Mazda CX-5 Forums
General Category => CX-5 => Topic started by: wesdev on June 29, 2016, 12:10:37 pm
-
Guys,
I'm considering a 2.2D Auto 2015 but just wondered if there is any gotchas i need to know?
Previously i owned
CRV mk2, 2002
CRV mk3 2006
LR Disco 3 2009
VW Touareg 2012
and i've currently a 2009 Volvo XC60 S (the bottom model with 73k on it as i had to downgrade from the Treg as we moved house).
All of those above i just drove and religiously serviced every 10-12k. THat was it.
Is the CX-5 the same? Im hoping to get better fuel, VED, insurance and it should save me £1500-£1750 a year at least on 10k miles and i get a car a year old with say 15k on the clock.
-
In your position I think I would be considering a petrol car, assuming you don't tow.
-
No, but i've had all diesels before and my wifes car is a diesel Grand C Max for the children so as not to worry when we swap. I'm also self employed and luckily i'm based locally at the moment but have driven to swindon from southampton daily on previous contracts.
-
Problem is there are issues with some of the early diesel cars.
Oil rise which can lead to other problems, turbo failures, cam wear, vacuum pump premature wear.
For that reason I couldn't recommend a pre 2015 car.
It's too soon to say whether the updated car has been sorted. But it still carries a warranty.
If you buy one make sure its been Mazda dealer serviced ideally, and comes with a warranty that cover the turbo ect.
-
Think you should be ok with 2015/16 model as they appear to be reliable. In fact even the last of the pre 2015 diesels have been reliable so you should be ok.
-
Im on the phone at the mo with 3 dealers
2015/15 20k miles
2015/15 16k miles
and 2015 facelift model
So just playing them off against each other.
Surely the warranty should cover the turbo even if the the dreaded DPF issue strikes?
-
Have a read through here.
http://mazdacx5forums.co.uk/index.php?board=14.0
Those cars you are looking at sound ok.
-
I’m wondering if some of this cam wear comes from the engine revving its nuts off when it starts from cold. You can hear the cam rattle for a couple of seconds.
-
Is this on all models or only pre 2015 ones?
Most dealers say they have done all recalls and updates but how do you know? Can you get a list?
-
I’m wondering if some of this cam wear comes from the engine revving its nuts off when it starts from cold. You can hear the cam rattle for a couple of seconds.
I complained to Mazda about the "engine destroying" start up, i was taught never to rev a cold engine from start up as the oil may not have fully circulated. This is the email they sent me some years ago. At least with the auto you can put the car straight into Rev to stop the revving.
"Thank you for your recent email.
Having discussed your concern with our Technical Department, I can advise the following:
High idle speed is a normal function of the SkyActiv Diesel engine on start up, and is not related to any PCM updates; this has always been a feature of this engine.
After a cold start, the regulating valve and the wastegate valve are fully open to enable the exhaust gas to flow through the turbochargers without losing much exhaust gas heating capacity. Also the VVL mechanism slightly opens one exhaust valve per cylinder during intake stroke in order to recirculate a certain amount of high temperature exhaust gas back to the cylinder.
This is for early activation of the catalytic converter and improved exhaust gas purification. This does not indicate defect of the parts.
<Operating Requirement>
1. Water temperature (ECT) at engine starting: from 15 to 32 degrees Celsius.
Intake air temperature (IAT) at engine start: from 15 to 35 degrees Celsius.
Barometric pressure at (BARO) at engine start: from: 91 to 200 kPa.
2. Gear position: P, N, D with the engine idling (Accelerator pedal not depressed)
This is mentioned in the owner’s manual
<Owner’s Manual>
This concern is mentioned in the O/M “When Driving Start/Stop Engine” as follows:.
After starting a cold engine, the engine speed increases and a whining sound from the engine compartment can be heard.
This is for improved exhaust gas purification and does not indicate defect of the parts.
In closing, I trust the above information clarifies your Mazda CX-5 is operating as intended."
-
Is this on all models or only pre 2015 ones?
Most dealers say they have done all recalls and updates but how do you know? Can you get a list?
This is what a Mazda247 owner sent me when i had my last cx-5.
"The affected VIN number for possible camshaft problems is up to number 163230 as long as it start with JMZKE. You VIN ends with 160600 so for me it looks like you fall under the category of potentially having a bad camshaft material quality. To be sure, please check your built date, if your car was built before Sept 17th 2013 then your are in the affected batch. All cars built after that date are not affected.
This doesn't mean you will get the problem, I have no idea what the chances of the problem happening are, probably very low.
Next week I am looking at test driving some new CX-5's, it's my wifes car, she loves how it drives and the height is perfect for getting our daughter in and out easily. I will try the automatic diesel too, with so much torque, I think an automatic would be good, I liked my last golf DSG.
Switzerland now gets the 2.5L petrol, so I will try that too (only automatic available) but I have a feeling I might miss the pull of the diesel, let's see."
Soon after that i had a service where the vacuum pump was checked for wear, it failed the checks and i wasn't allowed to drive away the car until it was replaced a week later.
After that i quickly lost confidence in the car and only traded in for aonther because i got an effective £5K discount.
-
I’m sick of the fuss that goes with running new diesels. I would have that 2.5 petrol without hesitation but for some reason they don’t offer it to us. My mate will pick up his new RAV4 Hybrid on the 23rd. I might even try one of those next time (3 years) unless this CX-5 behaves impeccably. I’m a teensy bit wary of this car which is a pity because I like it.
With regard to the revving, I don’t really know if they are being evasive with that answer. I think the tech department has answered why it does it not what the effect might be. Typical when you can’t ask directly. I think 6 monthly oil changes might be the answer, unofficial of not. Thanks xtm.
-
OP - another one for your consideration could be the Subaru Forester diesel. I had one for 3 years and found it a great car, very reliable, good MPG (much closer to official figure than Mazda). Went over to CX5 primarily because of the lower CO2 improving the BIK tax figures. The CX5 does drive/handle better, but the Forester has a bit more space and is more practical. Forester also has a better 4WD system.
I’m wondering if some of this cam wear comes from the engine revving its nuts off when it starts from cold.
Not related AFAIK, early production run engines were fitted with improperly hardened cams. No recall on those to my knowledge, but Mazda fix them if the problem occurs under warranty.
Alan.
-
Not related AFAIK, early production run engines were fitted with improperly hardened cams. No recall on those to my knowledge, but Mazda fix them if the problem occurs under warranty.
Alan.
I hope you are right but its early days. To the OP, its something to consider that there are some earlier models out there with possible problems - buy as new as you can. The engine on my 175 pulls like a train and the car itself is a good alternative to those cars listed in your first post. I like both the Discovery and the toe rag in your list but LR reliability is appalling and the VWs are not as good as they are cracked up to be in my opinion. They can be trouble and when they do out of warranty, oh dear.
-
So looks like the facelift 2015 car is in pole position.
19.5k is that about right. 16k miles?
-
So looks like the facelift 2015 car is in pole position.
19.5k is that about right. 16k miles?
You can look up the car on autotrader, value depends on model as well as mileage, or you can get a quote from webuyanycar.com provided you have the reg number, but they are really for selling too not buying from.
-
I guess what Im asking is
Is the face lift, dampening, tweaks and difference worth nearly £4k difference? (3k + 900 in the interest on the loan?)
Thoughts?
-
Is the face lift, dampening, tweaks and difference worth nearly £4k difference? (3k + 900 in the interest on the loan?)
My view is that v1.1 is where they fix all the things they should've fixed before they released v1.0... ;)
You get the (arguably) better 'infotainment' system (bigger screen), other cabin improvements, Smart City Brake Support, Emergency Stop Signalling, Hill Hold Assist, wing mirror signal, etc. The Sport version gets more changes.
-
You get the (arguably) better 'infotainment' system (bigger screen), other cabin improvements, Smart City Brake Support, Emergency Stop Signalling, Hill Hold Assist, wing mirror signal, etc. The Sport version gets more changes.
My 2013 model year Sport Nav has the SCBS and Hill hold (these might have been standard across the range).
-
No, you get more. They made changes to the steering and suspension and added the electric parking brake. They've also added more sound insulation to the bulkhead. They remapped post injection to ease dilution and increased the frequency of the regens to meet Euro 6. The centre screen also provides corrective actions for faults summarised in the dash warning panel. For instance if it says BSM malfunction in orange on the dash, going into the centre display now list checks - There is a fault with the BSM (blind spot monitoring or RCTA (rear cross traffic alert). Check rear bumper for obstructions such as leaves or snow. If problems persist, contact dealer.
-
Is it worth the difference in price? Would they have done updates to the 2015 models? Like the ecu updates etc?
-
No, you get more. They made changes to the steering and suspension and added the electric parking brake. They've also added more sound insulation to the bulkhead. They remapped post injection to ease dilution and increased the frequency of the regens to meet Euro 6. The centre screen also provides corrective actions for faults summarised in the dash warning panel. For instance if it says BSM malfunction in orange on the dash, going into the centre display now list checks - There is a fault with the BSM (blind spot monitoring or RCTA (rear cross traffic alert). Check rear bumper for obstructions such as leaves or snow. If problems persist, contact dealer.
The diesel was euro 6 on release, the petrol euro 5.
Latest car is definitely quieter, but as a result its gained weight.
Larger screen is a big improvement, although i personally don't see the nav as an improvement having used it now for some time.
The electronic handbrake does hold more effectively according to a practical caravan test last year where the cx-5 won its group due to the EHB addition.
I personally also prefer the front grill and interior on the new model, but i'm unsure about the new alloys on the sport.
Rear view camera day image is better, but on my car the night vision has gone backwards, dealer says its normal.
I also have an annoying brake squeal which the dealer again says is ok, but again the older version didn't squeal anything like this one which is embarrassing at times.
-
Is it worth the difference in price? Would they have done updates to the 2015 models? Like the ecu updates etc?
From a buying new point of view i got over twice as much discount on the 2015 car than the 2013.
I don't know what the ecu updates were, its the first i've read about reading anchorman's post, but the car isnt anymore economical in auto than it was in manual, i'm only showing 38mpg at the minute, while i would be about 41 mpg on the old car, i would also expect extra weight to slow the car a little.
Both cars are good to drive with excellent performance in 175ps guise, so really its your choice.
-
I think im going for the 15/15 plate one as i dont think the extras are worth £4k.
-
I guess what Im asking is
Is the face lift, dampening, tweaks and difference worth nearly £4k difference? (3k + 900 in the interest on the loan?)
Thoughts?
As I currently have both cars I would say it's not but that's the petrol version, having said that I do think the face-lift is better it has lots of tweaks from alloys lights, EHB, even leather type used on seats , it always comes down to budget, I still love driving around in the 2012 especially now it's loosened up a bit with 26k on clock
-
I actually went for a 15 plate pre-facelift for 3 reasons. The sat nav was way better, it had a normal hand brake and the grill looked sexy. Price was not an issue. I couldn't really tell any difference in the drive or sound etc, so I just went with what I liked best. 12 months down the line and I'm very happy I went for the earlier model.
Darrel
2.2 175 AWD Sport Nav
-
Nice one mate, i pick mine up tomorrow morning!
-
I should have test drove the 2016 model, I assumed it would be as good as my 2012 version. I'm very disappointed with this info system, and the sat nav, all of which are very important to me.
I should have gone for the Toyota RAV4 instead.
-
I know what you mean I am very disappointed with it, and like you thought the 2012 model was better. But I love the car.
-
I test drove the new rav-4 and found the suspension very hard. You could feel every bump however small. Also the interior is pretty bland and it drinks fuel?
-
I test drove the new rav-4 and found the suspension very hard. You could feel every bump however small. Also the interior is pretty bland and it drinks fuel?
Problem with Toyota hybrids is they firm up the suspension due to the battery weight. The one I test drove was the 2015 diesel version, which was a nice drive, but IIRC the emissions and official MPG figures were higher.
-
I test drove the new rav-4 and found the suspension very hard. You could feel every bump however small. Also the interior is pretty bland and it drinks fuel?
I had a 2008 Rav4 and my wife still has a 2012 Rav4 - both 2.2 diesel. The 2008 car was very noisy (think 'agricultural'!), was poor on CO2 emissions, had slightly lower power (140ps), but reasonably ok for fuel (~40mpg if you were careful). The 2012 model was much more refined, better CO2, more power (150ps), but drank fuel (~32mpg)...
My 2016 CX-5 is as good as or better on all counts.