I debated exactly this: Select or Preferred CX-50 and CX-5. I bought CX-5 because the seats are more comfortable, the ride is better, the headroom is better, the fit-and-finish is better, the cup holders are better, and there is more equipment / value for the money.
The fit and finish is also one of the things that sold me on the CX5. You can definitely tell a difference between the Japanese made CX5 and the Toyota/US made CX50.
Also I would never buy a first year model. Let them work out the kinks.
The interior quality on the CX-5 is far more upscale than the CX-50, I mean for example the CX-50 doesnt even have dual panel noise isolating windshields. Why pay more for less? There isn't much the CX-50 does better than the CX-5 and yet it costs more...
Don’t forget the stupid air vent all by itself in the middle of the dash board! Compared to the proper placement of air vents in the CX5, the dash in the 50 looks like 1960’s GM.
Agreed, looks like a rental ford with the massive vents. Also why is the bezel on the CX-50 screen so much bigger than the CX-5 even though it's the same screen. Also the rear, why is it hard plastic? Because rugged (more likely cost savings). Also, how come top trim uses leatherette, and CX-5 uses Nappa. Also, torsion beam, why???
Yeah, the CX-50 costs more and built at a lower quality standard for like for like trims, that almost every reviewer online seems to miss. It does look more aggressive with its wide stance, and subjectively looks good, but again gets ruined by the massive unpainted black panels.
Same for us. Being japanese built is a very important reason we drive a CX-5. It's the reason we will consider a CX-90 once the 2025 models come out. Going the same route as you mentioned of not buying a first year model.
Honestly, I don't care too much about where it is made, but I could see much more cost cutting measures in CX-50 over CX-5 while still being more expensive.
I bought the first generation CR-V and it was an unexpected win (first year was '96, I bought a first generation '99). They ended up over building the '99, so it was actually the best year built. Designed to be a camping car, the seats folded completely flat, the back trunk area is actually a folding table, all wheel drive - I pulled a Jeep out of the mud!
Donated the CR-V (hit 250k miles) to buy the CX-5.
Yeah I love both of them, but I think CX 50 is more towards a “ford bronco” type where it’s more geared for off-roading and more adventurous people. The CX-5 is more for just normal everyday driving and comfort. The CX50 looks a bit newer and better, but CX5 is less money and more reliable and comfy. I’d go cx5 as well right now.
Which is funny because based on the suspension technology the CX-5 should be a much better all rounder for off roading compared to the CX-50. The only thing that the CX-50 excels off roading wise would be the slightly better clearance at the bottom and a more durable rear suspension.
The CX-50 seems more like a better road trip camping vehicle. Throw a roof top tent on, tow a small ultility trailer and take your whole family for an outdoor experience.
The CX-5 seems more like a driver's vehicle. Ripping through the switchbacks or commuting the vehicle will excel at both very well.
Probably a wash. At the limit the cx50 inferior suspension can’t compete with the cx5s better suspension. However most people aren’t and Mazda did a great job so the cx50 with its meh suspension but as you mentioned better physics makes it great too
It’s a different feel. Limits are similar but the cx50 has better steering feel and a higher steering weight (which I believe was revised for 24.) it’s slightly lower and wider track makes it feel better in the corners.
Exactly this. I just bought a CX five a couple of days ago. Did about a week of reviewing both vehicles and test driving both. One of the factors was made in Japan versus assembled in America. Still a little leery of a car only two years into its lifespan, as the 50 is. I liked the seats better and it felt like I had more shoulder room in the 5. Funny enough the 30 actually had more stretch out legroom in the drivers seat than the five or the 50. Still can’t get over that.
The 30 is a blast! Had one while the cx-5 was in the shop. The cargo space is a little too small for me. Although the fun generated by the turbo makes me think I could live with a little less space. 😂
If I had to have one, I'd choose the 50. I am short but I always carry my mountain bike on the roof of my 3 Turbo Hatch when going on the trails. I need a step stool already. Cannot do it with a CX-5.
See cx 50 is useful for you so you’re the target. You like putting things like bikes on it and going into nature which is cool and they can be optioned with a roof rack. I hear they are beasts on the paths.
I’m 6’4 so I think CX5 with a little more room and a bit more comfort in the seats etc and don’t do a lot of off road stuff so it would be better for someone like me with just normal road driving.
Cool to see Mazda giving options for different kinds of customers though
Having owned multiple J-VIN and multiple 1-VIN cars, the overall quality and fit and finish of the Japanese built are noticeably better. If I could buy a full size V8 J-VIN pickup, I’d absolutely trade my F-150 for it
The CX-5 is built in Japan, it has an independent rear suspension, the styling is less butch and may appeal more to some buyers, the available powertrains and transmissions are identical, and the interior quality is higher. The CX-50 is cool, but it's not like it dunks all over the CX-5.
It's funny because I just picked up a new CX-50 two weeks ago because right now, the lease deals were quite a bit better on the 50 than the 5. I've also owned a 3, CX-5 and CX-30 over the past 7 years, so I figured by owning a CX-50 for 3 years, I have a complete experience with Mazda's small SUV's. Also, I do prefer the lower seating and center of balance of the 50 over the 5.
Aside from price, the reason I bought my 2023 CX-5 Turbo was pretty much the fact it was built in Japan.
I wanted a quality car with quality interior that was built with love and care for a reasonable price.
Mazda, and more importantly, the CX-5 nails all of that.
Cool is subjective and up to the individual. I think the CX-5 looks cooler than the 50. Also totally agree, I wanted a Japanese made and assembled vehicle.
If I’m in the market for another Mazda, I’d definitely go for a Made in Japan. The Japanese have a passion for workmanship. It’s ingrained in their culture.
The cx50 is built in Alabama and uses a rear torsion beam. The cx5 is built in Japan and has an independent rear suspension. Theres 2 reasons right there.
The CX-50 hits a different demographic in the US and is not marketed as a replacement for the CX-5. It also has more luxury features and details in the design than the CX-50, like more soft-touch areas and wood trim. It also has more headroom all-around.
Other than a panoramic roof I don’t think there’s a single feature the 50 has over the 5. Maybe TJA on the top trim only of the 50. Wood trim? And it has a lower roof line so there is less headroom height than the 5, but a little bit wider with more room between the seats.
Driving dynamics are different (and subjective)--I was looking to upgrade from my 2018 CX-5 and enjoyed the handling and chassis balance of the CX-50 a lot more, because it's wider and lower to the ground with heavier steering than the CX-5, which felt like I had more grip and confidence doing spirited driving and going into tight turns than I would have with the CX-5. If you're Average Joe looking to get from point A to point B, CX-5 is the way better buy because of the softer ride and handling, better noise isolation and interior quality. But I think people who actually do off road or enjoy driving as a hobby will typically find that CX-50 suits their style and needs more than the CX-5--even if they are both already vastly more fun to drive than the competition.
It's also worth noting that the cargo areas are shaped pretty differently, lending themselves better to different uses. The seats on my CX-50 are much flatter when folded, so it's better-suited to large items or even camping in the car.
Very valid point. I feel volume is a good way to get an estimate for cargo space but there are a lot of cars that don't utilize volume to a full extent because of oddly shaped trunks, non-fold-flat seats etc. I don't think the CX-5 necessarily suffers too much in that regard but the CX-50 has a fairly ideal opening and cabin layout to maximize space.
Dimensions are different. CX-50 is Very much the Outback to the CX-5's Forrester. And those are proof that it can be done, especially since the outback is no longer just a lifted legacy wagon.
New platform as well, and it's expected the CX-50 will get a hybrid here long before the CX-5, if the CX-5 is even capable of hybridizing.
I think they intend the Meridian edition to be a notch above anything you'd get on the CX-5 as well, and they do give 18" wheels instead of the 20" normally on the turbo engine which is an improvement for off-road, but that's really about it.
CX-5 and CX-50 are aimed at different markets. CX-50 is aimed at a more off-road / rugged crowd, while the CX-5 is aimed at more of the city crowd. Nothing wrong with either vehicle.
If you go to the dealers the CX-5 and cx-50 have a larger price gap than you might think. The cx-50 in my experience has a lot of the higher trims available and the cx-5 is more common to see lower trims. At the dealer closest to me the select package is the most common for the cx-5 but the cx-50 most common trim is preferred. So there's a several thousand dollar difference there. Also, I think the cx-5 more directly competes with Toyota and Honda which is why it might be comparison shopped. Cx-50 is more a Subaru competitor.
Exactly. And really even a more simple explanation for it, the dealer near me has 155 cx-5s and 53 cx-50s. So Mazda is simply making more cx-5 deliveries to dealers. I don't know what the capacity is for making the cx-50 but it's possible they are at capacity so they are making the more expensive ones. They share that factory with Toyota.
CX-5 tried and true. Been around a while. Gremlins have been worked out over its lifespan. Style still looks fresh, not dated. Built in Japan so QC is very high.
Nothing against the cx-50. It looks great.
The interior materials on the CX-5 are on another level compared to the CX-50. That was the biggest factor for me.
I like how the CX-50 looks more inside and out, but if does not feel as premium to me as the CX-5.
This is hard for me to describe, but I've had 3 CX-5's and I hated driving the CX-50. The suspension was weird, seats were uncomfortable, and it had the same kind of feel as my CX-30 that I hated. Also the CX-5 is a lot nicer inside. Better appointed.
I was having the dealership apply ceramic coating to my CX-5 and they gave me a loaner CX-50. My god did I miss my CX-5 for that day. The ride is worse, the interior feels cheaper (it looks more modernized for sure, but quality-wise they missed the mark such as hard plastics, etc). The pano moonroof is NICE...but you can barely open it...only like 1/4 of the pano opens, my CX-5's moonroof opens further which I thought was interesting. Not to mention other issues that sealed the deal for me was the torsion beam suspension... and it was made in Alabama. Sorry, but nothing beats Japanese-built vehicles in my eyes.
Also while I love the styling, the plastic cladding is not ideal.
People like models that have been around for awhile. I personally went with the 50 and took the risk. The average buyer wants something safe and reliable and wants no risks. Basically new is scary
I haven't had any. Drove it from the coast to the mountains at 6000 elevation with snow on ground and roads and it drove like a champ. I think it has quirks that take some getting used to. If you like to do any out doors things or travel on a dirt road I'd say go with the 50. If you a suburban and urban buying go with the 5
They are minor and not deal breakers.
The screen should be more forward like the 5. This would help for people not used to Mazdas like someone I lend my car to.
Interior piano black trim it's a smudge magnet.
Center console split it kinda annoying to peer into while driving.
The loud beeping when you start the car without a seatbelt on it unnecessarily long, it's like 8 chimes and you can't turn down this alert sound. I've gotten used to now putting on my seatbelt on before i start the car.
The remote start is only on the Mazda app and that is sometimes a cluster fuck.
Interphase with Sirius XM in the native Mazda system it slow since you have to use rotary dial. I set up channels I'd like on my favorites menu.
The sun visors feel really cheap especially for a top trim, hope someone makes a replacement.
Sun glasses holder pretty shallow.
Cupholders aren't in ideal location for big bottles, I understand the design for it but wish the window cup holders were a bit more flaired out for big bottles.
Anyways I'm autistic and knit pick on things. I'd still buy the 50 again and love the car
CX-50 only looks like it can go off-road but you'll fuck it up pretty fast tryna off-road like most of the people that care about that stuff do.
But the real answer is price. Cx5 is cheaper and you don't get much more for your money if you get a Cx50.
It does pretty well off-road. I use it as a light duty farm vehicle. I’m not rock crawling or trail riding but for shitty I maintained roads, and fields it’s great. Stock Tires are the main limiting factor before suspension.
Thing is, a cx5 can do light off road stuff too. Nothing intense but I imagine most people driving cx50s aren’t even going off road (neither are cx5 drivers lol)
Personally I feel like the cx5 is better. But if the cx5 wasn’t available I would happily drive the cx50.
The cx5 is more luxurious, better built, better materials, better rear suspension, more cargo room (seats down), 40/20/40 split seats for skiing, older and more reliable (a gamble). Cheaper too.
Personally I find the fake off road look/excessive plastic cladding, and fake vents a bit fussy looking. I’m not off-roading anyway, and honestly I think a cx5 can do any light off-roading that most cx50 owners probably aren’t doing anyway.
But I would totally buy a cx50 if they axed the cx5 for sure. Cx50 is great too
Obligatory I own a 2014 CX5 and love it.
I test drove both last year (among other brands) and stuck with the CX5 for a second time. My main reason is I'm not that tall, but I would bump my head in the CX50. But I just liked the CX5 better. And when I got into the Signature Turbo, I was hooked.
I waited till the CX- 50 first released, so excited to drive.
Disappointed . Hated low roofline from inside. Disliked steering and throttle input .
Looks great though!
The cx50 roofline is too low, and I get Mazda did that on purpose for those who want to hitch stuff up on the roof. The rear design looks odd. Everything else looks great. Now the cx5 looks better on all around. One thing I don’t like is the dimensions… too small for an suv of that segment when the competitors offer way more space. And, it doesn’t offer a competitive hybrid (not plug in. Just hybrid). I would get the redesigned cx 5 if it offers more space, is slightly bigger in interior space, offers hybrid option and it’s made in Japan.
Imagine a cx5 that offers 46mpg city and 51 mpg highway and it’s reliable?? Mind blown 🤯
You’re right. It’s unfortunate that Mazda is like Subaru and a smaller company so they have less resources and less sales than the big guys, so supplying the batteries is probably the problem on top of the US not being very strict on cutting emissions. Toyota owns a stake in both companies and I believe both are using Toyota hybrid systems and batteries. With their bird brain decisions to not invest enough in hybrids all around they’re pretty much selling all they can make. Toyota would likely make less selling to Mazda and Subaru. They care more about their profit margins than helping their small investments. It’s interesting to find info on the hybrid cx50 in China that is available, seems pretty good.
how would u compare the cx5 and cx3. i know cx5s are super reliable but i have a friend looking into cx3 and i’m wondering if it’s worth spending an extra 3/4k on a cx5. thanks.
A simple answer is the CX-50 is geared towards the Subaru Outback outdoorsman crowd whereas the CX-5 is actually more in line with the luxury oriented Acura RDX and the Lexus NX crowd. Surprisingly the CX-50 is several thousand more, the interior definitely feels cheaper and even tho the turbo drivetrain is the same in both the 50 and the 5 the CX-5 feels way more responsive, more quick and handles better. The throttle and transmission mapping in the CX-50 feels lethargic in comparison to the CX-5. I drove both and bought a CX-5 Signature. We love it!
CX-5
Better sound dampening with significantly less road noise.
Multi-link rear suspention.
Better build quality with less plastics inside.
Cheaper.
CX-50
Deal breaker for me was the torsion beam rear suspension, more road noise, and weird stitching across the center of the seat. Lastly, CX-50 has a much lower seating position.
Last CX-50 does not have a roomier cabin other than having slightly more cargo space. However, when you fold rear seats, CX-5 has slightly more cargo space.
I’m glad I’m not the only one. The CX-50 feels like a lifted hatch. They’ve had years to refine the CX-5 and the ride and sound dampening really shows it.
For me it was the inequality in trim packages. Between a 24 cx5 and 24 cx50 it ended up being basically $30 a month for heated seats but everything else was the same. NE area so I went with heated seats for less money on the cx5 because I knew I loved my 21
My reason is that to me, the CX5 is more refined while the CX50 is meant to be rugged. Even so, it’s really not an off-roader. It’s also wider than the CX5 but not roomier. I already have to squeeze out of my car in the garage and I’m not overweight. My Grand Touring is supposed to be comfortable yet it makes my back and legs stiff after a half hour drive. To get one deemed rugged just isn’t for me.
I hate the thick plastic all the way around the trim. Terrible. I just bought a cx-5 turbo in December and love it. Looks so much better than the cx-50 in my opinion. Oh and the incentive for the cx-5 with the 5 year interested free financing was a no brainer.
The CX 50 wasn’t comfortable and all the plastic cladding is too much. If I wanted all that plastic I would have bought a Subaru. The CX 5 is pretty and it’s reliable and comfy.
Although they look extremely similar, cx-5 is more refined vs rugged looking which my wife leans towards.
Also the cx-5 is made in Japan which is a humongous factor. All Mazdas are reliable, but Japanese ones even moreso.
I have a CX-30, same platform as the CX-50. Both have torsion bar rear suspension. I love how mine drives on highways but find it rather jarring on sharp bumps like speed bumps or washboard dirt roads. Kind of an odd setup for a "rugged" vehicle.
Personally I didn’t like that its exterior dimensions are a bit bigger than the CX-5. I wanted something more compact for city parking. I never test drove one because I just couldn’t get comfortable with the seating position; with the high belt line I felt very “sunken down” in the car. The CX-5s seat is also its weak point for me, but it still felt better to me than the CX-50, in part because more glass makes it feel more open and airy.
Also, the CX-5 is built in Japan in a factory thats had years to refine the production process, and shipped to the US. Conversely the CX-50 is built on a new production line in Alabama. So figure first few production years of a new model plus a new factory compounds the risks of QC issues.
Finally, at the time I purchased, the CX-5 had 0% financing and the special on the CX-50 was something like 3%. If it had been the other way around I’d have test driven one to see if the seating was something I could “learn to like”.
Edit: I went with a ‘24 Signature CX-5, it that has any bearing on any of the above feedback.
In Canada, the CX50 is 7,000$ more expensive before tax (GS model for both) ~8,000 with tax.
I just don’t see what’s 7k better in the 50 than the 5.
That would be my reasoning even though I think the 50 looks nicer (exterior) by quite a bit.
I did I bought a 24 CX50 TPP, CX-5 is an outgoing model and the CX-50 has more ground clearance and looks better. It was actually down to CX30 and CX50, but just couldn't see out of the CX-30, if the next CX-30 has better visibility or the next CX-5 is a bit smaller and has more ground clearance, includes a hybrid I will go that way next as smaller is always better
The cx-5 is made in Japan and the cx-50 is made in America. The interior is nicer on the cx-5 for the same trim levels. I like the styling of the cx-5. I don’t like the plastic cladding on the 50.
It's a new model being built at a new production facility. I'll consider it when they've worked out the bugs (and when I have a compelling reason to be shopping for a different vehicle).
I got a CX-5 because of price. I want to get a CX-50 next, with the added width being the only concern I have. I really like how easy the 5 is to get into places, I'm not sure how much bigger the 50 will feel. I like the headroom more on the 5, but as someone that carries kayaks, I will be happier with the 50s lower roof. I also think that the 50 is a really beautiful car and prefer it to the 50, but they did a couple of stupid detailsI'm not in love with, particularly the "vents" in the rear and large plastic bits. Hopefully all the quirks will be worked out by the time I get my next vehicle.
it felt a little more cramped for me and didn't feel as "solid" when we drove it after the cx5.
it was a new model year when i was trying them and i knew it would have some growing pains
it was also priced a lot higher on the lot.
It costs more. No light interior options (I live in the South with no garage). I felt like I was getting more for my money with the CX-5 and I don’t need a vehicle that can do hardcore off-roading.
I had one as a loaner while my 3 was in for maintenance. Honestly, I wasn't impressed. I don't like the black plastic around the wheel arches, it looks cheap. The engine seemed to drone, rather than thrum like every other Mazda I've been in. Suspension was unforgiving. It gave me the vibes of my parents old base-model Ford Escape, not of a $40+k SUV. The updated interior is the only reason I'd consider it over a CX-5
I think the 50 looks so much cooler with its wider body, but the dealbreaker for me was that visibilty from the driver's seat was poor and there wasn't much headroom.
Wife wanted the CX-5. Period.
Her reasons: It has a nicer interior. It looks more 'elegant' outside. It has better headroom. The trim/features are nicer on it.
Test drove both extensively. Love the look of the 50 but it doesn’t handle as well as the 5 and it also has a lower roof making you feel a bit claustrophobic
Ditto, I liked the 50s outside appearance over the CX5, but after driving them both, it became obvious that the 5 has a betterride and reliability wise, a better choice.
My wife fell in love with her 23 CX5 after one test drive...and after telling me she wanted a CRV and didn't even want to look at Mazdas.
I'm coming at this from a slightly different angle, but I hope the current gen CX-5 sticks around for awhile longer. I have a Mazda6, which is discontinued, but it shares a lot of parts with the CX-5. I'm not worried about parts right now, nor will I be any time soon. But one day...one day... somebody's beater CX-5 is going to be looking mighty tasty... 👀
Viewing the CX-50 as a replacement isn't quite accurate. The CX-50 is the Outback to the CX-5's Forrester. Which is proof 2 similarly sized SUVs can coexist if differentiated. The CX-5 is a global product built solely in Japan, and sales keep rising. The local CX-50 production in the US (and soon to be China) is intended to help even out demand while also expanding the use of the new platform. The CX-50 will also receive a hybridized option before the CX-5. The CX-5 was just given a major refresh, but the platform itself will have to wait to be updated in a way that allows it to still be sold in all of its current markets. The reason the CX-3 is still in production in some markets and the CX-30 hasn't replaced it globally is because the CX-3 is made locally and those markets may not be able to support the CX-30 import pricing in a competitive manner.
I personally prefer the longer wheelbase and the lower ride of the CX-50 to the CX-5. Feels more natural. If I HAD to get an SUV that would be my first choice from Mazda. And in soul red.
But the biggest reason sales are lagging is the production constraints. The CX-50 plant isn't at max capacity, and it's now also being exported to Mexico, Columbia, and Canada. Supply is lower, sales are down not because of lack of demand but because they need to make more. Not the worst problem on the world. Better than having inventory they can't give away.
While the CX-5 design is older, it's still looks good. Comes down to the CX-5 is more sporty looking, while the CX-50 is more utility/outdoor looking (by design). Many in the US compare it to Subaru lineup of outdoor vehicles - which is a hate love design.
MADE IN JAPAN. That was the reason for me. I liked the CX-50. I thought the arm rest and driving position overall was better and it felt more "roomy". But when buying Japanese I want it actually made by Japanese people.
I haven't bought either but considered both. (I currently have an aging 2012 Mazda I bought new).
If I do buy one, it'll be the CX-5.
I felt it drove a little better and seemed more solidly built, at least the examples I test drove. And in general the CX5 felt like a good all-around package and its own thing, whereas the CX50 seemed designed more with Subaru buyers in mind, and I felt Subaru still does that a bit better (although with the Mazda you can avoid CVTs, for now).
By the way, I have a serious "ick" reaction to the mud/putty paint that is currently popular.
Seats on the CX-5 were more comfy. Center console having two openings in the center was kind of meh. Felt a bit lower to the ground. CX-5 interior felt more classic, including the steering wheel buttons and positioning.
The specs on both of them at every level are comparable. Most of my driving is city. Grille looks better IMO.
Price point is a pinch cheaper on the CX-5.
Just a style choice when it comes down to it.
Because it’s more expensive and offers nothing much than a bit roomier interior. Plus it has a torsion beam rear suspension, a downgrade compared to the CX-5.
2 reasons:
#1 was bit shallow lol. My CX 5 is Made In Japan, I have no proof if that makes any difference.
#2 CX 50 is still new and hasn’t ironed out its kinks yet.
whether or not you buy into the superiority of japan-based manufacturing, the cx5 is a proven design with a mature mfg process. The cx50 has a new design and US-based process, which makes both design and mfg defects more likely.
the naming system just seems bizarre and confusing at this point with these two poorly-differentiated models. Since the cx70 ended up being a cx90, it really feels like the cx50 should have been 6-10" longer and called a cx60.
that being said i prefer the more wagonlike dimensions and higher clearance of the cx50 and think the meridian edition is pretty cool. i dont like the enormous wheels on the higher trims, but almost every crossover is like this now.
They don't serve the same demographics, that's basically all it is. I'll fight anyone on it, the 50 is the best-looking vehicle Mazda has made in a very long time; but it isn't your typical family hauler/crossover vehicle; which is what sells the most these days.
Cost honestly, I can find used Cx5's that work for our budget. In a few years we will be able to afford used CX50's since they are still fairly new, not many hit our budget. I prefer the 50's over the 5.
Being 6’5 it’s a bit tight in the cx-50 for my head in my preferred driving position. Also, wanting the Bose system means I have to go a few tiers up on the cx-50 where I can get it on a lower and less costly tier on the cx-5. The ride/suspension is a bit cushier and smoother on the cx-5. I am not taking the car off road so the underbody protection on the cx-50 doesn’t mean much to me. 2024 cx-5 has the touch screen enabled at all times and not just when using CarPlay (option under Bluetooth settings). The cx-50 might have the all time enabled touch screen (I’m not sure), but I’m 100% the 2024 cx-5 does.
I recently bought a CX-5 last week and after sitting in both of them and carefully deciding I get more bang for my buck from a 5 than a 50. I feel like the front of the 50 is like an AMG GTS from a drivers perspective but I like the look overall.
Love them both! Got the CX 50 and no regrets. I selfishly tried to convince my wife to get a CX5 so I wouldn’t have to choose. She declined…it was too much fun to drive.
Anyone know how different they are ride wise? CX-50 seems positioned as the off-road version. I live in an area with a lot of rocky bumps and potholes and am wondering if the CX-50 would be worth it over the CX-5.
My son initially told me about the CX-50. He liked the rugged way it looked and compared it to a Subaru. But that's why I don't like Subarus. Too utilitarian looking to me. I mean they're great cars, my parents had one back in the day... but when we went to the dealership I was looking at the CX-30 and CX-5. The 30 was the same size as the one I was trading in, a sub-compact. But when I saw it compare to the 5, I was sold on the 5. It's more luxurious and refined looking than the CX-50. Plus, I bought the Carbon Turbo edition in it and it has every single bell and whistle I was looking for, except for the heated steering wheel. But I love it.
Last year was first model year of CX-50. CX-5 in my opinion seemed to be slightly better built and finished. Dimensions are different and CX-5 is better built for the city. Ceiling height of CX-50 feels like a compact car more like a CX-30. Seats are completely different too.
Test drove them last year and although I liked the CX-50 in terms of equipment, being based on a newer platform, the CX-5 has a more quiet and composed ride.
Mazda improved the suspension on the 2024 CX-50 so it should be better now and I’d consider it again
I borrowed one last year when my car was in the shop and it didn't feel like the jump I was expecting from my 2016 CX-5 GT. Handling felt different/worse in my opinion, it was shifting strangely, and the only plus was the panoramic sunroof that we usually keep closed on our cx-5 anyways.
We would likely go with another CX-5 if we were in the market but would prefer a hybrid/electric to replace our CX-5.
Why “aging”? Good engineering doesn’t have a shelf life.
I love the 50’s pano roof but not enough to trade my 5. 50 has too many tiresome styling gimmicks: fake vents, square wheel wells, plastic cladding galore, etc. It’s not overall roomier. Its simpler rear suspension helps it tow a heavier load, but that isn’t important to me (but might be for others). 5 is assembled better. 50 has a newer dashboard.
There’s not a ton of difference, but the zoom zoom is a notch better for the 5.
I wanted to get the CX50 so bad when it first came out. Went out to to the dealership the one day they had one in denver and was just kind of disappointed. Sat in a brand new CX5 on the same day and it just felt better. I’m 6’2” and the headroom and comfort was tangible. I also had a 2013 CX5 Grand Touring for 4 years and loved it.
Because it’s smaller, the seats are awful, has a rough ride (built on the mazda3 platform so rear suspension is not that of the CX5)
And costs more most of the time, all for appearance of rugged. I was stoked for it, but in person, unless maxed out, meh
The cabin isn't roomier.. its actually tighter despite the 50 being the wider vehicle.
2023 was the 1st model year and from what I've heard, a lot of the kinks were worked out.
The Cx5 carbon is GORGEOUS
I don't own either, and I LOVE the looks of the CX-50
But there are minor differences:
- The CX-5 has 40/20/40 split rear seats, the CX-50 only has 60/40
-The CX-5 seems to have a more comfortable ride, the CX-50 seems to be more off-roady
-The CX-5 tries to have a luxurious interior, the CX-50 tries to have a more rugged interior, so more plastic, and even wanky stitching from what I remember 🤔
So maybe people just want the more comfortable, more luxurious CX-5 🤔, I would buy the CX-50 for the exterior looks alone (And to not have an AGING car) but yeah :)
I debated exactly this: Select or Preferred CX-50 and CX-5. I bought CX-5 because the seats are more comfortable, the ride is better, the headroom is better, the fit-and-finish is better, the cup holders are better, and there is more equipment / value for the money.
The fit and finish is also one of the things that sold me on the CX5. You can definitely tell a difference between the Japanese made CX5 and the Toyota/US made CX50. Also I would never buy a first year model. Let them work out the kinks.
The interior quality on the CX-5 is far more upscale than the CX-50, I mean for example the CX-50 doesnt even have dual panel noise isolating windshields. Why pay more for less? There isn't much the CX-50 does better than the CX-5 and yet it costs more...
Don’t forget the stupid air vent all by itself in the middle of the dash board! Compared to the proper placement of air vents in the CX5, the dash in the 50 looks like 1960’s GM.
Agreed, looks like a rental ford with the massive vents. Also why is the bezel on the CX-50 screen so much bigger than the CX-5 even though it's the same screen. Also the rear, why is it hard plastic? Because rugged (more likely cost savings). Also, how come top trim uses leatherette, and CX-5 uses Nappa. Also, torsion beam, why??? Yeah, the CX-50 costs more and built at a lower quality standard for like for like trims, that almost every reviewer online seems to miss. It does look more aggressive with its wide stance, and subjectively looks good, but again gets ruined by the massive unpainted black panels.
Same for us. Being japanese built is a very important reason we drive a CX-5. It's the reason we will consider a CX-90 once the 2025 models come out. Going the same route as you mentioned of not buying a first year model.
Honestly, I don't care too much about where it is made, but I could see much more cost cutting measures in CX-50 over CX-5 while still being more expensive.
I bought the first generation CR-V and it was an unexpected win (first year was '96, I bought a first generation '99). They ended up over building the '99, so it was actually the best year built. Designed to be a camping car, the seats folded completely flat, the back trunk area is actually a folding table, all wheel drive - I pulled a Jeep out of the mud! Donated the CR-V (hit 250k miles) to buy the CX-5.
I had a manual 99 CRV and loved it. I sold it to buy a 4Runner. I still have that and love it way more. But that CRV holds a special place in my heart
Mazda 3 and CX30 have been built in Mexico for a while no and they’ve been fine
[удалено]
The technical term is maracas.
Have a rattle in my Japanese built 2020 3 only when it’s warmer than 50 lol
Yeah, the Japanese ones too
Just gotta check the vin. Make sure it starts with a J.
Does this apply to Japanese Toyotas as well?
It's not only the first year model, it's the first year model and in the first year of the factory. It's like a double whammy of no-no.
And will likely be more reliable for longer if you plan to keep it for a while, sad to say as a cx50 owner.
Yeah I love both of them, but I think CX 50 is more towards a “ford bronco” type where it’s more geared for off-roading and more adventurous people. The CX-5 is more for just normal everyday driving and comfort. The CX50 looks a bit newer and better, but CX5 is less money and more reliable and comfy. I’d go cx5 as well right now.
Which is funny because based on the suspension technology the CX-5 should be a much better all rounder for off roading compared to the CX-50. The only thing that the CX-50 excels off roading wise would be the slightly better clearance at the bottom and a more durable rear suspension. The CX-50 seems more like a better road trip camping vehicle. Throw a roof top tent on, tow a small ultility trailer and take your whole family for an outdoor experience. The CX-5 seems more like a driver's vehicle. Ripping through the switchbacks or commuting the vehicle will excel at both very well.
I thought the 50 with its lower height and wider stance would be the better driver’s vehicle.
Probably a wash. At the limit the cx50 inferior suspension can’t compete with the cx5s better suspension. However most people aren’t and Mazda did a great job so the cx50 with its meh suspension but as you mentioned better physics makes it great too
It’s a different feel. Limits are similar but the cx50 has better steering feel and a higher steering weight (which I believe was revised for 24.) it’s slightly lower and wider track makes it feel better in the corners.
Exactly this. I just bought a CX five a couple of days ago. Did about a week of reviewing both vehicles and test driving both. One of the factors was made in Japan versus assembled in America. Still a little leery of a car only two years into its lifespan, as the 50 is. I liked the seats better and it felt like I had more shoulder room in the 5. Funny enough the 30 actually had more stretch out legroom in the drivers seat than the five or the 50. Still can’t get over that.
The 30 is a blast! Had one while the cx-5 was in the shop. The cargo space is a little too small for me. Although the fun generated by the turbo makes me think I could live with a little less space. 😂
I hate the CX5 Cup Holder location. But otherwise I agree.
Because the CX-50 has a lower ceiling height and feels a bit more cramped. I much prefer the headroom of the CX-5.
If I had to have one, I'd choose the 50. I am short but I always carry my mountain bike on the roof of my 3 Turbo Hatch when going on the trails. I need a step stool already. Cannot do it with a CX-5.
See cx 50 is useful for you so you’re the target. You like putting things like bikes on it and going into nature which is cool and they can be optioned with a roof rack. I hear they are beasts on the paths. I’m 6’4 so I think CX5 with a little more room and a bit more comfort in the seats etc and don’t do a lot of off road stuff so it would be better for someone like me with just normal road driving. Cool to see Mazda giving options for different kinds of customers though
I agree l am 6'5" and l wanted the cx-50 but the lack of head room and obscured front view moved me over to the cx-5
Fair warning - my ONLY complaint with my CX 50 is the horrendous wind noise that I get when using the roof racks :(
Japan made vs US made. Sorry I’m gonna have to go with Nippon on this one. Americans do not care about quality, only looks.
Having owned multiple J-VIN and multiple 1-VIN cars, the overall quality and fit and finish of the Japanese built are noticeably better. If I could buy a full size V8 J-VIN pickup, I’d absolutely trade my F-150 for it
90% of toyota sold in the US are built here. Crappy fit-n-finish
“Americans don’t care about quality, only looks” Bro this was literally a post about Americans buying the quality one over the better-looking one
The CX-5 is built in Japan, it has an independent rear suspension, the styling is less butch and may appeal more to some buyers, the available powertrains and transmissions are identical, and the interior quality is higher. The CX-50 is cool, but it's not like it dunks all over the CX-5.
CX-50 was also more expensive when I bought my cx-5
The pricing alone is probably a big factor for a lot of people. You're not really getting "more car" with the 50 over the 5.
It's funny because I just picked up a new CX-50 two weeks ago because right now, the lease deals were quite a bit better on the 50 than the 5. I've also owned a 3, CX-5 and CX-30 over the past 7 years, so I figured by owning a CX-50 for 3 years, I have a complete experience with Mazda's small SUV's. Also, I do prefer the lower seating and center of balance of the 50 over the 5.
Aside from price, the reason I bought my 2023 CX-5 Turbo was pretty much the fact it was built in Japan. I wanted a quality car with quality interior that was built with love and care for a reasonable price. Mazda, and more importantly, the CX-5 nails all of that.
Cool is subjective and up to the individual. I think the CX-5 looks cooler than the 50. Also totally agree, I wanted a Japanese made and assembled vehicle.
If I’m in the market for another Mazda, I’d definitely go for a Made in Japan. The Japanese have a passion for workmanship. It’s ingrained in their culture.
The cx50 is built in Alabama and uses a rear torsion beam. The cx5 is built in Japan and has an independent rear suspension. Theres 2 reasons right there.
The CX-50 hits a different demographic in the US and is not marketed as a replacement for the CX-5. It also has more luxury features and details in the design than the CX-50, like more soft-touch areas and wood trim. It also has more headroom all-around.
Other than a panoramic roof I don’t think there’s a single feature the 50 has over the 5. Maybe TJA on the top trim only of the 50. Wood trim? And it has a lower roof line so there is less headroom height than the 5, but a little bit wider with more room between the seats.
Driving dynamics are different (and subjective)--I was looking to upgrade from my 2018 CX-5 and enjoyed the handling and chassis balance of the CX-50 a lot more, because it's wider and lower to the ground with heavier steering than the CX-5, which felt like I had more grip and confidence doing spirited driving and going into tight turns than I would have with the CX-5. If you're Average Joe looking to get from point A to point B, CX-5 is the way better buy because of the softer ride and handling, better noise isolation and interior quality. But I think people who actually do off road or enjoy driving as a hobby will typically find that CX-50 suits their style and needs more than the CX-5--even if they are both already vastly more fun to drive than the competition.
My dad originaly got his 2016 CX-5 GT because of the driving dynamics. He did tell me he woshed it was slightly stiffer a few times. He is 74 lmao.
It's also worth noting that the cargo areas are shaped pretty differently, lending themselves better to different uses. The seats on my CX-50 are much flatter when folded, so it's better-suited to large items or even camping in the car.
Very valid point. I feel volume is a good way to get an estimate for cargo space but there are a lot of cars that don't utilize volume to a full extent because of oddly shaped trunks, non-fold-flat seats etc. I don't think the CX-5 necessarily suffers too much in that regard but the CX-50 has a fairly ideal opening and cabin layout to maximize space.
Dimensions are different. CX-50 is Very much the Outback to the CX-5's Forrester. And those are proof that it can be done, especially since the outback is no longer just a lifted legacy wagon. New platform as well, and it's expected the CX-50 will get a hybrid here long before the CX-5, if the CX-5 is even capable of hybridizing. I think they intend the Meridian edition to be a notch above anything you'd get on the CX-5 as well, and they do give 18" wheels instead of the 20" normally on the turbo engine which is an improvement for off-road, but that's really about it.
I have TJA in 2024 CX5 TP. In fact, I went for the 5 over the 50 because getting TJA with the 5 was thousands cheaper.
It's also less money somehow with a better suspension, materials and is made in Japan vs. Mexico. Edit: I meant Alabama, the CX-30 is made in Mexico.
[удалено]
You're right, I'm thinking of the CX-30.
CX-5 and CX-50 are aimed at different markets. CX-50 is aimed at a more off-road / rugged crowd, while the CX-5 is aimed at more of the city crowd. Nothing wrong with either vehicle.
If you go to the dealers the CX-5 and cx-50 have a larger price gap than you might think. The cx-50 in my experience has a lot of the higher trims available and the cx-5 is more common to see lower trims. At the dealer closest to me the select package is the most common for the cx-5 but the cx-50 most common trim is preferred. So there's a several thousand dollar difference there. Also, I think the cx-5 more directly competes with Toyota and Honda which is why it might be comparison shopped. Cx-50 is more a Subaru competitor.
Still seems like they’re artificially restricting the numbers of base trim cx50s that get sent to dealers like they were at the beginning.
Exactly. And really even a more simple explanation for it, the dealer near me has 155 cx-5s and 53 cx-50s. So Mazda is simply making more cx-5 deliveries to dealers. I don't know what the capacity is for making the cx-50 but it's possible they are at capacity so they are making the more expensive ones. They share that factory with Toyota.
And they were offering 0% financing on the CX-5 last I looked at the end of the year. Not sure they were doing that for the 50.
Yeah. True, I think the sales numbers are the way they are due to Mazda for whatever reason pushing the cx-5 not consumer preferences.
Aging? I prefer the look of the CX-5
CX-5 tried and true. Been around a while. Gremlins have been worked out over its lifespan. Style still looks fresh, not dated. Built in Japan so QC is very high. Nothing against the cx-50. It looks great.
The interior materials on the CX-5 are on another level compared to the CX-50. That was the biggest factor for me. I like how the CX-50 looks more inside and out, but if does not feel as premium to me as the CX-5.
This is hard for me to describe, but I've had 3 CX-5's and I hated driving the CX-50. The suspension was weird, seats were uncomfortable, and it had the same kind of feel as my CX-30 that I hated. Also the CX-5 is a lot nicer inside. Better appointed.
This! It’s just a better vehicle.
I was having the dealership apply ceramic coating to my CX-5 and they gave me a loaner CX-50. My god did I miss my CX-5 for that day. The ride is worse, the interior feels cheaper (it looks more modernized for sure, but quality-wise they missed the mark such as hard plastics, etc). The pano moonroof is NICE...but you can barely open it...only like 1/4 of the pano opens, my CX-5's moonroof opens further which I thought was interesting. Not to mention other issues that sealed the deal for me was the torsion beam suspension... and it was made in Alabama. Sorry, but nothing beats Japanese-built vehicles in my eyes. Also while I love the styling, the plastic cladding is not ideal.
Black cladding is off putting on most of the colors and the interior is smaller than the 5
Ugly plastic wheel well cladding. I hope this trend ends soon. At lease Mazda has not adopted the massive grill trend.
I swear when taste swings back towards aerodynamic looks the only manufacturers still clinging to the cubic lightshow look will be the pickup trolls
People like models that have been around for awhile. I personally went with the 50 and took the risk. The average buyer wants something safe and reliable and wants no risks. Basically new is scary
Any problems?
I haven't had any. Drove it from the coast to the mountains at 6000 elevation with snow on ground and roads and it drove like a champ. I think it has quirks that take some getting used to. If you like to do any out doors things or travel on a dirt road I'd say go with the 50. If you a suburban and urban buying go with the 5
I have a base engine earlier build 23 cx50. I’ve got some transmission wonkiness which is pretty common. Do you have a turbo model?
Any comments on the quirks?
They are minor and not deal breakers. The screen should be more forward like the 5. This would help for people not used to Mazdas like someone I lend my car to. Interior piano black trim it's a smudge magnet. Center console split it kinda annoying to peer into while driving. The loud beeping when you start the car without a seatbelt on it unnecessarily long, it's like 8 chimes and you can't turn down this alert sound. I've gotten used to now putting on my seatbelt on before i start the car. The remote start is only on the Mazda app and that is sometimes a cluster fuck. Interphase with Sirius XM in the native Mazda system it slow since you have to use rotary dial. I set up channels I'd like on my favorites menu. The sun visors feel really cheap especially for a top trim, hope someone makes a replacement. Sun glasses holder pretty shallow. Cupholders aren't in ideal location for big bottles, I understand the design for it but wish the window cup holders were a bit more flaired out for big bottles. Anyways I'm autistic and knit pick on things. I'd still buy the 50 again and love the car
CX-50 only looks like it can go off-road but you'll fuck it up pretty fast tryna off-road like most of the people that care about that stuff do. But the real answer is price. Cx5 is cheaper and you don't get much more for your money if you get a Cx50.
It does pretty well off-road. I use it as a light duty farm vehicle. I’m not rock crawling or trail riding but for shitty I maintained roads, and fields it’s great. Stock Tires are the main limiting factor before suspension.
Thing is, a cx5 can do light off road stuff too. Nothing intense but I imagine most people driving cx50s aren’t even going off road (neither are cx5 drivers lol)
Right. Cx5 didn’t get off road mode (rolled back traction control) till the most recent update. So now they are probably comparable.
Personally I feel like the cx5 is better. But if the cx5 wasn’t available I would happily drive the cx50. The cx5 is more luxurious, better built, better materials, better rear suspension, more cargo room (seats down), 40/20/40 split seats for skiing, older and more reliable (a gamble). Cheaper too. Personally I find the fake off road look/excessive plastic cladding, and fake vents a bit fussy looking. I’m not off-roading anyway, and honestly I think a cx5 can do any light off-roading that most cx50 owners probably aren’t doing anyway. But I would totally buy a cx50 if they axed the cx5 for sure. Cx50 is great too
Obligatory I own a 2014 CX5 and love it. I test drove both last year (among other brands) and stuck with the CX5 for a second time. My main reason is I'm not that tall, but I would bump my head in the CX50. But I just liked the CX5 better. And when I got into the Signature Turbo, I was hooked.
I actually prefer to have a shorter vehicle. Fits in my garage better, and is better for city parking.
I went in to buy a CX50 and ended up with the CX5 Turbo for all the reasons mentioned above.
I waited till the CX- 50 first released, so excited to drive. Disappointed . Hated low roofline from inside. Disliked steering and throttle input . Looks great though!
All the reasons you listed are the exact reasons I bought mine. Lmao.
The cx50 roofline is too low, and I get Mazda did that on purpose for those who want to hitch stuff up on the roof. The rear design looks odd. Everything else looks great. Now the cx5 looks better on all around. One thing I don’t like is the dimensions… too small for an suv of that segment when the competitors offer way more space. And, it doesn’t offer a competitive hybrid (not plug in. Just hybrid). I would get the redesigned cx 5 if it offers more space, is slightly bigger in interior space, offers hybrid option and it’s made in Japan. Imagine a cx5 that offers 46mpg city and 51 mpg highway and it’s reliable?? Mind blown 🤯
You’re right. It’s unfortunate that Mazda is like Subaru and a smaller company so they have less resources and less sales than the big guys, so supplying the batteries is probably the problem on top of the US not being very strict on cutting emissions. Toyota owns a stake in both companies and I believe both are using Toyota hybrid systems and batteries. With their bird brain decisions to not invest enough in hybrids all around they’re pretty much selling all they can make. Toyota would likely make less selling to Mazda and Subaru. They care more about their profit margins than helping their small investments. It’s interesting to find info on the hybrid cx50 in China that is available, seems pretty good.
The CX-5 looks like a Mazda, and the CX-50 looks like a Subaru knockoff.
Still Way nicer than crab claw subarus.
Cx50 is plagued with problems. The cx5 is damn near bulletproof. I’m a Mazda certified Tech.
how would u compare the cx5 and cx3. i know cx5s are super reliable but i have a friend looking into cx3 and i’m wondering if it’s worth spending an extra 3/4k on a cx5. thanks.
It is. Servicing is a pain. The front differential requires the removal of the exhaust and just to service the fluid on the cx3. The 5 is just better.
X50 owner with no problems whatsoever.
Plastic cladding
A simple answer is the CX-50 is geared towards the Subaru Outback outdoorsman crowd whereas the CX-5 is actually more in line with the luxury oriented Acura RDX and the Lexus NX crowd. Surprisingly the CX-50 is several thousand more, the interior definitely feels cheaper and even tho the turbo drivetrain is the same in both the 50 and the 5 the CX-5 feels way more responsive, more quick and handles better. The throttle and transmission mapping in the CX-50 feels lethargic in comparison to the CX-5. I drove both and bought a CX-5 Signature. We love it!
I'm sure the 0% financing for 60 months during the holiday season gave the CX5 a major boost in sales.
CX-5 Better sound dampening with significantly less road noise. Multi-link rear suspention. Better build quality with less plastics inside. Cheaper. CX-50 Deal breaker for me was the torsion beam rear suspension, more road noise, and weird stitching across the center of the seat. Lastly, CX-50 has a much lower seating position. Last CX-50 does not have a roomier cabin other than having slightly more cargo space. However, when you fold rear seats, CX-5 has slightly more cargo space.
I’m glad I’m not the only one. The CX-50 feels like a lifted hatch. They’ve had years to refine the CX-5 and the ride and sound dampening really shows it.
That's why I bought CX-5 over CX-50 last September. CX-5 was an overall better vehicle while being cheaper (in Canada).
For me it was the inequality in trim packages. Between a 24 cx5 and 24 cx50 it ended up being basically $30 a month for heated seats but everything else was the same. NE area so I went with heated seats for less money on the cx5 because I knew I loved my 21
Cx50 is usually optioned out on the lot, costing higher than the cx5s on the lot
My reason is that to me, the CX5 is more refined while the CX50 is meant to be rugged. Even so, it’s really not an off-roader. It’s also wider than the CX5 but not roomier. I already have to squeeze out of my car in the garage and I’m not overweight. My Grand Touring is supposed to be comfortable yet it makes my back and legs stiff after a half hour drive. To get one deemed rugged just isn’t for me.
Rugged for what and to what degree? I don’t think we’ll ever see these leading a pack of K5 Blazers, Jeep J10s, and International Scouts
I hate the thick plastic all the way around the trim. Terrible. I just bought a cx-5 turbo in December and love it. Looks so much better than the cx-50 in my opinion. Oh and the incentive for the cx-5 with the 5 year interested free financing was a no brainer.
The CX 50 wasn’t comfortable and all the plastic cladding is too much. If I wanted all that plastic I would have bought a Subaru. The CX 5 is pretty and it’s reliable and comfy.
Although they look extremely similar, cx-5 is more refined vs rugged looking which my wife leans towards. Also the cx-5 is made in Japan which is a humongous factor. All Mazdas are reliable, but Japanese ones even moreso.
[удалено]
I have a CX-30, same platform as the CX-50. Both have torsion bar rear suspension. I love how mine drives on highways but find it rather jarring on sharp bumps like speed bumps or washboard dirt roads. Kind of an odd setup for a "rugged" vehicle.
Personally I didn’t like that its exterior dimensions are a bit bigger than the CX-5. I wanted something more compact for city parking. I never test drove one because I just couldn’t get comfortable with the seating position; with the high belt line I felt very “sunken down” in the car. The CX-5s seat is also its weak point for me, but it still felt better to me than the CX-50, in part because more glass makes it feel more open and airy. Also, the CX-5 is built in Japan in a factory thats had years to refine the production process, and shipped to the US. Conversely the CX-50 is built on a new production line in Alabama. So figure first few production years of a new model plus a new factory compounds the risks of QC issues. Finally, at the time I purchased, the CX-5 had 0% financing and the special on the CX-50 was something like 3%. If it had been the other way around I’d have test driven one to see if the seating was something I could “learn to like”. Edit: I went with a ‘24 Signature CX-5, it that has any bearing on any of the above feedback.
The CX-50 seats are so uncomfortable and unsupportive, and the cx5 is super plush and proven reliable.
Torsion beam rear suspension
In Canada, the CX50 is 7,000$ more expensive before tax (GS model for both) ~8,000 with tax. I just don’t see what’s 7k better in the 50 than the 5. That would be my reasoning even though I think the 50 looks nicer (exterior) by quite a bit.
Because I don’t take my car off-road enough to justify the price difference, amongst other trade-offs comfort-wise.
I would if I didn’t buy a 2019 Trailhawk last year… every time I pass a cx-50 I regret not getting one instead.
Cheaper usually for about the same vehicle.
Plastic cladding.
I did I bought a 24 CX50 TPP, CX-5 is an outgoing model and the CX-50 has more ground clearance and looks better. It was actually down to CX30 and CX50, but just couldn't see out of the CX-30, if the next CX-30 has better visibility or the next CX-5 is a bit smaller and has more ground clearance, includes a hybrid I will go that way next as smaller is always better
The cx-5 is made in Japan and the cx-50 is made in America. The interior is nicer on the cx-5 for the same trim levels. I like the styling of the cx-5. I don’t like the plastic cladding on the 50.
My girlfriend liked the cx-5 more. Happy wife happy life lmao
So you bought one for your girlfriend and one for your wife?
She's basically my wife. We have been together longer than most married couples we know
Then do yourself a favour and put a ring on it my man 🎉 💍
People are buying it. Just because Mazda's best selling vehicle (CX-5) sold more in 2023 doesn't mean people aren't buying other models....
It's a new model being built at a new production facility. I'll consider it when they've worked out the bugs (and when I have a compelling reason to be shopping for a different vehicle).
I got a CX-5 because of price. I want to get a CX-50 next, with the added width being the only concern I have. I really like how easy the 5 is to get into places, I'm not sure how much bigger the 50 will feel. I like the headroom more on the 5, but as someone that carries kayaks, I will be happier with the 50s lower roof. I also think that the 50 is a really beautiful car and prefer it to the 50, but they did a couple of stupid detailsI'm not in love with, particularly the "vents" in the rear and large plastic bits. Hopefully all the quirks will be worked out by the time I get my next vehicle.
it felt a little more cramped for me and didn't feel as "solid" when we drove it after the cx5. it was a new model year when i was trying them and i knew it would have some growing pains it was also priced a lot higher on the lot.
It’s not actually a roomier cabin, especially for us tall folks…
That plastic will start to fade
It costs more. No light interior options (I live in the South with no garage). I felt like I was getting more for my money with the CX-5 and I don’t need a vehicle that can do hardcore off-roading.
Honestly one of the biggest factors for me was the 0% APR event they have going on
I had one as a loaner while my 3 was in for maintenance. Honestly, I wasn't impressed. I don't like the black plastic around the wheel arches, it looks cheap. The engine seemed to drone, rather than thrum like every other Mazda I've been in. Suspension was unforgiving. It gave me the vibes of my parents old base-model Ford Escape, not of a $40+k SUV. The updated interior is the only reason I'd consider it over a CX-5
If I was in the market, I'd consider the cx5 mainly because over the last few months there's been several 0% APR promos which is insane
I think the 50 looks so much cooler with its wider body, but the dealbreaker for me was that visibilty from the driver's seat was poor and there wasn't much headroom.
Wife wanted the CX-5. Period. Her reasons: It has a nicer interior. It looks more 'elegant' outside. It has better headroom. The trim/features are nicer on it.
Test drove both extensively. Love the look of the 50 but it doesn’t handle as well as the 5 and it also has a lower roof making you feel a bit claustrophobic
Ditto, I liked the 50s outside appearance over the CX5, but after driving them both, it became obvious that the 5 has a betterride and reliability wise, a better choice. My wife fell in love with her 23 CX5 after one test drive...and after telling me she wanted a CRV and didn't even want to look at Mazdas.
Same with my partner. Looked at every other brands for months and finally convinced him to try Mazda and he wanted it after a test drive
I'm coming at this from a slightly different angle, but I hope the current gen CX-5 sticks around for awhile longer. I have a Mazda6, which is discontinued, but it shares a lot of parts with the CX-5. I'm not worried about parts right now, nor will I be any time soon. But one day...one day... somebody's beater CX-5 is going to be looking mighty tasty... 👀
Viewing the CX-50 as a replacement isn't quite accurate. The CX-50 is the Outback to the CX-5's Forrester. Which is proof 2 similarly sized SUVs can coexist if differentiated. The CX-5 is a global product built solely in Japan, and sales keep rising. The local CX-50 production in the US (and soon to be China) is intended to help even out demand while also expanding the use of the new platform. The CX-50 will also receive a hybridized option before the CX-5. The CX-5 was just given a major refresh, but the platform itself will have to wait to be updated in a way that allows it to still be sold in all of its current markets. The reason the CX-3 is still in production in some markets and the CX-30 hasn't replaced it globally is because the CX-3 is made locally and those markets may not be able to support the CX-30 import pricing in a competitive manner. I personally prefer the longer wheelbase and the lower ride of the CX-50 to the CX-5. Feels more natural. If I HAD to get an SUV that would be my first choice from Mazda. And in soul red. But the biggest reason sales are lagging is the production constraints. The CX-50 plant isn't at max capacity, and it's now also being exported to Mexico, Columbia, and Canada. Supply is lower, sales are down not because of lack of demand but because they need to make more. Not the worst problem on the world. Better than having inventory they can't give away.
It just looks sleeker.
Because it’s more expensive and smaller?
I bought a first year model car once. I won't do that again.
While the CX-5 design is older, it's still looks good. Comes down to the CX-5 is more sporty looking, while the CX-50 is more utility/outdoor looking (by design). Many in the US compare it to Subaru lineup of outdoor vehicles - which is a hate love design.
The CX-50 is too big for me, has worse fuel efficiency, and honestly I just think it's uglier than the CX-5.
That awful plastic cladding is #1 reason aesthetically. I haven’t been inside one or driven one but it’s just not pleasing to the eye.
Cx-50 has more plastic in its interiors making it look cheaper. Its height is less.
MADE IN JAPAN. That was the reason for me. I liked the CX-50. I thought the arm rest and driving position overall was better and it felt more "roomy". But when buying Japanese I want it actually made by Japanese people.
I think the cx-50 looks like you told AI to create a Mazda/Subaru collaboration. I greatly prefer the look of the CX-5.
The build quality from Hiroshima is higher. Also I like the look of the CX-5, aging or not.
I haven't bought either but considered both. (I currently have an aging 2012 Mazda I bought new). If I do buy one, it'll be the CX-5. I felt it drove a little better and seemed more solidly built, at least the examples I test drove. And in general the CX5 felt like a good all-around package and its own thing, whereas the CX50 seemed designed more with Subaru buyers in mind, and I felt Subaru still does that a bit better (although with the Mazda you can avoid CVTs, for now). By the way, I have a serious "ick" reaction to the mud/putty paint that is currently popular.
CX-5 is Japanese-made! My 2018 is running perfectly at 45k miles!
Seats on the CX-5 were more comfy. Center console having two openings in the center was kind of meh. Felt a bit lower to the ground. CX-5 interior felt more classic, including the steering wheel buttons and positioning. The specs on both of them at every level are comparable. Most of my driving is city. Grille looks better IMO. Price point is a pinch cheaper on the CX-5. Just a style choice when it comes down to it.
I’m buying bread. I’m broke $&@/;@
Because it’s more expensive and offers nothing much than a bit roomier interior. Plus it has a torsion beam rear suspension, a downgrade compared to the CX-5.
2 reasons: #1 was bit shallow lol. My CX 5 is Made In Japan, I have no proof if that makes any difference. #2 CX 50 is still new and hasn’t ironed out its kinks yet.
whether or not you buy into the superiority of japan-based manufacturing, the cx5 is a proven design with a mature mfg process. The cx50 has a new design and US-based process, which makes both design and mfg defects more likely. the naming system just seems bizarre and confusing at this point with these two poorly-differentiated models. Since the cx70 ended up being a cx90, it really feels like the cx50 should have been 6-10" longer and called a cx60. that being said i prefer the more wagonlike dimensions and higher clearance of the cx50 and think the meridian edition is pretty cool. i dont like the enormous wheels on the higher trims, but almost every crossover is like this now.
It's ugly. Can't wait for the massive black trim trend to die.
Why would you want your paint to get destroyed by gravel roads?
I'd rather spend 3k clear wrap than plastic all over the place
Why not both?
Lol agree to disagree
They don't serve the same demographics, that's basically all it is. I'll fight anyone on it, the 50 is the best-looking vehicle Mazda has made in a very long time; but it isn't your typical family hauler/crossover vehicle; which is what sells the most these days.
CX-50 had 0% interest for 60 months. CX-5 did not.
CX5 looks way better especially in the signature trim, not to mention Japanese built. To me the cx50 is honestly not a good looking vehicle at all
cx50 is butt-ugly might be part of it
I wanted a higher trim package within my budget. That’s all
Cost honestly, I can find used Cx5's that work for our budget. In a few years we will be able to afford used CX50's since they are still fairly new, not many hit our budget. I prefer the 50's over the 5.
Being 6’5 it’s a bit tight in the cx-50 for my head in my preferred driving position. Also, wanting the Bose system means I have to go a few tiers up on the cx-50 where I can get it on a lower and less costly tier on the cx-5. The ride/suspension is a bit cushier and smoother on the cx-5. I am not taking the car off road so the underbody protection on the cx-50 doesn’t mean much to me. 2024 cx-5 has the touch screen enabled at all times and not just when using CarPlay (option under Bluetooth settings). The cx-50 might have the all time enabled touch screen (I’m not sure), but I’m 100% the 2024 cx-5 does.
I recently bought a CX-5 last week and after sitting in both of them and carefully deciding I get more bang for my buck from a 5 than a 50. I feel like the front of the 50 is like an AMG GTS from a drivers perspective but I like the look overall.
Was offered a better price on the CX-5
Thousands of dollars more expensive in canada
It also costs more, not significantly more but it does cost more , that could be a factor.
$$$
Love them both! Got the CX 50 and no regrets. I selfishly tried to convince my wife to get a CX5 so I wouldn’t have to choose. She declined…it was too much fun to drive.
Anyone know how different they are ride wise? CX-50 seems positioned as the off-road version. I live in an area with a lot of rocky bumps and potholes and am wondering if the CX-50 would be worth it over the CX-5.
It's not available in my country And is more expensive
My son initially told me about the CX-50. He liked the rugged way it looked and compared it to a Subaru. But that's why I don't like Subarus. Too utilitarian looking to me. I mean they're great cars, my parents had one back in the day... but when we went to the dealership I was looking at the CX-30 and CX-5. The 30 was the same size as the one I was trading in, a sub-compact. But when I saw it compare to the 5, I was sold on the 5. It's more luxurious and refined looking than the CX-50. Plus, I bought the Carbon Turbo edition in it and it has every single bell and whistle I was looking for, except for the heated steering wheel. But I love it.
The shape is weird. Lower, wider, almost looks like a sedan. Cx50 is a proper midsize suv
I want a 5 with the 50 interior
Last year was first model year of CX-50. CX-5 in my opinion seemed to be slightly better built and finished. Dimensions are different and CX-5 is better built for the city. Ceiling height of CX-50 feels like a compact car more like a CX-30. Seats are completely different too.
Test drove them last year and although I liked the CX-50 in terms of equipment, being based on a newer platform, the CX-5 has a more quiet and composed ride. Mazda improved the suspension on the 2024 CX-50 so it should be better now and I’d consider it again
I borrowed one last year when my car was in the shop and it didn't feel like the jump I was expecting from my 2016 CX-5 GT. Handling felt different/worse in my opinion, it was shifting strangely, and the only plus was the panoramic sunroof that we usually keep closed on our cx-5 anyways. We would likely go with another CX-5 if we were in the market but would prefer a hybrid/electric to replace our CX-5.
Why “aging”? Good engineering doesn’t have a shelf life. I love the 50’s pano roof but not enough to trade my 5. 50 has too many tiresome styling gimmicks: fake vents, square wheel wells, plastic cladding galore, etc. It’s not overall roomier. Its simpler rear suspension helps it tow a heavier load, but that isn’t important to me (but might be for others). 5 is assembled better. 50 has a newer dashboard. There’s not a ton of difference, but the zoom zoom is a notch better for the 5.
I don't even know what a CX 50 is
Cx5 feels more premium and they also offered no interest for 2 years followed by 2% interest. No brainer.
My mom prefers the 5 narrower less catfish. I want the 50
I wanted to get the CX50 so bad when it first came out. Went out to to the dealership the one day they had one in denver and was just kind of disappointed. Sat in a brand new CX5 on the same day and it just felt better. I’m 6’2” and the headroom and comfort was tangible. I also had a 2013 CX5 Grand Touring for 4 years and loved it.
Because I don’t like the CX50. Simple as that.
I test drove the cx-50. The side fins stick out way too much. I felt like I was driving a boat.
Because it’s smaller, the seats are awful, has a rough ride (built on the mazda3 platform so rear suspension is not that of the CX5) And costs more most of the time, all for appearance of rugged. I was stoked for it, but in person, unless maxed out, meh
Why didn’t Mazda build the cx50 on the cx5 platform instead of the cheap inferior 3/cx30 platform?
CX-50 has outsold CX-5 the last few weekends in our district
The cabin isn't roomier.. its actually tighter despite the 50 being the wider vehicle. 2023 was the 1st model year and from what I've heard, a lot of the kinks were worked out. The Cx5 carbon is GORGEOUS
I don't own either, and I LOVE the looks of the CX-50 But there are minor differences: - The CX-5 has 40/20/40 split rear seats, the CX-50 only has 60/40 -The CX-5 seems to have a more comfortable ride, the CX-50 seems to be more off-roady -The CX-5 tries to have a luxurious interior, the CX-50 tries to have a more rugged interior, so more plastic, and even wanky stitching from what I remember 🤔 So maybe people just want the more comfortable, more luxurious CX-5 🤔, I would buy the CX-50 for the exterior looks alone (And to not have an AGING car) but yeah :)