Review of 2016.5 CX-5 Grand Touring
#1
11-23-2016, 01:24 PM
Review of 2016.5 CX-5 Grand Touring
I was hoping to see a place on this forum for reviews, but I overlooked it if it is here. I would like a place to put a review that is more wordy than some of the sites allow. I like the CX-5 a lot, but there is room for improvement which I point out in my review. Maybe Mazda has incorporated them for 2017 already.
I hope I can link to this review from other sites.
Intro
I had a customized 2003 Audi A4 1.8L Turbo with the performance package (manual transmission) and all other upgrades. I wanted something with more utility, more ground clearance, better gas mileage, cheaper maintenance costs, automatic transmission, and modern safety features. I live in the Washington DC metropolitan area, so my driving is more like the city even when on the highway. Most of my driving is in Fairfax, VA. I test drove the Toyota RAV4 Hybrid, Honda CR-V EX-L with navigation, Hyundai Tucson Sport, and the Mazda CX-5. I purchased the 2016.5 Mazda CX-5 Grand Touring AWD with everything on it. I’ve had it for around 6 months and have 2500 miles on it or so. I’ve only made minor additions so far: Mazda OEM rubber mat in back, 3DMAXpider front and rear floor mats (I think that I would have preferred Mazda OEM), an OEM front window accordion sun screen, Suntek Carbon XP on front side windows to legal tint limit and top of front window, and an XPEL Ultimate film kit for the front lights.
Exterior
Looks: Looks are in the eye of the beholder. Personally, I think the CX-5 has character without looking strange or childish. I got mine in soul red. This red received an award and is unlike the many reds rolling out there. Personally, I liked this color best, although both the white and silver were also nice in my opinion. There is a lot of black plastic trim that runs along the bottom and between the side windows. Be careful not to get wax on it, because the wax doesn’t come off easy. Modern cars have plastic fenders (body skirts), but most are painted. The Mazda did not paint theirs, and some other SUVs don’t either. Personally, I’m not a fan of its looks – the black plastic looks cheap to me. However, I am a fan of not having to worry about paint dings or scratches on these vulnerable areas. My car also has the stainless-steel roof rails and sun roof. Those rails are a nice, distinctive crown.
Wheels: The 19” wheels actually look decent on the grand touring model. They go well with the red, as they are painted dark grey with some stainless-steel accent. BMW wheels (on their high price cars) are nicer, but most stock wheels look worse, so these Mazda wheels get a rating of above average from me.
Locks: You can lock the doors with a remote or a convenient button on the outside of the door (as long as you the remote in your pocket). Of course, you can also use a key when your remote’s battery dies. I typically just press the button, never having to fish the remote (or key) from my pocket. I like that.
Tailgate: This is an area where Mazda could have improved. Ford has something that will automatically lift the gate when you stick your foot under the bumper and have the remote. Many makes produce tailgates that will close on their own with a press of a button. The CX-5 tailgate is old timey manual. I’m certainly strong enough to handle that, but I do find it inconvenient to deal with the gate when my hands are full.
Lights: I like the look of this car at night when walking around it. I also like the running LED lights in the day as a safety feature that isn’t too gaudy.
Entry/Exit: I find the entry and exit to be easy and better than low slung sports cars or trucks with ladders.
Interior
Comfort and Appearance: The leather is black (looks great with my red car). The window tint and screen doesn’t allow it to be overly hot. I like that the leather is perforated. The quality of the leather is good but not great. It is better than was in my Ford, but I don’t think it quite as good as was in my Audi. The interior textures and looks seem very nice to me. It’s not a luxury vehicle, but there’s nothing shabby about it either. There are plenty of cup holders and spaces to stick things. Personally, I would rather have had a more convenient electrical plug for gadgets up front like radar detectors or such. The ergonomics are good. I can reach the touch screen without a problem. The voice commands seem to work to a limited degree – I typically don’t bother using them as I have found button entry to be more reliable. The seat and wheel are fully adjustable. The visors work well for their purpose of blocking the sun and have extensions.
Space: This car is rather spacious to me. It has the size of mid-size SUV from a decade ago in my opinion. I am only 5’8”, but there is room for me in the back and front. Three adult men in back would be tight, but two should be fine unless they are big. I think a large man would find the front comfortable. A very large man may want something bigger. Storage in the back is adequate for the usual grocery haul or luggage trips. For more, you can either let the rear seats down, stack the gear on top, and/or pull a light trailer. The height of the trunk area is nice for me; it makes loading easy.
Heating and Cooling: I’ve had no problems with the heating and cooling systems. I like it that I can choose a temperature and the AC/heat will make sure I get it (eventually, but usually fairly quick). This is a common feature with the up-class models of many vehicles now. The speed of bringing the cabin to temperature isn’t the best I’ve experienced, but it is at least average. It has also kept my windshield clear of fog for the most part – I especially like that.
Stereo and controls: I have the advanced stereo and it sucks compared to the $5000 customized stereo in my Audi. The biggest culprit is a total lack of bass (not a lack of quality, but a total lack of low frequency sound). The rest of the frequency, while not comparable to a good stereo, is at least tolerable. The Bose noise cancellation feature probably helps the car be a little quieter. I like that I can connect to my smart phone (bluetooth), use a USB drive of my music collection, collect to satellite radio, or HD or regular radio (and other choices). It’s very versatile. Controls are usually prompt (after the initial startup, which is too long in my opinion). I’d like to customize this stereo eventually. However, I have NEVER been satisfied with a stock stereo and never experienced a stock stereo that had satisfactory bass.
You have several ways of controlling the command center of the stereo and car settings. You can use voice, buttons and dial near the automatic transmission selector (i.e. shifter), or touch screen. The voice commands are hit and miss. Sometimes things work fine and sometimes not. I usually find it quicker not to bother with the voice commands. I prefer using the touch screen, which seems to work well overall. There’s not too many submenus, and it seems responsive. Mazda prevents using the touch screen while the car is moving. I don’t like this, and think it a useless safety feature. You have to look at the screen to see what you want changed regardless. It’s really quicker and less distracting to touch the screen than to use the dial and buttons to make your selection. Although the dials and button system works well, the touch screen is quicker. The screen does attract finger prints, and I wish Mazda had done something about that. The screen is visible during the bright day and at night.
I have no problem reaching any of the controls. I like the steering wheel controls. I like the ignition button (which can be used even if your remote is dead). So far, the engine has always started easily with a simple press of the button! There are a multitude of controls on the steering wheel and handles near it. I admit that I haven’t even learned them all. I don’t think it is the simplest system, but it does seem similar to other cars.
GPS: The GPS is handy. I like that I can get updates to the map. It seems to be as accurate as any other GPS that I have tried. It is integrated well with the system. For example, music will be turned down while it announces directions so you can easily hear it. The 7” color screen is readily visible.
Backup camera: Many cars have these now. While not essential by any means, these are certainly nice to have. They make backing up safely and accurately much easier/ comfortable.
Homelink rear view mirror. This is handy as is the automatic diming when lights are shining behind you. I wonder if the same trick could be used with the side view mirrors?
Performance
Handling: As everyone has said, handling is the strong point of the CX-5. The handling (maneuverability while rolling) and braking (not necessarily the distance to stop, but the feel of the brakes) are very high quality. Handling is easily superior to all other SUVs that I test drove (Toyota RAV4 hybrid, Honda CR-V, and Hyundai Tucson). It was better than a Lexus SUV that I drove previously. I feel sure that this SUV is the best handling SUV in its price class. It definitely gives confidence in the curves.
Acceleration: This is an SUV, so don’t expect miracles. However, it will provide more acceleration than most cars on the road. I have to deal with traffic all the time. So, obviously, every car’s acceleration is limited to the slowest car in front of it. I find that automatic transmission to be satisfactory in traffic. There is a semi-automatic mode, where you bump the shifter up or down to change gears. I like this mode when there is little traffic (say at 4 AM). It allows a surprising amount of acceleration for an SUV with a 2.5L naturally aspirated 4-cylinder.
Gas Mileage: I was disappointed to find that I get 21.6 MPG in my city driving. Still, I’m getting this using low grade gas, whereas I was happy to get 19 MPG with my Audi using premium gas. I expect it would get much better gas mileage on the flats cruising at 70 MPH.
Maintenance Cost: This was one of my chief reasons for choosing Mazda. The CX-5 is supposedly extremely reliable with economical maintenance and repairs. That and decent gas mileage makes for a low cost of ownership.
Lighting: I really appreciate great lighting at night. Everything is easily read inside. I also love the LED lighting outside. Everything is very well lit, and there is a clear difference between low and high beam, as there should be. I really like the adaptive headlights too. They also help me see where I am going. I think the lighting helps it look cool at night. During the day, the day light LEDs and side view mirror mounted flashes add to the vehicles safety and coolness.
Safety Features: This is an extremely heavily trafficked area and has more than its fair share of aggressive drivers. So, I am very happy with the large number of safety features that can be purchased with this ride. In fact, my insurance costs about the same when I switched from my 2003 Audi to this 2016 Mazda, which I feel is directly related to these safety features. Some of the feature include lane drift warning. I think this is a useful feature for long road trips where I may get drowsy. I typically have it deactivated, though. I’ve found that there are at least as many people here who will speed up to prevent you from switching lanes when you use a signal as there are people who will not. The blind spot alarm is very handy, because many people move faster than they should down the 3 lanes or more (each way) avenues. The backup (cross-direction) detector is great too, because many people race in the parking lot and there are many pedestrians who will stroll behind a car that is backing up. I also like the automatic brakes that will stop you when necessary. I am embarrassed to admit that I have bumped a car at a stop sign before. In this incident, the car had accelerated as if it was going to go, but then immediately braked again. With this safety feature, that moment of stupidity should never happen to me again.
Road Noise: This vehicle is not quiet. In the world of vehicles, I would classify it as very slightly below average. It’s not bad, but I do wish it was better.
Ride Comfort: This vehicle does not provide the greatest ride comfort. It is slightly worse than the Honda CR-V and clearly worse than the Toyota RAV4. However, it’s not bad. The ride of my customized Acura RSX-Type S was much stiffer, as was my dad’s jacked-up 4WD. I really think that ride comfort is a necessary tradeoff for this SUV’s handling. My Audi A4 had both better ride comfort and better handling, but it also had a much lower center of gravity. I also think Audi is exemplary in blending good ride comfort with good handling.
Comparisons: The Hyundai Tucson Sport has a peppy engine with the 1.6L Turbo. I liked its acceleration. It also offered decent handling. I hated its head rest. The Honda CR-V EX-L was a good car at a good price. It had no weaknesses, but overall I considered it bland and didn’t like its looks. However, I can understand how it is the bestselling SUV by far, especially at its price. The Toyota RAV-4 Hybrid XLE seemed cramped to me compared to the Mazda. The materials were less desirable to me than the Mazda. The more expensive (over my budget) Limited model was actually more comparable to the Mazda. It’s pep, despite the ratings, was less than the Mazda or it seemed so to me. The handling was clearly inferior. The brakes were – different. Conversely, it was probably the quietest, most comfortable ride that I test drove. It also gave the best gas mileage in the city by far. The dealership gave the best fringe benefits for a purchase. Reliability and cost of ownership are good. For some people, the Toyota would be the best choice.
Conclusion: After having the CX-5 for a while, I am satisfied that I made the best choice within my budget. It is not a perfect car, but I understand compromises must be made at this budget level. I think it is nice inside and out, and some of its weakness will be solved – when I can afford to do so.
I hope I can link to this review from other sites.
Intro
I had a customized 2003 Audi A4 1.8L Turbo with the performance package (manual transmission) and all other upgrades. I wanted something with more utility, more ground clearance, better gas mileage, cheaper maintenance costs, automatic transmission, and modern safety features. I live in the Washington DC metropolitan area, so my driving is more like the city even when on the highway. Most of my driving is in Fairfax, VA. I test drove the Toyota RAV4 Hybrid, Honda CR-V EX-L with navigation, Hyundai Tucson Sport, and the Mazda CX-5. I purchased the 2016.5 Mazda CX-5 Grand Touring AWD with everything on it. I’ve had it for around 6 months and have 2500 miles on it or so. I’ve only made minor additions so far: Mazda OEM rubber mat in back, 3DMAXpider front and rear floor mats (I think that I would have preferred Mazda OEM), an OEM front window accordion sun screen, Suntek Carbon XP on front side windows to legal tint limit and top of front window, and an XPEL Ultimate film kit for the front lights.
Exterior
Looks: Looks are in the eye of the beholder. Personally, I think the CX-5 has character without looking strange or childish. I got mine in soul red. This red received an award and is unlike the many reds rolling out there. Personally, I liked this color best, although both the white and silver were also nice in my opinion. There is a lot of black plastic trim that runs along the bottom and between the side windows. Be careful not to get wax on it, because the wax doesn’t come off easy. Modern cars have plastic fenders (body skirts), but most are painted. The Mazda did not paint theirs, and some other SUVs don’t either. Personally, I’m not a fan of its looks – the black plastic looks cheap to me. However, I am a fan of not having to worry about paint dings or scratches on these vulnerable areas. My car also has the stainless-steel roof rails and sun roof. Those rails are a nice, distinctive crown.
Wheels: The 19” wheels actually look decent on the grand touring model. They go well with the red, as they are painted dark grey with some stainless-steel accent. BMW wheels (on their high price cars) are nicer, but most stock wheels look worse, so these Mazda wheels get a rating of above average from me.
Locks: You can lock the doors with a remote or a convenient button on the outside of the door (as long as you the remote in your pocket). Of course, you can also use a key when your remote’s battery dies. I typically just press the button, never having to fish the remote (or key) from my pocket. I like that.
Tailgate: This is an area where Mazda could have improved. Ford has something that will automatically lift the gate when you stick your foot under the bumper and have the remote. Many makes produce tailgates that will close on their own with a press of a button. The CX-5 tailgate is old timey manual. I’m certainly strong enough to handle that, but I do find it inconvenient to deal with the gate when my hands are full.
Lights: I like the look of this car at night when walking around it. I also like the running LED lights in the day as a safety feature that isn’t too gaudy.
Entry/Exit: I find the entry and exit to be easy and better than low slung sports cars or trucks with ladders.
Interior
Comfort and Appearance: The leather is black (looks great with my red car). The window tint and screen doesn’t allow it to be overly hot. I like that the leather is perforated. The quality of the leather is good but not great. It is better than was in my Ford, but I don’t think it quite as good as was in my Audi. The interior textures and looks seem very nice to me. It’s not a luxury vehicle, but there’s nothing shabby about it either. There are plenty of cup holders and spaces to stick things. Personally, I would rather have had a more convenient electrical plug for gadgets up front like radar detectors or such. The ergonomics are good. I can reach the touch screen without a problem. The voice commands seem to work to a limited degree – I typically don’t bother using them as I have found button entry to be more reliable. The seat and wheel are fully adjustable. The visors work well for their purpose of blocking the sun and have extensions.
Space: This car is rather spacious to me. It has the size of mid-size SUV from a decade ago in my opinion. I am only 5’8”, but there is room for me in the back and front. Three adult men in back would be tight, but two should be fine unless they are big. I think a large man would find the front comfortable. A very large man may want something bigger. Storage in the back is adequate for the usual grocery haul or luggage trips. For more, you can either let the rear seats down, stack the gear on top, and/or pull a light trailer. The height of the trunk area is nice for me; it makes loading easy.
Heating and Cooling: I’ve had no problems with the heating and cooling systems. I like it that I can choose a temperature and the AC/heat will make sure I get it (eventually, but usually fairly quick). This is a common feature with the up-class models of many vehicles now. The speed of bringing the cabin to temperature isn’t the best I’ve experienced, but it is at least average. It has also kept my windshield clear of fog for the most part – I especially like that.
Stereo and controls: I have the advanced stereo and it sucks compared to the $5000 customized stereo in my Audi. The biggest culprit is a total lack of bass (not a lack of quality, but a total lack of low frequency sound). The rest of the frequency, while not comparable to a good stereo, is at least tolerable. The Bose noise cancellation feature probably helps the car be a little quieter. I like that I can connect to my smart phone (bluetooth), use a USB drive of my music collection, collect to satellite radio, or HD or regular radio (and other choices). It’s very versatile. Controls are usually prompt (after the initial startup, which is too long in my opinion). I’d like to customize this stereo eventually. However, I have NEVER been satisfied with a stock stereo and never experienced a stock stereo that had satisfactory bass.
You have several ways of controlling the command center of the stereo and car settings. You can use voice, buttons and dial near the automatic transmission selector (i.e. shifter), or touch screen. The voice commands are hit and miss. Sometimes things work fine and sometimes not. I usually find it quicker not to bother with the voice commands. I prefer using the touch screen, which seems to work well overall. There’s not too many submenus, and it seems responsive. Mazda prevents using the touch screen while the car is moving. I don’t like this, and think it a useless safety feature. You have to look at the screen to see what you want changed regardless. It’s really quicker and less distracting to touch the screen than to use the dial and buttons to make your selection. Although the dials and button system works well, the touch screen is quicker. The screen does attract finger prints, and I wish Mazda had done something about that. The screen is visible during the bright day and at night.
I have no problem reaching any of the controls. I like the steering wheel controls. I like the ignition button (which can be used even if your remote is dead). So far, the engine has always started easily with a simple press of the button! There are a multitude of controls on the steering wheel and handles near it. I admit that I haven’t even learned them all. I don’t think it is the simplest system, but it does seem similar to other cars.
GPS: The GPS is handy. I like that I can get updates to the map. It seems to be as accurate as any other GPS that I have tried. It is integrated well with the system. For example, music will be turned down while it announces directions so you can easily hear it. The 7” color screen is readily visible.
Backup camera: Many cars have these now. While not essential by any means, these are certainly nice to have. They make backing up safely and accurately much easier/ comfortable.
Homelink rear view mirror. This is handy as is the automatic diming when lights are shining behind you. I wonder if the same trick could be used with the side view mirrors?
Performance
Handling: As everyone has said, handling is the strong point of the CX-5. The handling (maneuverability while rolling) and braking (not necessarily the distance to stop, but the feel of the brakes) are very high quality. Handling is easily superior to all other SUVs that I test drove (Toyota RAV4 hybrid, Honda CR-V, and Hyundai Tucson). It was better than a Lexus SUV that I drove previously. I feel sure that this SUV is the best handling SUV in its price class. It definitely gives confidence in the curves.
Acceleration: This is an SUV, so don’t expect miracles. However, it will provide more acceleration than most cars on the road. I have to deal with traffic all the time. So, obviously, every car’s acceleration is limited to the slowest car in front of it. I find that automatic transmission to be satisfactory in traffic. There is a semi-automatic mode, where you bump the shifter up or down to change gears. I like this mode when there is little traffic (say at 4 AM). It allows a surprising amount of acceleration for an SUV with a 2.5L naturally aspirated 4-cylinder.
Gas Mileage: I was disappointed to find that I get 21.6 MPG in my city driving. Still, I’m getting this using low grade gas, whereas I was happy to get 19 MPG with my Audi using premium gas. I expect it would get much better gas mileage on the flats cruising at 70 MPH.
Maintenance Cost: This was one of my chief reasons for choosing Mazda. The CX-5 is supposedly extremely reliable with economical maintenance and repairs. That and decent gas mileage makes for a low cost of ownership.
Lighting: I really appreciate great lighting at night. Everything is easily read inside. I also love the LED lighting outside. Everything is very well lit, and there is a clear difference between low and high beam, as there should be. I really like the adaptive headlights too. They also help me see where I am going. I think the lighting helps it look cool at night. During the day, the day light LEDs and side view mirror mounted flashes add to the vehicles safety and coolness.
Safety Features: This is an extremely heavily trafficked area and has more than its fair share of aggressive drivers. So, I am very happy with the large number of safety features that can be purchased with this ride. In fact, my insurance costs about the same when I switched from my 2003 Audi to this 2016 Mazda, which I feel is directly related to these safety features. Some of the feature include lane drift warning. I think this is a useful feature for long road trips where I may get drowsy. I typically have it deactivated, though. I’ve found that there are at least as many people here who will speed up to prevent you from switching lanes when you use a signal as there are people who will not. The blind spot alarm is very handy, because many people move faster than they should down the 3 lanes or more (each way) avenues. The backup (cross-direction) detector is great too, because many people race in the parking lot and there are many pedestrians who will stroll behind a car that is backing up. I also like the automatic brakes that will stop you when necessary. I am embarrassed to admit that I have bumped a car at a stop sign before. In this incident, the car had accelerated as if it was going to go, but then immediately braked again. With this safety feature, that moment of stupidity should never happen to me again.
Road Noise: This vehicle is not quiet. In the world of vehicles, I would classify it as very slightly below average. It’s not bad, but I do wish it was better.
Ride Comfort: This vehicle does not provide the greatest ride comfort. It is slightly worse than the Honda CR-V and clearly worse than the Toyota RAV4. However, it’s not bad. The ride of my customized Acura RSX-Type S was much stiffer, as was my dad’s jacked-up 4WD. I really think that ride comfort is a necessary tradeoff for this SUV’s handling. My Audi A4 had both better ride comfort and better handling, but it also had a much lower center of gravity. I also think Audi is exemplary in blending good ride comfort with good handling.
Comparisons: The Hyundai Tucson Sport has a peppy engine with the 1.6L Turbo. I liked its acceleration. It also offered decent handling. I hated its head rest. The Honda CR-V EX-L was a good car at a good price. It had no weaknesses, but overall I considered it bland and didn’t like its looks. However, I can understand how it is the bestselling SUV by far, especially at its price. The Toyota RAV-4 Hybrid XLE seemed cramped to me compared to the Mazda. The materials were less desirable to me than the Mazda. The more expensive (over my budget) Limited model was actually more comparable to the Mazda. It’s pep, despite the ratings, was less than the Mazda or it seemed so to me. The handling was clearly inferior. The brakes were – different. Conversely, it was probably the quietest, most comfortable ride that I test drove. It also gave the best gas mileage in the city by far. The dealership gave the best fringe benefits for a purchase. Reliability and cost of ownership are good. For some people, the Toyota would be the best choice.
Conclusion: After having the CX-5 for a while, I am satisfied that I made the best choice within my budget. It is not a perfect car, but I understand compromises must be made at this budget level. I think it is nice inside and out, and some of its weakness will be solved – when I can afford to do so.
#2
12-01-2016, 10:42 PM
Nice review. Thought I would make a couple of comments (not criticisms though). I have a 2014 CX5-GT and I use the voice control frequently. However, I have noticed that it responds well to my voice, but my wife can't get it to recognize her voice correctly at all.
Regarding the mirrors, they can indeed do the auto dim on the outside mirrors - my 2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee Overland has them. On the other hand, the Jeep cost $50k.
I'm not sure which nav system they are using in the 2016.5. The 2014 has a Tom-Tom system which I was fully expecting not to care much for. I also have nav in the Jeep and on the Panasonic AVIC-8000NEX I installed in my 2013 MX5 Club. The Jeep one is the fanciest with the most bells and whistles, but it isn't updated frequently. The Tom-Tom system is updated fequently (some updates are weekly) and is the least expensive to keep updated. As I said, the 2016.5 might have a different system.
The CX5 is primarily my wife's vehicle, though we generally use it for local trips when the weather is bad or we need to carry more than the MX5 can handle. We use the Jeep for long trips and off-roading. Overall, I am happy with the CX5 and I hope you enjoy yours.
Regarding the mirrors, they can indeed do the auto dim on the outside mirrors - my 2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee Overland has them. On the other hand, the Jeep cost $50k.
I'm not sure which nav system they are using in the 2016.5. The 2014 has a Tom-Tom system which I was fully expecting not to care much for. I also have nav in the Jeep and on the Panasonic AVIC-8000NEX I installed in my 2013 MX5 Club. The Jeep one is the fanciest with the most bells and whistles, but it isn't updated frequently. The Tom-Tom system is updated fequently (some updates are weekly) and is the least expensive to keep updated. As I said, the 2016.5 might have a different system.
The CX5 is primarily my wife's vehicle, though we generally use it for local trips when the weather is bad or we need to carry more than the MX5 can handle. We use the Jeep for long trips and off-roading. Overall, I am happy with the CX5 and I hope you enjoy yours.
#3
01-06-2017, 01:27 AM
My wife and I bought the 2016 CX-5 GT and love it. We test drove the Audi Q3 and the Lexus NX300 and couldn't justify spending $10-$15k more on vehicles that were pretty darn similar to the CX-5. My only complaint with the CX-5 is the subpar stock Bose Audio. I feel like I have to turn it way to loud to "hear" anything. It lacks bass as well.
#4
01-06-2017, 10:20 AM
Thorough review. I bought a 2016 CX-5 GT AWD as my wife puts many miles on our MDX. SHe does complain about ride quality but as you mention the trade-off is great handling and ride assurance.
#5
12-05-2019, 11:52 AM
The handling is spectacular. We've owned MX-5s for years and my wife has a 2016. The CX-5 handles like a MX-5 on stilts. Much more fun to drive than my 2010 Mercedes SLK350. With the great handling comes a somewhat rougher ride. I'll gladly take the trade-off.
#7
12-07-2019, 11:31 AM
3carmonte...
Can you expand on your last comment re 17" vs 19" wheels and handling a little bit?
I'm looking now mostly at the 2017 Touring vs GT, and one of the reviews (maybe Edmunds) indicated a preference for the Touring's 17" rubber.
Whatever we end up with will primarily be my wife's daily driver, though I'm sure she'll share...and I prefer a more spirited/sporty feel. I'm currently in a 2015 Forester XT, and for me, the 4-cyl turbo rocks, as does the Sport mode(s) and paddle shifters when in the twisties, which we have a lot of. Wife never uses either.
Thanks!
Can you expand on your last comment re 17" vs 19" wheels and handling a little bit?
I'm looking now mostly at the 2017 Touring vs GT, and one of the reviews (maybe Edmunds) indicated a preference for the Touring's 17" rubber.
Whatever we end up with will primarily be my wife's daily driver, though I'm sure she'll share...and I prefer a more spirited/sporty feel. I'm currently in a 2015 Forester XT, and for me, the 4-cyl turbo rocks, as does the Sport mode(s) and paddle shifters when in the twisties, which we have a lot of. Wife never uses either.
Thanks!
#8
12-07-2019, 12:11 PM
The larger the wheel diameter the shorter the sidewall of the tire. Th diameter of wheel and tire, combined, for both size wheels will be approximately the same. The shorter the side wall the "stiffer" the tire. It flexes less. So if you want a car that corners really well there is less distortion and it handles the cornering better than a tire with more sidewall and more distortion. If you want a tire that handles bumps better and absorbs the impact better you want more sidewall and more flex. So for comfort a smaller wheel diameter and larger sidewall is better. For "looks" more wheel to fill the wheel well gap is what car manufacturers go for.
#9
12-07-2019, 12:29 PM
The larger the wheel diameter the shorter the sidewall of the tire. Th diameter of wheel and tire, combined, for both size wheels will be approximately the same. The shorter the side wall the "stiffer" the tire. It flexes less. So if you want a car that corners really well there is less distortion and it handles the cornering better than a tire with more sidewall and more distortion. If you want a tire that handles bumps better and absorbs the impact better you want more sidewall and more flex. So for comfort a smaller wheel diameter and larger sidewall is better. For "looks" more wheel to fill the wheel well gap is what car manufacturers go for.
#10
12-07-2019, 02:25 PM
@Raprider , I have low profile tires on the 18" rims on my VW GTI. It corners like a sports car should and runs on pristine asphalt like a dream, but in the real world of crumbling roads, potholes etc. you feel every imperfection past the toleration point of comfort. On the other hand (my wife's) CX-5's 17" touring wheels (with Bridgestone tires not the OEM Yokohama's) handles remarkably well / better than average for an SUV "in the twisty's" and forgives road surface issues beautifully, even at 34 PSI. The laws of physics haven't changed. Tires are still a major part of your suspension. The 19" look better I admit but when I'm doing a 2500 mi. road trip, I'm happy to be on the 17" tires. * We researched all of this before buying the Touring over the Grand and the extra money for that upgrade and the technology packages that follow could not be justified. The Touring has the rear-view camera which is an asset. All of the rest of that stuff is not only UN-necessary but just more **** to break. The only upgrade we went for in 2014 was the 2.5l engine over the 2.0l which was still standard at the time.