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



  • conwelpicconwelpic Ontario, CanadaPosts: 600
    you have to keep in mind that the Rondo is actually third generation, so yes it is an old design - but I think it looks great.
    You may change your comments however, when you see some of the new stuff coming down the pipeline in the next year or two due to the new head KIA designer Peter Schreyer, who I believe came from Audi.

    Do you think the new Soul is "bland and boring"? There is a new redesigned Sorento and Forte (replacing the current Spectra) coming in the next few months, as well as a Forte Coupe that is currently under testing. I've heard the whole lineup will be revamp by 2011-12, so it will be interesting to see what you have to say then!
  • coolmazda5coolmazda5 Posts: 525
    A couple of comments:

    We still have a last gen Mazda5 and you still have a last gen Rondo. Good for KIA bringing a designer from Audi but that will not change the way the Rondo looks today unfortunately.

    As we discussed some time ago on this same thread, if the owner-to-be is not into good car handling, fun-to-drive, ZOOM-ZOOM philosophy features and looks, then the Rondo is the way to go, just as the previous Mazda3 owner posted above, good stuff and good decision for him

    Interestingly enough, you can find (especially in Canada) that many people buy the Mazda5 based on their experience with their previous or existing Mazdas' ownership (i.e. Protege, Mazda3, MazdaSPEED3 and Mazda6), especially because of the items highlighted on point b)

    But now, Hyundai (and KIA) have money to spend today where other car manufacturers don't, so they have the opportunity to continue growing and punch hard. They have come with much better and competitive new models (i.e. the Genesis Sedan, the Genesis Coupe and even the Equus), but the brand perception overall does not change overnight. Once they apply a common philosophy to all their cars then I believe that the KDM concept will take off as the JDM has done for the last 15 years, yet it will take time to be adapted to all their models.

    Oh, and I believe Hyundai will come first as a better perceived brand overall, then KIA
  • ged3ged3 Posts: 2
    Most comments are about the "design" of both vehicle. For the Mazda enthusiasts, I repeat that I was very pleased with my Mazda3...really! It nervous, cocky and stick to the road like no other cars I've had. I remember coming back home late and driving around 160km, luckily no cops around. The faster you seem to go the better the driving is, the aerodynamics!

    Thus the first car I thought at the end of my lease was Mazda. I was disapointed because the 2009 models are 99% the exact replica of my 4 year old. The other thing that I wanted was a more comfy ride.

    I tried the Mazda5 and the overall space for the driver isn't comfortable...for me. I was disappointed with the ride. This is a family vehicle, not a sport model, and I felt like driving a truck with it's hard suspension.

    It is a quality if you want a vehicle with a better suspension getting in a curve.

    The medium model with the Mazda5 for a four years lease is about 440$ per month. The top model for Kia's Rondo is 338$. And if you compare the standard equipment, and the warranty, then Rondo is way, way ahead.

    It is a matter of personal taste as far as the design is concerned. My wife thinks the Rondo is the better of the two.

    I did apreciate that there weren't any negative comments on the vehicule per-se. Mechanics, service etc.

    I do retain that I can negociate some options and the price.

    Thanks for all your input
  • vg33e powervg33e power Posts: 314
    I think coolmazda5 hit it right on the nail. Kia is indeed a fairly new "Korean" brand of vehicles and although they are taking the correct steps to establish credibility and loyalty, they still have a long way to go. Hyundai is definately the right choice of parent company to be under for Kia. Just think back to the first Hyundai offered here in the States...the 1985 Hyundai Excel. What a piece of doo-doo that car was! Unfortunately this "Korean" vehicle left a bad taste in American's mouth about Korean cars. It has taken Hyundai lots of money and time to establish themselves as a great car manufacturer able to compete with the likes of the fav 4 import companies-- Toyota, Honda, Mazda, Nissan. It has been excatly 24 years since Hyundai's first vehicle here in the States. Unfortunately, Kia is a "Korean" car manufacturer and not all American's are quick to jump and buy a Kia, probably for the same reasons that were established 24 yearcs ago by Hyundai. However, Kia is taking action and thinking optimistic by offering awesome warranty, added standard features, and packaging it all in their affordable vehicles. This is the way Hyundai did it and made it to where they are now, and it is definately the way Kia should continue to do business to earn them their "bragging rights"

    Has Kia vehicles improved? Definately! Are they up to par with the fav 4? Perhaps with some but not with others. Will they ever get to where Hyundai is? If they continue to do what they are doing...yes, but it is not going to happen over night. Looking at the future designs by Kia, you can definately see the improvement and I am sure that Kia will be succesful in veering new customers to their vehicles.

    However, the niche that Mazda has created is that of a "sporty, ZOOM ZOOM" vehicles and it is working for them because all of us that own Mazdas, we all agree and love that about our vehicles, whether it is a MZ3, MS3, MZ5, MZ6, etc...

    Coolmazda5 put it nicely, if you want a soft supple 6 seater without the sporty looks and feel but don't want a full size mini-van, go with a Kia Rondo. However, if you are an enthusiast and one that craves sportiness and handling then go with a MZ5. I have always been a gearhead and I love sporty great handling cars, unfortunately a 2 or 4 seater coupe is not going to work for my growing family, so this is why I bought my MZ5 and I couldn't be happier.

    Needless to say I will not buy a Kia anytime soon for those two reasons:
    Kia = Cheap Korean Vehicles
    Kia = Boring Looking Unspirited Vehicles.
  • As with all things opinions vary between individuals as to what may be more important to each.

    Being an owner of a '05 Mazda 3 (2.0L w/5-speed manual) who recently purchased an '08 Kia Rondo LX V6 I'll offer my opinion of the two manufacturer's products based on my experience after 4-years as a Mazda owner and based on my experiences as a current and former owner of quite a few Toyotas and and at least one Acura (Honda).

    First, I do prefer the Mazda5's styling better than the Rondo. I also like the 5's rear sliding doors better.

    There-I said it :) .

    However, I'll also admit to being over 50... and for a while now looks have been less important to me than other properties including among others "function" and "value".

    Frankly, if I could have purchased a Mazda 5 equipped similarlyto our Rondo for the same $$ there might have been two Mazdas parked in my driveway last night. I also wish the Rondo was available in the U.S. with a 5-speed manual instead of being limited to the choice of a four (I-4) or five (V-6) speed automatic.

    Fact is I ended, up paying less for our brand-new '08 Rondo than I paid for my brand-new '05 Mazda 3i four years ago. Also, although I've been very satisfied with my Mazda 3 the Rondo we recently purchased represents a lot more car (in size, weight, functionality, room and especially safety features) for the money.

    Compared to our Rondo my '05 Mazda 3i lacks ABS, ESC, traction control,
    side air bags, side curtain air bags, active seatbelts/head restraints. And there may be a few more safety advantages offered by the Rondo that I'm forgetting.

    Of course some (but not all) of the Rondo's standard safety features WERE available when I purchased my '05 Mazda 3, but only through the purchase of extra-cost options packages. None of them was included as standard equipment on the 3i-at least not on 2005 models like mine.

    Of course can't say I've made a direct comparison of standard safety features offerd on the '08/'09 Mazda5 and the '08/09 Rondo. So there may be in fact be little difference between what standard equipment on the two now. I have read that ABS became standard equipment on later Mazda3 models (since '06 or '07?) and it's also possible side impact airbags may be standard equipment now. However, I have doubt if all the Rondo's standard safety equipment comes standard on the Mazda5.

    In any case I'd choose more standard safety features for my wife and kids over styling preferences any day of the week.

    But that's just a reflection of MY priorities. Others may (and have every right to) feel differently.

    B.t.w. so far I'm very pleased with the quality of construction, driving behavior, preliminary results for fuel ecoomy and even the "the look" (mine is white w/black trim)! But most important-the wife really seems to like it a lot too!

    That said, I don't intend to knock either vehicle.

    While it's too early to judge how the Rondo may hold up as the mileage increases, I can say my Mazda 3 has been very economical and reliable to a fault for more than four years and 60k miles. I've also averaged 38.6 mpg with it based on all miles driven and gallons used since purchase. I'll also mention that while being a contributor to a Mazda3 forum for several years, I've read MANY complaints about poor fuel economy from owners of Mazda3s models equipped with the 2.3 L engine-especially from those who have automatic transmissions. So since the Mazda5 is only available with the same 2.3L engines used (until '10) on Mazda 3s models, this possibility was a negative in my book when considering a Mazda5 automatic.

    Of course I've also read similar complaints from more than a few Rondo owners-especially those who's vehicles have the same 2.7L V-6 engine & 5-speed automatic transmission as mine. However, judging from the first 700 miles driven in our our Rondo so far I haven't been displeased with the car's fuel economy. The first fillup calculated to over 25 mpg and I'm expecting even better results (probably 27+ mpg) when I stop to fill up for the 2nd time this evening.

    If so, that's not bad at all in my book for a V-6 engine that's still in the process of breaking-in.

  • coolmazda5coolmazda5 Posts: 525
    What do they say? Opinions are like belly buttons, everyone has one :D

    I own a 2006 and a 2008 Mazda5 in the US, and, as per the safety features, apart from I believe ESC and traction control, all of them are standard on any Mazda5 trim (at least in the US)

    As per your age, I don't really point into that at all, I'm just glad you like zippy cars, but now that you mention it, I had a theory on one of my posts that although both cars are functionally similar the may not be targeting the exact same market. It may be partially true :D.

    Here is the old post:
  • Since posting my prior message I doubled-checked the '09 Mazda5's list of safety equipment and discovered ABS, side airbags and side curtain airbags all come standard now. So you're probably right that ESC and traction control may be the only other safety oriented standard equipment which the Rondo may have over the 5.

    Also, you're right-I do enjoy "zippy" vehicles. In addition to the Mazda 3 I also own a '99 BMW 323ic convertible and a Honda ST1100 motorcycle. However, I rarely push my 4-wheeled vehicles hard these days and tend to sow my sporting oats when riding my ST through the twisties along the Blue Ridge Mountains when the urge strikes.

    Unfortunately, with 5 vehicles currently licensed and insured for just two drivers I'm gonna have to make some hard decisions soon. That my wife's '98 Toyota Sienna is going is almost a given, although I've considered hanging on to it for use a my daughter's first vehicle in a few years since the Sienna has a proven safety record in vehicle crash testing. On the other hand, deciding between getting rid of my BMW or Mazda3 is going to be a tough call.

    The Mazda is six years newer, has ~27k fewer miles, less expensive to insure and maintain and averages about 9 mpg better than the BMW which at ~28-31 mpg is hardly a gas hog when driven conservatively. However the BMW truly is a lot of fun to drive - especially with the top down on a warm, sunny day with that oh-so-smooth inline-6 making such sweet sounds. My Mazda 3 is a lot of fun to drive to and has one of the best manual shifters I've had the pleasure of using. But of course it's no convertible and mine example lacks a sunroof.

    Decisions, decisions... : :confuse:
  • vg33e powervg33e power Posts: 314
    So let me catch have:

    2008 Kia Rondo
    2005 MZ3
    1999 BMW 323ic
    1998 Sienna
    XXXX Honda ST1100

    My suggestion is to dish the Sienna and insure the BMW as an occasional (leisure) vehicle with the minimum amount of miles per year (I believe its 1000 miles) This way, you get rid of the least paltable vehicle and you save money. I don't know how old your daughter is but when she becomes of age to drive, I can certainly assure you she will definately not want to drive the Sienna. I take it your wife drives the Rondo and you switch off between the MZ3, BMW, and ST100. When your daughter starts driving you may be forced to give her your MZ3 and then run really fast to your nearest Mazda dealer and get yourself an awesome little wagon called the MAZDA5.

  • Thanks for the advice, but I have other ideas.

    The Sienna has been our family (and the wife's primary) vehicle for nearly 5 years and I bought the Rondo with the intention of replacing it. Except for some broken (plastic) body hardware issues, with almost 160k miles on the odometer it's served us very well. Also since I scored it at a bargain price (for $6k with 96k miles...and it's a loaded XLE model) we've gotten our money's worth from it i.m.o.. It's just at the point where I either need to spend money to fix it up (tired shocks & strut cartridges, power steering is leaking, engine and automatic transmission still seem solid but have not been rebuilt, engine timing belt is about due for replacement, original radiator & a/c, etc.) or just get rid of it. Since most of the car's components are original there's certainly the possibility something major could fail (say the automatic transmission?) at any time. It also has one of those Toyota engines which have developed a reputation for having oil sludge issues. Our Sienna's V-6 has never given me any problems (only had the starter rebuilt last summer), but I've always used synthetic motor oil and premium oil filters while we've owned it.

    Your probably right that my daughter might not want to get the Sienna when she gets her license. (Note: she's only 12 1/2 so this milestone is still several years in the future). However I'll be more interested in her safety than in her vehiclular preferences. I wasn't particularly "excited" about my first car either (1964 Oldsmobile Dynamic 88...what a tank!). But it was big enough to provide superior protection (at least for the standards of the time) and the big 392 cubic inch V-8 was thirsty enough to keep my teenage male hormones in check long enough to allow me a chance to gain some driving experience. The Olds was replaced with a '66 VW bug right before I started college and the bug was a total opposite (ie almost no power along with very little protection). But it was light, quick steering, and had a manual which helped make it reasonably fun to drive despite the lack of power (50 hp). The thrumming flat four in the rear did provide some character too. Best of all I could fill the 10 gallon tank for $5!

    Although I really do like my Mazda3, I probably won't choose to pass it on to either of my kids when they receive their licenses, for as previously noted my 3 lacks many of the standard safety equipment that comes standard on most late model vehicles being sold today. All my 3 has are the dual front air bags...and from what I've read when lacking side and side curtain airbags Mazda3 models have not scored well in side impact tests.

    The jury is still out on whether I'll choose to sell my Mazda3 or the BMW. My 323ic is equipped with the (optional) SAB package along with dual front airbags, ABS and ESC. However, being a convertible all bets would be off if one of us should be unlucky enough to flip it some day. Another drawback to the BMW is that premium gas is recommended. I filled up last night and it cost $10 more to fill the BMW's 16.8 gal tank than it did to fill the Rondo's 15.8 gal tank the day before...even though BMW's tank only swallowed about a gallon more than the Rondo's. Why premium gas is selling @ $.45-$.55+ more than regular these days is beyond me. All I know is the premium paid for "premium" can be painful on the wallet even though all gas prices are of course far less than a year ago. Since I have a 55-mile (round-trip) commute between home and work, fuel economy and gas prices are somewhat important to me.

    Still, fact is my BMW holds a "grin factor" advantage over my Mazda3. Smoother and sweeter-sounding I-6 engine, more power (175 hp vs 148 hp) and more grip (BMW has meatier 225/45 Continentals)

    And of course it IS a BMW convertible and definitely turns more heads than my also sharp-looking Mazda3.

    Like I said, it's not gonna be an easy decision.

    And yeah-I realize that a Mazda5 probably will turn more heads than a Rondo would.

    Of course, the Rondo will primarily be my wife's car! :P
  • conwelpicconwelpic Ontario, CanadaPosts: 600
    interesting comments. In the latest issue of Consumer Reports (auto edition) they have a section entitled "Reliability by Brand" with a list of 34 brands. Kia is in 10th place, Hyundai in 8th and Mazda in 12th, so they are making huge strides from there Excel days.
    My mother-in-law bought one of those Excels when they first came out, what a load of crap, but then again Toyota and Honda went through the same thing before.

    KIA has only been in Canada 10 years and in the US since 1994.
  • coolmazda5coolmazda5 Posts: 525
    Interesting, would that be for Canada?

    From Consumer Reports I see Mazda in 4th place, behind Honda, Subaru and Toyota :confuse:

    With an overall score of 78 out of 100 points, Honda was followed closely by Subaru (75), and Toyota (74) in the overall score. Subaru is also the only automaker with 100% of its tested vehicles Recommended, although it has a relatively small model lineup. Mazda (73), came in 4th, followed by Mercedes-Benz, Nissan, Volkswagen, and BMW, all tied at 72.

    Of the Asian automakers, Subaru, Nissan, Mazda, and Hyundai improved their overall scores. Nissan and Hyundai also improved their reliability rating. Of the four, Hyundai showed the most improvement, increasing its overall score from 66 to 70. The Hyundai Genesis also topped Consumer Reports’ upscale-sedan ratings, contributing to the automakers continued progress.

    Source Consumer Reports:
    Release Date: Feb 26, 2009
    Consumer Reports’ Automaker Report Cards: Honda Leads Again, Mercedes-Benz Improves, Chrysler Lags - r-report-cards-honda-leads-again-mercedes-benz-improves-chrysler-lags.html
  • conwelpicconwelpic Ontario, CanadaPosts: 600
    no, Consumers Reports is a US magazine, we have a Canadian Supplement with regards to price differences and contacts in Canada, not the information provided.

    You are correct too, as there is two different reports, the one you refer to is on page 15 and the one I'm referring to is on page 17. Hyundai and KIA are grouped as one on your list. The list I'm referring to takes the reliability section of your list and breaks that down - "Reliability by brand".
  • vg33e powervg33e power Posts: 314
    I never said that Kia cars were not reliable (as I really don't know because I have never owned one), I simply said that Kia is a faily new "Korean" car company and needs to establish their reputation by doing excatly what they are doing-- offering an awesome warranty at very affordable priced cars.

    The only other thing I said was that Kia, like Toyota cars are rather bland, boring, or simply ugly in their design, unfortunately Honda is following too with their rather ugly new Accord.

    My Mazda5 still wins in looks and spotiness against the above mentioned, and it is in par with reliabilty with the likes of the fav 3 import brands (Toyota, Honda, Nissan).
  • conwelpicconwelpic Ontario, CanadaPosts: 600
    Rondo - 533 (767 in '08)
    Mazda 5 - 384 (1,028 in '08)
  • coolmazda5coolmazda5 Posts: 525
    So in page 15 Mazda is 4th place and in page 17 is 12th? I didn't know Mazda was different from Mazda as a brand :confuse:. Those magazines, telling ya :)
  • coolmazda5coolmazda5 Posts: 525
    Think Rondo is no longer the stylish name it was? Does Magentis remind you of those magnetised bedsheets your granny always raves about?

    Apparently Kia shares your concerns, and is investigating how best to revamp its model naming system to appeal to a wider (ie: under 40 year-old) audience.

    The new Soul and Forte (aka Cerato) are rumoured to be safe, as both nameplates are fresh enough and hip enough to strike a chord with younger car buyers. However, the rest of the range will likely see a good number of badges being thrown into the bin.

    “We want to leave the old baggage behind,” Kia’s Michael Sprague said in an interview with Automotive News.

    “A lot of people don’t know who we are anyway. So why not come out with new and more attractive names like Forte and Soul?”

    An alpha-numeric naming convention isn’t expected to be on the cards, but we do expect to see some funkier names popping up in Kia’s stable in the near future. All we ask is that they make more sense than Ssangyong’s.

  • larrytbmlarrytbm Posts: 10
    The Mazda5 and Rondo were the two vehicles we tested the most before deciding on the Rondo. The best feature about the M5 is the sliding doors. I'm not into zoom-zoom or impressing others, just functionality and value (not cheap). The car we test drove just 30 min. before our first drive in the Rondo was a $40k Audi A4 Avant and I fully expected that to totally kill our interest in the Rondo, but it didn't. Back to the M5 and Rondo, for us the decision is how the vehicle is primarily used. The M5 is a nice package and works well as a people mover that sometimes may have to carry cargo. But we mostly carry pets and/or cargo and the Rondo absolutely works better. For large pets, the 2nd row buckets on the M5 don't work and we carry items on the floor that wouldn't fit in the M5. Finally, the Rondo is quiet, rides well and good placement of all controls. The Rondo is bland looking, but I'm not paying to improve the scenery for other drivers.
  • coolmazda5coolmazda5 Posts: 525
    I'm not paying to improve the scenery for other drivers

    You are making a good point, I agree with that, but at the same time to me driving a car is like using a suit, I want it to be comfortable but also to look good when I wear it :)

    What happened to the Audi A4 Avant? Why the test drive if you don't like impressing others? I would have chosen that hands down over a Mazda5 or a Rondo :blush:, but I prefer to have 2 Mazda5s for the price of one Audi though :shades:

    Allright, allright, enough of questionnaires, enjoy your new car, that is what matters most!!
  • larrytbmlarrytbm Posts: 10
    You are making a good point, I agree with that, but at the same time to me driving a car is like using a suit, I want it to be comfortable but also to look good when I wear it.
    The difference is the suit must fit the best first, if it happens to look good, that is just extra. The Rondo fits better than the M5 and the Audi wasn't to impress others, it just didn't fit our needs more than the Rondo, and certainly not 2X more.
  • conwelpicconwelpic Ontario, CanadaPosts: 600
    Rondo - 807 units vs 764 for March '08
    Mazda 5 - 964 units vs 1,560 for March '08
  • coolmazda5coolmazda5 Posts: 525
    Interesting for Canada, up north seems to be a KIA/Hyundai stronghold. I also found this, would that explain the difficulty to find 2009 models in the US dealerships? I'm not sure how they are counted in Canada: ers/
  • dona83dona83 Posts: 67
    I'd just like to note that the Ford Aspire was actually a Kia made vehicle, and I've heard from people who own these cars that the only way to kill them is by getting into a horrific car accident, in which case the next to nil crash test ratings would likely kill you too. Hopefully the new Kias still have this level of reliability as the old Aspire with the added benefit of much safer vehicle designs, you really can't go wrong with a Kia.

    EDIT: Seems the Aspire motor was a Mazda... go figure. Hopefully they kept a few engines to reverse engineer.

    My wife and I really liked the Rondo but in the end we still love our clutch and stick shift, so the Mazda 5 won that battle. We're quite happy with our decision. =) The 5's super fun to drive and the versatile interior just can't be matched (except for the Rondo of course). Not quite the refined ride of the Kia but I like the sportier ride.
  • havilandhaviland Posts: 1
    I've owned both an 08 Rondo and an 07 Mazda 5. We drove the 5 for a year before it was totaled (everybody's okay, thanks.) Then we went shopping and the Rondo caught our attention. After a year with the Kia, here are my impressions of the two cars. The sliding doors on the Mazda are a definite plus. The Rondo's back doors are quite wide. Great for getting in and out. Lousy in a tight parking ramp. The Rondo rides smoother and significantly quieter than the Mazda. Mazda's obsession with putting 17 inch wheels and low profile tires on everything is silly. Nobody buys the 5 for zoom-zoom and you pay for it in bumps and grinds. You'll also pay for it (dearly) when you buy new tires. Stereo is better in the Kia. Individual seats in the second row make the Mazda a bit more versatile in cargo/passenger configuration but the Kid can actually carry three in the second row and seven overall. We have six grandkids. Advantage: Kia. The roof rack on the Rondo is kind of weird. The bars are an accessory but the rails are standard. The rails, however, are completely useless without the bars. You can't even strap anything to them so why not add 50-100 bucks onto the sticker price and include them? The factory rack for the 5, on the other hand, looks like steel girders on concrete blocks and the wind noise is horrendous. The problem with the Kia rack is that, in its stock configuration, you can't get the bars more than 21 inches apart! The front bar won't even come as far forward as the middle of the back door! Carrying a 16.5 foot canoe or a few 4x8 sheets of plywood is real nail-biter. The value/resale argument (expect to hear it from your Mazda dealer) is, of course, based on the depreciation of past vehicles. Kia has definitely improved quality and that, plus the big warranty, has improved perception and, therefore, value. Time will tell. At 6'2" I find the Kia's seating position for the driver to be more comfortable, even on short runs. That of course, is very individual. I do believe, however, that the Kia seats are superior. Overall, I don't think there's a wrong choice here. Both are well thought out, sell designed vehicles. Think about what and who you'll be hauling and what's most important to you. Take each one for a good, long test least half an hour. None of this five minutes around the block with the salesman yakking in the back seat stuff. By the way, there is a way to extend the spread of the Kia rack by removing a rubber strip and sliding the front bar forward.
  • coolmazda5coolmazda5 Posts: 525
    Nobody buys the 5 for zoom-zoom

    No offense but that is incorrect, definitely a Rondo is for you then. Glad everybody is OK and you found the right car, good report and enjoy the grand kids!
  • dona83dona83 Posts: 67
    Nobody buys the 5 for zoom-zoom

    Ha ha. Ha ha. The things I've done with my 5. The car loves to corner and I've tamed three of the local mountain roads so far. It's no Porsche for sure but it's still fun to drive, the 5-speed manual transmission is just absolutely made for this car, and sure the suspension is not as comfy as a Kia Rondo or Toyota Corolla's but then again the first thing I did with my Corolla was put stiff as heck springs on them to improve handling. The Mazda 5 is not as stiff yet still has great handling. Sorry if you don't enjoy driving anymore, the Rondo is a great car but don't claim that people don't buy the 5 for the zoom-zoom, if the 5 drove like any other minivan I would never have considered it in the first place! But alas it has a soul of a sports car and I love it!
  • vg33e powervg33e power Posts: 314

    What he said x2. It is very clear why you drive the Rondo. You prefer comfort, functionality and bland looks. We Mazda5 owners prefer sporty handling, funtionality and sporty looks.

    "Nobody buys the 5 for zoom zoom"

    HA HA HA HA!
  • dona83dona83 Posts: 67
    ^^^ Yep! The Rondo is definitely a very comfortable and refined car, I would consider one when I'm like 60 years old or something, but right now I'm a parent with a mission: to prove that parenting doesn't have to mean giving up a love for driving!

    And in my comment, I love my 5 speed manual Mazda 5 but nothing against the 5 speed auto Mazda 5s out there, we're still Zoom-Zooming!
  • nissmazlovernissmazlover Posts: 162
    I gotta agree with all the replies to your post. Sorry, but your assertion that no one buys the Mazda 5 for "zoom zoom" is totally off the mark.

    I would have never considered the 5 if it weren't for its good and sporty looks, sporty intentions and driving demeaner and youthfulness, in addition to its practicality. I feel my 5's steering feel is perfect. It handles like a dream - a sporty one at that - AND it fits my family's needs perfectly (married father with two 9 year old boys). We all couldn't be happier with our car and it's sportiness and looks. So, yes, it's "zoom zoom" was/is a DEFINITE factor (my wife hates minivans, but she loves the 5, and very much disliked the Rondo because of its "uncool minivan-ness").

    I'm really glad you're happy with your choice to drive the Rondo. More power to you! :) But, honestly, all this talk about the Rondo's "comfortable ride" has perplexed me. I, extensivlely, drove a 2007 Rondo for over a week and didn't find the ride to be superior to the 5's in the least. No offense, as we all are able to express our opinions in this forum, but I found the Rondo's ride to be very cheap feeling and misleading. At first, the ride seemed to be comfortable until you come in contact with bumps, potholes, speed bumps or dips in the road. Then, all that supposed "comfort" went flying out the window as the suspension felt harsh and cheap, and let all the unfiltered vibrations into the cabin - especially with a full load of passengers who all complained that their butts, literally, hurt after a long trip because of the harsh ride (characteristics my 5 does not exhibit at all). Mazda 5's ride may seem firmer at first, but you soon find it's, in actuality, more cosetting than the Rondo's - PLUS, it delivers better handling. Side note - I also noticed a slight but noticeable difference in ride quality between my 2006 5 and my 2008 - 08 rides better and feels more refined.

    Another side note: To the person who alluded to the fact that a 60 year old should drive/consider a Rondo. No fair! Let's not generalize with the mature folks that way. My mom's 60 years old and still very much enjoys driving and appreciates my 5's "zoom zoom". :blush:
This discussion has been closed.