NA: Honda v. Mazda mini SUVs

LDJones

LDJones

Touchdown! Greaser!
Gone West
Joined
Sep 6, 2011
Messages
10,998
Location
Twin Cities, MN
Display Name
Display name:
Jonesy
Any strong preferences/aversions? Considering HR-V vs. CX-5.
 
I'm not a fan of the mini SUV category at all. They are more like min vans than SUVs in my mind.
 
I know someone with a CX-5 and likes it. All I can say.
 
Preferences/Aversions? I'm not fond of raw tomatoes.

Vehicles? Answer is always "pickup truck" if you have to spend money acquiring it. :)
 
The Mazda CX-3 is more comparable to the HR-V. Reviews indicate the Mazda is a better driver as long as you don't want a manual transmission.
 
CX-3 on paper seems better than the HR-V. The Honda has a CVT trans, if that is an issue for you. It was for me. I just helped my mom get a Buick Encore. She loves it. All these cars in this class are underpowered (trying to get the MPG #'s). The Encore is actually pretty big inside and the trunk is useful. The Jeep Renegade was nice, but the dealer wouldnt budge that much and the Nav screen was a joke. My Ti83 has a bigger screen.
Didnt drive the Mazda or Honda.
 
I have an '07 CR-V, first year of the 3d gen w/ 120k mi. Overall, it's a good suburban car for when AWD is needed in northeast winters. It's no kind of all-terrain vehicle. Its basically a front-wheel drive crossover with a limited slip diff between the front and rear axles. I have 120' of straight driveway at about 10% grade, and it climbs it reliably after a basic clearing by snow blower: Better than my old FWD Saturn; not quite as sure-footed as my Subaru Legacy. My wife gets about 19-20 MPG in around town driving; I see 24 MPG on highway stretches. I find the 2.4L I-4 engine a little underpowered, like when loaded or highway merging or passing. Its made worse by less than stellar noise proofing. Engine + road noise is noticeable. But generally it gets the job done. The car has been very reliable for me, but I have treated it well with regular dealer maintenance.

Personally, I'd like something with an occasional 3rd row, because booster seat laws are going to be forever on the installment plan. Every year they raise the minimum age, so much that I think my kids are going to learn to drive from booster seats. Sometimes you just need a 3rd row to haul a fifth ass. But that's not a problem with the CR-V as designed. I had been looking at the Mazda5 mini-mini-van before it got discontinued. If It came in AWD I would have bought it.

For comparison, a friend's wife had a turn of the century ('00 or '01) 2WD CR-V that she LOVED. They replaced with a '12 CR-V (first year of the 4th Gen), but she disliked the ride and the view immensely. Within 2 years they traded in for the Mazda CX-9, which she likes better (but is larger than the CX-5).
 
I just purchased a cx5 in August to replace my 00 jeep xj. Couldn't find a replacement on the market so had to settle for a 4 banger wagon. Apparently in the 15 years that elapsed having a six banger became some sort of luxury in vehicles.

I went with the 2.5 engine. Don't bother with the 2.0. The 2.5 has the same to higher power to weight as my Cherokee which means it accelerates well enough to merge onto traffic. Highway mpgs so far have run in the high 20s to low 30s with the air conditioning on I'd say my avg mpg mid 20s. Space is much better in the back and front than my Cherokee and its a very nice ride on road. Noise levels are also much quieter than the xj, on par with new vehicles. . It's ultimately a station wagon with the elevation of an SUV, so I treat it as such. I can't tow anything with it the way I could with my xj of the same dimensions. Ultimately went with it as it was the closest I got to the space I needed for the cheapest price

The steering is also pretty responsive, which is kinda the Mazda staple. I like the smallish steering wheel. Rear visibility is on par with the new egg shaped vehicles, which is not great. I removed the head rests in the backseats to improve visibility. My xj was an f16 bubble canopy by comparison, and miss it greatly.

As to reliability,talk to me in 10 years and ill let ya know. The vehicle has given me zero indications it is gonna fail me in any significant way but I just don't have the confidence on these electrics ladn vehicles that they're meant to be driven that long. Time will tell.

All in all I don't think you can go wrong with the cx5. I'm not in love with it, but its the best I found for myself in the market. If it had the option of a 6 banger at the 25k price point, I would have bought two lol
 
My wife got a new HR-V about a month ago. So far it seems very nice and the CVT and traction control seem great on ice/snow so far.
 
I bought a 2016 CX5 AWD in November after 249K trouble free miles in an 06 Mazda 3 that is still on the road getting 30 miles a gallon with no oil consumption. I purchased the Grand Touring model and so far it's performed flawlessly and handles the snow in the Idaho and Washington passes very well. The radar controlled cruise takes some getting use to as do the auto high/low beams, etc. Overall, I've been very pleased with Mazdas and if I can get 200K miles out of this one, it will be a solid value.
 
Driven both as rentals a few times, not something I'd consider as a personal vehicle due to feeling a bit cheap and being fairly underpowered.

I'd go with a Nissan Murano or Ford Escape before the CR-V or CX-5, just based off of week-long rentals.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
Well the correct answer is get a Subaru.

But out of the two, I'd go honda all day long.
 
Just bought a Subaru Forester this month. Looked at both the HR-V and CX-5 though. HR-V just didn't have the cargo space and to get an AWD version, price is approaching the Forester. CX-5 was nice but really not much of a selection in my area and found only one AWD. Cost was around 2K more than my Forester as well.

So far love the thing. 27.5 MPG since owned. Plenty of space and the CVT is smooth. Heard the Yokohamas suck in snow but haven't gotten the opportunity as of yet.

New Hyundai Tucsons are nice as well. Took a turbo out for a test drive. Ride was stiff but good acceleration. Quite cabin.
 
If you'd consider an alternative, I love my Ford Escape. I have 168,000 mi on 2008, 4 cylinder 5 spd manual, FWD. It's been a great vehicle. Still get 30 mpg hw.
 
Last edited:
My Forester is great in the snow and we've had quite a bit of it this year. It has the factory tires but I don't think they are Yokohama. I also concur with the other poster's mpg estimate.
 
DJTorrente said:
I have an '07 CR-V, first year of the 3d gen w/ 120k mi. Overall, it's a good suburban car for when AWD is needed in northeast winters. It's no kind of all-terrain vehicle. Its basically a front-wheel drive crossover with a limited slip diff between the front and rear axles.
Click to expand...

No kind of all-terrain vehicle may be an understatement. The CRV limited slip apparently doesn't deliver enough torque to the rear to move the vehicle up a parking garage ramp if the front hits ice. Watch the video below.

http://www.autoblog.com/2014/10/24/honda-cr-v-fails-swedish-awd-test/
 
Everskyward said:
My Forester is great in the snow and we've had quite a bit of it this year. It has the factory tires but I don't think they are Yokohama. I also concur with the other poster's mpg estimate.
Click to expand...

Subaru is king of the snow and ice, they've been in the AWD and rally game for quite some time now.


Only thing you got to do with newer, like 2000 on, subies is to ditch the pointless plastic "splash guard" and replace it with full 3/8 aluminum skid plates, full engine bay, tranny and rear end.

In the tundra I live in even a small chunk of snow will tear a crappy plastic factory guard to shreds, the full aluminum plates give you piece of mind, keep the under carriage like new and are easy to install to boot.

image.jpg



http://get-primitive.com/4-skidplates
 
HR-V. I hear it has an incredible amount of leg room and if the automatics have CVTs, which are supposed to be as smooth as butter.
 
Everskyward said:
My Forester is great in the snow and we've had quite a bit of it this year. It has the factory tires but I don't think they are Yokohama. I also concur with the other poster's mpg estimate.
Click to expand...
Correction; I looked and they are Yokohama, but I haven't had any problems with them other than screws and that isn't the tire's fault.
 
GlennAB1 said:
My parents have owned nothing but Hondas since 1978.
Click to expand...

On a somewhat related note, does brand loyalty make sense in this day and age? I could see it making sense for Cessnas, Pipers and Mooneys with airframes that are pretty much the same as when they were originally rolled out, but you gotta figure the guys that designed Hondas in 1978, 1988, and 1998 are probably long since dead, retired or moved into non-engineering positions. Soichiro himself died a few decades ago and it could be argued that the cars haven't been the same since that time. Also, you gotta figure the regulatory environment, CAD tools and consumer tastes have shifted all over the place since that brand loyalty was first developed. And lastly, the auto industry has fully embraced componentization such that a lot of major parts across different carmarkers are sourced from the same supplier nowadays.
 
Car brands are getting a little fuzzy. We were at a Toyota/Scion dealership today looking at the new Scion iM, which has been sold for the last couple of years in Europe as "Toyota Auris." Also on the lot was another new Scion, the iA -- which is built by Mazda.

Go figure.
 
ElPaso Pilot said:
No kind of all-terrain vehicle may be an understatement. The CRV limited slip apparently doesn't deliver enough torque to the rear to move the vehicle up a parking garage ramp if the front hits ice. Watch the video below.

http://www.autoblog.com/2014/10/24/honda-cr-v-fails-swedish-awd-test/
Click to expand...

That's a known problem with a number of "All Wheel Drive" vehicles.

Older Subarus with a true "symmetrical" (and many Audi vehicles also) AWD had always traditionally done better than their "AWD" counterparts when attempting to move with only one tire able to gain traction.

But the computer controlled center differentials with clutches, and various wheel spin sensors and what-not, have been changing the game for a few years.

Honda definitely isn't known for doing "AWD" right.

But with the number of changes in various brands and even differences inside brands, if you need hard core AWD and need to know exactly what it'll do in various scenarios -- you'd better be reading up on what's in the specific vehicle you're planing to purchase.

Example: Subaru has dropped the original "viscous transfer case" and 50/50 truly symmetrical AWD on almost all of their vehicles, depending on engine and transmission chosen... there's THREE systems they use to good effect now, but none are the original system... and this changes across both model of vehicle AND which transmission you purchase in it. (The CVT vehicles use a completely different center diff than the non-CVT.)
 
ElPaso Pilot said:
No kind of all-terrain vehicle may be an understatement. The CRV limited slip apparently doesn't deliver enough torque to the rear to move the vehicle up a parking garage ramp if the front hits ice. Watch the video below.

http://www.autoblog.com/2014/10/24/honda-cr-v-fails-swedish-awd-test/
Click to expand...

P.S. You did notice that the article was updated to say that Honda offered a software update that completely fixed the problem the reviewers found, right?

That's one of the more impressive things about some of this stuff in modern cars... find a scenario that was supposed to work and didn't... slap in some new firmware and the vehicle handles it...

Magic. :)
 
denverpilot said:
P.S. You did notice that the article was updated to say that Honda offered a software update that completely fixed the problem the reviewers found, right?

That's one of the more impressive things about some of this stuff in modern cars... find a scenario that was supposed to work and didn't... slap in some new firmware and the vehicle handles it...

Magic. :)
Click to expand...

... which per the article was undone in 2015 and once again couldn't perform the test that Honda had approved.

That "Magic" must have caused some other drivability or durability issue, eh?


Honda CR-V proves once again that its system doesn't deliver what it promises.

Last year Teknikens Värld tested the 4WD system in Honda CR-V. We then discovered that Honda's 4WD system didn't perform well at all. The system overheated when the surface was slippery. The CR-V wasn't able to drive uphill when the traction was poor. The front wheels were just spinning and the rear wheels were not moving at all.

Honda explained that is was a built-in functionality to spare the mechanical parts of the system. But Honda did listen to our criticism and they shortly after offered all their customers in Sweden a software update to eliminate the problem.

We then tested the CR-V again with the updated software and the problem with the 4WD system was gone. CR-V was now able to run up the hill on the slippery surface.

We have now performed the same test again, now with Honda CR-V model year 2015. As you can see in the movie above the problem is back. The CR-V is not able to climb uphill when the front wheels have no friction. The rear wheels are once again not moving. After 15-20 seconds the CR-V instead slides off the low friction rolls.

Our test method with low friction rolls was approved by Honda last year. The method, which is very realistic, has also been adopted by some automakers, such as Subaru.
Click to expand...
 
Pilawt said:
Car brands are getting a little fuzzy... Also on the lot was another new Scion, the iA -- which is built by Mazda.
Click to expand...

Plus the Scion (Toyota) FR-S is built by Subaru, the Infiniti (Nissan) Q30 is a rebadged Mercedes A-class, the original "new" Mini (BMW) Cooper (2001-2006) used a Chrysler engine and the upcoming 2016 Fiat 124 is a rebadged Mazda Miata.
 
SoonerAviator said:
Lol, sounds like an exciting bunch!
Click to expand...
They were raised in a different time. Being born in 1933, they grew up post depression era. A "penny saved is a penny earned" has been a lifelong lifestyle for them. And it paid off. They saved and invested well and turned modest income into comfortable retirement. Dad retired at 57 after 33 years with TWA. They are 82 now and are the busiest people I know. They raise puppies for Canine Companions for Independence (have for over 20 years), and are active in their fundraising efforts. They are members of Lions and Lioness International (for around 40 years), and head up fund raising efforts. They are on the board of their local Historical Society. Active in their church. In several card clubs. And much more. If you're looking for my dad, you may catch him volunteering at the USAF Museum at Wright Patterson AFB or at the information booth in the terminal at Dayton International. Their calendar is full, they don't have time for excitement.
 
Last edited:
GlennAB1 said:
They were raised in a different time. Being born in 1933, they grew up post depression era. A "penny saved is a penny earned" has been a lifelong lifestyle for them. And it paid off. They saved and invested well and turned modest income into comfortable retirement. Dad retired at 57 after 33 years with TWA. They are 82 now and are the busiest people I know. They raise puppies for Canine Companions for Independence (have for over 20 years), and are active in their fundraising efforts. They are members of Lions and Lioness International (for around 40 years), and head up fund raising efforts. They are on the board of their local Historical Society. Active in their church. In several card clubs. And much more. If you're looking for my dad, you may catch him volunteering at the USAF Museum at Wright Patterson AFB or at the information booth in the terminal at Dayton International. Their calendar is full, they don't have time for excitement.
Click to expand...

Just to be clear, my comment was mostly tongue-in-cheek. I'm a firm believer in "to each their own". Some people derive little satisfaction from the car they drive every day, and that's fine. Honda didn't get their reputation from being poor values, they're just a car designed to offend as few people as possible, which ends up with bland styling. Toyota is no different.

My parents owned several vehicles over my life that spanned the gamut of American autos: Ford, GM (Chevy/Pontiac), Jeep (Mopar) and a few Nissans and a Honda. I grew up around a lot of American muscle and wrenching on cars/boats, so my like/dislike of particular cars usually stems from maintaining them!

I've owned an F-body Camaro, a few 300ZX's, a Taurus SHO (the Yamaha version), and a few Ford trucks. My trucks have been flawless mechanically through 160K+. The Z's ran like sewing machines for the most part, despite being turbo'd and twin-turbo'd. The SHO was great until the tranny blew randomly with 80K on it. The Z28 was fast in a straight line, but was built cheap as could be and all of the failures (complete ignition system failure while at dealership for unrelated audio failure) occurred under warranty, so I never have been stranded by any of them. Since I have owned, or my parents have owned, such a wide array of cars/brands, I find it hard to be brand-loyal because I love/hate things about most all of them. They all pretty much went 150K+ miles with no or negligible mechanical issues, and were sold off. Hard for me to claim any brand is better than another, or vice versa. :)

As I mentioned earlier, I drive a rental car while traveling for business an average of 4-6 days per month (for the past 6 years). I try to drive different vehicles when I'm able, but they're usually small/mid-size SUVs, full-size sedans, or V6 sports cars as that's what National/Hertz carry in general. As far as that mid-level is concerned, I'm generally impressed by the Tech features in the Fords, the general sportiness of Nissans, and predictability of Honda/Toyota to have the same layout in every car they make. I've driven new Mustangs in white-out conditions in PA, and Yukon XL's in rush hour traffic in Houston. They're all capable vehicles as long as it fits your needs.

Final note: worst car I have EVER rented was a 2012 Subaru Imprezza 4-banger. Could NOT get out of it's own way, the interior was a disaster, noisy, and it was cramped as could be. I'm sure the WRX and models with better engines might be acceptable, but this was a piece of junk. It didn't even have to climb any hills out in Odessa, TX!!
 
Last edited:
GlennAB1 said:
They were raised in a different time. Being born in 1933, they grew up post depression era. A "penny saved is a penny earned" has been a lifelong lifestyle for them. And it paid off. They saved and invested well and turned modest income into comfortable retirement. Dad retired at 57 after 33 years with TWA. They are 82 now and are the busiest people I know. They raise puppies for Canine Companions for Independence (have for over 20 years), and are active in their fundraising efforts. They are members of Lions and Lioness International (for around 40 years), and head up fund raising efforts. They are on the board of their local Historical Society. Active in their church. In several card clubs. And much more. If you're looking for my dad, you may catch him volunteering at the USAF Museum at Wright Patterson AFB or at the information booth in the terminal at Dayton International. Their calendar is full, they don't have time for excitement.
Click to expand...

and that, in my book, is WINNING! (reluctant nod to Charlie Harper)
 
ElPaso Pilot said:
No kind of all-terrain vehicle may be an understatement. The CRV limited slip apparently doesn't deliver enough torque to the rear to move the vehicle up a parking garage ramp if the front hits ice. Watch the video below.

http://www.autoblog.com/2014/10/24/honda-cr-v-fails-swedish-awd-test/
Click to expand...

That is a particularly challenging test. Starting from a dead standstill, on at least 10% incline, zero traction on the front wheels. Fortunately, that doesn't reflect my driveway conditions. I have about 25' to get a run before hitting the incline.

In any case, I'm not surprised that they sacrificed edge case performance to gain efficiency. All hail the mighty CAFE standards. Nice to know there is a software fix available if I ever had that problem.
 
DJTorrente said:
In any case, I'm not surprised that they sacrificed edge case performance to gain efficiency. All hail the mighty CAFE standards. Nice to know there is a software fix available if I ever had that problem.
Click to expand...

I think Honda is defrauding the public by advertising this car as AWD. As this test shows, in certain conditions this car is no better than a FWD or RWD.
 
asicer said:
Plus the Scion (Toyota) FR-S is built by Subaru, the Infiniti (Nissan) Q30 is a rebadged Mercedes A-class, the original "new" Mini (BMW) Cooper (2001-2006) used a Chrysler engine and the upcoming 2016 Fiat 124 is a rebadged Mazda Miata.
Click to expand...


Haha so true, so true. Nissan has a Cummins now... Or something that has a Cummins badge on it anyway... Heh.

Bill Jennings said:
I think Honda is defrauding the public by advertising this car as AWD. As this test shows, in certain conditions this car is no better than a FWD or RWD.
Click to expand...


Plenty more than just Honda have that problem or similar ones. The devil is in the details on AWD systems.
 
Only difference is near the end of the cars life the Honda will be worth $1,000 more.
 
DJTorrente said:
That is a particularly challenging test. Starting from a dead standstill, on at least 10% incline, zero traction on the front wheels. Fortunately, that doesn't reflect my driveway conditions. I have about 25' to get a run before hitting the incline.

In any case, I'm not surprised that they sacrificed edge case performance to gain efficiency. All hail the mighty CAFE standards. Nice to know there is a software fix available if I ever had that problem.
Click to expand...

Challenging, but not uncommon in slippery conditions. It doesn't have to be uphill.

Picture a family member in an AWD vehicle with the front axle sunk slightly into mud or wet snow. Shortly, they have to call for a tow when the rears don't turn at all. While the front wheels dig in deeper.

No thanks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top