cnet.co/1jvj8Ad It's a tough room for the Mazda CX-5, going up against the Ford Escape, Toyota RAV4, and Honda CR-V. Does Mazda hold its own with that "Zoom Zoom" promise?
The 2016 Hyundai Tucson is (will be) the best SUV in this segment for 2015/2016. It's being released in July 2015 and there are already 120,000 pre-orders here in the US, far outnumbering the total sales of the Mazda CX-5 this year so far. If you haven't seen the 2016 Hyundai Tucson yet, you need to check it out.
I've been watching CX-5 reviews to decide on a car and this guy is posting the same comment every where. The same people like his comment. Very very strange.
He starts off with a lengthy description of the Nav system.....really? I think how the vehicle DRIVES, HANDLES, and BRAKES would take priority over a video tv map.
CNET on cars reviews always focused more on the technologies than the driving characteristics. You would know if you watched more than one video. But I agree with you: a car review should at least contain more than a minute worth of talk on the actual driving bit. It's a car after all, not something you sit in idle.
Missed some things. o auto braking is not new, was on 2014 model. o 185ft-lbs peak is very low 3250rpm, so 1 second faster than CRV of same HP o USB and bluetooth has some serious flaws o only new feature on 2015 wasn't mentioned (advanced fob)
I love Cooley's reviews. My only question is always why aren't the car manufacturers systems faster. Never seem to here the spec's like we do with smart phones or tablets. Why are they so slow from certain companies and why do other's (Chrysler uconnect) continue to impress. Maybe a show just focusing on that point.
What about the hatch?! He didn't talk about it at all. The review of the 2014 said it was "cavernous", and he demonstrated this. I'm a drummer, so this is pretty important. Moving on the next reviewer...
I'm not a big fan of his vehicle reviews. He seems a bit too picky when it comes to vehicles. The 2014 Mazda 3 has top of the line stuff for a compact car yet he thinks there's stuff missing to it. I've looked at many other reviews on Mazda 3 and they all love it yet he finds something he can't be content with.
That's exactly why we love him. Brian provides us with a real-world critical review. If you prefer sugar-coating, try The Fast Lane or Everyman Driver.
Michael Leibowitz Actually, he was quite a bit off on that Mazda3 review, because he devoted so little time talking about the strong driving dynamics of that car. He complained that the transmission was "rubber bandy", even though it isn't more so than other economy class, fuel-efficient cars. He failed to mention the characteristics when using the paddle shifters under manual mode (which is a very strong aspect of the car, due to the improved torque converter lock up time). He failed to mention the increased throttle responsiveness and gear holding capability of the transmission under sport mode, which his GT trim had. In fact, he spent about less than a minute of that review discussing the driving characteristics of the best handling car in the segment, only touching on the "faults", which aren't even really faults. In short, he conveyed a completely faulty impression of the car to the viewers. So yes, he can be quite partial sometimes when it comes to driving the car. He's usually pretty good on the tech bits, which is what CNET focuses on anyway. I love Brian and his humor, but when it comes to actual information on the car, I look elsewhere. Everyone welcomes criticism as long as you are covering all the bases fairly. Cherry-picking faults while ignoring strengths is not being critical; it's just being partial and misleading.
zxbc "CAR TECH" does not focus on driving dynamics. So, I don't even know why you dedicated so much of your comment towards that. His issues with the HUD were the exact same issues I had when test-driving it. So, yes, the "faults" really are faults. "Best-handling car in the segment"? I don't think so. I'd give that to the 2015 Golf, which is what I purchased instead of the Mazda3. You want to know what's misleading? When a reviewer has NOTHING but positive things to say about a car. That's when your bullshit meter should spike.
Michael Leibowitz Actually, "car tech" includes all technologies, not just dashboard technologies. So no, you're the one off on this one. Transmission is a technology element, so is the engine, so is the suspension, braking, body rigidity and aerodynamics. Besides, nowhere does the show say it is NOT about driving dynamics. In fact, every single show has touched on it, even if it doesn't focus heavily on it. As I said, I'm fine with the show focusing on the interior and safety techs, I don't watch the show for driving dynamics anyway. But onto the main issue of the problems. His picking of the HUD and quirks in the infotainment are all legitimate, but his picking of the transmission isn't, which is the only thing I mentioned. If he wants to compare the Mazda3's transmission to a CVT, he should compare every single economy car's automatic transmission to a CVT, because the Mazda3's is one of the best, and one of the farthest away from a CVT in terms of feels (it is actually a lot closer to a dual clutch). So yes, he is misleading the viewer in his assessment of the transmission in what he says and doesn't say. As for the 2015 Golf, you can argue either way. I find the suspension too soft and the steering not as engaging as the Mazda3. I also find the automatic transmission feels a lot less connected compared to the Mazda3's. Combined with the thoughts of the reliability rating of VW, there were enough reasons for me I to buy a Mazda3 instead. But arguing which one is superior in handling is not even relevant, because Brian gave the completely wrong impression on how the Mazda3 drives, especially if you look at his comments on the CX-5 in this video, and his praises for the Mazda6. You seem to think that as long as someone is criticizing a car, he is doing his job as a reviewer. One can be wrong in both praising a car and criticizing a car. Being inconsistent and holding a double standard is the worst crime a reviewer can commit, because it undermines his credibility. I like Cooley a lot and have followed him since before this show even existed. But his biases aren't going to distinguish him from other biased reviewers such as the ones you mentioned that only give positive reviews. You don't get credit for being wrong in different ways.
***** Sure, but again, everyone is entitled to criticize someone else's opinion. You can't hide behind the concept of "opinion" and be irresponsibly wrong. You're just as legitimate a target of criticism as the car you're reviewing.
My 2014 Forester Touring is better than this, when you factor AWD, in terms of snow driving and off-road capability. It got the X-MODE, which lock the differentials for snow or mud and the same button is also used as hill-descent control. The Forester's montly sales are around 13,000 units, which is pretty good for an AWD only vehicle. Even the CVT is better, considering most 4 cylinder CUVs with 6 speed automatic transmissions actually feel like CVTs.
The Forester is not better when you factor mpg, trunk space, cargo space, handling, noise insulation, reliability, quality/fit & finish, and it never made any top 5 lists of compact suvs, nor JD power highest customer ratings like the CX5 has. They both have the same 5 year cost of ownership and the same excellent crash ratings. Now don't get me wrong, my brother-in-law drives a Forester and it's a good car, but one needs to factor in other aspects and needs before bragging about being "better".
Subaru is reliable, and is a Japanese brand. Most Japanese brands do better in reliability and practicality. My Forester Touring with EyeSight is a Top Safety Pick +, and Boxer engines have low center of gravity, unlike many other automakers with inline and V-type engines. Even Consumer Reports highly rates the Forester in every category. In fact the Forester is 2014 Motor Trend Sport Utility Vehicle of the Year.
Don't get me wrong man, I like Subarus and I know Subaru is a Japanese brand, and so is Mazda, but that doesn't guarantee goodness (see Toyota's string of recalls). Forester owners complained about things like cheesy cabin finish & starter issues. Consumer Reports has never been thrilled with the noisy Boxer engine nor CVT, and also highly rated the CX5, Kudos to this year's Forrester, hopefully Subaru addressed the past issues. You forgot power lift gate.
Charles Copeland Yes, I was excited about the latest model Forester until I read about the excess oil consumption. And owners also complained about the "jittery" ride and feeling too many bumps in the road. So I'm back to reading reviews of other small SUVs, wagons, hatchbacks and reading reviews of their dealerships, too. I've liked what I have read about the CX-5, but not the local dealerships and their service departments.
Cooley could review a shopping cart and I would watch it, he's the best on CNET
Its like I hear his voice and all my withdrawal symptoms go away.
two cooley vids in one day? is this heaven
Cooley is THE auto guy at cnet!!
another great review from Cooley!
COOLEY!
The 2016 Hyundai Tucson is (will be) the best SUV in this segment for 2015/2016. It's being released in July 2015 and there are already 120,000 pre-orders here in the US, far outnumbering the total sales of the Mazda CX-5 this year so far.
If you haven't seen the 2016 Hyundai Tucson yet, you need to check it out.
David Bennett I agree. The design on the 2016 Hyundai Tucson is stunning.
David Bennett Japanese cars = tainted with Fukushima and Hiroshima radiation.
I've been watching CX-5 reviews to decide on a car and this guy is posting the same comment every where. The same people like his comment. Very very strange.
He starts off with a lengthy description of the Nav system.....really? I think how the vehicle DRIVES, HANDLES, and BRAKES would take priority over a video tv map.
CNET on cars reviews always focused more on the technologies than the driving characteristics. You would know if you watched more than one video. But I agree with you: a car review should at least contain more than a minute worth of talk on the actual driving bit. It's a car after all, not something you sit in idle.
The King Returns.
Cooley is back!!!!
I'm not a fan of paddle shifters on cvt and automatic transmissions. Kinda strike me as gimmicky, but dual clutch definitely
Better looking than all the competitors imo, maybe they should put a bigger screen in there soon like the size in Mazda3.
Missed some things.
o auto braking is not new, was on 2014 model.
o 185ft-lbs peak is very low 3250rpm, so 1 second faster than CRV of same HP
o USB and bluetooth has some serious flaws
o only new feature on 2015 wasn't mentioned (advanced fob)
Man, that hood sounded pretty harsh!
Why do you not say that the Mac screen is to small
I love Cooley's reviews. My only question is always why aren't the car manufacturers systems faster. Never seem to here the spec's like we do with smart phones or tablets. Why are they so slow from certain companies and why do other's (Chrysler uconnect) continue to impress. Maybe a show just focusing on that point.
What about the hatch?! He didn't talk about it at all. The review of the 2014 said it was "cavernous", and he demonstrated this. I'm a drummer, so this is pretty important. Moving on the next reviewer...
This Guy loves some paddle shifters!
cx5 or rogue?
I'm not a big fan of his vehicle reviews. He seems a bit too picky when it comes to vehicles. The 2014 Mazda 3 has top of the line stuff for a compact car yet he thinks there's stuff missing to it. I've looked at many other reviews on Mazda 3 and they all love it yet he finds something he can't be content with.
That's exactly why we love him. Brian provides us with a real-world critical review. If you prefer sugar-coating, try The Fast Lane or Everyman Driver.
Michael Leibowitz Actually, he was quite a bit off on that Mazda3 review, because he devoted so little time talking about the strong driving dynamics of that car. He complained that the transmission was "rubber bandy", even though it isn't more so than other economy class, fuel-efficient cars. He failed to mention the characteristics when using the paddle shifters under manual mode (which is a very strong aspect of the car, due to the improved torque converter lock up time). He failed to mention the increased throttle responsiveness and gear holding capability of the transmission under sport mode, which his GT trim had. In fact, he spent about less than a minute of that review discussing the driving characteristics of the best handling car in the segment, only touching on the "faults", which aren't even really faults. In short, he conveyed a completely faulty impression of the car to the viewers.
So yes, he can be quite partial sometimes when it comes to driving the car. He's usually pretty good on the tech bits, which is what CNET focuses on anyway. I love Brian and his humor, but when it comes to actual information on the car, I look elsewhere. Everyone welcomes criticism as long as you are covering all the bases fairly. Cherry-picking faults while ignoring strengths is not being critical; it's just being partial and misleading.
zxbc
"CAR TECH" does not focus on driving dynamics. So, I don't even know why you dedicated so much of your comment towards that.
His issues with the HUD were the exact same issues I had when test-driving it. So, yes, the "faults" really are faults.
"Best-handling car in the segment"? I don't think so. I'd give that to the 2015 Golf, which is what I purchased instead of the Mazda3.
You want to know what's misleading? When a reviewer has NOTHING but positive things to say about a car. That's when your bullshit meter should spike.
Michael Leibowitz Actually, "car tech" includes all technologies, not just dashboard technologies. So no, you're the one off on this one. Transmission is a technology element, so is the engine, so is the suspension, braking, body rigidity and aerodynamics. Besides, nowhere does the show say it is NOT about driving dynamics. In fact, every single show has touched on it, even if it doesn't focus heavily on it. As I said, I'm fine with the show focusing on the interior and safety techs, I don't watch the show for driving dynamics anyway.
But onto the main issue of the problems. His picking of the HUD and quirks in the infotainment are all legitimate, but his picking of the transmission isn't, which is the only thing I mentioned. If he wants to compare the Mazda3's transmission to a CVT, he should compare every single economy car's automatic transmission to a CVT, because the Mazda3's is one of the best, and one of the farthest away from a CVT in terms of feels (it is actually a lot closer to a dual clutch). So yes, he is misleading the viewer in his assessment of the transmission in what he says and doesn't say.
As for the 2015 Golf, you can argue either way. I find the suspension too soft and the steering not as engaging as the Mazda3. I also find the automatic transmission feels a lot less connected compared to the Mazda3's. Combined with the thoughts of the reliability rating of VW, there were enough reasons for me I to buy a Mazda3 instead. But arguing which one is superior in handling is not even relevant, because Brian gave the completely wrong impression on how the Mazda3 drives, especially if you look at his comments on the CX-5 in this video, and his praises for the Mazda6.
You seem to think that as long as someone is criticizing a car, he is doing his job as a reviewer. One can be wrong in both praising a car and criticizing a car. Being inconsistent and holding a double standard is the worst crime a reviewer can commit, because it undermines his credibility. I like Cooley a lot and have followed him since before this show even existed. But his biases aren't going to distinguish him from other biased reviewers such as the ones you mentioned that only give positive reviews. You don't get credit for being wrong in different ways.
***** Sure, but again, everyone is entitled to criticize someone else's opinion. You can't hide behind the concept of "opinion" and be irresponsibly wrong. You're just as legitimate a target of criticism as the car you're reviewing.
My 2014 Forester Touring is better than this, when you factor AWD, in terms of snow driving and off-road capability. It got the X-MODE, which lock the differentials for snow or mud and the same button is also used as hill-descent control. The Forester's montly sales are around 13,000 units, which is pretty good for an AWD only vehicle. Even the CVT is better, considering most 4 cylinder CUVs with 6 speed automatic transmissions actually feel like CVTs.
The Forester is not better when you factor mpg, trunk space, cargo space, handling, noise insulation, reliability, quality/fit & finish, and it never made any top 5 lists of compact suvs, nor JD power highest customer ratings like the CX5 has. They both have the same 5 year cost of ownership and the same excellent crash ratings. Now don't get me wrong, my brother-in-law drives a Forester and it's a good car, but one needs to factor in other aspects and needs before bragging about being "better".
Subaru is reliable, and is a Japanese brand. Most Japanese brands do better in reliability and practicality. My Forester Touring with EyeSight is a Top Safety Pick +, and Boxer engines have low center of gravity, unlike many other automakers with inline and V-type engines. Even Consumer Reports highly rates the Forester in every category. In fact the Forester is 2014 Motor Trend Sport Utility Vehicle of the Year.
Don't get me wrong man, I like Subarus and I know Subaru is a Japanese brand, and so is Mazda, but that doesn't guarantee goodness (see Toyota's string of recalls). Forester owners complained about things like cheesy cabin finish & starter issues. Consumer Reports has never been thrilled with the noisy Boxer engine nor CVT, and also highly rated the CX5, Kudos to this year's Forrester, hopefully Subaru addressed the past issues. You forgot power lift gate.
The CVTs is running buyers off. Excess oil consumption on Foresters too.
Charles Copeland Yes, I was excited about the latest model Forester until I read about the excess oil consumption. And owners also complained about the "jittery" ride and feeling too many bumps in the road. So I'm back to reading reviews of other small SUVs, wagons, hatchbacks and reading reviews of their dealerships, too. I've liked what I have read about the CX-5, but not the local dealerships and their service departments.
رائع جدا عندي واحد مثله ماشاء الله رائع
Love mine
2mpg HAIRCUT... LOL...
i get upset when a Cooley video ends... grrrr
The head unit ruins the cx5
DoubleD 613 Agreed - luckily, fixed for 2016
Stick better.
Get a GLA 250 way better car
Meh! mazda 3 is good.
FIRST!
رائع جدا عندي واحد مثله ماشاء الله رائع