Just joined - considering a CX-5 2.2

[mrg9999]

I have a 4 day trial starting next week.  I've only had a 30min test drive so far.  I'll probably go for the 2.2 Diesel auto Sport Nav.

I've considered other cars and had week trials of
Hyundai - Tuscon - currently my favourite - thirsty
Skoda yeti - digital speedo only in kmph!


tried - but rejected
Vauxhall Mokka - Bumpy ride, Mad Entertainment (curved dash)
Ford Kuga -  Mad Entertainment, that can't easily be replaced / upgraded. Mad sun visors. Nice car otherwise.
Quashqai - I don't fit / cramped
Toyota RAV4 - I don't fit / cramped
Honda CRV - I don't fit / cramped
BMWs - too expensive / too complex options. I said to dealer I have up to 30K and I want this -  small X-over/SUV - "Leather, Auto,  climate, Sun roof, 4x4, what can you offer me?" - He hadn't a clue what cars BMW did!! He suggested a 3 series.

What I'd like to find out from this board are the things I can't find out in a weeks trial.
What are the top three things that let it down?
My use
I want it for a bit of towing, a bit of gentle off road, town driving. motorway driving. I may spend a long time sitting in it.

[Anchorman]

Welcome to the club.

I've had the same car you fancy for approaching a month and with a trip to Scotland included, am just coming up to 1100 miles. I've got no regrets whatsoever. The economy is creeping up and I'm so far nudging 40mpg which I'm more than happy with. It pulls like a train and the box is super smooth.   I'm struggling to find three things I don't like. I've got a little niggle in that the indicators are too easy to move and if I try to nudge the "3 flashes" position it clicks into permanent. I'm not concerned and I will raise but ally not bothered.  I'd like a full size spare so I'm going to have to buy the styrene inserts, jack and wheelbrace and then bolster the boot floor by 50mm.

If on the other hand you think of a question, fire away.

[xtrailman]

I have a 4 day trial starting next week.  I've only had a 30min test drive so far.  I'll probably go for the 2.2 Diesel auto Sport Nav.

I've considered other cars and had week trials of
Hyundai - Tuscon - currently my favourite - thirsty
Skoda yeti - digital speedo only in kmph!


tried - but rejected
Vauxhall Mokka - Bumpy ride, Mad Entertainment (curved dash)
Ford Kuga -  Mad Entertainment, that can't easily be replaced / upgraded. Mad sun visors. Nice car otherwise.
Quashqai - I don't fit / cramped
Toyota RAV4 - I don't fit / cramped
Honda CRV - I don't fit / cramped
BMWs - too expensive / too complex options. I said to dealer I have up to 30K and I want this -  small X-over/SUV - "Leather, Auto,  climate, Sun roof, 4x4, what can you offer me?" - He hadn't a clue what cars BMW did!! He suggested a 3 series.

What I'd like to find out from this board are the things I can't find out in a weeks trial.
What are the top three things that let it down?
My use
I want it for a bit of towing, a bit of gentle off road, town driving. motorway driving. I may spend a long time sitting in it.

I drove the 182? auto Tucson on 17" wheels and thought it was excellent, but at the price i thought some dash plastics were cheap looking, and those over sized wheel arch black surrounds i thought spoilt a otherwise great looking car.

I also liked the 8" screen and the full sized spare alloy with loads of space round it for tools etc.

Also test drove a 2L 189? bmw auto x3 and thought it drove great, but for the price with the extras i wanted, i really did think the interior looked down market.
The X1 wasnt available to drive at the time i bought my second CX-5 otherwise i would have test drove the high powered diesel at around 230ps?

I test drove the Crv twice back in 2013 and liked it, it was easily one of the largest cars and i'm supprised you find it cramped, i didn't buy one due to the lack of power and torque compared to the 175ps cx-5, and during the test drive the car pulled violently to one side when i floored the throttle, very scary.

Didn't even look at the rav4 as the power wasn't enough, i tow a caravan.
Kuga i didn't test either as i don't find buying Fords new sensible from past experience, but a good used buy.

I would also suggest you test the new Tucson equivalant Kia, forgot its name, looks naff from the front, but great from the back, IMO.

CX-5 is a good car, but from all the Jap cars i've had both have have more issues than any other, but to be fair the CX-5 has more equipment that the others except the T31 Xtrail which was 100% reliable, only a seat swab was changed in the 4.5 years i owned it.

The auto CX-5 also uses around 4 to 6 mpg more fuel than the manual car i had previously, and although the auto shows an average read out of around 38mpg in truth the read out reads around 2.5mpg too high, so economy is actually around 36mpg. Read out for manual car was from 41 to 43mpg, so again around 41mpg.  Local rural driving with average traffic and mainly sedate driving.

Auto does weigh more than the manual by around 35kg, spare wheel weights around 27kg, and the towbar i have weights around 21kg, so my car weights around 1750kg.

[Deeps]

What are the top three things that let it down?
My use
I want it for a bit of towing, a bit of gentle off road, town driving. motorway driving. I may spend a long time sitting in it.

Overall quality of materials used, very thin paint application and the MZD which imho is very poor in comparison to systems used by other manufacturers. These are the items that let the CX-5 down when overall cost is taken into consideration although everything is subjective of course. I'm still reserving judgement as concerns Mazda's diesel motor technology as I'm not 100% convinced that they have got the lid on this oil dilution problem and in many ways I would have felt happier had they adopted the more common AdBlue system.

As concerns towing. Having recently returned from our first caravan tour of the season I am left with a very favorable impression of this cars towing capabilities. I'm not too sure of the actual fuel consumption as there were days when the car was used without the caravan hanging off the back which obviously affects these figures. However, from the occasional look at the actual point in time figures but bearing in mind the uncertainty of accuracy with this gauge, I was really quite pleased. The car and caravan maintained a straight line despite often being overtaken by trucks that I'm guessing had had their speed limiters disconnected. This was also my first towing experience with an automatic gearbox and what a joy it turned out to be. Reversing the caravan seemed to be much easier and positive with the CX-5 when compared to earlier 'tugs' and the reversing camera really came into it's own allowing for 'pinpoint' accuracy when reversing up to the caravan tow hitch. Due to heavy overnight rain approaching biblical proportions prior to our departure from the campsite resulting in extremely soft ground thereby making it impossible to physically maneuver the caravan itself, being able to reverse the car with such accuracy without the OH having to cry out 'back a bit - back a bit more' etc, was extremely good news.

[Anchorman]

In 1100 miles, mine has not diluted the oil at all - it is exactly where it was when I got it at 11 miles. I think that might be down to short journeys where the regen process is repeatedly interrupted.  I have a mixed duty - country road/motorway/city journey of 23 miles each way to work which is usually 4 times per week.

[ROCKETRON]

What are the top three things that let it down?
My use
I want it for a bit of towing, a bit of gentle off road, town driving. motorway driving. I may spend a long time sitting in it.

Overall quality of materials used, very thin paint application and the MZD which imho is very poor in comparison to systems used by other manufacturers. These are the items that let the CX-5 down when overall cost is taken into consideration although everything is subjective of course. I'm still reserving judgement as concerns Mazda's diesel motor technology as I'm not 100% convinced that they have got the lid on this oil dilution problem and in many ways I would have felt happier had they adopted the more common AdBlue system.

As concerns towing. Having recently returned from our first caravan tour of the season I am left with a very favorable impression of this cars towing capabilities. I'm not too sure of the actual fuel consumption as there were days when the car was used without the caravan hanging off the back which obviously affects these figures. However, from the occasional look at the actual point in time figures but bearing in mind the uncertainty of accuracy with this gauge, I was really quite pleased. The car and caravan maintained a straight line despite often being overtaken by trucks that I'm guessing had had their speed limiters disconnected. This was also my first towing experience with an automatic gearbox and what a joy it turned out to be. Reversing the caravan seemed to be much easier and positive with the CX-5 when compared to earlier 'tugs' and the reversing camera really came into it's own allowing for 'pinpoint' accuracy when reversing up to the caravan tow hitch. Due to heavy overnight rain approaching biblical proportions prior to our departure from the campsite resulting in extremely soft ground thereby making it impossible to physically maneuver the caravan itself, being able to reverse the car with such accuracy without the OH having to cry out 'back a bit - back a bit more' etc, was extremely good news.

AdBlue is not an alternative method of burning off particulate it is an alternative system for reducing NO in the exhaust. All manufacturers inject diesel to heat up the exhaust to burn off particulates, and quite a few cars also suffer from oil dilution as a result but due to piston ring design and software for doing a burn some dont have any problem with dilution and some do. Also a few cars inject the diesel straight into the exhaust and so it cant dilute the oil but that is probably a much more expensive way of doing it.

[twabrigs]

Am overall very happy with mine, but three things that let it down are the mpg which isn't horrific for the size of engine and car at around 38 (highest I've had is 45) but WAY lower than the fantasy figures quoted by Mazda. Then the oil dilution thing does worry me...have had to had it towed into the garage once with the scary 'do not drive' engine warning. Thirdly the fact that I can see a text has arrived but because I have an iPhone (like 75% of the population) I can't have it read to me. So I get the annoyance of the beep and the notification on the screen that I have to click 'download later' but zero benefit.

Overall though, an excellent car.

[Brian14]

We have a manual version of the CX-5 Sport Nav it is 6 months old. We tow a Caravan max 1500kg which it does very well.
The only problem we have had is the mobile telephone disconnecting from the car. Mazda Newport did a software upgrade 2 weeks ago and so far so good. Though I believe some on the forum have had the module changed because the upgrade did not work.

The other issue when we first had the car was the electrics for towing, I would go to a proper tow bar / electrics installer rather than the Mazda Dealer who in our case could not sort out the problem.

If you want a spare wheel the Space Saver supplied  By Mazda is not suitable for towing. We bought a full size wheel and tyre and the Foam surround for the boot, it worked out £100 cheaper the Mazda Space Saver.

I am also surprised you found the Honda CRV cramped, we have owned 2  and had a test drive of the new model. it is roomier than the Mazda for passengers with a much larger boot. The reason we bought the Mazda was Honda is now a 1.6d engine and as we tow 4000 miles plus each year I was not confident the Honda was up to the job. The CX-5 certainly is.

The CX-5 is a great car and a pleasure to drive.

[Deeps]

AdBlue is not an alternative method of burning off particulate it is an alternative system for reducing NO in the exhaust. All manufacturers inject diesel to heat up the exhaust to burn off particulates, and quite a few cars also suffer from oil dilution as a result but due to piston ring design and software for doing a burn some dont have any problem with dilution and some do. Also a few cars inject the diesel straight into the exhaust and so it cant dilute the oil but that is probably a much more expensive way of doing it.

You are no doubt correct on all accounts and I certainly won't argue numbers with you because I obviously don't have a clue. What cannot be disputed, however, is that the CX-5 is not sold in vast numbers in the UK any more than it is over here in Germany, but the number of vehicles (diesel engine)  that appear to suffer from this dilution problem (false positives or not) with the engine safety warning resulting in a tow truck needing to attend is somewhat high to say the least.

One point I should have mentioned previously and that is I have found the Cruise Control/Engine Braking excellent on this car. I can only speak for the automatic gearbox version of course but when I set 100km/h and then a downhill section is met, the system actually slows the car down (dropping a gear if necessary) so that 100km/h isn't exceeded. This most certainly wasn't the case with my previous two Volkswagens (Golf & Touran) when cruise control had absolutely no effect when going downhill resulting in heavy use of braking instead.

[BigAl]

I went through a similar process of elimination in 2012 before getting my first 2.2 175 sport-nav (manual) and am now on my second. I had a Subaru Forester previous to that and had never had the same car twice, so had narrowed it down to the CX5 or the Tiguan. The CX5 won out because its a better drive, more involving, better handling, better equipped, etc. However, as it's a company car, the low CO2 emissions were the deciding factor. The fact that I had a second one (despite some issues with the first) speaks volumes.

Don't believe the official claims for MPG - Honest John has much more realistic values http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/realmpg/mazda/cx-5-2012 and - whilst they are low compared to official figures, they aren't bad for a 2.2D 175HP 4wd at all! I have on occasions had 50+MPG out of mine for a whole tank on long runs; my current average since new is about 42.5 (previous one averaged 41 over 70k miles). Personally, I'd stick with a manual rather than auto as the MPG will be significantly better and it's a sweet gearbox as well.

As others have mentioned, the MZD system promises a lot but is not brilliant - I still can't get my wi-fi to connect automatically after 8 months and Mazda have given up trying to solve it! That is the only aspect of the new one that I'm disappointed with. I've never had any issues with oil dilution or cat regeneration on either of mine, but that could be down to not using it for lots of short journeys, I generally do at least 2x 200+ mile journeys per week.

I find it has all the space I need and is comfortable to drive (I'm 6ft 5in), 300+ mile trips without a stop aren't a problem.

I get the general impression that there is a lot of variation of dealer standards as well, my first dealer in Tamworth was pretty hopeless (they took on Hyundai as well, and it went downhill from there), the current one in Derby is quite good (they were previously Subaru and Saab)

I think you'll be convinced after a 4 day trial, though.

Alan

[xtrailman]

I should add also that the 150ps engine is the sweetest of the two, i only chose the 175ps due to towing, and i'm use to that sort of power now.

I forgot to also mention that the 182 Tucson also has more torque lower down than the 175 engine, but the VED is higher and fuel claims lower, but the fuel claims may be actually more accurate.

[Alex]

Can't really fault it. Bought mine in 2012 when first came out and was on a waiting list.

Everyone says "Don't buy a new model car that's just out" Yet I did.

Few early niggles which was to be expected but the service recalls sorted them. TomTom was an utter disaster, and I was stuck in a blame culture loop between TomTom & Mazda. All the way through the fault was down to Tomtom but they vehemently denied all ownership of the problem. I kept the forums well entertained with my tales of woe on that part - as Xtrailman will confirm. Once TomTom applied an on-line fix via a download more or less sorted, and Mazda were brilliant.

Normally change car every three years, beyond that timescale now, but can't see me moving to anything else.

If I have anything to moan about....

Seats a bit hard, notice it on long motorway journeys.

No vents in rear, not my problem as I'm quite happy in the front.

Blue-tooth drops out, Samsung Galaxy S4 problem me thinks?

Stereo bit "Boomy" not Bose I hasten to add.

Finally there are dash rattles, I've had that with Volkswagens in the past so not that bothered. Easy fix; whack the music up - provided you can hack some "boominess" as above.

[mrg9999]

Now in my 3rd day. I really like how the car drives. I find visibility is poor due to the front pillar sometimes at those "near linear motorway junctions". Passengers like the legroom in the back. I find the Entotainment  / sat nav a bit mad, but I'm resigned that all built in are like this.
Can't find an easy single click way to mute sat nav audio, multiple menus.  No start nav button, have found  a few times, it started going the wrong way. I had my tomtom and sygic on the window.
The dab radio is better than most I've used.

I've a 4 day trial of a BMW X3 next month, but the price with the extras will probably put it out of budget.

[Bert321]

Can't find an easy single click way to mute sat nav audio

If it's the same as our Mazda 3 and 6 - adjusting the volume while the sat nav voice is talking adjusts only the sat nav volume, and adjusting it when the music is playing adjusts only the music volume.

Edit... Quote "No start nav button"
Press the voice button and say "start navigation".

[Deeps]

Seats a bit hard, notice it on long motorway journeys.

I'll echo that. Having recently pulled a Caravan 2 x 500km I really began to wonder whether my seat really had lumber support or was it just a piece of rear luggage pressing into my back.