SW17LS

I think the Outback is a different consumer altogether.

mmarshall

Apples and Oranges. I can speak for the Encore GX because I own one. It's true that the turbo-three could use another cylinder, not for power (which it has plenty of for its size), but for low-RPM smoothness. But, first, base-versions of the GX, with FWD and the smaller three-cylinder, are actually quite inexpensive, starting around 24K. And what you DO pay for one includes a lot of standard equipment, safety features, and refinement for the money.....not to mention the traditional and effective Buick sound-insulation.

Now, that's not to pan the CX-5in any way. Yes, it is bigger than the Encore GX, and gives you more room inside for cargo space (room that I didn't really need), and the in-line four may be a little smoother off the line....although with the non-aggressive way I usually drive my GX, it's hard to really tell the three from an in-line four. GM did a good (but not perfect) job of muffling its worst vibrations. I suspect that engine was really developed for the Chinese market, not here. We' will probably also see it in the new upcoming GEM-platform-replacement for the existing (non-GX) Encore and Trax.

SW17LS

Just my opinion. I think the Encore GX is very expensive for what you get, i would much rather have a bigger and more substantial CX-5 for the same money. My point of bringing it up was to show that the CX-5 doesnt really compete pricewise with Buick and Acura, the CX-5 is similar in price to the smaller lower end Buick. Its the same as Lexus, the CX-5 is cheaper than the UX, I would much rather have a CX-5 than a UX. Thats kind of Mazda's schtick, they offer what feels like a premium vehicle for what a mainstream vehicle costs

mmarshall

That, we'll just (respectfully) disagree on. One could (?) also say the same thing of a Mercedes S-class.....a 6-figure vehicle, but you feel that you got your money's worth, and I guess we can leave it at that.



The UX has excellent road-manners, particularly for its size, but I agree the interior is cramped even for my single-person needs, much less your family of four, and the mouse-control and tiny radio-controls on the console could be a deal-breaker for me.

I agree that for your needs, the CX-5 would be a good choice. You also seem to be one of those who would like the traditional Mazda emphasis on sharp steering and a firm handling-feel.

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

you'd think they'd do the awd switch for canada too!

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

have you been in a new subaru lately? i have, and they're very nice. not 'luxury' but leaps and bounds nicer and smoother than a decade ago. and of course very practical.

a mazda 'signature' or whatever may look good when it's new, but i bet after a few years it looks cheap.

SW17LS

I think there is a very valid argument that an S Class is not worth what it costs compared to competitors that are significantly cheaper. I have said routinely that I think my S Class is worth $250 a month more than my LS, but not $33,000 more in a purchase. I'm talking about things objectively.

You're missing my point. The point was to illustrate that the CX-5 really does not compete with luxury entries, Mazda wants buyers to think it does...but its much cheaper.

You keep saying me and my family, I am talking about cars objectively, not through the lens of my own needs. I would never buy any of these vehicles. The Encore GX, Lexus UX, MB GLA etc are cars that a buyer is paying a premium for because they are luxury/premium nameplate vehicles. One of the CX-5's selling propositions is that it offers a premium nameplate feel in a compact vehicle size where true luxury nameplate vehicles only offer a subcompact vehicle at that price point.

So, unless you really care about brand, or specifically want a really small little vehicle, I think a buyer gets much more value out of the CX-5 than they do those vehicles.

For instance I really don't think you would have bought an Encore GX if it weren't a Buick.

One of my friends just retired and he traded his 2015 S550 in on a loaded CX-5 Signature. He never would have done so for a Rav 4 or a CRV, but those vehicles are the same cost really. So, I think Mazda has an opportunity to push a little more upmarket.

It is cheap. How is a Rav 4 or CRV going to look after a few years? Cheap. Same price.

mmarshall

Opinions may differ on this, but IMO the days of the really nice Subarus went out with the L.L. Bean models, the two-tone paint, the white-letter tires, the gold/silver two-tone wheels, and the standard Weather Radios for storm-warnings. Most of today's Subarus look like appliances.








Agreed. In fact, the grilles on many present vehicles are way overdone.

mmarshall

Maybe, maybe not. I liked the nameplate.....but also liked what was behind it.

Ha. Sounds like my old Lacrosse for the Encore GX, although I'll admit the Lacrosse, though a large sedan by today's standards, is not in the S-class league financially.

Anyhow, congratulations to your friend .....hope he enjoys his new vehicle, especially considering how they hard they are to get (and bag on) nowadays.

sm1ke

iTrader: (5)

Right?! No idea why they didn't just do the entire NA market. But it's still early, we'll see what happens.

I know this wasn't directed towards me, but I've been in a 2020 Ascent and a 2021 Ascent. By comparison, the CX-9's interior is markedly better than the Ascent's. It's strange to me that you think the Subaru interior is nice, while you've commented in other threads that Mazda interiors are nothing special, but that is of course your opinion. I am curious to understand what you mean by your last statement. In what way would it look cheap after a few years? Do you mean that you think the interiors will wear quickly, or that the design won't age well compared to other brands?

SW17LS

I 100% agree. I have also been in all of these new Subarus and their interiors aren't anywhere near as nice as those of Mazdas, Mazdas have much higher quality materials.

SW17LS

I think the nameplate had a lot to do with it.

He likes it a lot, obviously its a huge adjustment but the S Class was getting old and financially not working and not driving much it just didnt make sense to spend that kind of money on a car any longer.

Mike728

We bought ours when they first came out, in December 2018. I can't imagine what's going to change on it in the next few months, that it will start looking "cheap". It still looks and feels the same as the day we picked it up.

sm1ke

iTrader: (5)

I bought my CX-9 in December of 2017. It's got nearly 40k miles on it now and it still looks as good as the day I took delivery (aside from the piano black pieces of course).

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

yes, but several including you here keep saying how it's so much better than other cheap cars and i don't agree, although it's true i've not sat in one, just watched lots of reviews.

i guess i don't think the subaru is trying to be something it's not, while mazda is claiming this 'signature' trim for example is something ooh so special, when it's not.

i think it's plain and nothing special today, and the 'tombstone display', leather old school shifter, wasted space on center console, acres of plain dash plateau, dated looking steering wheel, analog gauges...

here's a grab from a recent cx5 sig review. it's by no means 'terrible' i just think it's nothing special.



​​​​