[Shiro_SE]

In the dynamics area BMW has lost their way a bit, but they are commercially successful. Ultimately a car company needs to sell cars and they are doing that.

BMW M2 is has incredible power and does handle well, but it's HEAVY!

Z4M Coupe is 700lbs lighter, 120+hp and 130+ft-lbs less powerful , yet is more fun to drive on track. And yes, I have track driven both.

All cars have become victims of modern safety standards, buyers who prefer gadgets and isolation over the actual act of piloting a vehicle. Bloat and disconnected driving experience.

My wife has an AWD 3.3T Stinger, which is very nice inside and fast, but it's not a sharp driving experience. She complains that my Mazda and BMWs have heavy steering. I feel the Stinger is a tad too light in the steering and the rear end is floaty. The 540i is in the middle of the Stinger and the Mazda, comfortable, but controlled. Great highway car, nimble in traffic. It's only downfall is the recirculating ball steering,. It's a bit vague on center and a bit slow to respond compared to the hydraulic rack/pinion of the Z4M. Every car has compromises, and they couldn't fit a rack under the V8.

 

[DCH]

Question to those who have driven both. Is the CX-5 ride more comfortable than the CX-50? I see that the top line trims come in 19" and 20" wheels respectively. I also read some criticism of the CX-50 ride with the 20" being a little harsh. I live in Boston and the roads where I live in Newton are terrible. I prefer the CX-50 looks and slightly extra room, but am concerned that I would only be satisfied with either the 17 or 18" wheels because of ride quality.

I have owned and driven both; 2019 CX-5 Touring (19" wheels) and 2025 CX-50 PP (19" wheels). I can say emphatically that the CX-5 is a bit less firm albeit, IMO, not much less firm.
I knew that the CX-50 would be somewhat firmer as I had rented one a year ago before I purchased the new vehicle. And that trip involved some unpaved mountain roads. Actually, I preferred the firmer ride since the roads required that type of suspension.
So, while the CX-50 does have firmer suspension, I actually prefer it over the CX-5 even though my typical driving conditions now are highways and county roads. Plus, I prefer the heavier steering effort on the CX-50 as it gives a better sense of road conditions. The CX-5 steering was somewhat vague.
It's pretty easy to acclimate to the firmer ride of the CX-50 really.

 

[Expattyke]

I’ve spoken with Mazda dealership mechanics here in Colombia, and when asked which of the two they would choose, they all say the CX-5 because it’s made in Japan. So far, so good. The problem is, I personally like the design of the CX-50 much more.

For those of you who already own a CX-50: if you could go back in time, which one would you choose? I really want to know which one I should buy.

CX-50. Like the styling better, need the room as it’s our travel vehicle, and hit dirt roads fairly regularly, and it’s better at those. For me it compares well to a VW GTI, it handles well, corners like a FWD hot hatch, and that Turbo is astounding. Also I came from a CRV hybrid, with a CVT, a boring car, that drones on mountain climbs, and handles like a pregnant whale. Like the quality of the interior too, puts Honda’s Touring trim to shame. Costs me 10 mpg, but it’s worth it.

 

[dankatz2]

I have owned and driven both; 2019 CX-5 Touring (19" wheels) and 2025 CX-50 PP (19" wheels). I can say emphatically that the CX-5 is a bit less firm albeit, IMO, not much less firm.
I knew that the CX-50 would be somewhat firmer as I had rented one a year ago before I purchased the new vehicle. And that trip involved some unpaved mountain roads. Actually, I preferred the firmer ride since the roads required that type of suspension.
So, while the CX-50 does have firmer suspension, I actually prefer it over the CX-5 even though my typical driving conditions now are highways and county roads. Plus, I prefer the heavier steering effort on the CX-50 as it gives a better sense of road conditions. The CX-5 steering was somewhat vague.
It's pretty easy to acclimate to the firmer ride of the CX-50 really.

Hmm...interesting that the Hybrid version of the CX-50 has a 19" wheel and the non hybrid version has 20" wheels. I am not sure why. While I generally prefer a firmer ride, the roads around my house are so terrible that I almost sold my BMWw with RFT tires...

 

[BigD_CX-50]

I had to quickly replace my totaled TLX TypeS (running out of insurance rental payments). I had mostly driven Accords and couple of earlier Acuras. Unfortunately the Accord no longer had 2L Turbo, so was not sure what to get. Saw the Car&Driver review of 8 compact CUV/SUVs, which the CX50 TPP had won based on the very good power and handling balance. I am getting older and thought getting in and out of a SUV would be easier on my back. Test drove a top of the line Accord Hybrid and my CX50 TP. Obviously the CX50 won. Did not hurt that they had a lot of Black Friday Incentives. Love the dynamics of the CX50, comparable to the TypeS except for raw quickness. Agree with a lot of you about the other competitors in the class. My wife has a RAV4 and my daughter a CRV, both are boring even with nonCVT transmissions.

 

[Black50]

Definitely if I had to buy again,Cx5 would be my choice,I have a 2024 CX50 love everything but the ride quality is questionable,I actually switched to perilli scorpion which seems to help smooth out the ride it rides on 17 inch wheels the I beam rear suspension is a concern,I actually had Mazda pay for new tires because of the ride quality (switched at 1500 miles) I am over 6 feet tall the cx5 was to cramped.i owned it now for about a year with no other complaints,I only driven 4500 in a year

 

[Shiro_SE]

the I beam rear suspension is a concern

It's a twist beam and it is quite well engineered. It's simple, effective, durable and reliable. It's not the suspension geometry and design, but the spring and damper rates that give the firm ride. Would IRS give more compliance? Maybe. Most people can't even, nor care about, the difference. I have owned and driven a lot of miles in both designs, from many manufacturers, and neither really stands out as better at comfort in my opinion. My M Coupe is quite firm and has IRS.

What IRS gives is more traction in extreme situations, because it can keep both tires better aligned with the road surfaces (independently).

 

[Ol Biker]

Look at the first letter of the VIN. If it's a J it's made in Japan. I have the CX-50 and really like it. Mine is 7MM which is made at the Mazda/Toyota factory in Alabama, at least that's what the Internet says. No problems so far. Also it has the 17 inch wheels and rides good. Remember the bigger the wheel the less sidewall and rougher ride. My only complaint is the narrow seats. Made my hip hurt on long trips so I added a pad and lower seat cover.

 

[Black50]

How can you not notice the difference in ride quality

 

[RedCX]

Hmm...interesting that the Hybrid version of the CX-50 has a 19" wheel and the non hybrid version has 20" wheels. I am not sure why. While I generally prefer a firmer ride, the roads around my house are so terrible that I almost sold my BMWw with RFT tires...

I'm guessing due to the heavier weight of the hybrid (hauling those batteries around) needing a bit more sidewall to smooth things out??

 

[Peter T]

I have only test driven a cx5 while I have owned a cx50 (S Premium na) since November -- 8,500 miles so far. The 5 is a little smoother on rough roads because it has independent rear suspension (the 50 has a more primitive torsion beam rear suspension). But the 50 is more off-road capable because it has more clearance. The 5 to me was almost claustrophobic because the interior is so narrow -- I moved my head slightly to the left and it was touching the driver's side window. The 50, on the other hand, is luxuriously spacious inside (except for tall people headroom in the back seats). That was one of the reasons I chose the 50.

Whether you get the 5 or the 50, getting the models with the big wheels, 19 or 20" is going to make the ride rougher than if you get the models with the smaller wheels, 17 or 18". The reason is simple. Within the spectrum of cx5/cx50 wheel sizes, more wheel diameter means less air between the wheel and the road.

 

[Pitts Pilot]

The Macan is the closest vehicle in class to the Mazda CX-50 driving dynamics, that also offers 3500lb towing. Obviously for roughly twice the price, the Porsche is quite a bit better in ride/handling compromises and has RWD power, so it rotates better. The interior is stunning.

Mazdas don't compare to Porsche for interior quality, nor do they aim to. Porsche is consistantly at the top of luxury reliability over the last few decades, up there with Lexus and Acura. Better than Genesis and easily besting the Germans. Buick does pretty well as of late, and I think their styling has come a long way (opinion) as well.

But no Luxury or Premium CUV has better steering feel than the CX-50 other than the Mecan. The CX-5 is also good apparently, but has less body control as it has softer suspension tuning and is limited to 2000lbs towing.

I haven't driven all the competitors, but have read a lot of reviews and comparison tests. I have driven:
2023 Mecan S, it was very good.
2024 Ford Escape ST Active, Bronco Sport Badlands, Lincoln Corsair were all pretty good, but questionable reliability and lack of seat adjustability did them in. Same for the Maverick. Came close to buying, but seats and interior quality were a big step down from Mazda for the same price range.
2024 Hyundai Santa Cruz was on my list of possibilities, but it was too soft for me, drove too sloppy for my daily use. Very nice interior and seats though.

Toyota, Honda and Subaru currently make ugly cars IMO. I couldn't stand the stupid looking steering wheel in Genesis, and the closest dealer is over 150km from my house. Too many CVTs in many of the competition too.

I only considered conventional automatics with proper gears, even if they were DCTs. Mazda's SkyActive 6sp is quite well built and the 2.5T gets a very robust version with more planet gears, bigger carriers, thicker gears and shafts.

Excellent comparative review. I agree, especially for the $$, the 50 turbo is the best looking and handling in it’s class. Three years with mine and still love driving it every time. Although not miles on it, it has been very reliable so far.

 

[Shiro_SE]

How can you not notice the difference in ride quality

I didn't say there was no difference in ride quality. Just stated that IRS does not determine ride quality. It has only a small part of ride quality, springs and dampers have much more influence.

The Mazda3/CX-30/CX-50 torsion beam could be categorized as 'semi-independent' as it has designed in flex (torsion) to allow some movement across the axle. It's quite clever, when properly designed and eliminates not just the multiple arms of the IRS suspension, but also another component: the anti-sway bar.

 

[Black50]

I have only test driven a cx5 while I have owned a cx50 (S Premium na) since November -- 8,500 miles so far. The 5 is a little smoother on rough roads because it has independent rear suspension (the 50 has a more primitive torsion beam rear suspension). But the 50 is more off-road capable because it has more clearance. The 5 to me was almost claustrophobic because the interior is so narrow -- I moved my head slightly to the left and it was touching the driver's side window. The 50, on the other hand, is luxuriously spacious inside (except for tall people headroom in the back seats). That was one of the reasons I chose the 50.

Whether you get the 5 or the 50, getting the models with the big wheels, 19 or 20" is going to make the ride rougher than if you get the models with the smaller wheels, 17 or 18". The reason is simple. Within the spectrum of cx5/cx50 wheel sizes, more wheel diameter means less air between the wheel and the road.

I agree with you 100%,that's the same reason I purchased the 50.The 5 was to uncomfortable and just not enough of room.The 50 hits the sweet spot not to small not to big.My rides on 17 inch and I switched to a perilli scorpion plus which help about 70% have no plans on taking the payment queen off road anytime soon😁

 

[Frankiestoys]

.

 

[svahadean]

I agree, can’t see using these vehicles for anything serious off road ... these are not built for anything punishing

Hence my continued use of the term urban-adventure for this so-called adventure vehicle; glorified grocery-getter, or at most, transport your bikes to the trailhead, or your kayak to the launch-point, or drive to the lake and set up the rooftop tent -- nothing too intense.

Though, that being said, I'm going to drive the Valley of the Gods and Moki Dugway this summer. It's not rock-crawling or primitive backroads, but it will be a test of the adventurous nature of the vehicle. It'll be on the stock Goodyear Assurance tires as well.

 

[Peter T]

I agree, can’t see using these vehicles for anything serious off road . I purchased mine solely on wet weather or snow ability…these are not built for anything punishing

This past winter I was able to confirm that my 50 is a good snow car, even with the stock Assurance tires. I don't try to do any serious off-roading or anything very punishing, but every year we do wind up on dirt/gravel roads in the mountains where AWD and a little extra clearance are required. I'll find out more in July how my 50 does for those situations. We have a big Western vacation planned. I'm looking forward to replacing the Assurance with good tires next year; but so far they're adequate (although only just).

 

[TomZoom]

Definitely if I had to buy again,Cx5 would be my choice,I have a 2024 CX50 love everything but the ride quality is questionable,I actually switched to perilli scorpion which seems to help smooth out the ride it rides on 17 inch wheels the I beam rear suspension is a concern,I actually had Mazda pay for new tires because of the ride quality (switched at 1500 miles) I am over 6 feet tall the cx5 was to cramped.i owned it now for about a year with no other complaints,I only driven 4500 in a year

IRS is great when suspension is tuned to move with it. You want a firm sporty ride - IRS will do little to make it comfortable over rough surfaces. This is why very expensive cars have driving modes that adjust suspension. Some are even automatically adaptive based on electronic inputs.

 

[Black50]

So what you saying is if the CX50 had a IRS suspension it would still have a firm ride?

 

[TomZoom]

So what you saying is if the CX50 had a IRS suspension it would still have a firm ride?

Of course it would still be a firm ride. It would be slightly more complaint on bigger hits to the rear suspension, but overall it would absolutely be firm. Plenty of people complained about the CX5 firm ride and it comes with IRS.