2019 Mazda CX-5 Turbo - The Best Mainstream Crossover
video description
Date: 2019-05-30
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 10
Stephen Hendricks
As usual an excellent review, Alex. Full of detail and insights that arent offered by others. A few comments. ) Engine/Drivetrain. Of the vehicles (CX-5, CX-9, Mazda6, and in non-American markets, the CX-8) where Mazda offers their turbo4, I think the most successful application is probably the CX-5. The Mazda6 trails both the Accord and Camry (top trim) rivals in performance and interior room. The CX-9 sacrifices both interior space and smooth, linear performance against its V6 competition. The CX-5 also sacrifices interior room against its competition but its performance is a major plus compared to the mainstream compact rivals. Its true that Mazda trails the competition in terms of the race to provide the most individual gears but the turbo4s massive torque covers a variety of sins and the six speed transmission is undoubtedly adequate even though it hurts fuel economy to some extent. ) Styling. Like the CX-9 and Mazda6, the CX-5 has earned almost universal praise for its looks. But Alex is the only reviewer Ive seen who pinpoints the reason for those looks, the long, long hood and the hood-to-body ratio of each vehicle. Its a styling decision that designers have employed for about a hundred years in sports cars and sedans to suggest potency and performance. A cynic might argue that a cheaper and more effective solution for the need it satisfies is a Viagra prescription. But far be it from me to suggest that. ) Utility. The U in SUV stands for utility. And Mazdas styling choices significantly shortchanges that priority. The sacrifice is nowhere near as great as in the CX-9 where interior passenger room and cargo space trails the tweener (Goldilocks) category that includes the Kia Sorento and the Hyundai Santa Fe even though the CX-9 is nearly a foot longer. But the CX-5 still offers far less overall cargo space and passenger room than a CR-V as well as several other of its rivals. Alex says hed be willing to lose 25% of the overall cargo space compared to a CR-V and hes probably not alone. But those who dont have a Dodge Durango sitting in the garage as an option to haul cargo and passengers may have a different take on giving up utility for style and performance. ) Overall. The CX-5 is Mazdas best selling model in the US. The option of a turbo4/AWD should boost those sales. But there are some compelling alternatives including the Subaru Forester with greater utility for less money and the Hyundai Santa Fe in a larger tweener category at about the same price.
reply
As usual an excellent review, Alex. Full of detail and insights that arent offered by others. A few comments. ) Engine/Drivetrain. Of the vehicles (CX-5, CX-9, Mazda6, and in non-American markets, the CX-8) where Mazda offers their turbo4, I think the most successful application is probably the CX-5. The Mazda6 trails both the Accord and Camry (top trim) rivals in performance and interior room. The CX-9 sacrifices both interior space and smooth, linear performance against its V6 competition. The CX-5 also sacrifices interior room against its competition but its performance is a major plus compared to the mainstream compact rivals. Its true that Mazda trails the competition in terms of the race to provide the most individual gears but the turbo4s massive torque covers a variety of sins and the six speed transmission is undoubtedly adequate even though it hurts fuel economy to some extent. ) Styling. Like the CX-9 and Mazda6, the CX-5 has earned almost universal praise for its looks. But Alex is the only reviewer Ive seen who pinpoints the reason for those looks, the long, long hood and the hood-to-body ratio of each vehicle. Its a styling decision that designers have employed for about a hundred years in sports cars and sedans to suggest potency and performance. A cynic might argue that a cheaper and more effective solution for the need it satisfies is a Viagra prescription. But far be it from me to suggest that. ) Utility. The U in SUV stands for utility. And Mazdas styling choices significantly shortchanges that priority. The sacrifice is nowhere near as great as in the CX-9 where interior passenger room and cargo space trails the tweener (Goldilocks) category that includes the Kia Sorento and the Hyundai Santa Fe even though the CX-9 is nearly a foot longer. But the CX-5 still offers far less overall cargo space and passenger room than a CR-V as well as several other of its rivals. Alex says hed be willing to lose 25% of the overall cargo space compared to a CR-V and hes probably not alone. But those who dont have a Dodge Durango sitting in the garage as an option to haul cargo and passengers may have a different take on giving up utility for style and performance. ) Overall. The CX-5 is Mazdas best selling model in the US. The option of a turbo4/AWD should boost those sales. But there are some compelling alternatives including the Subaru Forester with greater utility for less money and the Hyundai Santa Fe in a larger tweener category at about the same price.
reply
HugFest
I have the top of the line non-turbo 2018 CX5 and the car is an amazing value for the money. Like one other youtuber claimed many times, Mazdas have the best transmissions out of any brand and any car up to 60, 000. I do agree. The transmission in the car is out of this world and completely makes the car what it is - and now with the Turbo, it should be the blast to drive too. Although coming from a 306 HP car to this 186 HP car, believe it or not, is not a massive downgrade. This car is also extremely quiet and behaves very well with the power it has. Both the transmission and the noise levels are better than my 60k Lexus GS. I also love the simple black and white design in the car console. No color other than the entertainment screen. Simple and elegant. The seats are not super comfortable and they are tiny for anyone with an actual butt (side patting will bother you thies. Any other car you look into, whether its a Nissan Rouge, Rav 4 or pick a different brand, has a wider seating area in the seats. And I am not a fat person by any means (6 ft, 175 pounds) and its clear the seats were originally made for Asian market/people. The gas mileage is 27 avarage which is not the best, but its on regular. RDX will be 15-17k more to buy (250+ more to lease) and takes premium fuel. Insurance cost is very low on the CX5 too compared to RDX. Lastly, I never ever touched the touch screen as the toggle near the arm rest is very good and my Lexus didnt have a touch screen either so I got used to it. If you would not tell people its a touch screen, they would not know or need it. The entertainment design (what you see on the screen) is better in the Mazda compared to a Lexus, although the sound system was better sounding in the Lexus. Sound is only bass and trebble in the Mazda, not mids. Very weird. As long as you dont expect Subaru AWD capability and amazing seating, its the best car in the segment. I am paying 349 with 0 down and 12k miles a year on a lease (I could not get a RDX below 700 on a lease. I would not buy any Korean car over this, and never buy a GM product. Honda has currently issues with oil consumption and Toyota will not be as quiet and elegant compared to Mazda. This car is in a class of its own because, again, transmission. If the seating bothers you after a test drive, see if you can get the CX9. That car is a gem.
reply
I have the top of the line non-turbo 2018 CX5 and the car is an amazing value for the money. Like one other youtuber claimed many times, Mazdas have the best transmissions out of any brand and any car up to 60, 000. I do agree. The transmission in the car is out of this world and completely makes the car what it is - and now with the Turbo, it should be the blast to drive too. Although coming from a 306 HP car to this 186 HP car, believe it or not, is not a massive downgrade. This car is also extremely quiet and behaves very well with the power it has. Both the transmission and the noise levels are better than my 60k Lexus GS. I also love the simple black and white design in the car console. No color other than the entertainment screen. Simple and elegant. The seats are not super comfortable and they are tiny for anyone with an actual butt (side patting will bother you thies. Any other car you look into, whether its a Nissan Rouge, Rav 4 or pick a different brand, has a wider seating area in the seats. And I am not a fat person by any means (6 ft, 175 pounds) and its clear the seats were originally made for Asian market/people. The gas mileage is 27 avarage which is not the best, but its on regular. RDX will be 15-17k more to buy (250+ more to lease) and takes premium fuel. Insurance cost is very low on the CX5 too compared to RDX. Lastly, I never ever touched the touch screen as the toggle near the arm rest is very good and my Lexus didnt have a touch screen either so I got used to it. If you would not tell people its a touch screen, they would not know or need it. The entertainment design (what you see on the screen) is better in the Mazda compared to a Lexus, although the sound system was better sounding in the Lexus. Sound is only bass and trebble in the Mazda, not mids. Very weird. As long as you dont expect Subaru AWD capability and amazing seating, its the best car in the segment. I am paying 349 with 0 down and 12k miles a year on a lease (I could not get a RDX below 700 on a lease. I would not buy any Korean car over this, and never buy a GM product. Honda has currently issues with oil consumption and Toyota will not be as quiet and elegant compared to Mazda. This car is in a class of its own because, again, transmission. If the seating bothers you after a test drive, see if you can get the CX9. That car is a gem.
reply
C C
No it is not the best. It is good even very good but use much more gas than the Rav4 hybrid xse and has less 2nd row legroom space and less cargo. Also the screen is not touchscreen during driving. 3 very impotant aspect of a car. Having a turbo, good styling and luxury interior (mainly in GT, especially in signature) is not enough for being the best crossoverCons: Rav xse city: 5. 8L/100 cx5 non turbo: 9. 8L/100 turbo: 11. 4L/100 and probably these numbers are higher in real life. The seat are narrow in Cx5. During driving you have to use a very distracting and not practical wheel and button. How do you scroll a map with that? how do you click on a screen where there is at least 6 or 7 buttons (stations, main buttons. Plus: Price and financial rates. Features standard in GT Model. (Passenger power seat, ventilated front seat, heated rear seat and bose high end audio. Also it has a lot of options equipment missing in rav4 xse. I try to be as honest as possible. Both model are good. one (rav4 xse) targets fuel consumption, practicality and reasonable performance with controlled price (for an hybrid, another (cx 5), performance (turbo model) and luxury feature (gt model) with better price.
reply
No it is not the best. It is good even very good but use much more gas than the Rav4 hybrid xse and has less 2nd row legroom space and less cargo. Also the screen is not touchscreen during driving. 3 very impotant aspect of a car. Having a turbo, good styling and luxury interior (mainly in GT, especially in signature) is not enough for being the best crossoverCons: Rav xse city: 5. 8L/100 cx5 non turbo: 9. 8L/100 turbo: 11. 4L/100 and probably these numbers are higher in real life. The seat are narrow in Cx5. During driving you have to use a very distracting and not practical wheel and button. How do you scroll a map with that? how do you click on a screen where there is at least 6 or 7 buttons (stations, main buttons. Plus: Price and financial rates. Features standard in GT Model. (Passenger power seat, ventilated front seat, heated rear seat and bose high end audio. Also it has a lot of options equipment missing in rav4 xse. I try to be as honest as possible. Both model are good. one (rav4 xse) targets fuel consumption, practicality and reasonable performance with controlled price (for an hybrid, another (cx 5), performance (turbo model) and luxury feature (gt model) with better price.
reply
Peter O
Bought the car and its the worst car ever bought by me. If it would be 22k alright but at 37k look elsewhere. Here are just a few instances whyCold air blows into the car right from startup with a cold engine. Doesnt wait until car is warmNavigation system is sub par with ANYTHING out there today in this price segment. Partially heated steering wheel. Wipers on Auto do not go to highest setting. needs to be done manually. Outermost Vents need to be manually turned off otherwise they always blow air on your hands. Hot or cold. Dash illumination is linked to nav screen. You can not have the dash on full brightness and the nav on night mode on auto. Needs to be changed in settings manually every time. Car will turn into night mode even if you just drive under an overpass. Auto Highbeams only work sometimes. All LEDs in the heating system in warning light yellow. I have like 10 more annoying items which you will NOT find in any other car in that price segment. This car shames no other car and quite frankly is awful. Also note that the horsepowers advertised only with premium gasoline, and the HUD only works without sunglasses. Not a thorough review.
reply
Bought the car and its the worst car ever bought by me. If it would be 22k alright but at 37k look elsewhere. Here are just a few instances whyCold air blows into the car right from startup with a cold engine. Doesnt wait until car is warmNavigation system is sub par with ANYTHING out there today in this price segment. Partially heated steering wheel. Wipers on Auto do not go to highest setting. needs to be done manually. Outermost Vents need to be manually turned off otherwise they always blow air on your hands. Hot or cold. Dash illumination is linked to nav screen. You can not have the dash on full brightness and the nav on night mode on auto. Needs to be changed in settings manually every time. Car will turn into night mode even if you just drive under an overpass. Auto Highbeams only work sometimes. All LEDs in the heating system in warning light yellow. I have like 10 more annoying items which you will NOT find in any other car in that price segment. This car shames no other car and quite frankly is awful. Also note that the horsepowers advertised only with premium gasoline, and the HUD only works without sunglasses. Not a thorough review.
reply
Ramon Suarez
After testing the Honda CR-V EX, Mazda CX-5 Touring, Nissan Rogue SV, and Hyundai Santa Fe SEL, I decided to get the Honda CR-V, but the Mazda CX-5 was a very close second. The CX-5 was the best looking inside and out and had the most refined driving feel. I really felt that it was about a half step into the luxury class. However, the CR-V was not that far behind in interior and driving feel, and I liked the extra room, fuel economy, and just the fact that its a Honda. I also preferred the touch screen infotainment system on the CR-V over the Mazdas which I found cumbersome and would have preferred a touch screen while driving. I find that especially with Apple Carplay a touch screen is very nice and I use it a lot. My girlfriend still bothers me about not picking the Mazda because that was her favorite. Alex did mention that aftermarket you can enable the touch screen while moving, which may have sealed the deal for me with Mazda had I known about it. BTW I was aware of the oil dilution controversy with the CR-V. I live in Florida so I didnt worry about it, and my CR-V appears to warm up very quickly.
reply
After testing the Honda CR-V EX, Mazda CX-5 Touring, Nissan Rogue SV, and Hyundai Santa Fe SEL, I decided to get the Honda CR-V, but the Mazda CX-5 was a very close second. The CX-5 was the best looking inside and out and had the most refined driving feel. I really felt that it was about a half step into the luxury class. However, the CR-V was not that far behind in interior and driving feel, and I liked the extra room, fuel economy, and just the fact that its a Honda. I also preferred the touch screen infotainment system on the CR-V over the Mazdas which I found cumbersome and would have preferred a touch screen while driving. I find that especially with Apple Carplay a touch screen is very nice and I use it a lot. My girlfriend still bothers me about not picking the Mazda because that was her favorite. Alex did mention that aftermarket you can enable the touch screen while moving, which may have sealed the deal for me with Mazda had I known about it. BTW I was aware of the oil dilution controversy with the CR-V. I live in Florida so I didnt worry about it, and my CR-V appears to warm up very quickly.
reply
rod miranne
Thanks, for a great video review. Ive been waiting for your full test video since your shorter in the snow drive last month. Ive been waiting on the 2019 model since the Fall and was hoping for the new changes, mainly a change in the GT wheel design and the addition of brown Nappa leather seat color. The turbo wasnt that big of a deal for me. I would opt for the GT with the premium package if it had come with the brown Nappa seats. As it was, I was going to wait until spring, but after a test drive 2 weeks before Christmas with my Wife (& Chief Financial Officer, we made a deal and bought a Soul Red 2019 GT Signature model. I love it so far. Its like a Starship compared to my old 07 Mazda 6i 5-door. My only quibbles are; 1. The brown leather is a little to dark. 2. The price was a little higher than I was hoping for and 3. The gas mileage is not as high so far (it still has less than 1, 000 miles in Michigan winter driving) as I would like. The added power is great and the 360 degree camera and parking sensors are great to have. Thanks again for the great reviews.
reply
Thanks, for a great video review. Ive been waiting for your full test video since your shorter in the snow drive last month. Ive been waiting on the 2019 model since the Fall and was hoping for the new changes, mainly a change in the GT wheel design and the addition of brown Nappa leather seat color. The turbo wasnt that big of a deal for me. I would opt for the GT with the premium package if it had come with the brown Nappa seats. As it was, I was going to wait until spring, but after a test drive 2 weeks before Christmas with my Wife (& Chief Financial Officer, we made a deal and bought a Soul Red 2019 GT Signature model. I love it so far. Its like a Starship compared to my old 07 Mazda 6i 5-door. My only quibbles are; 1. The brown leather is a little to dark. 2. The price was a little higher than I was hoping for and 3. The gas mileage is not as high so far (it still has less than 1, 000 miles in Michigan winter driving) as I would like. The added power is great and the 360 degree camera and parking sensors are great to have. Thanks again for the great reviews.
reply
Robert Pigeon
I agree that the CX-5 is the top pick, particularly if one liked what they have to offer. From viewing, feeling and driving it myself, its a winner. As long as those who can pull their head out of. their disposition of having to be seen in a luxury German or Japanese or other product, this vehicle like many Mazdas are as good if not better and its manufactured in Japan (QC; reliability. Its true I chose a 2019 Santa Fe 2. 0L, over this fantastic vehicle, yet only because I accept the SFe for being a little more roomy and rear under floor storage hat suits my specific needs and yes cost about 1200 more than the natural 2. 5L CX-5 equivalent. My understanding is that both brands have predictive AWD (i. e. HTRAC / iActiv. Finally, after driving a 2019 RAV4, it unfortunately is no match against this CX-5 in my opinion and Toyota continues to hold out on options (some Safety too) by comparison, unless you buy the top trim.
reply
I agree that the CX-5 is the top pick, particularly if one liked what they have to offer. From viewing, feeling and driving it myself, its a winner. As long as those who can pull their head out of. their disposition of having to be seen in a luxury German or Japanese or other product, this vehicle like many Mazdas are as good if not better and its manufactured in Japan (QC; reliability. Its true I chose a 2019 Santa Fe 2. 0L, over this fantastic vehicle, yet only because I accept the SFe for being a little more roomy and rear under floor storage hat suits my specific needs and yes cost about 1200 more than the natural 2. 5L CX-5 equivalent. My understanding is that both brands have predictive AWD (i. e. HTRAC / iActiv. Finally, after driving a 2019 RAV4, it unfortunately is no match against this CX-5 in my opinion and Toyota continues to hold out on options (some Safety too) by comparison, unless you buy the top trim.
reply
James
I took the turbo cx5 for a test drive today and was surprised (based on all the great reviews) how unrefined the Mazda 5 drove. Suspension felt bumpy, bouncy and still suv like with average steering response. The seats are WAY to firm and very uncomfortable. My girlfriend took this test drive with me and completely agreed. We were both nauseas after 25 minute ride. Not the test drive we were expecting. Will likely go with rav4 xse due to nicer interior, much better fuel economy, better overall ride, much comfier seats, and higher expected reliability. Ill also say the Volvo xc40 has been BY FAR our fav test drive. T5 engine matches this turbo Mazda and suspension is MUCH more refined. Yes I know its a luxery compact SUV and 10000 more but the difference between cx5 and xc40 is night & day. Enthusiasts that can afford the xc40 I highly suggest taking one for a test drive.
reply
I took the turbo cx5 for a test drive today and was surprised (based on all the great reviews) how unrefined the Mazda 5 drove. Suspension felt bumpy, bouncy and still suv like with average steering response. The seats are WAY to firm and very uncomfortable. My girlfriend took this test drive with me and completely agreed. We were both nauseas after 25 minute ride. Not the test drive we were expecting. Will likely go with rav4 xse due to nicer interior, much better fuel economy, better overall ride, much comfier seats, and higher expected reliability. Ill also say the Volvo xc40 has been BY FAR our fav test drive. T5 engine matches this turbo Mazda and suspension is MUCH more refined. Yes I know its a luxery compact SUV and 10000 more but the difference between cx5 and xc40 is night & day. Enthusiasts that can afford the xc40 I highly suggest taking one for a test drive.
reply
Jack Eaker
test drove it at a dealer that just gave me the keys and said see you in an hour. they also offered to let me take it home over a weekend. thats a real test drive. engine and tranny were great, smooth and quick. interior sporty and a level just below luxury. mazdas have a custom feel which is really nice. handling was ok for this type of vehicle, but the short wheelbase gave me a tippy feeling on wet curves. brakes were good and infotainment was complete and suffucient. for the 37 k for the gt r, i want nav, leather heated steering wheel, ventilated seat AND a pano roof. too bad, almost checked all the boxes. then drove the new rav 4. liked the styling and the interior, but the engine is weak and somehow the car felt cheap. will wait for the hybrid and retest. happy hunting
reply
test drove it at a dealer that just gave me the keys and said see you in an hour. they also offered to let me take it home over a weekend. thats a real test drive. engine and tranny were great, smooth and quick. interior sporty and a level just below luxury. mazdas have a custom feel which is really nice. handling was ok for this type of vehicle, but the short wheelbase gave me a tippy feeling on wet curves. brakes were good and infotainment was complete and suffucient. for the 37 k for the gt r, i want nav, leather heated steering wheel, ventilated seat AND a pano roof. too bad, almost checked all the boxes. then drove the new rav 4. liked the styling and the interior, but the engine is weak and somehow the car felt cheap. will wait for the hybrid and retest. happy hunting
reply
De U
The CX5 is the fastest and has the best looking interior in the mainstream compact Crossover. The interior of the CX5 though with nice material quality looks a little too familiar in 2019 and even dated (the infotainment screen size, Mazda could have refreshed the interior like they did with the new Mazda 3 and this would have been an absolute winner for me. So for the interior Id still pick the latest Rav4 over this as its more modern and more spacious as well. If we are gonna include the RDX, then Id be willing to pay the difference and pick the RDX over the CX5 as the RDX is better all-round (interior, exterior, drivetrain, teck and luxury trappings. RDX is certainly a better value over this if youll be willing to pay extra. My thoughts though
reply
The CX5 is the fastest and has the best looking interior in the mainstream compact Crossover. The interior of the CX5 though with nice material quality looks a little too familiar in 2019 and even dated (the infotainment screen size, Mazda could have refreshed the interior like they did with the new Mazda 3 and this would have been an absolute winner for me. So for the interior Id still pick the latest Rav4 over this as its more modern and more spacious as well. If we are gonna include the RDX, then Id be willing to pay the difference and pick the RDX over the CX5 as the RDX is better all-round (interior, exterior, drivetrain, teck and luxury trappings. RDX is certainly a better value over this if youll be willing to pay extra. My thoughts though
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
