Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Mazda 5 vs Kia Rondo

1151618202128

Comments

  • uzvuzv Posts: 8
    I'm 6 ft tall and currently own Dodge Caravan (short ver) with 7 seats and looking to replace with smaller but 6-7 seat.
    1.
    Visited Mazda dealer and played just with Mazda5 seats for 15 min:
    Adjusted seats to the BEST possible sitting for myself (6ft tall) in ALL rows (1,2,3)
    The result:
    1 row - good
    2 row- so-so : problem with feet (does not fit well under 1 row seat)
    3 row - bad : feet just does not feet under 2nd row seat
    There is solution but for only one foot - to stuck it between
    2nd row seats (other foot has to be cut of to be comfortable)
    So Mazda5 3d row - for kids ONLY.
    2.
    Visited KIA dealer and played just with Rondo seats for the same 15 min:
    Adjusted seats to the BEST possible sitting for myself (6ft tall) in ALL rows (1,2,3)
    The result:
    1 row - good
    2 row- good
    3 row - Ok : head is very close to ceiling
    So Rondo 3d row - Ok for 6ft adults
    IMPORTANT: the main thing is to readjust ALL rows to achieve good result in each row
  • coolmazda5coolmazda5 Posts: 525
    I'm 5'11" and after all the pics posted earlier in this thread, I would not buy either a Mazda5 nor a Rondo based on the ability of myself to seat on the 2nd or 3rd row. My main need is family (with small kids). For 2nd/3rd row adult seating needs I would buy a mercury Grand Marquis or may be a massive minivan. Adults sit on the 2nd and 3row seats 2-5% of the time on my case (mostly 2nd row, which is OK. I own 2 Mazda5s)
  • uzvuzv Posts: 8
    The main point of Mazda/Rondo is to get away from BIG cars and still have ability to take 7 people (of course not every day - but when needed).
    BIG cars as mainstream are dead (only for that ones who do not care about price of gas) - which is well confirmed by almost funeral state of GM/Ford, etc
    It's actually very happy time for US - FINALY to open eyes and see what a mess
    we created in sense of cars we drive
  • bgwbgw Posts: 116
    Uzv said "The main point of Mazda/Rondo is to get away from BIG cars and still have ability to take 7 people (of course not every day - but when needed)."
    Exactly!
    I could have bought an 07 Dodge Caravan but I chose to look at the Mazda5 and Rondo. I bought a Rondo V6, since it is big enough for my family's needs but not too big.
    Good point, Uzv!
  • coolmazda5coolmazda5 Posts: 525
    Uzv said "The main point of Mazda/Rondo is to get away from BIG cars and still have ability to take 7 people (of course not every day - but when needed)."

    :). I did not see that as the "main point", but I understand.

    Keep on mind that the models did NOT show up in 2008 in NA, but is interesting to see how trends change. I bought my first one in 2005 before the gas craze and the theme was more like a "small people mover on a budget", nothing else. My wife is originally from Europe where petrol was already pricey so for her was perfect.

    Now with a $4+ a gallon everybody is turning around to buy them and they are selling well. Don't take me wrong but I see now more people sacrificing comfort by cramping up these cars due to the price and better gas mileage, which is natural.

    I think Mazda and KIA had just luck on the early timing when bringing these models to the NA market :D
  • bobw3bobw3 Posts: 2,997
    It's funny on the one hand because even though people are buying the Mazda5 or Rondo to get better MPG, they'll probably only AVERAGE in the low 20s vs high teens as with a full sized minivan, or save about $700 per year on gas, while their real savings is the $5-10,000 they'll save on the initial purchase price. So they would have saved that at $1/gal gas. If gas was $2/gal they'd save $350/year, so the real gas savings difference from going from $2 to $4 gas is $350/year.

    Again, people are buying them to save $ because of gas but they're really saving because of the lower purchase price, which has nothing to do with the price of gas. In fact, these little cars are being less discounted due to the high gas prices. Anyway, just some thoughts. I just wonder why the same people who say they're buying small because of the gas weren't so worried about the total purchase price when gas was cheap.

    It's even more strange to me to hear someone going from a $40K SUV to a $20K economy car to save gas. They don't even mention the fact that they just saved $20K on the purchase prices, but are more interested in the $20 bucks a week they'll save in gas! Pretty strange logic to me!
  • coolmazda5coolmazda5 Posts: 525
    I've read something similar about the hybrids, especially when you pay the hefty markup nowadays for things like the Prius.

    Hybrid Vehicles Not Best Value According to Edmunds.com
    http://www.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20080- 625005404&newsLang=en
  • uzvuzv Posts: 8
    As price of gas goes up (and most likely it will) - gas savings of small cars will also go up.
    Also it looks like Mazada/Rondo does not have really good MPG - but I think
    they can improve it. I'm less optimistic about MPG improvement for big minivans
    as they had a lot of time to do it with no result. I'm speaking about old fashion improvement (without hybrid). Diesel will also big help as it takes about 30%
    less fuel.
    About less comfort in smaller cars - yes we have to give up comfort that we
    can not afford.
    I think next on funeral list are big houses (and actually not so big like 2500-3000
    sq.ft.) as people will not be able to pay heating and electric /AC bills
  • Karen_CMKaren_CM Posts: 5,030
    A reporter would like to speak with consumers who are thinking about trading in a gas-guzzler for a more fuel-efficient vehicle. If you are in the process of making this decision, please respond to jwahl@edmunds.com with your daytime contact information no later than Wednesday, July 22nd.

    Community Manager If you have any questions or concerns about the Forums, send me an email, karen@edmunds.com, or click on my screen name to send a personal message.

  • conwelpicconwelpic Ontario, CanadaPosts: 600
    Mazda 5:
    June 2008 - 1,281 vs 1,156 for June 2007
    YTD 2008 - 7,848 vs 6,398 for June 2007

    Rondo
    June 2008 - 935 vs 830 for Jun 2007
    YTD 2008 - 5,170 vs 3,445 for June 2007

    for US readers keep in mind that the US market is 9.5 times larger than Canada
  • 5_more5_more Posts: 43
    Also it looks like Mazada/Rondo does not have really good MPG - but I think
    they can improve it.


    My 2008 Mazda 5 gets 29-31 MPG in mixed city/suburban driving on every tank. Including the first two tanks, the lifetime average (~6500 miles) is above 28 MPG -- with only one highway trip of 90 miles. Regardless of what you think, I see a relatively safe, six-seat, 3500 lb., automatic transmission, sub-$20k, 30 MPG vehicle as doing pretty well.

    I'm less optimistic about MPG improvement for big minivans
    as they had a lot of time to do it with no result.


    My 1996 Dodge Grand Caravan averaged around 20 MPG on my annual 3000 mile trip. It's highest ever mileage was 23 MPG -- (later model years did a bit better). My 2007 Toyota Sienna averaged 25.5 MPG on last year's trip and 25.8 MPG this year -- in all cases, the trips included several hundred miles of stop and go traffic in major cities. The high for the Sienna on this year's trip was 29.0 MPG -- topped-off and hand calculated over 400 miles.

    For comparison, the Sienna weighs 4200 lbs, vs. the Dodge's 3700 lbs, it (Sienna) has 13 cu ft more cargo volume, an additional seat, 109 HP more, 8 more air bags and does 0-60 in under 7 seconds.

    So, more power, more weight, better safety AND almost a 30% improvement in mileage. Not bad...

    Drive train efficiency gains cause corresponding percentage improvements in cars and minivans equally.

    Diesel will also big help as it takes about 30%
    less fuel.


    I filled-up this weekend for $3.739 (87 Octane). Diesel was $5.139 at the same station. Dollars/mile, matter to me, not MPG. At these prices, diesel offers no advantage. At a smaller percentage spread, it might, depending on the difference in purchase price between a diesel and gasoline engine, the mileage difference and the difference in repair costs.
  • uzvuzv Posts: 8
    About Mazda5 MPG:
    Spec Manual - 22/28
    Auto - 21/27

    Is your model manual ? You say you get 30 MPG per mile on average.
    It's rather unusual when people exceed spec.

    You also exceeded Sienna spec MPG of 17/23.

    By the way do you know if MPG is calculated with FULL load or other way ?

    I still do not see substantial change in spec MPG for big minivans - during many years they stay mostly the same for the same models.
  • 5_more5_more Posts: 43
    For the Mazda 5, the EPA estimates on the 2008 sticker carry the following foot note:

    Actual Mileage will vary with options, driving conditions, driving habits and [the] vehicle's condition. Results reported to [the] EPA indicate that the majority of vehicles with these estimates will achieve between 17 and 25 mpg in the city and between 22 and 32 mpg on the highway.

    For the Sienna, the estimates on my 2007 sticker were 19/26 with reported ranges of 16-22 city and 22-30 highway (on vehicles with similar ratings).

    2008 testing is different than 2007 and before, so a 2007 and 2008 Sienna will have different EPA ratings, even though they are essentially the same vehicle. See: http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/FEG2000.htm I'm sure you can find more details on the testing there.

    My Mazda5 is an automatic.

    For my trip mileages on the Sienna, I had 5 people in the van, and enough cargo to require fully inflated air bag helpers in the rear suspension (~1000 lbs.) Last year I had 3 bikes and a bike trailer hanging from the back as well.

    My actual fuel economy has exceeded EPA estimates in all but two of my vehicles in the last 20+ years. I don't find it unusual.
  • radar1radar1 Posts: 25
    "Diesel will also big help as it takes about 30% less fuel.

    I filled-up this weekend for $3.739 (87 Octane). Diesel was $5.139 at the same station. Dollars/mile, matter to me, not MPG. At these prices, diesel offers no advantage. At a smaller percentage spread, it might, depending on the difference in purchase price between a diesel and gasoline engine, the mileage difference and the difference in repair costs. "

    Diesel would not show an advantage at those prices, but I think you found a station with extreme prices; extremely low for gas and extremely high for diesel. Today's National average is $4.04 for gas and $4.80 for diesel. Using those figures, diesel cost approx 19% more than gas so if you got 30% more miles from each gallon, your cost per mile for diesel would be cheaper than gas. Of course as you pointed out you would also have to factor in having the extra expense of the diesel engine option and the downside of finding and using diesel fuel.

    John
  • lavrishevolavrishevo Posts: 312
    JUst FYI, the Sienna does not do 0 - 60 under 7 seconds. No minivan comes close to that. 7.8 - 8.2 are the recorded times for stock Sienna. Still fast but not that fast... Compared to my 4.9 in a Mustang GT :)
  • 5_more5_more Posts: 43
    It all depends how it's driven (Sienna). The engine can easily break the tires free in 1 and 2.

    If shifted manually, and if the tires are kept from spinning, a sub-7 second time is possible.

    6.6 seconds
    http://www.autos.com/autos/vans/minivans/acceleration

    7.2 seconds
    http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparison_test/vans/2007_hyundai_entourage_- vs_2007_nissan_quest_2008_dodge_grand_caravan_2007_toyota_sienna_2007_honda_odys- sey_comparison_test+page-5.html

    video in the low 7's, with comments of 6.9
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gadUoJnEzfs

    Other examples are out there.

    Test drive one. You'll be surprised.
  • coolmazda5coolmazda5 Posts: 525
    LOL, I didn't know minivans were that fast. The problem is not how fast they accelerate but how tight they can turn :D.

    Anyhow, regardless, check the Mazda5 acceleration for a 5MT, not bad for a 4cyl people mover.

    Mazda5 Performance
    Engine 2.3 I-4
    Transmission 5-Spd Manual
    Drive System fwd
    Acceleration Summary
    Acceleration, 0-30 MPH 0-30 MPH: 2.85
    Acceleration, 0-40 MPH 0-40 MPH: 4.49
    Acceleration, 0-50 MPH 0-50 MPH: 6.33
    Acceleration, 0-60 MPH 0-60 MPH: 8.53

    Source:
    http://www.intellichoice.com/reports/vehicleReport/vehicle_nmb/17149/section/spe- cs/type/used/2006/Mazda/Mazda5

    Also, some very old Mazda5 video, makes me laugh a little, but great handling
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zU4paH8qcQ8

    And a fast Rondo (Carens). 150mph, 230kmh :surprise:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6hgerWf0yc

    It is funny seeing people doing this to these type of cars, but hey :D
  • 5_more5_more Posts: 43
    Certainly, the 5 is a whole lot more fun around town, and on twisty roads. Cornering is vastly superior on the 5, and it does turn a circle in 2 fewer feet (34.8 vs. 36.8).

    However, for the most part, my 0-60 times, on both vehicles, are in the 10-15 second range. I'd rather get better mileage, have a transmission last an extra 50,000 miles, and have my tires last longer than best a car that I already know I can beat, or prove that I that can take the same curve at the vehicle's limits time after time -- we all get old eventually.

    I took my last Mazda to almost 250,000 miles on the original clutch. I sold the car shortly before that point, but the clutch was still working like new.
  • coolmazda5coolmazda5 Posts: 525
    2008 Mazda5 5-DR. Hatchback w/SAB

    * Frontal Driver Rating: 5 stars
    * Frontal Passenger Rating: 5 stars
    * Side Driver Rating: 5 stars
    * Side Rear Passenger Rating: 4 stars
    * Rollover 2 Wheel Drive Rating: 4 stars

    Chance of rollover 14%
    Static Stability Factor 1.30
    Dynamic Test Result No-tip*
    Drive FWD
    Tire Size P205/50R17

    2008 KIA Rondo 4-DR w/SAB

    * Frontal Driver Rating: 5 stars
    * Frontal Passenger Rating: 5 stars
    * Side Driver Rating: 5 stars
    * Side Rear Passenger Rating: 4 stars
    * Rollover 2 Wheel Drive Rating: 4 stars

    Chance of rollover 13%
    Static Stability Factor 1.32
    Dynamic Test Result No-tip*
    Drive FWD
    Tire Size P205/60R16

    Source:
    http://www.safercar.gov/portal/search?model=7828

    Some videos:
    Frontal crash: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0qPGDrLIsww
    Side impact: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWojbZkAJ0A
    __________________
  • garnermikegarnermike Posts: 72
    ....will get the same Theta I-4 engine as the '09 Optima, which is rated at 175 hp and achieves better mpg (32 mpg hwy). That's a 13hp increase over '07 and '08 Rondo.
    No news on the V-6 yet engine yet, but if it follows Optima form, the hp will go to 190, an 8 hp increase.
  • coolmazda5coolmazda5 Posts: 525
    Is there a manual transmission on that thing finally? With that HP and MT it could definitely attract a different buyer audience
  • bgwbgw Posts: 116
    As much as I love my 07 EX V6 Luxury, I sure wish it had a manual trans. Maybe a 6 speed?
  • conwelpicconwelpic Ontario, CanadaPosts: 600
    I doubt they would put one in, the percentage of the market that buys manual transmission is extremely small, thats why for example when Honda redesigned the CR-V they dropped it as they said it was less that 5% and the sales did not justify it.

    Just use the steptronic feature and get the best of both worlds :) I've had a lot of manuals over my driving career, but would not go back - besides the wife would never drive one.................. :D
  • conwelpicconwelpic Ontario, CanadaPosts: 600
    Mazda 5 - 1,336 units
    Rondo - 2,556 units
  • coolmazda5coolmazda5 Posts: 525
    Well, you may be surprised, especially in Canada. It is kind of interesting that even the Mazda5 GT top trim with all the toys (kind of the Grand Touring in the US) offers manual transmission. And from other forums you can see that there is more demand than supply for them...

    As per the CR-V, yes, the MT was dropped, but because it is an SUV I believe. I tested the 05, one of the last models with 5MT, but my wife thought it was too tall and jumpy (very SUV or small truck if you ask), and we only test drove it because of that, because it had manual transmission.

    Anyway, that is why I mentioned the new target market. I'm sure there are some people out there disappointed with models like the Rondo SX concept that only was shown as automatic.

    As per wives, manual transmission topped the list of mine when buying a Mazda5, she can drive automatic by need (i.e. rental), but cannot stand it, don't ask why :).

    Tiptronic is a nice thing but it cannot compared to a modern manual transmission like the Mazda one, very soft clutch and close ratio gearing, precise shifting and a lot of fun to drive...
  • palkopalko Posts: 16
    I rented a Kia Rondo (2007,v-6) for a weekend trip to the beach @ Presque Isle Park in Erie,pa. The combined city/highway mileage was 23 mpg. Most of the highway was @ 70-75 mph with 3 people and a load of beach gear. This rental had 28000 miles on it and i did notice it had warped brake rotors when hard braking. Other than that it handled well. Far better than my 2004 chevy tracker 4wd. The v-6 had plenty of power. I'm thinking of buying a 2008. Now I'm torn between the 2.4L 4 cyl and the 2.7L v-6. Does anyone have any preference over either one? Plus I'd like to hear any experiences you may have with this vehicle...thanks..palko :shades:
  • conwelpicconwelpic Ontario, CanadaPosts: 600
    as you are trying to decide between a 2.4L or 2.7L Rondo, this question should not be in this thread as this thread is comparing Mazda 5 vs Rondo.
    I would suggest you start a new thread with a suggested title of "Rondo 2.4L vs 2.7L" for example or something similar as I am sure that this is a pretty common question amongst prior owners, I know it was for me. Also that way you question would get a more direct response.
  • maltbmaltb Posts: 3,572
    Or, you could test drive a Mazda5 and make it a ménage à trois
  • uzvuzv Posts: 8
    Had a chance to try Rondo (odometer 12,000 miles) in real life with real load.
    My friend came in 6 cyl Rondo to Cape Code Nikkerson State Park (90miles from Boston) from Toronto.
    Park is located on relativley steep hills and it is very twisty 4 miles from Park entrance to our camp on the very top.
    With 4 adults (3 - 6ft 200 pouns, 1 - 5ft 6in 150pouns) + 3 kids 15 years old (you know they are not very small in US) Rondo (6cyl) did not have any problems going these 4 miles down and up with 7 people mentioned above.
    Handling was Ok (but nothing special), power was more then enough.
    Brakes - no complaints. No feeling that suspension was stressed or overloaded.
    Then trip from Park to Provincetown - 30 miles one way by local hwy with the same load of 7 people at 50 mph.
    Park to Provincetown trip:
    Position-Behind the wheel: No problems passing other cars, handling is predictable (but nothing special). Ride is steady and even. Brakes are fine. Driver seat it comfortable. Visibility - very good (much better then in sedan). No road noise complaints. 2 15 years kids in back (3d row) seats - no complaints
    Provincetown to Park trip:
    Position- Back in 3d row (I'm 6 ft tall, 200 pouns): Comfort- Ok. Amazingly good
    visibility side and forward. Road noise - no complaints. Ride is steady and even.
    2nd and 3d rows - Very comfortable headrests (also noticed by one Honda Accord owner). 40 min 3d row trip for me (6ft) was fine but longer trips will not be comfortable. So for in town (or short out of town) trips Rondo looks good for 7 adults.
    PS: When we arrived in Provicetown locals were a little bit surprised by how many
    people managed to get out of relaively small car.
  • conwelpicconwelpic Ontario, CanadaPosts: 600
    Mazda 5 - 1,162 (not much less than the US and we are 9.5 times smaller in population), YTD - 9,010
    Rondo - 1,066, YTD - 6,235
This discussion has been closed.