By on February 6, 2012

The small crossover segment is heating up, with the Honda CR-V, Ford Escape and Mazda CX-5 squaring off as this year’s new entrants in an already crowded field. Starting at $20,695, the CX-5 will get class leading fuel economy numbers of 26/35 mpg thanks to the SKYACTIV 2.0L 4-cylinder engine – and a 6-speed manual gearbox.

A 6-speed automatic and AWD will set you back another $1,400 and $1,250 respectively. The Touring model costs  $23,895 and $25,145 for FWD and AWD respectively while the Grand Touring runs $27,045 and $28,295 for the GT AWD. A Technology package, featuring items like in-dash TomTom navigation, pivoting HID headlights and rain-sensing wipers adds another $1,185 ($1,325 for the GT model, which also adds keyless entry) while a Bose stereo/moonroof package is $1,130. A destination charge of $795 is not included in the price.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

35 Comments on “2013 Mazda CX-5 Starting At $20,695...”


  • avatar
    Yuppie

    A taller Mazda 3?

    • 0 avatar
      NightFlight

      …. that is available with AWD, tows 2,000 pounds, has higher ground clearance, and still gets decent FE.

      • 0 avatar
        stuki

        35 highway for a tall box is way beyond “decent” if you ask me!

      • 0 avatar
        Luke42

        Yes, but if you really wanted a compact station wagon but could only get a crossover, then 35mpg is decent.

        That’s how I ended up with my Escape. The Escape was really designed for what I do (all-weather family car w/ light towing and lots of hitch-mounted accessories), but I never wanted an SUV/CUV. This looks like it solves a similar problem, but with a little less SUV (and a having little less SUV is a very good thing, at least for me).

    • 0 avatar
      amca

      Just what the world needs. Another tall car.

      That’s kind of like another car.

  • avatar
    gottacook

    Can you get the 6-speed manual with AWD? What are the EPA ratings for the AWD version(s)?

    • 0 avatar
      Steven02

      25/31 for the AWD auto. 28 combined. I don’t know if you can get a manual with AWD.

      http://www.fueleconomy.gov

    • 0 avatar
      Wraith

      AWD + 6-speed auto = 25/31 (28 combined) EPA. Original estimate was 25/30.

      I don’t think there’s a manual + AWD option available. Touring and Grand Touring trims are auto only. Sport can be had with manual FWD, auto FWD, or auto AWD. (http://www.leftlanenews.com/2013-mazda-cx-5-to-start-at-20685.html)

      • 0 avatar
        sitting@home

        I’m guessing the AWD will be some puny on-demand setup that will require the electronics to carefully manage the power routing, hence no stick shift. With only 155hp/150lb-ft on tap, the average Corolla driver will smoke you at the stop lights.

    • 0 avatar
      DeadWeight

      Mazda is the most underrated car maker….well, since ever.

      IMO.

      YMMV.

      My .02

      What’s interesting is how much better Mazda sales are in so many other countries other than the U.S., usually by many multiples (as a % of their respective total sales markets).

      Check out the interior – if I were going to buy a CUV, this interior has everything I need, and nothing I don’t, which is less is more winning strategy given the buttons/knobs/levers/gadgets found in so many new vehicles.

      http://www.egmcartech.com/2011/09/14/2012-mazda-cx-5-revealed/2012mazdacx5-16/

      And the back seat, unless my eyes are playing tricks on me, looks to be the biggest by a mile in this segment:

      http://www.egmcartech.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/2012mazdacx5-07.jpg

    • 0 avatar
      kvndoom

      6-speed will be the FWD stripped down version only. Funny that the trim with the MPG Mazda brags about has almost no available options.

      http://www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/displayPage.action?pageParameter=modelsSpecs2&vehicleCode=CX5

      • 0 avatar
        stuki

        Either Mazda or me are reading this wrong. Mazda obviously figures people who buy manuals do so because they want the cheapest car, and the cheapest gas bill. I’m thinking those who buy manuals do so because they want the absolute last drop of performance from their engine; not because they want to save a few bucks.

      • 0 avatar
        Educator(of teachers)Dan

        @stuki, I’m with you but Mazda and most other car makers think like you do. Either the manual is for the stripped model or the most high performance model. (With the exception of Dodge and the Dart which is why a loaded Dart might get a look from me.)

      • 0 avatar
        redav

        stuki,

        ~97% of the population aren’t interested in the absolute last drop of performance. And those that are, typically buy a car built specifically for wringing the last drop of performance, not a CUV. CUVs are typically mommy cars.

        Why not at least offer it as an option? If you can easily and quickly deliver custom builds like the domestics can, that makes sense. If it’s built in Japan with a 4+ mo wait, not so much.

        Personally, I think Mazda needs to move more of their production out of Japan: one, because of the yen and two, to offer better local service/delivery.

  • avatar
    replica

    Looks pretty good. Reminds me of the late 90′s Mazda front ends. Mazda is one of the few car companies that makes affordable fun cars anymore.

  • avatar
    Wraith

    AWD + 6-speed auto = 25/31 (28 combined) EPA. Original estimate was 25/30.

    I don’t think there’s a manual + AWD option available. Touring and Grand Touring trims are auto only. Sport can be had with manual FWD, auto FWD, or auto AWD. (http://www.leftlanenews.com/2013-mazda-cx-5-to-start-at-20685.html)

  • avatar
    Type57SC

    Weakest post in a while, or else i logged into prnewswire.com by mistake. unfortunate timing to post it right after the very thoughtful article on the Sloan ladder.

  • avatar
    icemilkcoffee

    The Skyactiv technology suite hits all the right notes… but the execution is still lacking. They talked about chopping 1000kg out of every car- but this CX5 clearly hasn’t seen that kind of weight loss- it still weighs 34**lb in the AWD trim.

    • 0 avatar
      bumpy ii

      2,200+ pounds out of every car? That seems a bit excessive for the Mazda lineup. 3,400 pounds is pretty decent for an AWD midsize.

    • 0 avatar
      DeadWeight

      Mazda is doing something right if an Atkins cycle, normally aspirated 2 liter can get a 3300 pound vehicle from 0 to 60 in 8 seconds, especially given the best in class fuel economy.

      • 0 avatar
        cdotson

        I have not heard that the Skyactiv-G engine is Atkins cycle. Do you have a source for the information?

        “Atkins cycle” engines typically produce an abysmally poor amount of torque at low engine speed. This is because none of them are actual “true Atkins” engines with multi-stroke crankshaft assemblies, but virtual-Atkins engines with a lengthy intake valve duration and longer valve overlap. Large valve overlap and long intake duration in a naturally-aspirated engine is a recipe for a low-torque buzzbomb. This is why the Miller-cycle was created, which is essentially an Atkins-cycle engine with a power adder (turbo/supercharger) to improve airflow through the engine. Mazda did in fact produce a Miller cycle engine in the Millenia, but I don’t know of anyone who has made one since.

      • 0 avatar
        DeadWeight

        cdotson:

        It is according to C&D’s 1st Drive:

        http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2013-mazda-cx-5-first-drive-review

  • avatar
    roadscholar

    Saw one in Detroit and really like the styling. How much power? There better be a turbo in there somewhere and more than 200 hp, at least as an option.

    • 0 avatar
      DeadWeight

      Base engine is a 163hp 2.0 I4, that another site claims does 0-60 in 8.0 seconds with the stick and 8.2 seconds with the auto. It’s alleged that it dishes out more torque at lower RPM because it’s an Atkinson cycle motor (I do not know whether this is or is not true, but that’s what is being reported).

      A twin turbo 2.2 liter diesel motor is coming as an options, if what I’m reading is correct (Mazda is talking of rolling out the turbo diesel in the U.S. 18 months after its European unveiling), but it only makes 170 hp (it looks like it’s the standard motor in Europe, probably because of efficiency standards).

      • 0 avatar
        Dan

        It’s geared extremely short to make the most of the limited power (4.62 axle giving 30/60/80 mph through the first three gears, auto) and should put up an adequate paper 0-60.

        It’s also pushing 3,500 lbs with just the driver onboard, 3,650 with AWD. With that dismal power to weight ratio it isn’t going to move much short of 4K+ boil.

        So any kind of driveability will require downshifts and lots of them. With tuning for the window sticker instead of the road I wouldn’t be too optimistic.

  • avatar
    mzr

    The manual is probably going to be the stripper model with no options. Same with my 5, only three exterior color choices. That was it. I still went with the manual, but I’d like a sunroof or something.

  • avatar
    ambulancechaser

    This seems to be a sign of things to come. Underpowered overweight cars that are more expensive than they’ve ever been. I need to replace my 2002 Ford Escape 4wd V6 with something this year, and it will likely be a 2012 Ford Escape 4wd V6…

  • avatar
    RyleyinSTL

    Stylistically I think they did well here. Miles better than most everything else in this class. That in it self is big. I think Mazda’s choice to balance power with class leading fuel economy will pay off in the end when trying to sell these to the mass market. Under powered is a relative term, perhaps to American’s might feel that way but the rest of the world will likely be okay with the numbers. Initial reviews claim the CX-5 to handle very well or at least as “well” as such a vehicle can. Sounds like winner to me.

  • avatar
    Philosophil

    The base model starts at $22,995 up here in the great white north (aka ‘Canada’) (and that’s prior to Transportation and other costs). Base AWD with automatic starts at $27,690. It ain’t cheap, that’s for sure, but it seems to have a lot going for it.

    I hope Mazda has a winner with this. It looks like it has the potential to be a fine vehicle.

  • avatar
    tbhride

    The Miata needs to have this front end put on it…. like yesterday!

  • avatar
    malloric

    I hope the diesel makes it here. Either way, I’ll probably give it a look. The Mazda3 is just a little on the small side. I don’t particularly care for the stilts, but you know what? If Mazda can package Mazda6 space and twice the cargo room (with seats still up) all in a car that’s a foot shorter, then I don’t really mind so much. I’ve never felt the Mazda3 w/ 2.3 really lacked for power, so that just becomes a question of what the bump in weight and drop in torque really costs. I’m not all that concerned with the lack of power/weight. At roughly 300 pounds heavier and with similar power, I don’t think it’d be that bad. Even loaded up with closer to 800 pounds of extra weight beyond myself, my Mazda3 isn’t terribly slow. If I drove fully loaded, especially if towing, at altitude it certainly would not be my choice, but for your normal Costco runs and road trips I think it would be fine..


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Authors

  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • J & J Sutherland, Canada
  • Tycho de Feyter, China
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, Abu Dhabi
  • Mark Stevenson, Canada
  • Faisal Ali Khan, India