Last post on Aug 22, 2010 at 7:13 PM
You are in the Mazda Mazda5
What is this discussion about?
Mazda MAZDA5, Kia Rondo, Car Comparisons, Car Buying, Wagon
#508 of 859 Re: 5 vs Rondo [lavrishevo]
Jun 26, 2008 (7:15 pm)
Good stuff, glad to see a happy big Rondo brother owner. Several of my neighbors have Sedonas, so it should be a good bet. To me, as I said before, it is still a KIA. (and I agree with the consumer reports you talk about, but still...). Many people here will argue, well you own a Mazda, and they are right, not a BMW, but good and original enough
You are posting good KIA brand information in your post response so no issues there, but I have only one disagreement in the following comment: "the Rondo is probably a safer car". I'm not sure what are the basis for that conclusion, but below here are some reasons why I think is not the case:
Mazda5 Wins Highest Crash Safety Rating from EU and Japanese New Car Testing Agencies:
And here is what a forum member (mfuchs2004, who is not a Mazda5 owner) replied some time ago:
I have an extensive background in industrial safety, with a focus on chemical safety. Here are some points to ponder -
1. Mazda 5 is a very safe car on crash tests for adults:
NHTSA has a matrix for testing car safety that looks at a variety of factors. One of the most significant factors that may cause a vehicle NOT to be tested is that it has recently rec'd high scores on the Euro and Japanese tests (and the vehicle is structurally the same model). Doesn't mean it won't ever be tested, but it drops way down the waiting list. I think this is good gov't policy, and puts untested cars through the system sooner than might otherwise be the case.
2. Mazda 5 is very safe for children in appropriate restraints:
I agree that the lower child rating on the Euro test is procedural NOT the result of inadequate protection. The Euro test automatically deducts safety points for lack of clear labels, poorly marked electrical connections, etc. The wisdom seems clear - if things are poorly marked, then parents could incorrectly install safety seats, and technicians could inadvertently disconnect air bag sensors.
Jun 26, 2008 (8:28 pm)
Good info coolmazda5. I may stand corrected though from the stats they are so close I would concede the difference is negligible. I put the word probably in there because I did not know for sure. Anyway, I know many will not even test drive a make because of the name of the manufacture. Honestly, if you asked me a few years ago what auto maker I would probably never purchase from it would have been Hyundai / Kia. I did not have high hopes when I went to test drive my van but it was such a pleasure to drive and so comfortable I could not say no. If you get a chance take a look at the Odyssey forum and look at all the transmission problems people are having.
I am glad auto manufactures are getting it together and building much better cars on a whole. Even Ford and GM have some good models now which is amazing. Again, I really have nothing bad to say about the 5, it is a great car. I know my brother loves his. Don't you hate the tire life on those 17" rims. Look good but show me a tire that will last 30K... You know the funny thing is how many people will line up at the light against the big minivan and get burned.... lol I love it. Of course this is without my family inside....
Take a look at this:
Jun 27, 2008 (8:07 pm)
Wrt. the tires, I've read several complaints on the OEM 17in tires (Toyos Proxes) and I can say that they are not the best, but I check PSIs and rotate regularly and on the 06 (purchased in July 05) the tires are still around 1/2-2/3 of life. I admit, not put many miles a year but I'm sure I will change them not due to the worn tread, but due to their age as tires lose quality after some years...
As per minivans kicking butt, I'm no longer into racing mine (nor does my wife, that is for sure), but people movers rock, check this out. That one really burns, so stay out of the way
#512 of 859 Wanna chime in here...
Jun 30, 2008 (12:21 pm)
Honda and Nissan owner here, so no vested interested in either a Kia or a Mazda. Even so, my brother owns a Mazda 5 ('08 Navy Blue Grand Touring) and that is one BAD car! Like bad as in REALLY good. The thing never ceases to impress me! I drive his 5 at any chance I get. Good thing he knows I like it, so he lets me drive it anytime I'm around. Recently went on a road trip with him, his wife and my wife, and all 4 of us were impressed with the car - peppy performance, great handling, brakes, seats, leather, sound system, cool and useful features everywhere, good looking, great mileage and more. Never thought of owning a Mazda before but I'm seriously considering trading in my wife's 07 CRV for the 5. It's that good!
On the other hand, my cousin owns a new 2008 Kia Rondo EX. He loved my brother's car, and wanted to get something like it but without copying him (self esteem issues). So he went for the Rondo. He likes his car. Overall, he's happy with it. But, he often mentions how my brother's 5 is better, and how he would've loved to have bought that car instead, but just didn't want to seem like a biter (issues). And, we all have to agree. Just like "Nissmazlover" is saying, the 5 is just a better car. There's no denying it. Sorry.
The Rondo's an alright car (comfortable, decent engine, nice sound system). But it just doesn't seem as high quality as the 5, or drive as nice, or ride as nice, or look as good, or feel as good, it's not even as economical or have as many features as the 5. Even though it's comfortable and seats one more person, it just doesn't seem as comfortable as the 5 - i love the middle row captain's chairs, and 3 adults in the middle row seat of a Rondo are not comfortable! I love driving my bro's 5, but after driving my coz's Rondo a few times, I wouldn't care about driving it ever again. I wouldn't go as far as to say that it sucks but, to me, there's no comparison - and the Rondo's cheaper price doesn't compensate for it.
Now, the Rondo's alright. If you absolutely need space for 7 and want to pay a few dollars less, then go with the Rondo. If not, then go with the 5. It's just better. Now, don't go jamming down my throat like you did with Nissmazlover (poor guy). Just wanted to add my two cents in.
Can you Mazda 5 guys out there convince me even more into trading in my CRV for the 5? I'd like to hear what you have to say. And, Rondo owners, what is the absolute best deal you've gotten for your cars? Maybe if it's a LOT cheaper, then I'd think about it.
#513 of 859 Re: 5 vs Rondo [coolmazda5]
Jun 30, 2008 (3:03 pm)
I've read those safety reports before, and they are interesting, but they measure different things than we do in the USA, so comparing a NHTSA report on a US spec Rondo to EuroNCAP report on a EU spec Mazda could be like comparing apples and oranges.
I wish the Mazda5 NHTSA ratings were published for comparison purposes to the NHTSA crash ratings for the Rondo.
Here's an excerpt from the NHTSA FAQ concerning comparing different organization results;
"Note: Each organization's rating results are generally for vehicles sold in its respective country or region. Vehicle specifications, and therefore crash results, may vary between countries. As such, comparing the rating results for a similarly named vehicle model from different countries should be done with care, as there can be differences in the rating protocols and rating systems as well as the vehicle model itself."
Interestingly, the 2008 Comparison of Insurance costs does compare both vehicles. With 100 being average, Mazda got a 90 (better than average) and Rondo got a 66 (much better than average)(In this test, lower is better meaning that Rondo had collision costs 34% below the average, and Mazda 5 was 10% below the average). While the test does not reflect injury potential, it does reflect what the insurance companies pay out based on historic figures for the two vehicles compared to an industry average.
Full report here;
#514 of 859 Re: Wanna chime in here... [nycdriver1]
Jun 30, 2008 (3:04 pm)
I think you already sounded convinced for trading in for a Mazda5 , but...
For what is worth, when I bought my 06 Mazda5 I also test drove an 05 CR-V. As you may know during that time the Honda CR-V was also offered with manual transmission, which my wife likes, so we gave it a look. Good looking car, manual transmission, OK engine and great fuel economy but a) it was an SUV and it was too "tall" for wife. In addition, she thought the interior was not as functional as the Mazda5 one so the Mazda5 won over.
My 08, I traded it for a Honda, and I chose a 2nd Mazda5 based on the experience of my wife's car, something not commonly heard of.
Also, there are many reviews out there, but if you like driver-car engagement, this is the one that tells me the most out of a people mover that price:
But the best part about the 5 is how you feel driving it. Sliding doors? Three rows of seats? It's hard to believe that the 5 can carry six people considering the way that it drives. Due to being so low to the ground it has a sporty ride quality, and its well-damped multi-link rear suspension and nicely weighted, agile steering make it a joy to drive. It also corners flatly, and has surprisingly good levels of grip complemented by strong brakes, and that's not just compared to other minivans, that's in general. If you enjoy driving, I've no doubts the Mazda5 will please you.
#515 of 859 Re: 5 vs Rondo [radar1]
Jun 30, 2008 (3:30 pm)
My only 2 comments are:
1) If we are comparing apples to oranges, why the NHTSA has waived the collision testing for the Mazda5 for so long? Why we don't have already tons of Chinese cars running in the US today just because the China collisions test are safe? NHTSA does look after recognized tests globally including E-NCAP and J-NCAP to prioritize their testing, that is for sure. In other words, comparing those tests may be like comparing red apples with green apples instead, they are not the same but they have common guidelines.
2) Collision costs? Mazda collision parts may be more expensive than KIA collision parts in average, but that does not mean one car is safer than the other. Example: Honda Accord 4 door, it has 99, does that mean the car less safe than a Mazda5?
#516 of 859 Re: Wanna chime in here... [coolmazda5]
Jul 01, 2008 (8:04 am)
That's a great review! I didn't know the doors had electric assistance. I'm gonna have to check my brother's ride to confirm that.
It really is a nice car. I'm really thinking about getting it. And I love the whole thing the reviewer said about "passion" at the end of the article. It's true: You can't put a price on that. Sadly, that is something the Rondo is sorely lacking. The Rondo's is merely functional. Whereas the 5 is not only functional, but stylish, fun and passionate. I don't understand why someone would pick the former over the latter.
#517 of 859 Re: Wanna chime in here... [coolmazda5]
Jul 01, 2008 (8:13 am)
Hey, CoolMazda5m that is a cool review! Thanks for sharing. I think it's spot on.
Also, nycdriver1, I noticed the same thing about the electric sliding assistance. I know my Mazda 5 Grand Touring doesn't have that, so may be it was an oversight or something on the part of the reviewer. Also, thanks for the vote sympathy in your last posting. I appreciate it!
Like CoolMazda5 said, it doesn't sound like you need much convincing about getting the 5 . The only thing I'd worry about, and this isn't my business at all, would be if you'd be upside down on your payments by trading in such a new car for the 5. I mean, part of the appeal of the 5 is that it is so affordable and you feel like you cheated the world or something by buying a car that feels so much more expensive than what it is. Other cars that contain the same things the 5 GT has are so much more expensive. So, the affordability of it all is factored in heavily. Would you still have that if you have to make higher payments than other 5 owners because of the upside down portion of your trade-in? Just something to consider is all. Again, that's your business.
Any Rondo owners out there going to try to convince him to go the Rondo way?