I own a 2024 Mazda CX-5 and I really love it. It was my first expensive car. The pricing, style, and great features of the base trim made me a big fan of Mazda. I need to upgrade our second car soon and I’m looking for something slightly bigger but not going into the medium SUV range. I test drove both the CR-V and the Mazda CX-50.
The CR-V has great reviews but I wasn’t too impressed, especially compared to the CX-50. I’m actually curious if I’m missing something about the CR-V!
Here are some pros and cons I noted:
Pros of the CR-V:
- The boxy shape gives a lot of vertical space and some horizontal space too. The second row is super spacious and the trunk is normal sized. Most of that horizontal space goes to the second row while the CX-50 seems more balanced. I’m 5’7" and don’t want to stack stuff in the trunk much.
- The hybrid engine in the CR-V feels more refined than the hybrid in the CX-50. There’s less noise and it uses electric power more often at low speeds. Plus, the CR-V has tech to lessen the CVT noise when you accelerate quickly.
- The lane-keeping assist in the CR-V is more advanced. Mazda’s CX-50 just has lane departure warning. It seems odd that Mazda hasn’t added better lane tech from their CX-70/90 by now.
- The driver’s seats in the CR-V are really comfy. I loved them right away, while I needed some time to adjust to the seats in the CX-50.
Cons of the CR-V:
- The exterior is less stylish due to its boxy shape, and the interior has cheaper materials compared to Mazda.
- The 1.5T gas engine is loud. It has enough power but reminds me of the 2023 Nissan Kicks I test drove before. The non-turbo CX-50 engine is like the CX-5. For the CR-V, it’s too expensive for that noisy engine. I leaned more toward the hybrid trims, but it was more of a necessity.
- I’ve read reports that the CR-V hybrid’s gas mileage isn’t as good as the Mazda CX-50’s.
- The price is higher. The ads say one thing, but AWD costs extra and the trims feel basic, pushing you to upgrade for wanted features. The base hybrid starts at $37.5k with just a 7" touchscreen. Why not have a 9" screen by 2025? Meanwhile, the base CX-50 is $36k and has that plus a wireless charger and spare tire. Plus, the CX-50 has lower demand, so you might end even with lower total prices.
I liked the CR-V but it feels like Honda knows they can charge more because they sell well. I think it will hold higher resale value later, but it annoys me a bit since the brand keeps some of that money without offering much in return. If their sticker prices were closer, I might feel differently.
What am I not considering about the CR-V? Besides the extra space for passengers, which could be a big deal if you have tall passengers. At 5’7", I feel okay with the space in the CX-50.