Mazda 5 vs Kia Rondo

dakota29803 · January 2007

"Maybe Kia is better with this sort of issue."

I think that this has a lot more to do with the dealership (they are privately owned franchises) than it does with the manufacturer. If somebody has that sort of problem, they should contact the manufacturer and try to get it resolved.

w9cw · January 2007

If you perform your own maintenance, document everything you do, and keep all receipts, you will be covered. This is a statement specifically from Hyundai. Now, for Kia, that's another matter, even though they're owned by Hyundai, they're a separate company.

However, the Moss-Magnuson Warranty Act effectively protects owners against a company for negating a warranty for a number of reasons.

See this link on the Moss-Magnuson Act:

http://www.hyundaiperformance.com/forums/maintenance-help/31754-information-moss- - - -magnuson-warranty-act.html

I follow the routine inspection/replacement schedule in the Owner's Manual perfectly, in fact what I do is overkill. For example, their severe service oil change interval is 3K/3months. I change oil and filter (OEM Hyundai/Kia filter) every 3 months exactly, as my wife only averages less than 500 miles per month. So, this car is getting an oil and filter change every 1,500 miles - worst case - with Mobil 1 5W-30 synthetic no less.

As an ex-certified SAAB/Volvo mechanic, I am anal-retentive regarding maintenance on my cars. How many Hyundai or Kia mechanics hand torque your wheels to the specified lb./ft. when they either remove the wheels to inspect the brakes or rotate tires. Not many, I can assure you. As long as the air impact wrench is handy, that's what they will use. This is the exact cause of hub and rotor warping problems and resultant front-end shimmy on a number of Hyundai and Kia products.

idavidson · January 2007

"I think that this has a lot more to do with the dealership (they are privately owned franchises) than it does with the manufacturer."

No. Not at all. It's all to do with the manufactuer
as they effectively pay the dealer when doing warranty
work. Maybe some dealer will do work for free, but
I severely doubt it.

For example, my driver side sliding door locks froze
and broke. I had heard on this forum this a common
problem. I bought it in to the dealer and asked him
to fix both locks since its a dangerous problem. They
pointed out, it was totally up to the discretion of
Mazda as they were paying for the service.

dakota29803 · January 2007

It is true that the manufacturer reimburses the dealer for warranty work, but not at the same profit margin that the dealers shop can make on non warranty work. If the dealer's shop is full, many would try to avoid warranty work, but other more far sighted dealers, realize that customer satisfaction is worth more in the long run.

idavidson · January 2007

"If the dealer's shop is full, many would try to avoid warranty work"

I'm not sure where you getting your information ...

A dealer cannot refuse to do warranty work. Period.

I asked Mazda this since I bought my car from out of town.
Mazda USA informed that part of the dealer franchise
contract is to service all warranty claims in a timely
fashion.

csandste · January 2007

I think both post 106 and 107 are correct.

The dealer can't refuse warranty work, on the other hand if things are backed up and they can make more money on non-warranty work, basic customer service can suffer.

maltb · January 2007

"A dealer cannot refuse to do warranty work. Period."

I've seen it happen. There once was this dealer in NJ who refused warranty work on vehicles that were not sold by that dealer. The factory could do nothing about it because it was not part of the franchise agreement.

dakota29803 · January 2007

I thought the whole point of this thread was dealers refusing to do warranty work because the owner did not follow the letter of the warranty requirements (See message 100). Now you are saying that that cannot happen period. I agree with the original poster. Some dealers can and do refuse warranty work if they can find a loophole.

csandste · January 2007

for oil related engine failure if you change every 4000 miles-- haven't checked their web site it might be slightly less or slightly more.

The point is, that oil related engine failure is extremely rare in any car unless you run the engine well past 4K. My Malibu Maxx's oil life monitor shows 7000+ change intervals-- although the GM OHV engine is probably a lot easier on oil than any Hyundai/Kia unit.

Assume for a moment that oil was changed at 4000 miles (a thousand more than the severe cycle but 3000 less than the extended if the Rondo is like my Optima).

Are you saying that some dealers would refuse warranty work on (say) an alternator if your oil change receipts weren't for 3000 miles?

If so, that's a pretty low end dealer network.

I went with Kia rather than Sonata because I liked the local dealer better. My Hyundai dealer charged me $120 to change rear bulbs on my Elantra (only car I've ever had that I couldn't figure out how to do it), and $100 when I lost a gas cap, replaced it with an aftermarket unit and drove for a year at which point the engine light came on.

I generally changed oil on a 4000 mile cycle (I did do a used oil analysis with almost no appreciable wear) -- thank god the dealer didn't try to get out of the few warranty claims (i.e. neutral safety switch failure) because of any inconsistancies in my service record.

dakota29803 · January 2007

The recommended oil change interval on my Rondo is 7500 miles. My wife's Buick Lucerne has the oil change interval calculated on the car computer. Currently it is projecting over 10,000 miles for the first oil change. Tires have to be rotated more often than oil changes.

jeffpurd · January 2007

From personal experience with Mazda (very recently), I can assure you that the manufacturers are getting much more aggressive with restrictions on coverage of engine issues if you don't have all your evidence.

Probably natural because the quality of the drivetrains has improved to the point such that owner neglect may now be a leading cause of issues. If you change your own oil - keep the receipts of your purchases and log your activities religiously. Follow the schedule in the manual to a t.

csandste · January 2007

doesn't the Rondo have a 3000 mile severe changing cycle. If not Kia has changed things between the Optima and Rondo...strange.

drxsushimon · January 2007

I am currently thnking of buying a new car. And the Mazda5 and Kia Rondo have really caught my eye. Im wondering whats the best deal i can get with the most features, specs, looks, etc. Or if you guy can suggest a diffrent model i would be very grateful. :P

dakota29803 · January 2007

I checked the owner's manual and yes, 3000 miles is the severe cycle oil change interval. I don't drive severe cycle, so I never looked it up before.

raderator · February 2007

Drove it for an hour today. Base model, M/T. Zoom, zoom! This a great car for a young family man. Too bad I'm old and gray

But I still like it.

It has a lot more style than the Rondo (which I also drove for an hour). Seems lower and sportier. You sit more in it than on it.

I have no use for the middle seats let alone the back seats (standard). And the cargo area is not flat because of the large hole between the middle buckets when folded so it's not so good for my dog. Unlike the Rondo, the middle seats tumble forward so it doesn't make as good a sleeping surface for a 6' footer because the lower seat cushions form a barrier. There is vitually no storage behind the 3rd seat when it is upright.

I might have considered this car if it weren't loaded up with junk options. They charged over $200 for the white paint (???) and another couple of hundred for some dopey compass or something. The base model CD player, tho a 6-changer, does not play mp3s.

The mid-level (Touring) seems like the best deal. You get a moon-roof with that.

starlightmica · February 2007

but I'm hesitant to buy a car that's in its first model year, with unknown reliability. The Rondo had a nicer and bigger interior along with standard ESC, TRAC, and TPMS. We have 3 kids and wanted a backup vehicle for our Sienna that could hold all the child seats.

Mazda5 does have some of those safety features available overseas, and just introduced direct injection and a 5-speed auto on the JDM version - maybe in US in MY2008?. We ended up picking up the Mazda5 this past weekend as there was a good deal on a stripper Sport with no options other than the automatic.

arumage · February 2007

The chassis, engines, etc. are the same as the Optima which has been out for about a year. Reliability reports look very good with it. The Optima was even a finalist for MT COTY. The Rondo was part of the first cut.

maltb · February 2007

My guess is that once you have a car with "some dopey compass or something" aka an electro-chromatic auto-dimming mirror, you'll never own another car without one. if it was just a compass, I'd agree with you.

davidfehr · February 2007

In many ways much different than the Mazda however in my opinion it was far superior as far as power and overall build.

Styling was not that great but it drove well with auto stabilization. The one I had was equipped with a six cylinder that could keep up with a BMW 7 Series on heavy acceleration getting onto a highway. Damn car could cruise at 110 without any issues at all.

In the time I used it I had no mechanical problems. In fact what I found rather strange was that many more people were attracted to and commented on the car than anyone ever has with the Mazda 5.

maltb · February 2007

The 5 will do 110 effortlesly as well. I'd expect most cars today that aren't limited lower than that to do the same.

yes, it's photoshopped...

crutnacker · February 2007

I finally test drove the Mazda 5, and while I liked the way it drove and the utility of it, I couldn't get the feeling that the car was inexpensive because it was cheap. The seats and finish of the car reflected cheapiosity to me. My wife and I are back to the original choice for her, a CR-V, which is, of course, lots more expensive, but better finished and probably infinitely more reliable.

I'd like to test drive the Rondo, or at least see one. I wonder why Mazda does nothing to push the 5, it seems as though they could sell a few with a little effort.

mytitanic · February 2007

For the past two months I have done extensive research on these two vehicles. The models I selected were the Kia Rondo EX 5-seater and the Mazda5 GT (Mazda5 Touring in the USA).

The two vehicles, when compared side-by-side have many similar features, so I will only speak to the differences. My requirement is for an economical vehicle with a 4 cylinder engine, maximum cargo area with rear seats folded, precise handling, and maximum versatility. I rarely have need to carry more than two passengers, but do have a lively 100lb. Labrador that always insists on coming along!

When assessing the maximum cargo volume, I encountered some particularly incomprehensible figures, so resorted to measuring it myself while taking both for a test drive. With all rear seats folded flat, I calculate that the Rondo has 73.6 cu.ft. available, and the Mazda5 has 64.6 cu.ft.

Having eliminated identical or nearly identical features, I was left with the following major differences:

Kia Rondo EX 5-seater:

Longer basic warranty and roadside assistance coverage
Air conditioning standard
Electronic Stability Control
Traction Control
Generous underfloor storage spaces
Heated front seat standard

Mazda5 GT:

Sliding side doors
Telescoping steering wheel
More responsive handling due to larger wheels and performance tires
Rear seat fore/aft adjustment
Reclining rear seats
Rear seat mounted armrests

At this point, it seemed with a MSRP approximately $3,500 less and valuing safety over convenience that the Rondo seemed the clear choice. It was not until I drove both during an extended test period that I had to reconsider. On a typical shopping trip to my local mall (a common, almost daily use for the vehicle) the value of the sliding side doors on the Mazda5 became apparent. Loading and unloading was a breeze, and the dog could enter and exit without having to use the rear hatch. When fully open, the rear door on the Rondo extends a full 46" out from the body. The parking spaces at shopping malls in your area may be more generous, but ours are designed with smaller vehicles in mind, so loading groceries into the Rondo is best done via the rear hatch. For a passenger getting into the rear seat, this is not an option! Loading a large carton through the rear hatch led to another interesting discovery. While the Rondo is 3" taller overall, the tallest object that can be slid into the hatch is 32" vs. 34" for the Mazda5.

In conclusion, I believe both are fine vehicles, well constructed, and highly versatile. In the end, I decided that the Mazda5 was better suited to my purpose, and purchased one yesterday ---- your requirements may lead to a different conclusion.

bren · February 2007

I'm in the market for a new car and am having a hard time narrowing it down.

I am interested in both the Mazda5 and Kia Rondo as well as several other utility/wagon-type vehicles with good space and a high seating position with easy entry/exit. Of course I'd also like a vehicle with reasonable fuel economy and good acceleration, but the latter doesn't seem very common in this class of vehicle or price range. In most cases, I'll probably choose to buy a slightly used car with low miles to save big bucks. I currently own an AWD Suzuki Aerio wagon.

These are the vehicles I'm considering:

Saturn Vue V6: great performance, poor reliability
Suzuki SX4: AWD, slow, cheap
Scion xB: slow, cheap, great resale value, stability & traction control, EBD
Dodge Caliber/Jeep Patriot or Compass: optional AWD, slow

And of course the Mazda5 and Kia Rondo.

I wish there were a leasing organization which allowed you to drive a different vehicle every month or few months and just swap them with other members. :P :shades:

zbx · February 2007

I bought a Mazda5 GT last month and am happy so far. My 13 year old son says it's noisier than our 2003 Honda Accord.

I would still pick a Mazda5 over the Kia Rondo simply becuz I don't like buying a 1st year model. Although I like the Rondo's 2nd row bench seat and added features which a "lower status" brand such as Kia always offers to entice customers.

arumage · February 2007

Have you seen pictures of the '08 xB? It's 3" wider and nearly a foot longer. It's still a pretty short vehicle, but cargo space and power got alot better.

bren · February 2007

Yes I have. But it won't be available for at least a few months and it's likely to cost $1500 more than the old xB. So right now I'm considering the current xB.

arumage · February 2007

My friend has an '06 xB 3.0. It's roomy and has pretty good road manners. The price is right too. My only gripe with the current xB is the highway power. It's a bit buzzy, though a great city car. Since I'm on the highway and interstates fairly frequently, it's not for me.

viamede · February 2007

I have been in the same boat. After 6 hours at the auto show I was as confused as ever. I was set on the Rondo ut my family complained it lacked shoulder room for three in the back seat (although it says it is wider than many others they thought were fine).

I would consider adding a Matrix to your list to consider it has remarkable space and gets better mileage than any of the above. It doesn't have the rear capacity of the Rondo but is bigger than the Suzuki or Scion. If you want 4wd you can buy used. It lacks newer safety features you also get on the newer designs however.

arumage · February 2007

The word is that the Matrix is being canned soon though. I don't know if that matters to anyone.

newkiaowner · February 2007

I have looked at all the vehicles you are considering and then some. I ended up purchasing the Kia Rondo EX 4cyl. For me, the saturn had poor gas mileage. The suzuki was way to small. Scion was too slow, no power at all. The dodge caliber was too tight for back seat passengers. I'm 6'3" and push my seat all the way back, in the rondo I can still sit in the back and have knee room! The jeep vehicles just seemed to cheaply made. In the mazda the fifth passenger would have to squeeze into the small back seats, and you would give up alot of storage space. All in all the rondo seemed the best value. When they began offering the $750 cash assistance with the special financing, thedecision became easier. I purchased the car, the next day.

mytitanic · February 2007

Prior to narrowing my choice to the Rondo or the Mazda5, the Toyota Matrix was a worthy contender. My reason for eliminating it is due more to "protest" than based on facts and figures. Allow me to explain ...

The Toyota plant in Cambridge, Ontario, Canada manufactures the Matrix models for all of North America. Customers in the USA are able, via options, to add the safety features needed to make it competitive with the Rondo and Mazda5. Canadian customers are not. :mad: This is no doubt due to market volume, however as a proud Canadian I find the decision unconscionable. Being denied access to "frills and fluff" is one thing ---- safety features, NOT. :mad:

The Matrix is a fine vehicle with a bulletproof reliability record, and is a worthy contender for US customers. Rather than being "about to be discontinued" as another poster has suggested, given their current sales figures I rather think it will be around for some time to come.

arumage · February 2007

Try again. :P

The Matrix will probably be replaced by the 2009 Toyota Blade. It is more like a Mazda3 type vehicle. See articles below:

Car and Driver

Autospies

Wikipedia (about half way down)

w9cw · February 2007

zbx - The Rondo is a first year model, but essentially only here in the States. The Rondo marketed here is the 3rd Generation Kia Carens everywhere else in the world, except perhaps Canada. The underpinnings are quite well sorted out already.

mom2sydney · February 2007

I was set on getting the Mazda5 because I wanted a small-ish 6-7 seater that would easily fit my family of 4 and the occasional guest(s) of my kids. After test driving the 5 two separate times, I couldn't help feeling that I was missing something with all the rave reviews of the 5 that I had read. I didn't feel that the ride was all that great and the interior just felt cheap for some reason (even on the GT version with the leather seats!) It also looked like a minivan which was something I definitely didn't want. I was almost ready to "settle" for a 5 but then decided to look at the Rondo.

I hadn't even really considered it because it was Kia (after owning Subarus, Volvos, Chryslers and Toyotas I considered Kia a step backward) but after taking an extended test drive, the Rondo grew on me. The interior fit and finish was way better than what I expected. It felt similar to the Volvo V40 I previously owned in terms of ride and interior quality and I loved that car.

The dealer didn't have any EXV6 models but found one for me to test drive the next day. The EXV6 was really sharp in leather and a tad smoother but I didn't think the difference in engine was all that great. I ended up buying the LX with the 3rd row and convenience package and find myself making every excuse imagineable to drive it because I enjoy driving it. I usually suffer from buyer's remorse but not this time. The Rondo was exactly what I needed (6-7 seats, good gas mileage, safety features, practical value) but surprised me with the added bonuses of being fun to drive and well appointed.

If you absolutely don't need the third row, there are more options but if it's a choice between the Mazda5 and the Rondo, I vote Rondo hands down.

conwelpic · April 2007

I was able to check out the M5 and Rondo at the Toronto Auto Show but found the Rondo more to my liking. On the M5 I did not like the rear sliding doors or the black only interior (felt too enclosed), also did not like the rear storage area as it was not a solid floor with the seats flat (we have a golden retriever and could step in the gaps); not as much underfloor storage as the Rondo. Had no use for the third seating and preferred the second seater to be for three across if required.

There is also much more standard features on the Rondo (comparing it to the Rondo EX L4 model); more storage with the seats down; greater leg and headroom; better fuel mileage. The Rondo definitely the clear winner.

It will be interesting to see how the sales compare as the year progresses as the M5 has had quite a head start.

odman · May 2007

Here's a Canadian comparison article. I think the author said in a prior article that he bought a Rondo, so his conclusions may be influenced by that, but good press is good press:
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/driving/story.html?id=fa1e4465-f7b5-47f4- -8c2e-4e68d95fd6f9

bobw3 · May 2007

If you have no need for a 3rd row, then why not the Suburu Forrester or some other station wagon?

conwelpic · May 2007

did check out the Subaru Forester at the same auto show, not bad but was really turned off by the fact that the door windows have no frame - not a very secure feature. They are also $5000 more than the Rondo EX 4-cylinder. Ford Focus has dropped their wagon. Too bad we don't have the selection in MPV's that they have in the UK.
There is a good under floor storage area on the Rondo. When you compare it feature for feature and the price you pay, it takes some beating - but appreciate any feedback as I won't be making a move till the 2008 models arrive.

csandste · May 2007

I looked closely at the Forester before buying a Malibu Maxx. I looked at the Rondo before buying my wife an Optima.

IMHO, the Optima is a newer and more enjoyable package than the Forester, although I liked both vehicles.

conwelpic · May 2007

At first I didn't know what a Optima was but did some checking and its called the Magentis here in Canada. Nice vehicle but no good to me, as I need the versatility of a hatchback design. We've owned wagons, hatchbacks and sedans in the past and prefer the wagon/hatchback design the best. We have a large dog - Golden Retriever and our current sedan is not very good for "dog travel".

rwm2 · May 2007

In my opinion, Foresters are too small inside. The rear seat feels cramped. The Rondo is four inches wider than the Forester. Compared to the Rondo, the only thing going for the Forester is AWD.

prulex · June 2007

I would argue that the Forester has more than just it's fantastic AWD system going for it. How about suspension, brakes, fit and finish, engine, and proven Subaru quality? Kia is definitely and up-and-comer, but I don't think it can be put in the category of Subaru just yet.

arumage · June 2007

All those things are nice, but if you can't fit in the vehicle, what good are they to you? :P I didn't fit in the Forester. I had to spread my legs apart to keep my knees from hitting the front seat when sitting in the rear. My head also touches the ceiling in the 2nd row. I fit like a glove in the Rondo, even with the driver's seat all the way back.

rwm2 · June 2007

The category of Subaru? Check this out:

http://www.strategicvision.com/auto_segmentwinners.php?year=2007&award=TQA&seg=19

dakota29803 · June 2007

Go to this site, scroll to the bottom, to see the JD Powers ratings of initial quality of 2007 makes. Kia is just above average, Subaru is way down,

http://www.jdpower.com/press-releases/pressrelease.aspx?id=2007088

conwelpic · June 2007

and to quote "Kia posts the largest improvement in ranking, moving from 24th in 2006 to 12th in 2007", that just shows how fast the quality is improving - should put some of those skeptics to rest!

coolmazda5 · June 2007

conwelpic replied:
and to quote "Kia posts the largest improvement in ranking, moving from 24th in 2006 to 12th in 2007", that just shows how fast the quality is improving - should put some of those skeptics to rest!

Good job for KIA (somebody posted the other day that the KIA CEO is a big fan of quality, which always supports this case).

Now, as I mentioned earlier, with regards to (wrt.) quality, yes, KIA may have improved greatly if you like, but the car is still a KIA. Quality is supporting KIA to become a better brand, but the skepticism does not only come from quality itself, but also from its unique style, features, design, etc. KIA still lacks style and design to say the least. I would give it another 5 years to get there (i.e. to fight Toyota, Honda or even Nissan).

coolmazda5 · June 2007

Arumage replied:
All those things are nice, but if you can't fit in the vehicle, what good are they to you? I didn't fit in the Forester. I had to spread my legs apart to keep my knees from hitting the front seat when sitting in the rear. My head also touches the ceiling in the 2nd row. I fit like a glove in the Rondo, even with the driver's seat all the way back.

The priority to buy a car should be in the seat(s) you and your loved ones drive or ride 95% of the time. Now, if you are chauffeured or have teenager kids 5'9'' or up, Arumage brings a good point. Yet, in that case, I would go for a Lincoln TownCar or a Suburban, not a Rondo, a Forester or a Mazda5.

Some questions that could help:

- When is the last time I rode in the back seat of my own car? (my case: never, I also have a 1999 Honda, bought brand new)

- How many times Have I used the full car capacity, with the 3rd row unfolded, a total of 5 adults, a baby on its car seat and the stroller? (my case: once in 2 years, the big stroller actually fits! but one of its front wheels was sticking out of the 3rd row back seat. Greatest comfort for the passengers: No, accomplished the goal: Yes. Would I do this everyday: No! :surprise: )

dakota29803 · June 2007

I own a Kia and have rented a Kia; I have rented a Nissan, The Kias were far better cars that the Nissan. I used to be a Nissan (actually Datsun)fan, but no more. The Kia is a far better car. If you buy your car for style (looks) at the expense of functionality then go elsewhere. I think the Kia Rondo is a far more attractive car than the Honda Fit, Honda Element or any of the Scions. YMMV

coolmazda5 · June 2007

dakota29803 replied:
If you buy your car for style (looks) at the expense of functionality then go elsewhere

Hmmm... I have a Mazda5, so we got the style (looks) at no functionality expense (ask my wife, car is very versatile and looks great

)...

dakota29803 replied:
I think the Kia Rondo is a far more attractive car than the Honda Fit, Honda Element or any of the Scions

I'm 100% with you on that one! The models you listed are ugly :P .

My comment was more oriented to more down-to-earth cars like the Honda Civic, Honda Accord, Honda CR-V, Toyota Camry, Toyota Avalon, Nissan Quest or Nissan Altima (even the 300ZX, but that is not really a concept targeting family cars).

Mazda 5 vs Kia Rondo

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles