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
Wagons Kia Rondo Rondo vs Outlander/Rav4/Santa Fe/Mazda5
271 messages, Last post on Jul 30, 2008 at 12:09 PM
You are in the Kia Rondo Forum. Your Host is kcram
|
Replying to: kech (Dec 03, 2007 10:02 am) Any how, it is nice that Kia offers small (Rondo), medium (SWB Sedona), and large (LWB Sedona). Then again, my reference point is a Sienna. There's nearly 100 cubic feet behind the 2nd row, which means 5 people plus tons of stuff. |
|
|
Replying to: kech (Dec 03, 2007 9:23 am) The Traction Control ans Stability Control are very nice things to have. I do happen to have a Mazda5 and we have been been dealing with snow all last week. I will admit that we have a set of Dunlop Wintersport 3Ds on the 5 and it have performed very well in conditions ranging from compact snow/ice to deep snow. On ice, the traction can be a bit hard to come by, but the Auto allows for starting in second gear which helps significantly. That, along with careful throttle modulation gets it going easily. I don't want to come across as saying that TC and ESP are useless, but I have never had either on a car and have managed to survive winter using careful driving techniques. I also believe that TC and ESP can lull some drivers into a false sense of security. Once the snow starts in my area, a large percentage of accidents are the result of drivers going too fast for conditions (mainly AWD SUVs). I also have driven with and without snow tires (studded and studless) and believe that a good set of snow tires is a good investment for those in snow climates. While TC and ESP may definitely help in those rare, unforseen circumstances, I would still want a good set of snow tires for their superior braking and cornering performance in the nasty stuff. |
|
|
Replying to: kech (Dec 03, 2007 8:44 am) I believe the photo is a good thing and can see you observation. I Like how the driver appears to be relatively short. Only thing I can point out as a Mazda5 owner is that the legroom in a little different than we traditionally think about in the 5. It is the same what with my Toyota ECHO and also with a Mazda 3 that I had for a loaner. The apparent legroom is a bit tight, but the cars are engineered to sit more upright and provide toe space under the front seats. with a full load of adults on board, it is still a bit of a pinch, but that is the compromise of these vehicles. I had researched the Rondo and Mazda5 before buying and the reviews cam across as the 3rd rows being very alike. The Rondo did have more measured legroom, but you sit lower, which is another tradeoff. Both the Rondo and MZ5 are fine cars that fit different needs for people. |
|
|
Replying to: mrbwa1 (Dec 03, 2007 12:45 pm) Rondo:Legroom (front/middle/rear) 41.3 in./38.2 in./31.3 in. Mazda 5 Leg Room, front/2nd/3rd row (inches) 40.7/35.2/30.7 cargo room behind the 2nd row Rondo 31.7 Mazda5 44.4 So there is more legroom in the Rondo, but the opening in the 2nd row of the Mazda5 between the two seats might make is seem less cramped than with the Rondo's 2nd row bench. Plus I doubt if the Rondo's 3rd row passengers will feel any of the AC from the 2nd row vents, but they would in the Mazda5 again, because of the 2nd row captain chairs will allow air to flow between them to the 3rd row. You do get more cargo space behind the 2nd row of the Mazda5, so if you're using it mostly as a 2 row vehicle, then I'd rather have the additional cargo space. It's like my Honda Fit. The Versa has more 2nd row legroom than the Fit, but the Fit has more cargo space behind the 2nd row. Since our family of 4 fit in the Fit just fine, I went with the Fit for the better cargo space. So it depends on if you want the extra legroom inches of the Rondo or extra CuFt of the Mazda5.
|
|
|
Replying to: mrbwa1 (Dec 03, 2007 12:45 pm) With legs elongated and extended downwards, less lateral room is required. The side effects are less comfortable sitting position and tall ceiling. I first noticed this trend of designing also with the Toyota Echo and Matrix. For a relatively small vehicle, there seemed to be a lot of legroom and headroom. However, the styling really suffered as it looked like a loaf of bread with the tall roof line. Subsequently, I noticed the Honda fit, Mazda 5 and Nissan Versa were designed with the same tricks to create legrooms. |
|
|
Replying to: bobw3 (Dec 03, 2007 2:21 pm) Rondo 31.7 Mazda5 44.4 Mazda figures on 2007 for storage was very strange and same on the Canadian site, but now they seem more realistic with the 2008 information as they now state 70.9 cu.ft. with the 2nd and 3rd seats folded which makes more sense when I had actually measured both vehicles. The Rondo is 73.4 cu.ft. for the same area. Passenger cargo room 97.7 cu.ft. for the Mazda 5 and 107.8 for the Rondo. The Rondo 5-seater has storage through to the dash on the passengers side as you can recline the back of the back seat but the 6/7-seater set up is basically the same on both vehicles.
|
|
|
Replying to: 08outtie (Dec 03, 2007 3:18 pm) |
|
|
Replying to: conwelpic (Dec 03, 2007 4:54 pm) And while our Fit has upright seating, it's not any more upright than a minivan or SUV seat, so I'm fine with that.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: bobw3 (Dec 03, 2007 6:02 pm) I've read in another forum about someone selling a washer and dryer set. The seller recounted how the buyer came by in a Rondo and was surprised that the buyer could fit both in the cargo area behind the first row. Not in my wildest dreams did I ever imagine that would be even remotely possible in my own Rondo, so you learn something new every day. When comparing cargo space, you have to remember the different seating arrangements in each vehicle. The Rondo is 2+3+2 (or 2+3 in the five seater) and the Mazda5 is 2+2+2. Let's say there are 4 people in the vehicle and you want to store stuff behind the second row. In the Rondo, you have the option of folding down one seat in the second row to free up additional cargo space. That option, of course, isn't available in the Mazda5. You can probably make use of the space between the second-row bucket seats in the Mazda5, but that space obviously isn't as large or useful as the space created when folding down one of the second-row seats in the Rondo. Now let's say there are 6 people in the vehicle. When I was checking out the Mazda5 earlier this year, it appeared to have more space behind the third row seats than the Rondo. You can probably store a bulky stroller behind the third row in the Mazda5, whereas I can just fit an umbrella stroller behind the third row in my Rondo. With the Rondo, however, you also have the option of folding down one of the third-row seats to free up additional cargo space. In the Mazda5, all seats would have to be deployed. As for how well seven people actually fit in the Rondo, I've posted about this before in much detail (my motto is, why say something in ten words when you can say it in a hundred?). That was in another forum, though. Long story short, sitting in the middle of the second row is comparable in comfort to sitting in one of the third-row seats. That's based on my subjective reading of the whine factor of my passengers. I think we can all agree that, for either vehicle, four people can sit in relative luxury and the additional seating is really for occasional use only. I've sat in the third row in both vehicles and my take is this: the Rondo seems to have more leg room and the Mazda5 seems to have more head room. This is after making adjustments in both vehicles so that the leg room is optimized in all rows. |
|
|
Replying to: 08outtie (Dec 03, 2007 3:18 pm)
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Wagons Kia Rondo Rondo vs Outlander/Rav4/Santa Fe/Mazda5
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2009 Kia Rondo
2010 Mitsubishi Outlander
2009 Hyundai Santa Fe
2011 Toyota RAV4
2009 Mazda MAZDA5
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
