one, the -3 I believe. I hate it. I’m sure the -5 is better. One thing Subaru gets right is the fuel tank. It’s huge. 16.6 gallons on the Crosstrek. Love that. I also gave my son my old one to buy the newer 2.5 at 20% more hp. It’s no burner but it’s an improvement.

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:

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.

I agree with you, except for one "gotcha," at least in Ford's system. In my 2020 Escape if I have a route entered on the nav system, the HUD shows distance to the next waypoint and the action to be taken at that waypoint (direction to turn, etc.). That information is displayed on the HUD if I use the built-in nav system, but if I use an iPhone navigation app, information is shown on the car's main screen, but not on the HUD.

quote:

Originally posted by V-Tail:

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:

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.

I agree with you, except for one "gotcha," at least in Ford's system. In my 2020 Escape if I have a route entered on the nav system, the HUD shows distance to the next waypoint and the action to be taken at that waypoint (direction to turn, etc.). That information is displayed on the HUD if I use the built-in nav system, but if I use an iPhone navigation app, information is shown on the car's main screen, but not on the HUD.

No HUD on my Explorer, but it does put the AA 'next step' in the cluster screen where it would normally say 'Trip 1'
Took this photo this morning as I crossed 30k, you can see the navigation at the top left of the center screen.
Not sure if it does the same for Apple CarPlay.

quote:

Originally posted by pedropcola:
One thing Subaru gets right is the fuel tank. It’s huge. 16.6 gallons on the Crosstrek.

The new Outback has a 18.5 gallon tank!

But my current car has a 15.9 gallon tank, and the CX-5 has a 15.3 gallon tank, so that's a wash.

As it is, I usually only refill my tank when it hits half full every ~2-3 weeks, since I'm only averaging ~500-600 miles per month. So except for further spacing out stops on long road trips, an extra 3 gallons in the tank won't matter much for me.

Should be a great choice. I'm actually window shopping again and am torn between a CX-5 (non-turbo) and the RAV4. Premium or XLE trim equivalent. Reviews on YouTube all say get the turbo if you want a little extra zing.

Not to derail the point of your thread but why doesn’t every manufacturer make big fuel tanks? I bet it is some govt CAFE nonsense. Big fuel tanks are just better. My RAV4 had a tiny tank by comparison and worse mpg.

18.5 is amazing. I would love that.

Size constraints also, I'm sure.
I've got 18 in my Explorer & 28 in the wife's Exped Max

quote:

Originally posted by pedropcola:
Not to derail the point of your thread but why doesn’t every manufacturer make big fuel tanks?

Probably size and weight.

Extra weight affects power/weight ratio and decreases the MPG.

And they'd be trying to shoehorn a 20% larger tank onto a compact frame. The Outback can more easily get away with it because it's comparatively large (long) for its class.

quote:

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

I'm in the "otherwise" bracket here.....back in late 70s had an actual original Rx3.

Wankle rotary engine was early model and lacking in a number of developmental issues. The 'econo model' was presented as an 'econo-box' with massive power advantages.

Yes, it did have great power for its size. Given 50 years now gone by, I still recall my disappointment with the entire package: all the disadvantages of a small econobox coupled with all the disadvantages of a finicky gas guzzling noisy engine that nobody (then) could civilize.

I'm sure it's all better now. Good luck. All 3 radiators on mine leaked.

We almost got a 2017 CX-9 (the CX-5 was a little small with two GSDs) in June 2020. I don’t remember if it had a turbocharger but I liked it a lot. My wife’s favorite was the Volvo XC-90. The only thing I liked more about the Volvo was the driver’s leg and knee room were better than in the CX-9, but it was’t a dealbreaker by any means. Of course we got the Volvo but I suspect the CX-9 or maybe the CX-5 will be my next daily driver vehicle. I was following a CX-5 a few minutes ago and then walked by another one on the way into the building. Good looking vehicle that should be very reliable for you.

My aunt owns a 2016 CX-5, my SIL owns a 2018 CX-5 and my Mother has a 2021 CX-5 Turbo. I've driven them all. Even the lower models have nice interiors. The older ones have 100K+ miles with no major repairs. I own a 2020 Mazda 6 Sig. Turbo and not had any repairs on mine (15K) I think Mazda updated the info screen for 2022+. The older ones that we have are OK but a bit lacking in display and camera resolution. They aren't touch screens unless you're diving very slow. Typical with Mazda, you'll have to go aftermarket or dealer-install for remote-start
I'm sort-of looking now too, as my wife's 2012 T&C is old and she wants something new/smaller. I like the CX-5 and new Nissan Rouge best.

I had a 2020 CX-5 Signature and at the end of my lease swapped it for the 2023 CX-5 Signature. For me, 250+ horse power and 320 pounds of torque (on premium gas) was worth it. Also, the Signature comes with the 360 degree camera and Nappa leather interior and I consider them both worth the extra dollars.I especially enjoy the 360 degree camera for parking ease. The 2020's infotainment software was laggy but the 2023 software is lightning quick.

The 2023 came equipped to respond to my phone app for starting the car, locking it, etc. It works very well.

You just get so much with a high-end CX-5: heated and cooled seats, heated back seats, HUD, premium sound system. And I love the power.

I cross-shopped the CX-5 with the Acura RDX and Lexus NX, so the $40K Signature trim seemed like a bargain compared to what a comparably equipped RDX or NX would have cost (approximately $8- $10K more).

quote:

Originally posted by TheBull:
Typical with Mazda, you'll have to go aftermarket or dealer-install for remote-start

Mazdas since 2020ish have had "Mazda Connected Services" remote start from the factory, accessed via the MyMazda phone app.

Your Mom's 2021 CX-5 Turbo should have it.

quote:

Originally posted by M'headSig:
You just get so much with a high-end CX-5: heated and cooled seats, heated back seats, HUD, premium sound system. And I love the power.

Yep. The 2023 CX-5 Turbo has all that, like your Signature.

Besides cosmetic differences, the step up into Signature really only gains you the nicer leather, 360 camera, and parking sensors. (Plus it comes with the in-car navigation map package standard instead of as an add-on, but I have no need for that.)

While I'm sure I'd enjoy the fancier style of leather and the 360 camera, I personally can't justify the extra ~$3k just for those two features. That's an additional 8% on the price of the car.

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:

Besides cosmetic differences, the step up into Signature really only gains you the nicer leather and the 360 camera, plus it comes with the in-car navigation map package standard.

While I'm sure I'd enjoy the fancier style of leather and the 360 camera, I personally can't justify the extra ~$3k just for those two features.[/QUOTE]

I hear you. I was willing to spend a little more, and in the price range I was looking at I felt the Signature was a value. Plus, I lease, so the delta was more incremental than if I were buying.

Anyway, if you can find yourself a nice Carbon Edition turbo, I really dig the poly-gray paint and ruby red leather interiors on those.

And we also have a Forester, and yes, the Subie Rattle is indeed a real thing!