Comments on Mazda CX5

[jonleelk]

Is that the latest list price for the Premium? The last I knew of a couple of weeks back was $139,888.

 

No disc?

2.0 Premium listed price $142,888.  SE offered 2k off if can commit.

Bro, Honda CRV price point is $160K upwards. Always too much.

For comparison sake, Ive test driven all the SUVs mentioned personally. In the end, Im still sticking with the CX. Just have to carry on with another 8 months or so with the old wagon.

oops...my wrong.  CRV still in the 160k range.  Way too high for a made in Thailand car.

[X5actor]

Ok tx. I just saw the latest price list updated today.

 

The 2.0 Premium is indeed $142,888. Discount is a bit too little.

[X5actor]

I don't see many CX-5 owners/drivers sharing much about their cars here. I would like to try to give a review but I am afraid I don't write well. I see a lot of information for the Subaru Foresters and XVs, Honda Vezels, Toyota Harriers, etc.

 

Briefly, since having collected my new CX-5 (2.0Premium) in late September 2015, I have refuelled 3 times. First two times were on Caltex 98. Third was Caltex 95. And here is my fuel consumption reading based on 70% city, 30% highway:

 

1. Mostly light to mid footed (below 600km) - 8.8l/100km (11.36km/l)

2. Mostly light to mid footed (below 1,100km) - 8.5l/100km (11.76km/l)

3. More mid-heavy footed (between 1,100km & 1,600km) - 8.2l/100km (12.2km/l)

 

I'm still running on my third tank of fuel which is now slightly below half-tank mark. I have not switched off the I-mode since day 1. I'm loving every drive of the car.

 

And FYI, on paper, Mazda states 15.6km/l for the CX-5 2.0.

 

Will share more when I can.

 

Have a great Sunday:)

Edited October 18, 2015 by X5actor

[jonleelk]

I don't see many CX-5 owners/drivers sharing much about their cars here. I would like to try to give a review but I am afraid I don't write well. I see a lot of information for the Subaru Foresters and XVs, Honda Vezels, Toyota Harriers, etc.

 

Briefly, since having collected my new CX-5 (2.0Premium) in late September 2015, I have refuelled 3 times. First two times were on Caltex 98. Third was Caltex 95. And here is my fuel consumption reading based on 70% city, 30% highway:

 

1. Mostly light to mid footed (below 600km) - 8.8l/100km (11.36km/l)

2. Mostly light to mid footed (below 1,100km) - 8.5l/100km (11.76km/l)

3. More mid-heavy footed (between 1,100km & 1,600km) - 8.2l/100km (12.2km/l)

 

I'm still running on my third tank of fuel which is now slightly below half-tank mark. I have not switched off the I-mode since day 1. I'm loving every drive of the car.

 

And FYI, on paper, Mazda states 15.6km/l for the CX-5 2.0.

 

Will share more when I can.

 

Have a great Sunday:)

Bro, can share how much unpaid for the cx5? My SE said that the current list price of $142,888 is the lowest for this car this yr due to the last 2k drop in Coe. However, sgcarmark historical price seems to indicate that previously it was also listed for 142,888 most of the time.

2.0 Premium listed price $142,888. SE offered 2k off if can commit.

 

oops...my wrong. CRV still in the 160k range. Way too high for a made in Thailand car.

Saw Honda ad, crv is 148k. So pretty close to cx5 premium. Edited October 18, 2015 by jonleelk

[Pioneer]

It could be there aren't so many CX-5 sold. The price of the CX-5 is much higher than Forester FXT, Vezel and even harriers after all.

 

Or the people who bought the car are your typical type of drivers who are interested only in the look and not car enthusiasts. Hence, they are not the type that comes to forums.

 

And then there are drivers like you who loves the car enough to buy it even though it is not value for money. I guess you belong to the minority and hence why few people comes online to share about the car.

 

I considered the car, it is a good suv no doubt, before but back off due to poor customer service at the showroom and the fact that it is quite pricey for the specification when there are other cars with better comfort or performance at lesser price.

 

I don't see many CX-5 owners/drivers sharing much about their cars here. I would like to try to give a review but I am afraid I don't write well. I see a lot of information for the Subaru Foresters and XVs, Honda Vezels, Toyota Harriers, etc.

Briefly, since having collected my new CX-5 (2.0Premium) in late September 2015, I have refuelled 3 times. First two times were on Caltex 98. Third was Caltex 95. And here is my fuel consumption reading based on 70% city, 30% highway:

1. Mostly light to mid footed (below 600km) - 8.8l/100km (11.36km/l)
2. Mostly light to mid footed (below 1,100km) - 8.5l/100km (11.76km/l)
3. More mid-heavy footed (between 1,100km & 1,600km) - 8.2l/100km (12.2km/l)

I'm still running on my third tank of fuel which is now slightly below half-tank mark. I have not switched off the I-mode since day 1. I'm loving every drive of the car.

And FYI, on paper, Mazda states 15.6km/l for the CX-5 2.0.

Will share more when I can.

Have a great Sunday:)

 

[Ntrj]

Went test driving with a friend yesterday - Nissan QQ, X-trail, Honda HR V, CR V and Mazda 3 hatch and CX 5. For the Interior finishes and comfort department, Mazda wins - IMO. On the drive, CX 5, QQ, and HR V topped the list, but QQ and HR V noise is louder. The Mazda sales rep wasn't pushy, but perhaps it was 7pm already and he is looking ready to go off! :)

 

Price wise, CX 5 is the pricer one compared to QQ and HRV, but I would go for CX 5 for the better finishes and comfort.

 

It could be there aren't so many CX-5 sold. The price of the CX-5 is much higher than Forester FXT, Vezel and even harriers after all.

 

Or the people who bought the car are your typical type of drivers who are interested only in the look and not car enthusiasts. Hence, they are not the type that comes to forums.

 

And then there are drivers like you who loves the car enough to buy it even though it is not value for money. I guess you belong to the minority and hence why few people comes online to share about the car.

 

I considered the car, it is a good suv no doubt, before but back off due to poor customer service at the showroom and the fact that it is quite pricey for the specification when there are other cars with better comfort or performance at lesser price.

[ken5977]

I don't see many CX-5 owners/drivers sharing much about their cars here. I would like to try to give a review but I am afraid I don't write well. I see a lot of information for the Subaru Foresters and XVs, Honda Vezels, Toyota Harriers, etc.

 

Briefly, since having collected my new CX-5 (2.0Premium) in late September 2015, I have refuelled 3 times. First two times were on Caltex 98. Third was Caltex 95. And here is my fuel consumption reading based on 70% city, 30% highway:

 

1. Mostly light to mid footed (below 600km) - 8.8l/100km (11.36km/l)

2. Mostly light to mid footed (below 1,100km) - 8.5l/100km (11.76km/l)

3. More mid-heavy footed (between 1,100km & 1,600km) - 8.2l/100km (12.2km/l)

 

I'm still running on my third tank of fuel which is now slightly below half-tank mark. I have not switched off the I-mode since day 1. I'm loving every drive of the car.

 

And FYI, on paper, Mazda states 15.6km/l for the CX-5 2.0.

 

Will share more when I can.

 

Have a great Sunday:)

I have a 2 months old CX5 2.0 as well.

 

FC is about 8.4l/100km or 11.85km/liter.

 

Pm me to discuss more if you are interested.

 

Thanks.

[Pioneer]

Did you try forester XT?

 

Easier 12K cheaper with higher BHP and Torque.

 

I tried both CX-5 and FXT. I guess you do feel more comfortable in a CX-5 and interior finish is also a bit more classy than the utilitarian look of a FXT but not enough to justify the 12k difference, not to mention the higher servicing cost of a mazda from the AD. 

 

All the cars you mentioned are easily 12-20k cheaper. Hard to compare I guess.

 

Went test driving with a friend yesterday - Nissan QQ, X-trail, Honda HR V, CR V and Mazda 3 hatch and CX 5. For the Interior finishes and comfort department, Mazda wins - IMO. On the drive, CX 5, QQ, and HR V topped the list, but QQ and HR V noise is louder. The Mazda sales rep wasn't pushy, but perhaps it was 7pm already and he is looking ready to go off! :)

Price wise, CX 5 is the pricer one compared to QQ and HRV, but I would go for CX 5 for the better finishes and comfort.
 

 

[Axela72]

But what you have quoted to compare is just initial price list.

 

The omv, FC, insurance and reliability (non turbo) of CX-5 might save u more than 12k over 10 yrs of usage vs XT in the long run

 

Did you try forester XT?

 

Easier 12K cheaper with higher BHP and Torque.

 

I tried both CX-5 and FXT. I guess you do feel more comfortable in a CX-5 and interior finish is also a bit more classy than the utilitarian look of a FXT but not enough to justify the 12k difference, not to mention the higher servicing cost of a mazda from the AD.

 

All the cars you mentioned are easily 12-20k cheaper. Hard to compare I guess.

[Pioneer]

A few post above.

 

Price is 142k after discount.

 

I think FXT now is 127k after discount.

 

Easily 15k difference.

 

FC cannot make up the difference and servicing is more expensive mazda.

 

No way CX-5 can make up the gap with higher price and higher servicing cost.

 

But what you have quoted to compare is just initial price list.

The omv, FC, insurance and reliability (non turbo) of CX-5 might save u more than 12k over 10 yrs of usage vs XT in the long run
 

 

[Magfocus]

A few post above.

 

Price is 142k after discount.

 

I think FXT now is 127k after discount.

 

Easily 15k difference.

 

FC cannot make up the difference and servicing is more expensive mazda.

 

No way CX-5 can make up the gap with higher price and higher servicing cost.

 

What about depreciation and OMV for both?

[Ntrj]

It was a lady friend looking to replace her near 10-yr car. FXT fails in the look dept. On servicing, thought it is covered up to the first 60k so not much material impact in the first 3 years of use?

 

A few post above.

 

Price is 142k after discount.

 

I think FXT now is 127k after discount.

 

Easily 15k difference.

 

FC cannot make up the difference and servicing is more expensive mazda.

 

No way CX-5 can make up the gap with higher price and higher servicing cost.

[Axela72]

142k is the premium. The non premium is less than 135k after discount. I was offer 131k after discount last week.

 

Without the extra add on from preimum, the standard from CX-5 should probably be able to take on the XT on build quality

 

A few post above.

 

Price is 142k after discount.

 

I think FXT now is 127k after discount.

 

Easily 15k difference.

 

FC cannot make up the difference and servicing is more expensive mazda.

 

No way CX-5 can make up the gap with higher price and higher servicing cost.

Edited October 18, 2015 by Axela72

[Pioneer]

Depreciation more important.

 

Based on SGCarmart:

 

CX-5 2.0A: 12700/year

CX-5 Premium: 1300/year

CX-5 2.5: 13500/year

FNA: 11400/year

FXT : 12100/year

 

About $6000 difference if you buy the CX-5 2.0A, $9000 if you buy the premium and 14000 if you want to the 2.5l which will bring you closer to FXT in performance. 

 

I would compare CX-5 2.0A to Forester NA ( 12700 vs 11400) and maybe CX-2.5 to FXT (13500 vs 12100) because of the performance.

 

Considering the fact that Mazda servicing cost are higher, the advantage in petrol saving will never be enough to cover the difference for an average mileage driver.

 

You are paying premium for a mazda for its comfort and design. Personally for me, a bit too much because I look for performance more than comfort.

 

 

What about depreciation and OMV for both?

 

Even after discount, it is still more expensive than a FXT who has about 80 more bhp and 140Nm torque.

 

Then there is the regular servicing from Mazda that costs more than Subaru, not to mention that the 2.0A has worst speakers than FXT.

 

 

Better interior and maybe design but more expensive, lousier speakers and slower.

 

Also, if you can get 4k off their price, it is still 2k more expensive and this is based on the assuming there is not discount from subaru which obviously has too.

 

Minus here and add there. In the end, CX-5 is more expensive at absolute price comparison.

 

 

 

142k is the premium. The non premium is less than 135k after discount. I was offer 131k after discount last week
 

 

Edited October 18, 2015 by Pioneer

[X5actor]

Woah... guys, let's not get carried away and start to make such comparisons. It will not bring us anywhere. Simply, we buy what we like and can afford. Whether it is over the looks of the car, cabin space, performance, price of purchase and resale, FC, value for money, etc..... They are subjective and very personal.

 

If it is real value for money, we shouldn't even be buying and driving a car in S'pore. It's crazy those prices we are paying for:(

 

So buy what you like more and can afford. Share experience and knowledge positively. We can all benefit from it.

 

Cheers:)

[Pioneer]

Oh.. of course.

 

My reply was in response to why CX-5 thread is not as hot as some other similar SUVs.

 

It may be unpopular in SG or it may be popular to a group of people who don't use mycarforum.

 

 

Woah... guys, let's not get carried away and start to make such comparisons. It will not bring us anywhere. Simply, we buy what we like and can afford. Whether it is over the looks of the car, cabin space, performance, price of purchase and resale, FC, value for money, etc..... They are subjective and very personal.

If it is real value for money, we shouldn't even be buying and driving a car in S'pore. It's crazy those prices we are paying for:(

So buy what you like more and can afford. Share experience and knowledge positively. We can all benefit from it.

Cheers:)

 

[gasman]

I have test driven the FXT before. Overall, very engaging drive & its indeed a powerful car. But a few chats with my mechanics , (I used 3 for their different expertise), they told me the same thing. "Stay away from Subarus"  All of them must have some hard on nightmares of Motor Image. Didn't pursue any further on this conversation as the FXT was decidedly not on our shortlist.

 

[Fastsapphire]

Forrester more thirsty ba?

Did you try forester XT?

 

Easier 12K cheaper with higher BHP and Torque.

 

I tried both CX-5 and FXT. I guess you do feel more comfortable in a CX-5 and interior finish is also a bit more classy than the utilitarian look of a FXT but not enough to justify the 12k difference, not to mention the higher servicing cost of a mazda from the AD. 

 

All the cars you mentioned are easily 12-20k cheaper. Hard to compare I guess.