CX-5 v CX-3 comparison. - Page 2 - Mazda CX3 Forum
User Tag List

 3Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #11 of 24 Old 06-06-2016, 09:10 AM
Senior Member
 
rockposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: UK
Posts: 122
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
The 'goodies' on the CX-5 are certainly attractive. However I prefer the size and looks of the CX-3, not that I'd be disappointed if I had a CX-5 I might add. Maybe on the next version of the CX-3 some of those items will make an appearance.

Still.................mustn't grumble
rockposer is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #12 of 24 Old 06-06-2016, 09:25 AM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 28
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
I wanted a CX-5, because it had more space. However, my girlfriend found it to big (we are only with the 2 of us) and preferred the CX-3. The CX-3 is better looking and sporty of course.

And, the CX-5 is around EUR 5k higher priced in comparable configuration.
Springbok is offline  
post #13 of 24 Old 06-06-2016, 01:37 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: South East UK
Posts: 204
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
Comparing On The Road prices on the UK Mazda Price List, where comparisons can be made on drivetrain and roughly on spec name :-

Petrol SE-L Nav 2WD CX5 is 3,600 dearer (roughly $5,200)
Petrol Sport Nav 2WD CX5 is 4,200 dearer (roughly $6,000)

Diesel SE-L Nav 2WD CX5 is 4,000 dearer (roughly $5,800)
Diesel Sport Nav 2WD CX5 is 5,600 dearer (roughly $8,000)
Diesel Sport Nav AWD CX5 is 6,400 dearer (roughly $9,200)
Diesel Sport Nav Auto AWD CX5 is 6,300 dearer (roughly $9,000)

In all cases, the petrol CX5 has significantly more bhp due to a tweaked engine, I believe, whereas the diesel CX5 has considerably more bhp due to a larger engine.

2016 Sport Nav 2.0 Petrol Automatic Arctic White plus options

Last edited by st3v3cx-3; 06-06-2016 at 01:43 PM.
st3v3cx-3 is offline  
 
post #14 of 24 Old 06-06-2016, 01:45 PM Thread Starter
Super Moderator
 
anchorman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Derbyshire UK
Posts: 2,076
Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 482 Post(s)
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by st3v3cx-3 View Post
Comparing On The Road prices on the UK Mazda Price List, where comparisons can be made on drivetrain and roughly on spec name :-

Petrol SE-L Nav 2WD CX5 is 3,600 dearer (roughly $5,200)
Petrol Sport Nav 2WD CX5 is 4,200 dearer (roughly $6,000)

Diesel SE-L Nav 2WD CX5 is 4,000 dearer (roughly $5,800)
Diesel Sport Nav 2WD CX5 is 5,600 dearer (roughly $8,000)
Diesel Sport Nav AWD CX5 is 6,400 dearer (roughly $9,200)
Diesel Sport Nav Auto AWD CX5 is 6,300 dearer (roughly $9,000)

In all cases, the petrol CX5 has significantly more bhp due to a tweaked engine, I believe, whereas the disel CX5 has consdierably more bhp due to a larger engine.
For the spec of the car I had v current, the list difference is 5500 which I suppose is reasonable for the extra value. What made it doable for me was the amount of discount which I think was 4K ish. I could have had a grey with white interior with another 1000 off as they had it in the compound but anchorman was insistent on red. I didn't choose white this time as it is just all white and not as nice as the CX-3 with black suede and red piping.
st3v3cx-3 likes this.

Currently CX5 SportNav 2.2 diesel automatic and AWD.
Formerly CX3 SportNav 1.5 diesel automatic and AWD.

All advice is given in good spirit and taken entirely at the readers own risk. WORK SAFELY. 2018 anchorman

.........and another thing"
anchorman is offline  
post #15 of 24 Old 06-06-2016, 07:47 PM
Senior Member
 
greaseman85's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 893
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 263 Post(s)
Garage
Awesome as always Anchorman. All I can say is that the CX-5 is definitely up for a redesign. This and the 3 look outdated compared to the CX-3, the new CX-9, and the 6. I could see myself trading the CX-3 for a CX-5 when Mazda decides to redesign it. I'm really missing a lot of the features/benefits the CX-5 has but the CX-3 is missing.

2016 Mazda CX-3 GT in Deep Crystal Blue on Parchment
greaseman85 is offline  
post #16 of 24 Old 06-06-2016, 08:16 PM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 28
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by greaseman85 View Post
Awesome as always Anchorman. All I can say is that the CX-5 is definitely up for a redesign. This and the 3 look outdated compared to the CX-3, the new CX-9, and the 6. I could see myself trading the CX-3 for a CX-5 when Mazda decides to redesign it. I'm really missing a lot of the features/benefits the CX-5 has but the CX-3 is missing.
Me2. But it will take another 2-3 years I expect. Which is perfect for me
Springbok is offline  
post #17 of 24 Old 06-06-2016, 11:29 PM Thread Starter
Super Moderator
 
anchorman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Derbyshire UK
Posts: 2,076
Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 482 Post(s)
Garage
And me too. I may just have one more before I retire which would be the new model. Want to see it? Just ask Ancs!

It may show its face next year in LA..........


Currently CX5 SportNav 2.2 diesel automatic and AWD.
Formerly CX3 SportNav 1.5 diesel automatic and AWD.

All advice is given in good spirit and taken entirely at the readers own risk. WORK SAFELY. 2018 anchorman

.........and another thing"
anchorman is offline  
post #18 of 24 Old 06-06-2016, 11:53 PM
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Seattle WA
Posts: 872
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 206 Post(s)
I expect we'll see a refresh for MY18. IMO, it's still quite attractive.

2016 CX3 GT w/ i-Activesense. Black on Parchment and lovin it!
DJ9999 is offline  
post #19 of 24 Old 06-07-2016, 02:26 PM
Senior Member
 
Vipre77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Milwaukee, WI, USA
Posts: 327
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 75 Post(s)
Garage
I'm glad I have one of each so I don't have to choose.

One other quirk I've noticed is related to how dirty the rear gate gets. The reverse camera on my CX-3 is seemingly always covered in gunk, reducing visibility on the cam. My wife's CX-5 reverse cam stays much cleaner for longer.

It's surprising how much difference the 2.5L engine makes in the CX-5 even though the car is several hundred pounds heavier. I fully expected the added weight to balance out power-to-weight ratio and they would feel about the same, but the CX-5 does feel faster. It also helps some that I'm comparing FWD CX-5 to AWD CX-3. AWD suffers added parasitic loss in total horsepower put to the ground, but I haven't seen any comparison tests to see what the actual difference is. In the CX-5, unless there's some loose material or water/snow/ice on the road, the FWD doesn't break loose under very hard acceleration. Traction control seems to work well without being overbearing.

I'm surprised at the improvement in fuel econ in the CX-5 compared to CX-3. We routinely get better mileage in the CX-5 by around 4-5 MPG with almost identical commutes for work. With our particular cars, the CX-5 is clearly the bigger car with bigger engine but more efficient drivetrain. The bigger engine means you don't need to get into the throttle so heavily for similar acceleration as the CX-3, so the bigger engine is less frequently running in an inefficient operating range. This was a surprising revelation for me. Totally unexpected for me that the CX-5 would give superior MPG over the CX-3.

His: 2018 Mazda6 Grand Touring, Machine Grey Metallic
Hers: 2016 CX-5 Sport, FWD, Reflex Blue
Vipre77 is offline  
post #20 of 24 Old 06-07-2016, 02:36 PM Thread Starter
Super Moderator
 
anchorman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Derbyshire UK
Posts: 2,076
Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 482 Post(s)
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vipre77 View Post
I'm glad I have one of each so I don't have to choose.

One other quirk I've noticed is related to how dirty the rear gate gets. The reverse camera on my CX-3 is seemingly always covered in gunk, reducing visibility on the cam. My wife's CX-5 reverse cam stays much cleaner for longer.

It's surprising how much difference the 2.5L engine makes in the CX-5 even though the car is several hundred pounds heavier. I fully expected the added weight to balance out power-to-weight ratio and they would feel about the same, but the CX-5 does feel faster. It also helps some that I'm comparing FWD CX-5 to AWD CX-3. AWD suffers added parasitic loss in total horsepower put to the ground, but I haven't seen any comparison tests to see what the actual difference is. In the CX-5, unless there's some loose material or water/snow/ice on the road, the FWD doesn't break loose under very hard acceleration. Traction control seems to work well without being overbearing.

I'm surprised at the improvement in fuel econ in the CX-5 compared to CX-3. We routinely get better mileage in the CX-5 by around 4-5 MPG with almost identical commutes for work. With our particular cars, the CX-5 is clearly the bigger car with bigger engine but more efficient drivetrain. The bigger engine means you don't need to get into the throttle so heavily for similar acceleration as the CX-3, so the bigger engine is less frequently running in an inefficient operating range. This was a surprising revelation for me. Totally unexpected for me that the CX-5 would give superior MPG over the CX-3.
Hopefully this will encourage Mazda to be a bit more adventurous with the CX-3.

Currently CX5 SportNav 2.2 diesel automatic and AWD.
Formerly CX3 SportNav 1.5 diesel automatic and AWD.

All advice is given in good spirit and taken entirely at the readers own risk. WORK SAFELY. 2018 anchorman

.........and another thing"
anchorman is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome