Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
SUVs Crossover SUV Comparison
6790 messages, Last post on Oct 02, 2008 at 1:59 PM
You are in the SUVs Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & tidester
|
|
|---|---|
|
I didn't realize the retuned engine and new 5-speed Auto had improved its mileage so significantly. 21/27 for the automatic, 22/28 for the manual, vs 19/24, 19/25 for the 2007 model. That bump is enough to warrant a second look by some people, but Mazda doesn't advertise this car well, so I doubt anybody knows. I sure didn't until reading an MSN article today. In comparison, the I4 Kia Rondo is rated 19/24, while the V6 Rondo is rated 18/24. Compared with other midsize vehicles which seat 5 (or 7 in rare cases here), the Mazda is very competitive with mileage, although there is no AWD or V6 option. I'll use only Automatic models, to be fair, but since no others offer a mini-minivan, I'll use 2WD CUVs, with the smallest engines, if possible. Hybrid models cost more than a Mazda5, so I won't compare those either. MAZDA5 - 21/27 Ford Escape (2.3L) - 20/26 Honda CR-V - 20/27 Hyundai Santa Fe (2.7L) - 18/24 Hyundai Tuscon (2.0L) - 19/25 Jeep Patriot/Compass (2.0L, 2.4L) - 23/27, 21/25 Mitsubishi Outlander (2.4L) - 20/25 Nissan Rogue - 22/27 Pontiac Torrent (Also Chevy Equinox) - 17/24 Saturn Vue (2.4L) - 19/26 Scion xB - 22/28 Subaru Forester - 20/26** Suzuki Grand Vitara - 17/22 Toyota RAV4 (2.4L) - 21/27 **The Subaru is only available with AWD The only model that could match the Mazda's seating and economy would be the RAV4 2.4L with the optional 3rd Row. EDIT: Added Subaru Forester |
|
|
Replying to: knr5 (May 20, 2008 7:35 am) The Outback is a bit nicer, with things like a padded headliner and nicer carpeting. You can get a twin moonroof, and the doors are still frameless. The turbo gets a little more boost so it makes more power, but at higher rpm. The Forester is lighter and shorter, so it feels a bit more tossable. It has more ground clearance and better approach and departure angles. The moonroof is one single huge glass pane, and it now has door frames. Drive them both. You sit a little higher in the Forester and it's a bit smaller on the outside, but inside the amount of space is similar. In the cargo area, the Outback's is longer but the Forester's is taller, so consider what you carry. I prefer the Forester. We owned a 98 and I still miss it. We needed more space (lots more) so we got a Minivan. The wife still drives an 02 Legacy, similar to your Outback, and she now wants a Forester, so we ordered one. We've owned both, and both of us prefer the new Forester, FWIW.
|
|
|
Replying to: thegraduate (May 20, 2008 7:51 am)  To be honest the old one already got much better than the EPA figures suggested, from what owners reported here in the forums. I would add the Forester to your list, which gets 20/26 even with AWD.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (May 20, 2008 8:05 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: thegraduate (May 20, 2008 8:12 am) aviboy: any more info? Hard to believe a trans alone would yield that kind of improvement.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (May 20, 2008 8:14 am) MSN reports "engine retuned" for 2008. Mazda5 (base price: $18,630): 21/27 mpg (city/highway) Most minivans are maxi in size, but the Mazda5 deserves the name. It's the only European-style compact van sold in America, with zippy handling and room for six adults. When the Mazda5 was first released, its fuel economy was disappointing, barely better than full-size minivans. For 2008, however, a new five-speed automatic transmission and retuned engine significantly boost the 5's mileage. That makes this ultra-affordable hauler worth another look, especially for families on a budget. - per MSN
|
|
|
Replying to: thegraduate (May 20, 2008 8:18 am) I would have taken another look at it, but I still think I needed more space at the time. Still, I'm sure it will help sales with prices for oil now.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (May 20, 2008 8:23 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: thegraduate (May 20, 2008 8:27 am) Mileage was one thing that didn't necessarily turn me off, but didn't draw me to it, either. The issue I had was all 3 rows are coach seating, i.e. all are tight if you use all 3 rows. I also didn't like that they don't bring AWD to the USA, no power sliding doors, no 2nd row bench (for 5 passengers with leg room), plus I didn't like the arm rest for the driver. I drove one at Mazda's Zoom Zoom Live event and it was actually very fun to drive. It's small and light enough to feel more like the Mazda3 it's based on than an SUV.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (May 20, 2008 8:54 am) Trust me, at 6'5", I noticed that as well. The lack of power sliding doors or AWD really wouldn't bother me, since this is essentially no more of a van than the 1995-1998 Honda Odyssey was. Actually, that's not a bad comparison. Both had 2.3L ~150 hp engines, and had enough room for 6 medium to small size people, although under the new EPA standards the 1998 Odyssey had fuel economy of 19/24.  
|
|
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2009 GMC Acadia
2009 Mitsubishi Outlander
2009 Subaru Forester
2008 Hyundai Santa Fe
2009 Ford Taurus X
2009 Toyota RAV4
2009 Nissan Rogue
2009 Saturn VUE
2009 Dodge Journey
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
