By on April 11, 2018

2017 Mazda CX-5 Front Quarter

2017 Mazda CX-5 Grand Touring AWD

2.5-liter inline-four, DOHC (187 hp @ 6000 rpm, 185 lb-ft @ 4000 rpm)

Six-speed automatic transmission, all-wheel drive

23 city / 29 highway / 26 combined (EPA Rating, MPG)

24.2 (observed mileage, MPG)

Base Price: $31,635 (USD)

As Tested: $34,380 (USD)

Prices include $940 freight charge.

 

The look back. That longing glance at your beloved ride as you walk away is a rite of passage for car enthusiasts. One more gaze at the car’s beautiful lines before you walk into the office can help that first cup of coffee kickstart another day of work.

Until I drove the 2017 Mazda CX-5 Grand Touring, I’ve never looked back at any crossover. Never had the need or desire, since most CUVs have all of the style and personality bred out of them in an effort to attract the widest variety of shoppers. Not the Mazda. The design of this compact crossover is nothing short of stunning.

2017 Mazda CX-5 Profile

Assuming the eco-police haven’t incinerated all internal combustion vehicles in favor of gleaming alloy air cars, I can legitimately see a pristine CX-5 rolling on the lawn at the Pebble Beach Concours in a generation or two. No, I’m not kidding. The $595 Soul Red paint is worth the extra cash, too — I don’t typically choose red cars, but this color is majestic.

2017 Mazda CX-5 Front

The big shield-shaped corporate grille is prominent, with a smiling chrome moustache that links the narrow headlamps. I’d prefer the hood shutline extended to the end of the sheetmetal — the horizontal line created is a bit distracting. But the contours created by the line that extends from the top of the headlamp, gently rising over the front fender, only to drop gradually along the doors makes the CX-5 look more sporty than a crossover should.

2017 Mazda CX-5 Rear Quarter

The interior is well thought out, though I object to Mazda’s continued use of the “iPad glued to the dashboard” infotainment screen. While controlling the audio or navigation is simple enough with the large polished knob located behind the shift lever, creating or changing radio presets is an incredibly tedious process that takes too many inputs for each selection.

2017 Mazda CX-5 Center Stack

For whatever reason, when press vehicles are delivered, they tend to have the same satellite radio stations preset no matter the manufacturer. Every car I get has the same dozen or so SiriusXM stations, only a few of which I’d typically listen to on my own. I’m just not into classical music. I typically reset those presets to my favorites. Anyhow, the Mazda’s clickwheel requires at least five or six turns, clicks, toggles, and pushes to change a preset. Paraphrasing the meme, I don’t have the time for that.

2017 Mazda CX-5 Infotainment

Beyond the perplexing audio controls, the CX-5’s interior is a lovely place to spend some time. The plastics on the dashboard feel of a high quality, and the ivory leather trim on the doors and console is soft and supple. I love the plush cushion where my knee impacts the left side of the console, especially. The leather seats on this Grand Touring trim are beautifully supportive, especially in the thigh — where I often feel lesser cushions come up short.

2017 Mazda CX-5 Interior

My usual backseat passengers had plenty of room, even when my bride squeezed in the middle between the kids when we had to haul an older passenger up front. Shoulder room was plentiful even with three abreast, and there were no complaints about leg room.

2017 Mazda CX-5 Front Seats 2017 Mazda CX-5 Rear Seats

On Monday, I looked at another crossover that coincidentally shares a bunch of similarities with the CX-5. Indeed, the Jeep Compass I drove weighs right around 3,600 pounds, much like this Mazda, and produces around 180 horsepower from a naturally aspirated four-cylinder engine. Dimensionally, the two trucklets are close, and the as-tested price hovers around $35k for each. But the driving experience is surprisingly different. While the Jeep is soft and compliant on the road, the Mazda CX-5 feels a bit more like a sports sedan, with taut handling and a slightly-harsher ride.

[Get new and used Mazda CX-5 pricing here!]

While the power-to-weight ratio is quite similar, the Mazda feels more spritely both during launch and when merging onto a fast-moving freeway. Perhaps the gear ratios in the six-speed CX-5 are more suited to acceleration compared to those in the nine-speed Compass, but the differences in driving demeanor are striking.

2017 Mazda CX-5 Gauges 2017 Mazda CX-5 Dashboard

Since it seems the traditional family sedan is going away, it’s time I embrace the crossover. While I still prefer the minivan form for hauling a lot of everything, if you aren’t a packrat like me a compact-to-midsize crossover will likely work well for the statistically average four-person family. With the Mazda CX-5, driving one of these tall wagons doesn’t have to mean selling your soul — indeed, enthusiasts might actually enjoy hustling this crossover around the back roads.

2017 Mazda CX-5 Cargo Area

[Images: © 2018 Chris Tonn/TTAC]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

67 Comments on “2017 Mazda CX-5 Grand Touring AWD Review – Crossing Over In Style...”


  • avatar
    FreedMike

    I don’t think I’d ever embrace the crossover, but if I did, this one would be on my list.

    And agreed 110% about Soul Red.

    • 0 avatar
      slavuta

      “The $595 Soul Red paint”

      – I think, this is special technology and called “soul red crystal metallic”. This is different red from the red before that was $300 option. There are “machine grey metallic” is $300 and “Snowflake … white” is $200.

      I drove this thing. 2014 is definitely more engaging. This one is more refined, slower. For my taste 2014 was good enough.

      I hate this white interior. Give me black any day. For some reason all reviews come in white.

      • 0 avatar
        Nick_515

        oyster or ivory is only available on the top Grand Touring trim, which is why it appears a lot on press reviews. also, you are completely wrong. it is gorgeous.

        • 0 avatar
          Flipper35

          Yup, I appreciate the fact that they are not black. It is difficult to find non-black seats in any vehicle any more.

          Can you get it without the stuck on infotainment system? A plain radio with buttons would suffice for us and much easier to use. If not, that Mazda is not on our short list.

        • 0 avatar
          slavuta

          They only gorgeous until you sit in them for a week. Then get the chemicals and start working

    • 0 avatar
      HuskyHawk

      I bought a 2016 model of one of these, and my only regret was going for blue instead of the Soul Red. It’s a great red.

      It’s a tremendously functional car. Not slow, handles snow capably, and seats five comfortably. I put an 11′ patio umbrella in it a few weeks ago. Couldn’t do that in my old 3 series. Ride is taught, but not harsh. The steering is better than the actual handling. Very precise and responsive.

    • 0 avatar
      rpn453

      There was almost no color choice for the 2.0L MT FWD CX-5 that my buddy wanted as the family vehicle, so he ended up with a black one. When he came to town to visit and saw that our other buddy had bought their loaded GT in grey, he was like, “you could have got the Soul Red, and didn’t?!”

      It’s a nice drive. I’d even prefer it to my Mazda3 during the winter and spring seasons when the roads are in poor condition.

  • avatar
    Astigmatism

    My wife drives the prior-gen CX-5, and it’s been a great car for all the practical-car reasons – comfort, reliability, gas mileage, space, utility – over the last five years. We haven’t even noticed any rust, despite living a thousand feet from the Atlantic. My biggest complaint has been road noise, but apparently the new generation has gone from the back to the front of the pack in that category. With the new styling, it’s hard to see an argument against the CX-5 now.

  • avatar
    30-mile fetch

    This is the only crossover that inspires any kind of emotive response in me at all, and outside the Trailhawk versions of the Jeeps it is the only crossover I have any interest in. Red with the handsome two tone interior? Bingo.

    There’s a grey one on our street. After seeing it come and go I’m a little mixed on the CX-5’s styling. It’s certainly distinctive and not garish, but the styling that works so nicely on the 6 is a little overtaxed when stretched vertically onto a CUV. The front fascia is very, very tall and the narrow headlights perched atop it look like piggy little eyes. This meme is carried to the rear. I also wonder if the peppy 2.5 is noticeably less so in this heavier vehicle.

    Otherwise, the Mazda dealer would be my first and likely final stop if I were in the market. I was impressed with the 2016 Mazda6 Sport.

  • avatar
    PrincipalDan

    I do love Mazda’s design language.

    There’s a Bureau of Indian Education school across the highway from my public school and if I’m running late I’ll get passed by the administrator of that school driving a white current gen Mazda 6. Every time I see him barreling up and blowing by I think: “I ought to test drive a Mazda 6 turbo when they get released.”

  • avatar
    tallguy130

    I worry about the interior size on this but want to like it. The wife wants a CUV and this is about the only one that is kinda interesting. The last gen felt really small on the inside for my 6’5” frame, did it stretch a little for this version? The reviewer says it has plenty of room but that could just be for normal sized humans…

    • 0 avatar
      VW4motion

      New 2019 model RAV4 could have a bit more legroom over the cx-5. Will also have an update engine and interior from the current model. Thank god. Subaru Outback is a great option that has a ton of leg room for taller folk. Road noise reduction is big in the 2018 Outback vs the previous models.

    • 0 avatar
      slavuta

      this thing has plenty back seat and leg room

      • 0 avatar
        HuskyHawk

        Agreed. Mine is plenty roomy. It also has quasi-stadium seats. They are well off the floor. My daughter gets car sick, and that helps (along with providing more effective leg room).

  • avatar
    carguy

    I did test drive one a couple of weeks back and it is a great vehicle with a premium feel. However, there are two issue that would prevent me from buying one:

    – The seats are under-padded (particularly for lower back support) and would be uncomfortable for longer trips
    – The brakes are terrible. Both the brake feel and and stopping power.

  • avatar
    gottacook

    Seals and Crofts’ “Summer Breeze” (either the single or the LP) is not “Rock” despite the use of electric guitar on some tracks – although I always enjoyed their tracks in which Crofts’ mandolin is prominent.

    I’d like the Mazda better if the side and rear windows were at least 85% the size of a Forester’s – that is, I’d want the Forester to have a competitor that isn’t claustrophobia-inducing.

  • avatar
    Nostrathomas

    I drove my sister in law’s 2014 CX-5 for a week in Colorado. I’m not a crossover guy, but if there was one brand that could make me reconsider, it would most likely be a Mazda.

    To be honest, I was kind of disappointed. It was fairly plasticky inside, had poor rearward visibility, and was really underpowered (it may have been a combo of the base 2.0 and the altitude). Yeah, the handling was ok…but nothing to write home about for a Mazda. I was hoping it would remind me of my previous Mazdas (Protege 5 and 323) that had some cheap and fun personality, but in general I walked away feeling pretty Meh about it.

    The Subaru Forrester XT that I also drove on that trip left me with a much better impression, and I’m not a Subaru guy.

  • avatar
    zoomzoomfan

    The CX-5 continues to be a saving grace sales-wise for Mazda, and it’s easy to see why. It’s simply a nice, well thought out offering in the booming crossover segment.

    My wife and I have a 2013 CX-5 Sport that we bought brand new in December 2012. It was one of the first all-Mazda designs after their split with Ford.

    Ours has been a great family hauler (we have a 14-month-old son) and a fuel miser. Averages 35-37 MPG on the highway and 25-27 in town. No real issues in 53,000 miles aside from the interior having a bit more wear and tear than I’d expect. And, ours has the 2013-only 2.0 SkyActiv motor with 155 HP. So, it’s not blazing fast by any means but it is more than adequate for daily driving.

  • avatar
    lastwgn

    In June of 2017 we had a 2016 CX-3 and a 2008 RX-8. We needed an actual 5 passenger vehicle. I fully expected to trade the RX-8 in for a top line 2017 Mazda6. I went to the dealership with the checkbook expecting to bring one home that night. I drove the 6 and came away impressed with its comfort, refinement, and general driving manners. It is a terrific car. But there was something missing. I was trying to figure out what it was. I then drove a 2017 CX-5. Almost immediately the CX-5 came across as more engaging and more nimble. The 2017 was clearly superior to the prior 2016 in terms of interior refinement and quiet ride. The road and wind noise of the prior year model was gone, but in comparison to the 6 I was left confused.

    I then looked closely at the specs. Mazda6 wheelbase 111.4 in., length, 192.7, and width 72.4. The CX-5 measures 106.2, 179.1 and 72.5 respectively. Compare it with the Mazda3 of 106.3, 175.6 and 70.7, and the difference between the CX-5 and 6 becomes clear.

    Unbeknownst to most people, the CX-5 shares the Mazda3 platform, NOT the Mazda6 platform. The shorter wheelbase and length of the CX-5, in my experience, made a significant difference. Bottom line, I went to the dealership to bring home a Mazda6 and came home with the CX-5 as a more engaging car with better overall utility than the 6. Nothing at all wrong with the 6, the CX-5 just seemed better.

    Regarding the reviewer’s note about the leading edge of the hood, I for one was happy to see the leading edge of the hood not come all the way to the front like in the 2016 model. I would rather have the narrow strip of painted plastic above the grille take the majority of stone chips and abuse over the years.

  • avatar
    maui_zaui

    I can only describe the current gen CX-5 as “elegant” whenever I see one in traffic. The photos don’t do it justice and it certainly looks distinctive in a sea of crossovers. If they offered the turbocharged 2.5 litre from the Mazda6 and CX-9, I would be all over this.

    • 0 avatar
      HuskyHawk

      Rumor is that it is coming. A CX-5 “Speed” version.

    • 0 avatar
      ect

      I entirely agree with you, on both counts.

      I disagree with Chris’ disdain for the placement of the infotainment screen. Especially when using the nav function, the driver can glance at without taking his eyes off the road – unlike when it’s placed further down in the controls.

      • 0 avatar
        krhodes1

        Agree, this is the best place to put it. Up high, but not like an iPad glued to the front of the dash. BMW does it much the same way.

        But that positioning won’t work with a touchscreen, and a controller is probably more expensive, so relatively few cars use it.

      • 0 avatar
        Flipper35

        The placement is fine, the execution is horrible. There are many with the screen up in a glancable position that don’t look like it came from a preschool design party.

        That design and plumbing the engine sound in are deal breakers for us. It is a cheap cop out for good design. Like they gave up.

  • avatar
    redapple

    I think the CX-5 is the best looking CUV made. Plus points for the RED.
    I looked at buying a new one 2 months ago.
    Drove Great
    Size / room was good.
    But.
    1- The way the options stacked up, the only way i could get the car i wanted was with the leather. I m not a PETA member, but they have some points. I will not have leather in my car. Period (also, it s cooler in the summer and warmer in the winter)
    2- Rear outward visibility was less than good.
    3- I wanted to Lease. The price was crazy on a CX 5.
    So.

    I leased a Forester.
    Huge windows. I can see out. Even rearward and off to the sides.
    Good price.
    Got eyesight safety, heated seats, lane departure WITH CLOTH SEATS.
    Great Controls. Big Physical knobs that click with nice detentes- not thru the TV Screen.

    Couldnt be happier.

    • 0 avatar
      slavuta

      Yea, the packaging is something Mazda used to do better. I think, things like leather and oversized wheels should be totally optional. And don’t worry about PETA. The leather in your car is not mink or something. It is just a cow you ate yesterday.

      • 0 avatar
        spookiness

        Plenty of people don’t eat cows, and would perhaps be creeped out by being ensconced in parts of their corpse on a daily basis.

        • 0 avatar
          slavuta

          I don’t know how you measure “plenty of people”, but according to official stats, average American eats 56lb of beef per year. 320M x 56 / 500 (average meat per cow) = 35.8M hides per year. No problems making furniture and whatever.

  • avatar
    TW5

    I rented one of these in Grand Touring trim. It was excellent. Vehicle proportions were good. Quality seemed excellent. Fuel economy was reasonable. Upright seating position was glorious. The controls were easy to use, and the infotainment display was nice. I don’t recall seeing Apple Carplay or Android Auto on these. Could be wrong, though.

    The only mechanical flaw I could detect was that the transmission would hunt for the correct gear anytime the vehicle was coasting down, particularly at residential speeds. A little bit jerky at times.

    Also, a foreigner rented it before me and switched the climate control to centigrade. Took me a few minutes to get that fixed.

    • 0 avatar
      slavuta

      I have ’14 Touring in family. And I test drove ’18 Grand Touring. The former feels like a “sports car”. The latter like “luxury mattress” of firmer variety.

      • 0 avatar
        TW5

        My impression of the 2018 Grand Touring is similar to yours. It’s more comfortable than sporty.

        I also had sticker shock when I looked up the price of a trim level similar to my rental. It was close to $35,000 which seemed a bit nuts. It was an excellent car though.

      • 0 avatar
        conundrum

        My brother and his wife have a 2.5l ’14 CX-5 . If that’s a sports car, I’m an alien from outer space. Hopping out of an ’08 Legacy GT into a CX-5 is like having a lobotomy or having a nightmare and not being able to wake up. I’m aware the CX-5 is regarded as best of breed, but dear God, in an absolute sense it’s boring.

        Then I had a Forester for a day, and it was even worse, with very poor seats. The Crossdreck is an utter joke. The RAV4 a testament to “Abandon hope all ye who enter here”. Cannot be bothered trying a CRV with the mighty mouse 1.5t and CVT. Probably garrot myself half way through the test drive.

        Compared to a half-decent car, these crossover things just do not cut the mustard for an enthusiast driver. If you think they do, rest assured you’ve become used to mediocrity in the handling department, and forgotten what a real drive is all about.

        I drove a Mazda6 manual. Dreary. Let us hope the new turbo has some sign of life – I’ll have a try in the coming months and hope for the best. Shoulda got that Accord Coupe V6 like Baruth did, crappy brakes and one wheel drive notwithstanding. I liked it well enough, but it just wasn’t quite compelling enough. With today’s deadened down choices, its virtues stand out like a beacon of light. Who knew vehicles would just get worse and worse?

    • 0 avatar
      krohde

      You’re not incorrect about CarPlay/Android Auto; Mazda promised they’d have it soon back in early 2017 and have been silent about it since. Pretty irritating.

  • avatar
    krohde

    My wife and I have owned our 2017 CX-5 Grand Touring since last Memorial Day and currently have almost 25k on it so I would guess we have one of the highest mileage ones around. The car has been flawless to date. Here’s some Pros/Cons from me:

    Pros
    – It is indeed gorgeous. We regularly get compliments from friends/neighbors on it and it’s nice driving something that’s not a CR-V/RAV-4/Rogue.
    – Fun to drive, for a CUV. Handles really well and I don’t get the complaint above about the brakes – they are just fine, IMO.
    – Comfortable to drive + ride in: taken a ton of long drives in it and have never been sore/uncomfortable (I’m 6’1 and 240 pounds so fairly tall and not skinny)
    – The Tech suite works great together and is not overly intrusive, IMO. I like every feature and don’t feel like any detract from the driving experience.
    – Mileage is good – we average about 26, which is only 2 less than we did with her prior 2008 3s hatchback. That is based on approx. 85% highway mileage though. If you get above 70 MPH, the mileage does drop to the 23-24 range, as the gearing isn’t tall enough to keep the revs low at that speed.
    – ZERO problems to date. The rear brake pads squeak a bit – that’s the biggest complaint I have.
    – Room: holds four people and cargo very well. Haven’t really done 5.

    Cons
    – Even if you get every option, like we did, you don’t get distance sensors in the front OR back. This caused me to almost hit another car the first time I parallel parked it, thinking it would beep. There’s a dealer-installed option for them.
    – The embedded modem (a $400 dealer option) is rendered almost completely useless by the awful app that Mazda isn’t bothering to update (still on v1.0 2 years after release and that’s awful). It sucks.
    – Lack of cooled seats
    – Wish it had more power. 187 HP is fine…but it’s a bit slow and has to drop down 2 gears and be above 4k to maintain speed on hills sometimes.

    The blunt nature of the front end means it attracts rocks/little dings, which is why I dropped $700 on a clear bra to cover the whole front bumper, 1/3 of the hood, mirrors, etc. The white leather requires regularly (weekly) cleaning to remove blue jean stains, etc. – I expected this going in and it doesn’t take long to clean (5 mins) but it’s something to keep in mind. We decided it was worth it for how pretty the white leather is.

    Happy to answer questions if anybody has ’em – we love this thing!

    • 0 avatar
      x-defector

      I’m 6k miles into a ’17 GT, and I like it (wouldn’t have bought it if I didn’t). That said, I of course got the one made on either Monday morning or Friday afternoon. Though it had fog lights and the wiring harness, the lighting stalk didn’t have the fog switch. Got that fixed. Was missing the fuse box cover under the hood, replaced that. Has an annoying shuffle in the B-pillar right behind my left ear every time you hit a bump, hugely aggravating. Two different dealers claimed to have fixed it but didn’t. They did however leave greasy fingerprints all over my fabric headliner. Also has a rattle from the clear lens over the gauges. Stupid dealers couldn’t fix that either.

      On the good side, I get 29+ mpg driving it like I stole it. It’s comfortable, quiet, looks good, handles very well for a hatch on stilts, and is the perfect size for me (wife, kid, big dog, bikes on roof).

      But honestly my 2016 model was a better-built car.

  • avatar
    22_RE_Speedwagon

    Crossover is a euphemism for dying.

  • avatar
    Pricha33

    Proud owner of 2018 GT fully loaded , and agree love the Soul Red . In fact I wanted the red/white combination as reviewed but the boss( aka the wife ) was not keen on the red and we ended up the only other colour you have to pay for, Platinum Grey. The interior is black , and concur feels premium vs the other SUV’s I drove, which was most of them.

    So far the mileage is not as advertised , though cold winter starts and city driving not helping. Expect to take on long vacation this summer, and will be curious to see if the cylinder deactivation actually allows for advertised economy.

    I have heard others mention the chips and nicks on the front end, and maybe I will consider the clear bra before this happens. A note to owners, do not buy the Mazda remote start farce that requires a second remote. I had an aftermarket installed for $300 less and you use the factory fob with no extra fob needed.

    Pat

    • 0 avatar
      Kek

      White is also a color you have to pay for $200.
      Mazda paint is soft, but rust is not an issue. I personally would not go for any coating except something like Ultimate Fast Finish from Meguiars. The paint is so soft – in 3 years you have to strip the wax and fix it, mayebe even use the color pen in some areas.

      Agreed mazda makes you carry an extra remote, the after market options are good.
      My 16 CX5 has done 20K miles, so far no issues. I am getting 28.5-29 mpg in mixed driving with trip peak being 37.4 – the 17s and 18s I have heard do better on highways, 30 mph followed by 45mph are peak mpg speeds. I wish I had bought a Mazda6 instead of a Camry – in real world Mazda would do 10% or more in mpg. Superb cars.

  • avatar
    Hummer

    I hope they updated the 2.5, the 2.5l from 2010 when used in the Mazda 3 was barely adequate to get that car moving, I can’t imagine how frustrating it would be in something like this.
    It’s a good looking car, but the go-cart engine seems beyond pointless especially when a V6 would get the same fuel economy with an extra 100 HP. As is now unfortunately the design can’t save this car due to the ridiculous cost and 1980s diesel Mercedes HP numbers.

  • avatar
    James2

    Wake me when the Turbo shows up, but I actually prefer the design of the original. It’s a silly thing, but I would prefer no chrome trim around the greenhouse, as well as larger headlamps that don’t look so squinty. And those ‘flower petal’ wheels look stupid.

  • avatar
    EBFlex

    These are absolutely stunning. By far one of the best looking vehicles of modern times. The design was absolutely nailed.

    The only improvement would be an addition of a small turbo to boost power a bit. The styling suggests there is some power under the hood….there isn’t.

  • avatar
    TDIGuy

    “Assuming the eco-police haven’t incinerated all internal combustion vehicles in favor of gleaming alloy air cars”
    I hardly see the CX-5 spinning around with shrieking tires.

  • avatar
    Jerome10

    Disclaimer:I haven’t driven any of the recent mazdas.

    I do own a 2006 corolla with an automatic.

    I guess I understand car enthusiasts talking about power, but at least in my neck of the woods, I out accelerate basically everyone in my corolla, and that thing seriously has no power and an ancient transmission.

    I can almost guarantee what this car has is sufficient for 95pct of the target market. Cuz I’m amazed how damn slowly everyone else drives their 400hp pickups or their more than adequate accords or grand Cherokees. You’d think they were Flintstone cars.

    Do you sometimes want more power? Yes, especially grades at highway speed. But the new gearboxes probably help with this a lot too. And it is fun at lights sometimes.

    But I’m starting to realize I think nobody uses the power they have. 25pct throttle application and a fear of anything north of 3000rpm. Cuz I can make my corolla hustle, just have to work it a bit.

    I suspect Mazda is fine here without more power. Hell Subaru just dropped their turbo on new forester. I guess for Subaru 180-ish HP is enough also.

    • 0 avatar
      krohde

      You’re not wrong – when the new CX-9 came out, a lot of the talk about the engine in the reviews I read was that they engineered the turbos to work as low as 2,000 RPMs since most drivers never go past 4,000. http://claveyscorner.com/mazda/2017-mazda-cx-9/

    • 0 avatar
      JLGOLDEN

      I’m not sure where you drive daily, but where I noticed the most lazy throttle applications / poky drivers was in the Portland, OR area. Jesus! Everyone must have been stoned and afraid to merge. Here in Houston, you tromp the gas pedal and *haul ass* or you get sideswiped, honk-honk-honnnnk, and pushed out of your lane. Even the “weakling” cars get pushed into the upper rev range…it is survival.

  • avatar
    Fred

    A couple of general questions, is Audi the only one who makes a retractable screen? Also with this CX5 there looks to be no way to add in a after market unit. Even if you could, it would be easy to remove the factory screen. I miss Scion now.

  • avatar
    orange260z

    We recently bought a leftover brand-new 2017 CX-5 GS AWD trim (I think in the US this is called “Touring”) for my wife, who decided she had enough with the RWD Chrysler 300S in the winter. Too bad, we really liked that car otherwise, but it was not a great winter car even with winter tires.

    I’m not a big fan of red cars but really wish we could have found one in the gorgeous Soul Red Crystal Metallic – we ended up with the Snowflake White Pearl Mica due to digging through 2017 leftovers. The GS has leatherette/faux-suede seats, a non-Bose but 6-speaker stereo, no moonroof, manual climate controls, 17″ wheels (instead of 18″ on the GT) and a little less safety tech.

    There is definitely room for improvement. I would have to have the option of full adjustments on both front seats, and the ability to drop them lower to the floor. The “pop-tart” display is not attractive, but it is in the line of sight which is good… but as the reviewer pointed out, selecting stations and favorites is maddeningly inconvenient. I’m generally pretty forgiving of infotainment systems – I have no issues with Cadillac Cue or Porsche PCM (circa 2009) – even the PCM is easier to program, and it’s generally considered pretty hellish.

    We compared the CUV to the others in the class – RAV-4, CR-V, Hyundai Tuscon, and the GM Terrain/Chev Equinox. In the end, the combination of the look, build quality, and the drive made us focus on the CX. The interior quality was leaps ahead of the others, even without the leather trim. It may not drive as taut as the previous generation, but it’s still miles sportier than the CUV competition. We haven’t put a lot of miles on it yet (about 1000kms) but we’re pretty happy with it so far.

  • avatar
    SuperCarEnthusiast

    From the side and rear views, I do not see how the CX-5 is so acclaimed as the most beautiful crossover! I guess i’d you like curves everywhere it is good but I rather like a more square shape crossover!

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • RHD: Agreed about the lack of colors. A lot of new vehicles look like they just clearcoated the primer.
  • stuki: In a world in decay, “dated” is a compliment.
  • stuki: Competing head on with Camry and Accord, like competing with Google in internet search, has to rate among the...
  • RHD: That and the nearly useless “truck bed” make this a non-starter. I saw one on the road a week ago,...
  • RHD: You are right about that! A facelift is all it needs to recover the sales volume. “Polarizing” is...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber