Any Comparisons with upcoming Mazda CX-50?

[Warpious]

So its a Mazda Sorrento Crosstrek...

Sponsored

 

[Osco]

The 2.5 turbo in that thing, I like that. Most of the small SUVs out there super wimpy engines.

My Base model’s 1.5L does not feel wimpy. It simply gives me what I ask for.

 

[AWSD]

Out of curiosity, a while back I placed myself on a call list at my local Mazda dealer for the CX-50. Today I got a call saying a factory rep is bringing one in for a demo on March 22nd. I plan on going and will report back my in-person experience for any that are interested. Lots of pictures for sure. Check back after March 22.

 

[Stustang05]

There is just no way I’d ever buy this instead of a BS. The styling alone is enough.

 

[AWSD]

I'm writing this for those that are not 100% set in stone on their BS order like I am. I've had a BL on order since December and have a production week of May 9th. I have been interested in both vehicles since release.

So today was the day. I got to see a CX-50 in-person, no test drive. Disclaimer, I have seen both a BS and now CX-50 in-person so I am strictly giving my opinion with the statements below without having test-driven either. Also, the pictures were the best I could get with other people looking. I did snap some pictures of spec sheets for a deeper comparison.

1.) Outside Appearance. Both will obviously appeal to different tastes. While the BS is boxier and more truck-like. The CX-50 definitely looks more rounded, wider, and sportier. The CX-50 is significantly longer and wider than the BS. The roof does sit much lower on the CX-50 making access to the roof rack/cargo much easier if you are vertically challenged. The CX-50 does look like a lot of other car shapes out there while the BS is more unique looking. Like everything, we all have opinions.

***The engine has a cover***?

2.) Interior Quality. Hands down the CX-50 has a much higher quality and refined interior. The leather seats were super plush and comfortable. Sitting in the driver's seat felt like I was in the cockpit of a fighter jet (yes I have sat in one of those). I assume a long rip would feel much more comfortable in the CX-50. The interior I saw was black leather with a terracotta orangish stitching throughout, looked really good. For the money you would pay for either a BS or CX-50, I think you're getting your money's worth with the Mazda interior.

No matter what trim level you get, all the floor is carpet. No rubber floor option like on a BL. You can get rubber mats throughout the passenger area as well as rubber seatbacks and cargo try.

***The dual-zone climate controls have a temp display screen***
***The engine start button has a green light***

3.) Cargo Space. The BS has more cargo space due to the safari-style roof, but not by much. The CX-50 does have a much longer cargo area when the rear seats are down. When down, the entire floor is flat, with no up angle or changing the rear floor to make it level like in the BS.

4.) Infotainment. Mazda has the leg up here as well, the 10.5-inch display is controlled by a dial/mouse that is placed on the center console by the shifter knob, no touch screen. Using it while not looking down was a breeze, with zero lag from input to the response. It also has wireless car play for apple and android, something later BS years will get when they decide to put Sync 4 in. The CX-50, at a certain trim level, also has a Heads Up Display (HUD) that projects about 3 inches up on the windshield just above the instrument panel. The HUD can display speed and directions from the navigation system, pretty sick if you ask me.


5.) Towing Capacity. The non-turbo model is the same as a non-BL, 2000lb. However, the turbo version of the CX-50 has significantly more towing capacity than a BL, 3500lb.

Attached are some spec sheets with comparisons to competitor models in the same segment. There is a comparison between the CX-50 non-turbo to the BS OB.

All this said, for me and my family lifestyle/interests, along with what I personally like in a car, I might sway toward the CX-50 after seeing one. We love the outdoors, but do not go hardcore offroading. We live in San Diego, so most of our outdoors is going to the beach, hiking, and driving to Big Bear or Mammouth in the winter. 95% pavement. We want to start taking some longer trips to Yosemite and Tahoe so cabin comfort will come into play.

I know it's not the best right up on comparison, but hopefully, it gives those that are on the fence a little more data to make their decision. Let me know if you have any questions and I'll do my best with the info I got from the factory rep.

 

[thekingprawn]

Nice looking station wagon.

 

[kino]

I'm writing this for those that are not 100% set in stone on their BS order like I am. I've had a BL on order since December and have a production week of May 9th. I have been interested in both vehicles since release.

So today was the day. I got to see a CX-50 in-person, no test drive. Disclaimer, I have seen both a BS and now CX-50 in-person so I am strictly giving my opinion with the statements below without having test-driven either. Also, the pictures were the best I could get with other people looking. I did snap some pictures of spec sheets for a deeper comparison.

1.) Outside Appearance. Both will obviously appeal to different tastes. While the BS is boxier and more truck-like. The CX-50 definitely looks more rounded, wider, and sportier. The CX-50 is significantly longer and wider than the BS. The roof does sit much lower on the CX-50 making access to the roof rack/cargo much easier if you are vertically challenged. The CX-50 does look like a lot of other car shapes out there while the BS is more unique looking. Like everything, we all have opinions.

***The engine has a cover***?

2.) Interior Quality. Hands down the CX-50 has a much higher quality and refined interior. The leather seats were super plush and comfortable. Sitting in the driver's seat felt like I was in the cockpit of a fighter jet (yes I have sat in one of those). I assume a long rip would feel much more comfortable in the CX-50. The interior I saw was black leather with a terracotta orangish stitching throughout, looked really good. For the money you would pay for either a BS or CX-50, I think you're getting your money's worth with the Mazda interior.

No matter what trim level you get, all the floor is carpet. No rubber floor option like on a BL. You can get rubber mats throughout the passenger area as well as rubber seatbacks and cargo try.

***The dual-zone climate controls have a temp display screen***
***The engine start button has a green light***

3.) Cargo Space. The BS has more cargo space due to the safari-style roof, but not by much. The CX-50 does have a much longer cargo area when the rear seats are down. When down, the entire floor is flat, with no up angle or changing the rear floor to make it level like in the BS.

4.) Infotainment. Mazda has the leg up here as well, the 10.5-inch display is controlled by a dial/mouse that is placed on the center console by the shifter knob, no touch screen. Using it while not looking down was a breeze, with zero lag from input to the response. It also has wireless car play for apple and android, something later BS years will get when they decide to put Sync 4 in. The CX-50, at a certain trim level, also has a Heads Up Display (HUD) that projects about 3 inches up on the windshield just above the instrument panel. The HUD can display speed and directions from the navigation system, pretty sick if you ask me.


5.) Towing Capacity. The non-turbo model is the same as a non-BL, 2000lb. However, the turbo version of the CX-50 has significantly more towing capacity than a BL, 3500lb.

Attached are some spec sheets with comparisons to competitor models in the same segment. There is a comparison between the CX-50 non-turbo to the BS OB.

All this said, for me and my family lifestyle/interests, along with what I personally like in a car, I might sway toward the CX-50 after seeing one. We love the outdoors, but do not go hardcore offroading. We live in San Diego, so most of our outdoors is going to the beach, hiking, and driving to Big Bear or Mammouth in the winter. 95% pavement. We want to start taking some longer trips to Yosemite and Tahoe so cabin comfort will come into play.

I know it's not the best right up on comparison, but hopefully, it gives those that are on the fence a little more data to make their decision. Let me know if you have any questions and I'll do my best with the info I got from the factory

Thanks for all the information. Very helpful.

 

[Escape2Bronco]

No crap to toss from here. People should get what ever floats their boat. Mazda makes a nice vehicle as do most manufacturers today. Looks like a lot of vehicle for not much more than the Outer Banks. Again, it all depends one what you are looking for. I’m more than happy with my BS Badlands, but then I was looking for a replacement for a 16 year old Escape since my 2 door Badlands is years out due to allocations.

 

[Big Kahuna]

All this said, for me and my family lifestyle/interests, along with what I personally like in a car, I might sway toward the CX-50 after seeing one. We love the outdoors, but do not go hardcore off-roading. We live in San Diego, so most of our outdoors is going to the beach, hiking, and driving to Big Bear or Mammoth in the winter. 95% pavement. We want to start taking some longer trips to Yosemite and Tahoe so cabin comfort will come into play.

⚠⚠⚠ CAUTION, THREAD JACK AHEAD!!! ⚠⚠⚠

Have you ever tried axe throwing?

I just thought it was funny that all the places you listing that you and your family like to travel, are places where my local axe throwing company has shops. Well maybe not Yosemite per se, but his first shop is located in Oakhurst which is only 17 miles from Yosemite.

When you make it out to Yosemite, let me know!

 

[thegadgetfish]

Great writeup. I’m surprised at how deep that trunk looks. Reminds me of an outback!

 

[Jess1]

Great writeup. I’m surprised at how deep that trunk looks. Reminds me of an outback!

Indeed. Saw one in the woodlands the other day (had dlr tags on it), and thought it was a variety of the new Outback at first. Kinda generic station wagon (not a bad thing, there).

 

[MaxVelocity]

Mazda builds some solid vehicles. We looked real hard at the CX-5 but the BS won me over in the test drive and looks department. If the BS was not introduced I'm sure that is what we'd be driving now.

 

[gman62]

awesome review

thanks

 

[Renee Soss]

I'm writing this for those that are not 100% set in stone on their BS order like I am. I've had a BL on order since December and have a production week of May 9th. I have been interested in both vehicles since release.

So today was the day. I got to see a CX-50 in-person, no test drive. Disclaimer, I have seen both a BS and now CX-50 in-person so I am strictly giving my opinion with the statements below without having test-driven either. Also, the pictures were the best I could get with other people looking. I did snap some pictures of spec sheets for a deeper comparison.

1.) Outside Appearance. Both will obviously appeal to different tastes. While the BS is boxier and more truck-like. The CX-50 definitely looks more rounded, wider, and sportier. The CX-50 is significantly longer and wider than the BS. The roof does sit much lower on the CX-50 making access to the roof rack/cargo much easier if you are vertically challenged. The CX-50 does look like a lot of other car shapes out there while the BS is more unique looking. Like everything, we all have opinions.

***The engine has a cover***?

2.) Interior Quality. Hands down the CX-50 has a much higher quality and refined interior. The leather seats were super plush and comfortable. Sitting in the driver's seat felt like I was in the cockpit of a fighter jet (yes I have sat in one of those). I assume a long rip would feel much more comfortable in the CX-50. The interior I saw was black leather with a terracotta orangish stitching throughout, looked really good. For the money you would pay for either a BS or CX-50, I think you're getting your money's worth with the Mazda interior.

No matter what trim level you get, all the floor is carpet. No rubber floor option like on a BL. You can get rubber mats throughout the passenger area as well as rubber seatbacks and cargo try.

***The dual-zone climate controls have a temp display screen***
***The engine start button has a green light***

3.) Cargo Space. The BS has more cargo space due to the safari-style roof, but not by much. The CX-50 does have a much longer cargo area when the rear seats are down. When down, the entire floor is flat, with no up angle or changing the rear floor to make it level like in the BS.

4.) Infotainment. Mazda has the leg up here as well, the 10.5-inch display is controlled by a dial/mouse that is placed on the center console by the shifter knob, no touch screen. Using it while not looking down was a breeze, with zero lag from input to the response. It also has wireless car play for apple and android, something later BS years will get when they decide to put Sync 4 in. The CX-50, at a certain trim level, also has a Heads Up Display (HUD) that projects about 3 inches up on the windshield just above the instrument panel. The HUD can display speed and directions from the navigation system, pretty sick if you ask me.


5.) Towing Capacity. The non-turbo model is the same as a non-BL, 2000lb. However, the turbo version of the CX-50 has significantly more towing capacity than a BL, 3500lb.

Attached are some spec sheets with comparisons to competitor models in the same segment. There is a comparison between the CX-50 non-turbo to the BS OB.

All this said, for me and my family lifestyle/interests, along with what I personally like in a car, I might sway toward the CX-50 after seeing one. We love the outdoors, but do not go hardcore offroading. We live in San Diego, so most of our outdoors is going to the beach, hiking, and driving to Big Bear or Mammouth in the winter. 95% pavement. We want to start taking some longer trips to Yosemite and Tahoe so cabin comfort will come into play.

I know it's not the best right up on comparison, but hopefully, it gives those that are on the fence a little more data to make their decision. Let me know if you have any questions and I'll do my best with the info I got from the factory rep.

Great job on your writeup / pics. CX-50 seems to be a slightly better choice overall. The headsup display and other STD and options on CX-50 are better. BS doesn't have front camers in bumper for a true 360 view (like my hubby's 2019 F-150, which strange.) But CX-50 does look more like a sporty station wagon / Subaru type (which, personally dislike; I like the boxier / "beefy" look). And I have to have a "yellow" SUV. I drove for 25 years Dodge Grand Caravans (7 different models / years during that time), and I finally put my foot down; hubby bought what I wanted - 2015 Jeep Renegade yellow). Was willing to wait one more year (supposed to be 2023 models but nixed; maybe 2024) for the hybrid BS. Now the proud owner (as of 3/24) of a BS OB cyber orange.

 

[AWSD]

Great job on your writeup / pics. CX-50 seems to be a slightly better choice overall. The headsup display and other STD and options on CX-50 are better. BS doesn't have front camers in bumper for a true 360 view (like my hubby's 2019 F-150, which strange.) But CX-50 does look more like a sporty station wagon / Subaru type (which, personally dislike; I like the boxier / "beefy" look). And I have to have a "yellow" SUV. I drove for 25 years Dodge Grand Caravans (7 different models / years during that time), and I finally put my foot down; hubby bought what I wanted - 2015 Jeep Renegade yellow). Was willing to wait one more year (supposed to be 2023 models but nixed; maybe 2024) for the hybrid BS. Now the proud owner (as of 3/24) of a BS OB cyber orange.

What blow's my mind is how Mazda made a vehicle that is physically bigger than the BS by a lot but manages to have less cargo room. The culprit is that the CX-50 has a much lower height to keep the Mazda sporty handling on road. The safari-style roof on the BS really is nice and adds a lot of functionality in a smaller package. I was really on the fence for a lot of the reasons you mentioned (more STD options, more tech, much higher quality interior). But I can't get over the significantly higher price. All four dealers I talked to in SoCal were pushing 50K with their bogus ADMs. I'll gladly take ownership of my BL, hopefully in late June!

Sponsored