As I've eluded to in a few posts, my wife and I recently bought a 2016 Mazda CX-5 Touring FWD 6AT. This past weekend we embarked on a 17 hour roundtrip drive between SW Ohio and Northern VA for thanksgiving and I got to spend a little more than half of that time behind the wheel. Since I’ve also taken this drive in my 14 EX a few times, I figured it was worth it to write a small comparison between the two cars.
Disclaimer: Ride and transmission in the CX-5 will get comments/thoughts only. I don’t think it’s really fair to compare a the ride of a family sedan with the ride of a small SUV. Also, my accord is 6MT while the CX-5 is 6AT so that’s not really a fair comparison either.
Power/Engine: I4 in the CX-5 feels more refined than the Accord, especially in higher revs. Low end torque on the CX-5 was rarely an issue, even with a full cargo area of luggage. I could tell the torque band dropped off quickly in the CX-5, and this was especially apparently going up the mountains in western MD. My Accord never really had an issue with pull, even going up the mountains. Overall, while the torque band is more powerful in the lower end of the CX-5, the band is more spread out on the accord.
Visibility: Both are a wash i.e. very good. The CX-5 doesn’t have the rear corner blind spot that plagues so many small SUVs in this segment. Rear visibility is better on my Accord, but I expected that. It would help if Mazda made the rear headrests a bit smaller.
Steering/EPS: This is where the CX-5 really shined. The CX-5 was never rough to turn when riding at low speed in a parking lot, but when you start going faster and try to push the car to its limits, the weight builds up well. I felt much more confident taking turns at high speeds in the CX-5. My accord never really “weights up” when taking turns at high speeds. I suppose this is to make the drive feel more “effortless” but it really results in the fun draining out of the drive. I also found the vagueness on center to be much less prevalent in the Mazda than in my Accord. Mazda really took the time to perfect its EPS tuning, and it shows.
Road/wind noise: This is where the CX-5 did not shine as much. While nowhere near as obtrusive as prior generation Hondas, road noise was very apparent in this car. I attributed this mostly due to the small SUV design, as a 2015 Mazda 3 I had as a rental wasn’t as bad. There was some wind noise though, mostly behind the driver’s side window, and at fairly high speeds (55MPH+), but it was easy to ignore after a bit of time. The only road noise I really get with my accord is over old pavement, and I’ve wondered how much of that is due to the cheap OEM goodyear fuelmax tires.
Transmission: The transmission was matched up well to the I4. Low rev shifts were smooth and higher rev shifts, while not exactly as smooth, were still very gentle given the RPM shift point. The lag between placing my foot on the throttle and the transmission “understanding” that I wanted to accelerate quickly was minimal. My only criticism was the tendency to holder gears longer than I would prefer.
Ride: Firm but not overly so. My parents own a 2008 CR-V EX and I would put it on par with that. Again, likely due to the segment more than the car itself. We test drove a few RAV4s and I thought that ride was worse. I felt that the ride got more “nervous” in speeds in excess of 80MPH, but again, I’m not sure if that’s more due to the segment than the car itself.
Interior fit/finish/quality of materials: A lot of people have spoken about how Mazda “hit it out of the park” with their interiors on the 2016 Mazda 6 and CX-5. While I agree it “looks” nicer than my Accord’s interior, I wouldn’t put it worlds above it. While there are parts and pieces that are much nicer than my Accord’s (steering wheel, passenger airbag dashboard, HVAC controls), there are is noticeable lack of “arm and elbow” padding compared to my Accord. The center console, as an example, is basically nicely textured hard (but not cheap) plastic. The upper interior door panels is also nicely textured hard but not cheap, plastic. I never found this to be a comfort issue while driving hours on end, but it was noticeable. Overall, I felt that Mazda put higher quality plastics generally everywhere, but "cut costs" by deciding to take out padding in favor of these higher quality plastics in certain areas. My biggest note was the steering wheel: my left arm tends to get sore after driving my accord for more than 15-20 minutes. I’ve tried different seat positons, as well as steering wheel positions, and the problem remains. I did not have this issue with the CX-5, even after driving it for 3-4 hours at a time. I feel that some of this may be due to the design (4 spoke in Accord vs. 3 spoke in the CX-5) but I never had this issue in my 99 Si, which was also 4 spoke.
Seats: Firm. My wife didn’t find them to be uncomfortable and neither did I, but these are definitely firmer seats than in my accord. While I initially missed power lumbar support, after the first few hours, I found that I didn’t notice its absence as much. The fabric in the seats is definitely higher quality than the cloth in my EX.
Radio (functionality): I’m more of a buttons kind of person, but I never really found myself getting that frustrated with the Mazda’s radio. I like how they have a knob and button combo near the shifter, so I don’t have to touch the screen (which is great because it’s a fingerprint magnet). I wish Mazda had put a button on the steering wheel to switch between audio sources. In terms of bugs, I didn’t really notice that many, other than it goofing with my wife’s iphone Bluetooth once or twice. It always played songs in the correct order with the correct data, and never skipped songs or started songs midway, which are two very persistent bugs in my EX’s radio (both on ipod and Bluetooth sources). I never got the chance to use Bluetooth as it was paired with my wife’s phone not mine, but she tells me it does its job. I like how the Mazda has two USB inputs, but wish one was in the center console.
Radio (sound): The Mazda has HD radio, which I wish was on my Accord, but I won’t comment much other than it sounds pretty good for radio. Standard non-HD radio sounds about the same across both cars. Bluetooth is slightly better on the Mazda, and ipod/USB is a lot better in the Mazda. The bass in the Mazda is much more defined, and the highs do not sound anywhere near as “screechy” as they do in my Accord. I also do not get any “rattle” on bass heavy music as I do with my Accord. I should also note that a -1 treble/+1 bass setting on the Mazda gets much better overall sound than a -2 treble/-2 bass setting on the accord (which still has weak bass to avoid door rattle). Putting the bass at +3 in the accord gets me some low end punch but nothing between 80-150Hz; Bass at +2 in the Mazda gets me more bass across the entire spectrum.
Other electronics: The Mazda has “smart entry” which is the same concept as my Accord, but slightly different execution. In my Accord, I only have to touch the door handle to open the car; in the Mazda, you have to press the button on the handle to open it. I slightly prefer the Accord in this area, but not by much. The Mazda has true blind sport monitoring with rear cross traffic alert. While I could take or leave the BSM (too many false positives when near guard rails), the rear cross traffic saved my butt a few times trying to back out of black Friday traffic. I feel that I slightly prefer the LaneWatch system, but wish I could combine it with some type of rear-cross traffic system. That being said, I found myself driving and switching lanes more conservatively with the BSM system than LaneWatch, which may be the point. The Mazda doesn't have as many lights for window switches as my Accord. It also does not have a light on the instrument cluster to tell you when your fog lights are on. The Mazda also has an electronic parking brake, which I could take or leave. I never tried the “sport” driving mode.
Overall: For the last year or so, my two biggest issues with my Accord have been the EPS tuning and the radio. Both are much better in the Mazda. While I’m happy that my wife and I “got it right” for our primary use vehicle, after driving the CX-5 for hours on end, I sat in my Accord this morning and while driving to work the issues I had with my Accord became much more visible. The value of my 6MT has taken a serious dive due to a minor accident and the fact that no one really wants a 6MT family sedan, so I’m not sure if the differences are worth the extra money to look at a new Mazda. I will say that anyone looking at a small SUV should give the CX-5 consideration.
Thanks, all.
Disclaimer: Ride and transmission in the CX-5 will get comments/thoughts only. I don’t think it’s really fair to compare a the ride of a family sedan with the ride of a small SUV. Also, my accord is 6MT while the CX-5 is 6AT so that’s not really a fair comparison either.
Power/Engine: I4 in the CX-5 feels more refined than the Accord, especially in higher revs. Low end torque on the CX-5 was rarely an issue, even with a full cargo area of luggage. I could tell the torque band dropped off quickly in the CX-5, and this was especially apparently going up the mountains in western MD. My Accord never really had an issue with pull, even going up the mountains. Overall, while the torque band is more powerful in the lower end of the CX-5, the band is more spread out on the accord.
Visibility: Both are a wash i.e. very good. The CX-5 doesn’t have the rear corner blind spot that plagues so many small SUVs in this segment. Rear visibility is better on my Accord, but I expected that. It would help if Mazda made the rear headrests a bit smaller.
Steering/EPS: This is where the CX-5 really shined. The CX-5 was never rough to turn when riding at low speed in a parking lot, but when you start going faster and try to push the car to its limits, the weight builds up well. I felt much more confident taking turns at high speeds in the CX-5. My accord never really “weights up” when taking turns at high speeds. I suppose this is to make the drive feel more “effortless” but it really results in the fun draining out of the drive. I also found the vagueness on center to be much less prevalent in the Mazda than in my Accord. Mazda really took the time to perfect its EPS tuning, and it shows.
Road/wind noise: This is where the CX-5 did not shine as much. While nowhere near as obtrusive as prior generation Hondas, road noise was very apparent in this car. I attributed this mostly due to the small SUV design, as a 2015 Mazda 3 I had as a rental wasn’t as bad. There was some wind noise though, mostly behind the driver’s side window, and at fairly high speeds (55MPH+), but it was easy to ignore after a bit of time. The only road noise I really get with my accord is over old pavement, and I’ve wondered how much of that is due to the cheap OEM goodyear fuelmax tires.
Transmission: The transmission was matched up well to the I4. Low rev shifts were smooth and higher rev shifts, while not exactly as smooth, were still very gentle given the RPM shift point. The lag between placing my foot on the throttle and the transmission “understanding” that I wanted to accelerate quickly was minimal. My only criticism was the tendency to holder gears longer than I would prefer.
Ride: Firm but not overly so. My parents own a 2008 CR-V EX and I would put it on par with that. Again, likely due to the segment more than the car itself. We test drove a few RAV4s and I thought that ride was worse. I felt that the ride got more “nervous” in speeds in excess of 80MPH, but again, I’m not sure if that’s more due to the segment than the car itself.
Interior fit/finish/quality of materials: A lot of people have spoken about how Mazda “hit it out of the park” with their interiors on the 2016 Mazda 6 and CX-5. While I agree it “looks” nicer than my Accord’s interior, I wouldn’t put it worlds above it. While there are parts and pieces that are much nicer than my Accord’s (steering wheel, passenger airbag dashboard, HVAC controls), there are is noticeable lack of “arm and elbow” padding compared to my Accord. The center console, as an example, is basically nicely textured hard (but not cheap) plastic. The upper interior door panels is also nicely textured hard but not cheap, plastic. I never found this to be a comfort issue while driving hours on end, but it was noticeable. Overall, I felt that Mazda put higher quality plastics generally everywhere, but "cut costs" by deciding to take out padding in favor of these higher quality plastics in certain areas. My biggest note was the steering wheel: my left arm tends to get sore after driving my accord for more than 15-20 minutes. I’ve tried different seat positons, as well as steering wheel positions, and the problem remains. I did not have this issue with the CX-5, even after driving it for 3-4 hours at a time. I feel that some of this may be due to the design (4 spoke in Accord vs. 3 spoke in the CX-5) but I never had this issue in my 99 Si, which was also 4 spoke.
Seats: Firm. My wife didn’t find them to be uncomfortable and neither did I, but these are definitely firmer seats than in my accord. While I initially missed power lumbar support, after the first few hours, I found that I didn’t notice its absence as much. The fabric in the seats is definitely higher quality than the cloth in my EX.
Radio (functionality): I’m more of a buttons kind of person, but I never really found myself getting that frustrated with the Mazda’s radio. I like how they have a knob and button combo near the shifter, so I don’t have to touch the screen (which is great because it’s a fingerprint magnet). I wish Mazda had put a button on the steering wheel to switch between audio sources. In terms of bugs, I didn’t really notice that many, other than it goofing with my wife’s iphone Bluetooth once or twice. It always played songs in the correct order with the correct data, and never skipped songs or started songs midway, which are two very persistent bugs in my EX’s radio (both on ipod and Bluetooth sources). I never got the chance to use Bluetooth as it was paired with my wife’s phone not mine, but she tells me it does its job. I like how the Mazda has two USB inputs, but wish one was in the center console.
Radio (sound): The Mazda has HD radio, which I wish was on my Accord, but I won’t comment much other than it sounds pretty good for radio. Standard non-HD radio sounds about the same across both cars. Bluetooth is slightly better on the Mazda, and ipod/USB is a lot better in the Mazda. The bass in the Mazda is much more defined, and the highs do not sound anywhere near as “screechy” as they do in my Accord. I also do not get any “rattle” on bass heavy music as I do with my Accord. I should also note that a -1 treble/+1 bass setting on the Mazda gets much better overall sound than a -2 treble/-2 bass setting on the accord (which still has weak bass to avoid door rattle). Putting the bass at +3 in the accord gets me some low end punch but nothing between 80-150Hz; Bass at +2 in the Mazda gets me more bass across the entire spectrum.
Other electronics: The Mazda has “smart entry” which is the same concept as my Accord, but slightly different execution. In my Accord, I only have to touch the door handle to open the car; in the Mazda, you have to press the button on the handle to open it. I slightly prefer the Accord in this area, but not by much. The Mazda has true blind sport monitoring with rear cross traffic alert. While I could take or leave the BSM (too many false positives when near guard rails), the rear cross traffic saved my butt a few times trying to back out of black Friday traffic. I feel that I slightly prefer the LaneWatch system, but wish I could combine it with some type of rear-cross traffic system. That being said, I found myself driving and switching lanes more conservatively with the BSM system than LaneWatch, which may be the point. The Mazda doesn't have as many lights for window switches as my Accord. It also does not have a light on the instrument cluster to tell you when your fog lights are on. The Mazda also has an electronic parking brake, which I could take or leave. I never tried the “sport” driving mode.
Overall: For the last year or so, my two biggest issues with my Accord have been the EPS tuning and the radio. Both are much better in the Mazda. While I’m happy that my wife and I “got it right” for our primary use vehicle, after driving the CX-5 for hours on end, I sat in my Accord this morning and while driving to work the issues I had with my Accord became much more visible. The value of my 6MT has taken a serious dive due to a minor accident and the fact that no one really wants a 6MT family sedan, so I’m not sure if the differences are worth the extra money to look at a new Mazda. I will say that anyone looking at a small SUV should give the CX-5 consideration.
Thanks, all.
