Howdy, Stranger!

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

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Did you get a great deal? Let us know in the Values & Prices Paid section!
Meet your fellow owners in our Owners Clubs

Mazda CX-5 Lease Questions

kyfdxkyfdx Posts: 128,420
Ask your CX-5 lease questions here!

Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!

Edmunds Moderator



  • What is good lease on the CX-5 Touring ?
  • Hi bbrazeal. Mazda is currently advertising the 2012 CX-5 with a payment of $277 per month for 36 months with a $2,165 down payment. This is for a Touring FWD model. Chances are that if you are in an area that has a decent level of competition you may be able to negotiate a better deal than that.

    Prices Paid: Buying & Leasing Experiences Forum
  • Greetings all. Let's crunch some numbers!! Finding myself with a totaled subaru, I stumbled across the CX-5. Drove it the next day and fell in love. Dealer in Manchester, CT priced a lease on an AWD Touring with auto dimming mirror for me. They used 12,000 miles / 39 months (said residual better than 36)/ cap cost was the MSRP of 26,235 (25,145 + 795 destination + 295 mirror) / residual value of 54% (14,215.50) / and money factor of .0019. for a final monthly payment of $450.13. Other numbers on the worksheet from the finance manager are: 6.35% sales tax, Accessory total of $179, Fee total of $530, Total Tax 1048.71, Amount Financed 27,629.

    My question to all: Are the Cap Cost, Residual Value and Money Factor reasonable? I would expect to get something less than the MSRP, even on something so new and hot. I absolutely qualify for their best interest rate. Is .0019 the best they can offer (dealer printout says "Chase Lease" on it)? And I have no clue on the residual value. And what about them telling me I should do 39 months because the residual is better than 36. Help!!!!

    Curiously though, the salesman handed me a quote of $444.60 before I asked the finance manager for the supporting #s. Manager said he was just giving me a break. Obviously he didn't pull that number out of thin air, but the printout we went through together has all of the above #s and a 450.33 payment. I don't know what's going on with this.

    Lastly, has the following lease offer for the Hartford CT region through April 3. Is this any good? If so, can my dealer apply this deal to the care I want?:

    2013 MAZDA CX-5

    $239/Month, 36-Month Lease, $2,999 due at Lease Signing. Includes 1st Month's Payment and Acquisition Fee. Excludes taxes, title and fees.

    MSRP $22,095 plus $795 destination charge. Payment based on capitalized cost of $20,175. Total payments of $8,604. No security deposit required. Dealer participation required. Not all lessees will qualify for lowest payment through participating lender. Some payments higher, some lower based on residency and other factors. Lessee responsible for excess wear and mileage over 36,000 at $0.15/mile. Purchase option at lease end for $13,276 plus tax or price negotiated at signing. Take new retail delivery from dealer stock by 4/3/2012. See participating dealer for qualifications.

    Thanks all.
  • tinycadontinycadon Posts: 287
    (imo) Don't lease, EVER!!! All that upfront money you shell out is gone if you ever get in an accident, the insurance only covers what's left on the balance, not what the car is worth.
  • The residual value is so significant in the lease payment that it dwarfs the money factor and sales price + other capitalized costs. So from a market value standpoint, you want to compare it to other vehicles in the same market segment that you may like. You will be astonished when you see how much a small differential in resid affects the monthly bottom line. The CX-5 is the bomb if you are buying but if your are leasing, the 54% resid is bordering on horrible in my opinion. If the CX-5 is your favorite, compare the lease against your 2nd and 3rd choice and make sure you are sitting down. I did this myself and fortunately was sitting at the time!

    As for your .0019, multiply it by 2400 to normalize this interest rate to an APR and you will get 4.56%. If the lease is 3 years, you should compare it to equivalent 3 year financing for buyers on new cars. You may then see that leasing from a finance perspective is more costly. If your FICO is worthly of something better than 4.56% which it sounds like is the case, then you decide. My credit union is offering 1.49% right now for new car 3 year loans so 4.56% sounds unfair.

    It appears to me as though there is not a wide band between invoice and MSRP on the CX-5, especially with options above the base. Looks like the difference is only $600 - $900 so I would not expect us to be in a strong haggling position on sales price for something so new, hot, and possibly even hard to locate in some areas.

    The 39 month residual being better is totally untrue. I think this is more of a ploy to get folks back into the showroom in the summer time of the year that your lease ends as car shopping spring fever is over by then.

    Those advertised lease deals like you posted are often on low-end models or models that are not moving as quickly and almost never map to the exact car you want. They do a good job getting you there as they are typically attractively sounding lease payments.
  • We looked at everything in the small/mid CUV/SUV segment with city MPG rated above 22. My wife likes to sit high but our CX-9 is simply not fuel-efficient enough for the coming threats of $5/gallon. Hence, 2 simple requirements, fuel efficient and high ride. Since I won't buy new, I am considering leasing for the first time since the most fuel-efficient cars are usually the newest. Also, I would like to get out of the viscious maintenance costs cycle. With leasing, one has a tendency to consciously lean toward fully-loaded vehicles, which we did. Narrowed in on the CR-V after 1.5 months of shopping. Then the bomb was unleashed and quickly became my number one choice. Yes, talking about the CX-5.

    The most valuable lesson I learned by re-educating myself on leasing and doing lease deal comparions is that leasing actually exposes true variances in market value that are hidden when buying. The 2 lease deals below illustrate my point and show the math behind my pain and frustraton with Mazda, as they are forcing me into my 2nd choice.

    The sticker price on these 2 vehicles is separated by less than $200. So for folks like us who have paired their list to Honda and Mazda, but unlike us are buying and probably financing, it is a no-brainer to just go with the one you like better, since the financing will be the same, given the similar sale prices.

    The BIG PROBLEM for the CX-5 is exposed in the leasing market due to an 8% differential in residual value as compared to Honda. I looked at lease deals from a couple of Honda and Mazda dealers. The best lease factor I saw from Honda is .0016 (3.84%), while the Mazda was slightly better .00142 (3.41%). The sales prices are different in the real lease offers I show, favoring the Honda. However, you can reduce the Mazda sale price in the calculation and you will still see that the difference in residual is the dominating metric. Notice that the financing cost portion of the lease payment is lower on the Mazda by about $10, even with the higher sale price, due to the lease factor. But the depreciation portion is a whopping $91.30 in the red. This of course results in more sales tax as well. These are Pennsyvania leases which are taxed at 9%.

    The CX-5 lease will cost $89.37/month more than the CR-V. If you are fortunate enough to get and equal sale price on the CX-5, the best you be able to do is get within $45.61/month of the CR-V. This was the adjusted calculation that I eluded to.

    Keep in mind that it is Mazda who is saying the resale value of the CX-5 after 3 years/36k miles is 56% as you generally won't find a bank or leasing company who would invest in a more optimal residual than the manufacturer. You can argue that 56% may be a realistic number and that perhaps the Honda resid of 64% is artifically inflated. Though it doesn't matter if your plan is to turn the car over for another at the end of the lease. This low residual hurts you every month along the way. For buyers, it may not be obvious that the resale values between the 2 vehicles is so different. Even so, if Honda can inflate resids to lease more cars, why can't Mazda do the same in order to compete?

    So my question to Mazda is: How can you build such an awesome car that will compete feverishly head to head against the likes of the Honda CR-V in the buyer market, yet allow the same car to be torched by Honda in the leasing market? Why not raise your resids to at least 58% to allow leasees to drive a CX-5 too? Aren't you short-changing this highly regarded newcomer? As a current Mazda owner I am shocked by these numbers and I am very frustrated that I cannot lease a CX-5 with sound mind. The better MPG and the customer loyalty free maintenance I will recieve for the lease term do not offset the $90/month difference in payment. This totally sucks.

    Mazda CX-5 AWD GT w/TECH
    Sale Price $29,875.00
    MSRP $30,470.00
    Residual % of MSRP for 36/12k 56.00%
    Residual Value $ $17,063.20
    Total Capitalized Fees $0.00
    Gross Capitalized Cost $29,875.00
    Cap Reduction $0.00
    Net Cap Cost $29,875.00
    Money Factor 0.00142
    MF as APR % 3.41%
    Monthly Dep $355.88
    Monthly Fin $66.65
    Monthly Pre-Tax $422.54
    Monthly Sales Tax 9% $38.03
    Montly Payment $460.56

    Honda CR-V AWD EXL w/Nav
    Sale Price $28,500.00
    MSRP $30,605.00
    Residual % of MSRP for 36/12k 62.00%
    Residual Value $ $18,975.10
    Total Capitalized Fees $0.00
    Gross Capitalized Cost $28,500.00
    Cap Reduction $0.00
    Net Cap Cost $28,500.00
    Money Factor 0.0016
    MF as APR % 3.84%
    Monthly Dep $264.58
    Monthly Fin $75.96
    Monthly Pre-Tax $340.54
    Monthly Sales Tax 9% $30.65
    Montly Payment $371.19
  • Actually, all good leases come with gap insurance built-in so this is not a reason one should not lease.
  • Oops, typo. The resid on GT AWD w/TECH is 56% not 54% but the good news is that the calculations did not have the same error
  • tinycadontinycadon Posts: 287
    Cap Insurance only protects the bank captainrod, if you put down $5k you lose $5k, if you put down $2k you lose $2k, so no matter what you will never recoup any part of the $$$ you put down when you drive off the lot even if your car is totaled 1 minute after you drive away.
  • Never say never. Leasing is the perfect situation for my business, and the last lease I acquired was $0 down, $0 for all maintenance, and actually rebates me for the miles I don't use. Lots of those deals out there - maybe not on the CX-5, but they are around, if you have good credit, are not a high-mileage driver, and want to get into a new car with very little out of pocket.
  • fonefixerfonefixer Posts: 247
    I would agree. For the self employed-Leasing with 0 down does make the most sense if you don't put on too many miles in 3 years. Having a vehicle always under warranty- driving the latest and greatest every 3 years- outweighs the purchase option considering most all vehicles lose in the neighborhood of 50% off MSRP in the same 3 years.

    The only way to come out on buying new is to buy and "hold" w/ no major repairs needed (for a long time.) I bought a 1998 Camry and still driving today w/ 145,000 miles. It is ageing but running well. Nevertheless, there are always payments of some kind on an automobile. Either lease / purchase/maintenance / repair expenses to come up with on a virtual monthly basis.
  • Obviously the bank needs to be protected since they own the vehicle. You have 0 equity and will always have 0 equity as they purchased the car. So you have no asset to protect but the gap insurance does protect you, the lessee, in this situation from an insurance standpoint, as it fills the exact gap that you are referring to. When you do conventional financing you also lose some of all of your down payment in the event the car is totaled. This is why I say this is not a reason to conclude one should never lease. Also the insurance company certainly won't refund the sales tax that you paid so when you go to buy a replacement vehicle you will pay the sales tax again. In my state sales tax is paid on lease payments so it is never on the entire car value but it is taxed at a premium of 50% additional sales tax. On a loan, most of your payment early on is interest so your equity builds slowly. Depending on how much you put down, you could get upside/down relatively quickly. You can never get upside down in a lease since you never have any ownership in this negative equity investment. Most lease deals don't risk much up front to lose in the first place. Often times the junk fees are capitalized and the the car is driven away with nothing down except the first month's payment. Folks that lease tend not to use large capital cost reductions as a prepaid lease is somewhat self-defeating.
  • I see a lot of misinformation here regarding leases, insurance, equity etc. so I thought I might try to clean it up for you. I'm an outside property damage appraiser for a major insurance company and typically settle 3+ total losses per week and also lease all of my family vehicles. Your insurance policy is a contract between you and your insurance company, whether you own, finance or lease it makes no difference in the policy language. 99% of personal auto policies are "ACV" or actual cash value policies. What this means is that in the event of a total loss we will pay the ACV of the vehicle. How the ACV is determined varies based on state regulations however in most states its either book value or from a local market survey. Whether you lease, finance or own the car outright it has no impact on what the car will be valued at or how much we will pay to settle the claim. The earlier post that said "the insurance only covers what's left on the balance, not what the car is worth" is entirely incorrect. An ACV policy will pay only ACV regardless of what is owed on the car. This is a conversation I have with customers all the time. I'm sorry but just because you paid $10,000 last week for your sweet '02 Malibu doesn't mean that's what it's worth, the settlement will be ACV regardless of wether you owe $10K or $500. Whether you paid too little or too much has no bearing on it's value or settlement amount. Now regarding leases that is also a contract between you and the leasing company. You agree to make a certain amount of payments with an option to buy for a fixed amount at the end of the lease term. Everything should clearly be spelled out in your lease contract. Also in error in previous posts is that you never have equity in a lease, that's just plain incorrect. The leasing company want's to cover themselves when the lease is over and they send the car to auction so they always set the residual low. Establishing the residual value at lease end requires some speculation so they aren't always right but they will do their best to keep it high enough to make the lease attractive while keeping it low enough that they won't loose on the back end. I've leased over 10 cars over the last 15 years and on every car I've been able to sell it at lease end for significantly more than my buyout. I actually have two leases ending soon, one next month and the other in July. The difference between my buyout option and NADA on them both is nearly $8,000. Even pricing them $3k under NADA would net me $5k each. I'd be foolish to turn them in at lease end a walk away leaving that much equity on the table. You can guarantee the dealer that I turn them in at would buy them and have them on the lot within a week. So in the event either one were to total my insurance would determine the ACV, call my leasing company to find out my payoff which is my lease end value, plus any remaining payments, plus any fee's stipulated in the contract and pay them off (assuming it's less than the ACV) any balance would be paid to me. This is handled the same regardless of a lease or loan. Payoff the bank and any balance is paid to the customer. In the beginning of the lease when you are most likely to be upside down is when the gap insurance would step in to take over any gap between what I pay for ACV and what is owed on the car. This protects you from owing it out of pocket and protects the bank from having to try and collect it from you. And lastly you may even be reimbursed for your taxes paid depending on the laws of your state. Overall leasing is great for many reasons, yes you are loosing money every month but hey, that's the cost of driving a new car all the time. The benefits are many, the most significant being that all of the risk is being assumed by the bank in determining the residual value. At your lease end if you have equity in the car you have the option of buying/selling it and recovering your equity, if something changes in the market and your residual value now exceeds the ACV you can turn in your keys at lease end and walk away. This happened a few years ago with trucks. In 2005 trucks were king and residuals on many models exceeded 55%. Then came the crash along with high gas prices and you couldn't give trucks away. New truck pricing dropped significantly with rebates as high as $8,000 on new models. That made the acv of those at lease end much lower than the 55% they had been set at. Perfect scenario to walk away where those who purchased those same vehicles now found themselves owing more on the truck they bought two years ago than they could buy a new one for now. Obviously buying used and keeping a car is the most cost effective however if you are getting a new car leasing often makes the most sense. Lease finance rates are so agressive it hard to ignore. I'm looking at an XC60 now that's lease rare is .6% The residual on only 44% which sucks but If I wanted to buy this car, cash or finance why would I when I can lease it for .6%? Invest my money elsewhere. Then at the end of the lease I will have decent equity due to the low residual.
  • fonefixerfonefixer Posts: 247
    I have leased cars in the past and always found the dealer's residual price at the end of the lease to be on the high side. (if I was so inclined to purchase at the end of the lease.) Since most cars lose 50% of the MSRP after 3 years-my experience was that the residual buyout price was usually 3 ~ 4000 more than the 3 year 50% "off" so called "ACV" price would be set at. In the end- the price of merchandise is whatever the customer is willing to pay-and the dealer can set any price they want. The question is--can they receive that price?
  • That's the beauty of a lease, you have that option in the end. Put it up for sale a month before the lease end and see what happens. If it sells great, pocket the money and go get something else, if it doesn't sell turn it in a walk away. You don't have that luxury if you buy. If you can't sell it for what you still owe well then you still owe it. If the market value of your lease is less than you paid you can just walk away from it. Don't get me wrong, buying and leasing are both expensive, leasing just gives you a nice option to buy or walk away three years down the road. Like I said before I've got two leases that are up right now, ones on a CX-9, my dealer has called me several times on this one wondering what I'm going to do with it. Apparantly they have a list of people waiting for CX-9's to come in off from lease. My buyout is $19k and they are offering me $25k as a straight out buy. However I really like the CX-9 so I think for $19k I'll keep it. Our other car is an '09 Outback, kind of the same story here, dealer is offering $21K to buy it, they are popular around here so I'm pretty sure I could get $23k easilly, the buyout is just over $15k. On this one I think I'm going to sell it and get a CX-5. I've only had 1 lease that I didn't sell for a nice profit at lease end. It was a '97 F150 which was when the new style at the time had just come out. Ford had the residual at 70% for three years which made the payment insanely cheap. At the end the truck wasn't worth anywhere near what they had projected, I turned in my keys and got something else. I didn't even try to sell that one.
  • jeisensc1jeisensc1 Posts: 35
    Hi car_man,

    I've ordered a 2013 CX-5 GT AWD w/ tech package, which will arrive either at the very end of May or early June. Would you mind sharing MMC/Chase residual and money factor for 24 and 36 months at 12k and 15k miles per year? Are there any incentives besides $500 owner loyalty? I turned in a 2010 Mazda3 lease at the end of April.

  • ken117ken117 Posts: 249
    I believe a statement "don't lease, ever!!!' is overly simplistic. Leasing can be a great way to go for many people. Particularly people who enjoy driving a new vehicle.

    Anyone with a decent credit score can lease virtually any vehicle with nothing down. I, for example, have leased five vehicles over the past few years and I have never put a single dollar down.

    The better leases, Acura for example, have GAP insurance built into the lease. The better leases, Acura again for example, also have money built in for routine wear and tear type issues at the end of the lease. For my current Acura lease, it is $1,500.

    The key to achieving a good lease is to (1) lease at a time when the manufacturer is providing support for the lease, often in the form of a low money factor, (2) lease a vehicle with a solid resale value to get a higher residual value, and (3) negotiate the selling price of the leased vehicle just as you would negotiate the selling price on a purchased vehicle.

    As an illustration, I currently lease a vehicle for about $450 a month. I achieved this monthly price as described above. The finance monthly payment for that vehicle, at 1.9%, with the same discount for both the leased and purchased price is $686. Clearly a significant difference and I did make any sort of down payment. I simply signed on the dotted line and drove off.

    When disposing of a leased vehicle a person can do about anything. The leased vehicle can be bought, sold, traded or (can't do this with a purchased vehicle) just given back when the lease is over.

    The simple fact is, people who reject leasing outright do not fully understand the value of leasing. Leasing may not be for everyone but for some, like me, leasing is the only way to go.
  • jeisensc1jeisensc1 Posts: 35
    Hi Car_man,

    My CX-5 arrived yesterday, and I'm picking it up tomorrow. I would be helpful to get the buy rate residual and money factor if you could please.

  • CarMan

    Looking for mf and residual for Grand Touring FWD and AWD (if they differ) 15k 36 months. Thanks in advance!!!
  • Hi John. Chase's May buy rate lease money factor and residual value for a 24-month lease of a 2013 CX-5 GT AWD with Tech and 15,000 miles per year are .00212 and 63%, respectively for consumers who qualify for its top credit tier.

    The numbers for an otherwise identical 36-month lease are .00123 and 54%.

    If you were to lease with only 12,000 miles per year, this vehicle's residual values would be I believe 1% higher.

    The $500 loyalty cash that you mentioned is the only cash incentive on this vehicle right now.

    Prices Paid: Buying & Leasing Experiences Forum
  • Hey tonystarks22. Chase's May buy rate lease money factor and residual value for a 36-month lease of a 2012 CX-5 Grand Touring AWD with 15,000 miles per year are .00123 and 54%, respectively for consumers who qualify for its top credit tier.

    The money factor for a GT FWD model would be the same, but the residual value would be 2% lower.

    Prices Paid: Buying & Leasing Experiences Forum
  • Carman,

    Any new programs/changes to lease program for June? Are they still the same for May?
  • captainrodcaptainrod Posts: 18

    Help me out. I am still not convinced that you have equity in your lease and still contend that you have 0 equity during the lease. Is a leased vehicle included in net worth calculations? Don't you have to own something to have equity in it? You cannot modify the leased car by contract because you don't own it.

    The lease end scenario that you describe is a flip. You are buying the car from the leasing company for 1 value and selling it for a higher value. During the lease you do not own any part otherwise you could liquify. If your buyout is $10k which you give to leasing company and sell it for an ACV of $12k, you acquired (not recovered) equity at the point of the buyout and liquified it at the point of sale.
  • supertoyzsupertoyz Posts: 3
    I guess you are technically correct....but what's the point? The bottom line is at the end of the lease you have the option to buy the car for a predetermined amount which is likely less than it's ACV. If you choose to purchase the car you then would have obtained it's equity. When you look at your option to buy price and the ACV of the car, why would anybody leave that kind of cash on the table? Again technically you are right that it's not equity until you own it however in my opinion it's irrelevent since it's mine to collect if I choose.

    PS - It's a busy spring for me with 3 leases ending within 60 days of each other. Doing well so far with this batch of leases. Sold my wifes XC70 to the dealer for almost $4K over the buyout. Bought our CX-9 for $6K under NADA avg trade value (I guess now that one can be can be considered equity). And put our 2009 Subarua Outback out front yesterday and within 6 hours had an offer for $22k. It's only loan value but still not bad considering the buyout is $15,200 and negotiated purchase price was only $25,200. I think that one will have the best return ever.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    And put our 2009 Subaru Outback out front yesterday and within 6 hours had an offer for $22k. It's only loan value but still not bad considering the buyout is $15,200 and negotiated purchase price was only $25,200. I think that one will have the best return ever.

    And people call car dealers thieves. lol
  • sentientsentient Posts: 4
    Hi Car_man,

    I cross posted by mistake in the prices paid and buying experience. Didn't see this one for some reason.

    I'm looking at a CX-5 GT FWD w/Tech.
    I'm curious what the residual and MF would be if I got a 36mo/15K lease or a 42mo/15K lease.
    I'm in the Houston area.

    Also, can you confirm for me that the Acquisition fee is $595 for Chase still? A finance manager fed me a line the other night about how "if you don't put money down, the fee is $745."

    Thank you so much for your help. So far I've been rather disappointed by the quotes I've gotten from various dealers.
  • CarMan@Edmunds[email protected] Posts: 38,515
    edited July 2012
    You're in the right place, sentient. Chase's July buy rate lease money factor and residual value for a 36-month lease of a 2013 CX-5 GT FWD with 15,000 miles per year are .00129 and 53%, respectively.

    The numbers for an otherwise identical 39-month lease are .00134 and 51%.

    Chase's base acquisition fee is indeed still $595. I don't believe that the fee increases for consumers who don't make a down payment.

    Good luck in your quest for a new ride and make sure to stop back and let us all know how everything turns out.

    Prices Paid: Buying & Leasing Experiences Forum
  • sdridersdrider Posts: 8
    Curious if you knew the August lease factor on a 2013 CX-5 FWD with 12K miles per year? Thanks!
  • I certainly do sdrider. Mazda's August buy rate lease money factor and residual value for a 36-month lease of a 2013 CX-5 Sport FWD with 12,000 miles per year are .00129 and 58%, respectively for consumers who qualify for its top credit tier.

    Prices Paid: Buying & Leasing Experiences Forum
  • Dear Car_Man,

    Could you please let us know 2013 CX-5 AWD Grand Touring MF and Residual with 12K miles per year and 15K miles per year.
    Thank you in advance.
This discussion has been closed.