2017 Sportage EX 2.4L AWD verses Mazda CX5 Touring AWD

gillb

I've taken a short drive in the Mazda and like most find it a well balanced and refined vehicle. I've sat in the Sportage but will likely not have a chance to drive on until I'm ready to make the purchase. Both vehicles have the same Magna AWD drive system, are approximately the same weight, have real transmissions not CVTs, and are within 4hp of each other and Mazda has better overall MPG. I have a feeling on any particular day Kia lease deals are probably superior
I was wondering of those of you who have considered both vehicles why you chose the Sportage

everfeb

I bot Sportage a year ago for a couple reasons (LX-AWD)....in Canada Kia had a huge cash purchase discount in April '15 so price up here was substantially lower than Mazda...Kia dealer only 18 miles one way away from me, Mazda 220 miles...thought the Mazda was sharper looking but Kia nice too...Kia better warrantee...although Mazda EPA #'s better than Kia we don't put on a lot of miles so lower purchase price really offset this.

In hindsite a year later...check my posts about EPA...if you do a lot of highway miles Kia is OK but if you do a lot of city driving beware. Kia has decent power, great tranny so ver.y smooth. Handles well. Heating/cooling for cabin very good. My radio sucks-don't know if they all do or if it's just mine, didn't notice this when I demoed it (bot the demo). I've recently developed a low groaning sound somewhere in passenger rear which I can't find and is very irritating to me. Driver seat quite hard-we use a cushion.

Mechanically...no issues to date. My rating on Kia...nothing special-just another small suv which I would rate higher if it was almost any other make.

If I lived in a town with both a mazda and kia dealer I would have given a LOT more thought to getting the Mazda.

Let us know what you decided on.

Let us know

gillb

Thanks for the reply. Actually I was up in Victoria BC a few weeks ago and sat in the Sportage. I felt a little guilty asking to take it out on a test drive since I had no intention of buying the car in Canada. Its curious to me that with the giant strides Kia has made in design that engine efficiency seems to lag so far behind the others. Of course the upside is that unlike Honda who forces you into a CVT you can still get real transmission in the KIa. And perhaps unlike the Mazda, the sheet metal on the Kia seems thoroughly modern where as the Mazda's interior and exterior seem a 1/2 generation behind at least to me. A few weeks ago I test drove the Hyundai 1.6 liter turbo Tucson which was so bad I can't believe their top management ever drove the car before green lighting it. You can step on the gas, count to three, take a brief nap and then the car finally starts to move. I think when I finally get to drive the Kia those first few seconds may tell the tale.

parachautopart

Mazda is preferable.

everfeb

gillb...couple of things...that low groaning sound I complained about being so irritating is gone. Could of been ice buildup somewhere down in the wheel well I guess as I never had it in warm weather. So that is good. Now NO creaks or groans.

Had an oil change done at dealer and sat in a 2017. They've made a lot of changes vs my '15, and as far as I'm concerned they were all for the better. More storage with the rear seats down. The new interior is great...everything I looked at I went shoot, wish mine was set up like that. The driver seat which I complained about above, is very comfortable yet firm. The sound system was superb compared to mine so I'm guessing my radio is a one off. I'm not sure what changes they did to the exterior but to me the '17 looks sharper than mine. Not that the interior materials in mine are bad, they are actually quite nice, but the '17's are better. Didn't drive it, but I'm sure it handles as well or better than mine.

I think mine has 181 hp and though I've never matted it from a standstill (and never will) I think you'll find it much peppier than the Tucson you talked about. One thing to be aware of if you test drive a Sportage...It has 2 drive modes, Ecco and Sport. Ecco is primarily for highway driving or around town once engine is warmed up. When in Ecco mode performance is sluggish compared to Sport mode. So make sure you are in Sport mode for your test drive. Above, I said my Sportage handles well. That is probably an understatement as I'm coming out of a Mazda 3 which handled better than any other vehicle I've ever owned...the Kia's handling is not very far behind my 3. All around I think the '17 is much improved over my '15 and I'm jealous.
To date I've not had one mechanical issue (knock on wood).... better than my Mazda3 or Acura TL when they were new.

Did you sit in a '16 (pretty much same as mine) or '17. If you haven't looked at the '17 I think it's well worth taking the time.

everfeb

gillb...don't know if you are aware of fuelly...here is a link to pretty much real world mpg for the CX-5 http://www.fuelly.com/car/mazda/cx-5/2016 . Sorry, can't link to Sportage page for some reason but you'll be able to surf around and find it easily enough. Careful when looking at Sportage #'s...a lot of Europeans with Diesels getting way better mpg than us North Americans.

parachautopart

Mazda is good

gillb

I finally got to test drive a EX AWD Sportage yesterday. Very nice. Good torque, comfortable seats, great interior. I liked everything about it. Whereas the Mazda CX5 is a nice 4 year old car with updates, the Kia felt like the newly designed vehicle it is.
I was just wondering, it seemed the SUV I was test driving had a tendency to veer to the right. I was wondering if it was the tester or if others have had this experience.
And I was wondering how people found the highlights at night. I've always felt the Honda CRVs have been weak in that are, how is the Kia?

everfeb

I much prefer the '17 to my '15, interior and exterior. Mine doesn't pull in any direction. Feels like it's on rails and from what I've read and seen in reviews of the '17 it handles better than Gen 3. Won't hurt to take another test drive in a different Sportage to double check.
Drive it at night to check out for yourself the headlights. I feel mine are very bright but you are the only one who'll know if they are satisfactory to you.

stever

Sometimes dealers forget to air the tires down during the initial prep. They usually are over-inflated to prevent flat-spotting while in transit. So I agree with @everfeb, test another one.

gillb

Hey guys....thanks for the feedback. After 5 Hondas there is still this slight reluctance to try a Kia. Having a 2013 CRV the 2016 is of new interest at all especially with its CVT transmission and lack of rear traffic avoidance warning system.

fredbilloie

I looked at a 2016 Civic sedan and it had most of the features you would want. After a lot of looking (and testing) I ended up with a KIA Sportage EX with the premium and Technology packages. There were three things I didn’t like about the Civic:
1. No Blind Moving object detection (instead they had a Lame lane watch on the left and an expanded mirror on the right:
2. The Media system screen had absolutely no control knobs, not even a volume control (except for a questionable control on the steering wheel.
3. You can not get into this car without literally dropping to the floor (it felt like you were on the floor).

The KIA had everything that I wanted in a car. Lots of features, comfort, compliant and quiet ride and handling (not far down from my 2014 Mazda 6), and the price was great with BIG discounts and rebates. If you have had Hondas before and want some the basic safety features, the Honda’s Lane watch can’t compare with Blind object detection or Cross Trafic alert. I am enjoying all of the comfort of the KIA and really appreciate its smaller turning ratio for an SUV. Take a look at the KIA Sportage Brochure and you will be delight at what you get for the money.