The Mazda CX-5 has long been an American sales hero for the underdog brand from Japan. The pressure is now on for the debut of the new 2026 Mazda CX-5. It needs to up the ante to stay with the times, and Mazda appears to have done just that. All except for one critical area, in which it’s bucking the current trend.
The headline is that the all-new CX-5 is bigger than the outgoing generation. It’s a full 4.5 inches longer than before, and half an inch wider, but with good reason. Mazda has sought to offer a more comfortable SUV that’s easier to live with every day, with the company eager to highlight the larger door openings. Ingress and egress weren’t the easiest on the old model, and that was a key factor to rectify for what is fundamentally a practical family vehicle. The cargo area is larger, too, with the rear area also given a lower lift-in height for ease of loading.
While it’s an all-new design, the car is still instantly recognizable as a Mazda. It follows the latest trends in the brand’s Kodo design language, while hallmarks like the grille shape and the rich red paint can be traced back well beyond a decade at this point. There are touches that keep it moving with the times. Most notably, the sleek modern lighting design up front, and the “MAZDA” wordmark badge on the rear. It’s become a bit of a trope at this point, something multiple brands have arguably nabbed straight off of Range Rover.
As far as powertrains go, the basic engine will carry over from last year’s model. The SkyActiv-G engine is a naturally aspirated 2.5-liter inline-four good for 187 horsepower and 185 pound-feet of torque. It drives all four wheels via a six-speed automatic transmission—almost an anachronism in a world where 9- and 10-speeds are increasingly common.
However, a hybrid is also on the horizon. In 2027, Mazda will introduce the SkyActiv-Z, which we’re told “will feature Mazda Hybrid System technology to offer a higher level of performance and fuel efficiency along with the engaging drive that our customers expect.” That sentence offers a whole lot of fluff but very little information; Mazda’s press release declines to give us any specifications on the pending electrified drivetrain.
In any case, the hybrid will likely be key to the CX-5’s future fortunes. Electrified models are becoming increasingly important in the SUV and crossover sectors. As an indicator, a full 50% of Toyota RAV4 sales in 2024 were hybrid or PHEV models. It tells us that customers are voting with their feet when it comes to drivetrain technology and fuel economy.
Inside, the CX-5 has increased room for rear passengers, particularly regarding leg, knee, and headroom. There’s also ambient lighting to provide that modern tech-luxury feel that has become so popular of late. Mazda has also given the CX-5 a new available 15.6-inch infotainment screen, the largest it has ever fitted to a production vehicle. It’s integrated with Google’s in-car services, including the tech company’s Gemini AI assistant.
In one critical area, though, Mazda has gone against the times. Where automakers like Volkswagen and Ferrari are rushing to put real buttons back in their cars, the Japanese automaker has gone the other way. There are no buttons on the dashboard for things like the radio or HVAC system. You don’t even get a volume knob. Instead, everything is controlled via the touchscreen. A small respite is that the buttons on the steering wheel, at least, are indeed proper physical controls.
Price is yet to be revealed, though Mazda has always been generally in the ballpark of its rivals in this regard. Expect the new CX-5 to remain competitively priced with the Honda CR-V and Toyota RAV-4, as was the previous generation, with a small price premium to be paid for the pending hybrid version.
Mazda has done an able job redesigning its family SUV for today’s market. Critically, the brand listened to customer feedback and put in the work to rectify the most obvious pain points—namely, space in the cabin, and how easy it was to get in and out of the thing. Beyond that, the other changes are more subtle, with visual tweaks and interior upgrades to keep up with the times.
The CX-5 has long proven popular, even if it hasn’t dominated the segment. Sans a total revolution, it’s unlikely to topple the Toyota RAV4 or Honda CR-V. However, Mazda will be hoping the all-new 2026 model will see the CX-5 surge back into strong six-figure sales as customers respond to the crossover that’s bigger and better than before.
Top graphic image: Mazda
“It drives all four wheels via a six-speed automatic transmission—almost an anachronism in a world where 9- and 10-speeds are increasingly common.”
IIRC there was an interview with a Mazda engineer about the time SkyactivG was released who claimed six speeds offered peak bang for the buck and more speeds brought only diminishing returns. Dunno how true that is but Mazda seems to have taken it to heart.
I have a 15 cx-5 with 125k on it. I rent vehicles often for work and often get back into my “old” Mazda and am SO happy to have the six speed. It works so well!!
“It tells us that customers are voting with their feet when it comes to drivetrain technology and fuel economy.”
Ah the irony.
Touch screen controls. Welp, there is only one reply:
YOU WERE THE CHOSEN ONE! IT WAS SAID THAT YOU WOULD DESTROY THE SITH, NOT JOIN THEM! YOU WERE TO BRING BALANCE TO THE FORCE NOT LEAVE IT IN DARKNESS! YOU WERE MY BROTHER, MAZDA! I LOVED YOU!
Nice soft-peddle of the buttons. Need better Headline-writer.
“Mazda makes a piece of shit car that has a driving-hazardous screen for buttons. Please, everybody, avoid buying this car and driving near one!”
.
.
.
Yeah, I suck at it, too.
Weird move on the touchscreen for Mazda. I absolutely hate their stupid iDrive ripoff multi-knob thing (using CarPlay with that thing was downright dangerous), but why go to the other extreme?
I personally don’t mind screens for HVAC since AUTO mode in my car does an adequate job 95% of the time and I rarely change it, but volume knobs should be a federally mandated standard item.
I rented one four years ago and hated its iDrive ripoff even more than I hated iDrive. Which was a lot.
I wish my car had a volume knob, but the steering wheel control and the touch screen are both very responsive, so it’s not the end of the world or anything.
I understand Mazda getting tired of the criticism from publications and auto bloggers about its rotary knob and dated infotainment but its interior redesign comes across as spiteful, especially when there’s easily enough space beneath the touchscreen to fit a row of physical HVAC controls while still keeping the tech obsessed happy.
One can only hope the lower trim levels with the “small” 12in touchscreen retains some buttons or at least a knob or two.
I dunno – had a last-gen CX-5 and compared to the CX-50, the proportions just dont seem right on the former. Doesnt seem like they fixed it here. And, I may be one of the few, but I liked the dial interface – was easy to use and kept focus on the road for me. It was clunky with Android Auto though, but they coulda fixed that.
Is Mazda slow? I think it has been shown that it takes a certain kind of special to think people don’t want physical buttons. Honda and Subaru caught on after a few years. Maybe in 3 years they’ll refresh the AV/HAVC system to include a volume button.
What a shame they got rid of all the physical controls; Mazda had the best-feeling dials and buttons of all the mainstream brands. They also had an excellent, easy-to-use HVAC control system with a small separate display for temperature readout, fan speed settings, etc. This is a huge step back for the brand and a misstep given all the negative press touchscreen-only controls have been receiving.
(/peers intently at interior pics)
Wait, did they ditch the Commander controller next to the shifter? They were so adamant for the longest time about not using touch screens for safety.
It’s probably just me, but the new styling makes it look like there’s even more overhang on the front end. Also, did they really have to make it look angrier? Does every goddamn new vehicle have to look like it wants to kill someone whilst driving down the road?
Yes, like pretty much every other automaker that has tried some kind of knob or joystick. Touch the button you want on the screen is simply more intuitive – and as a bonus it is cheaper.
“Does every goddamn new vehicle have to look like it wants to kill someone whilst driving down the road?”
Its better than Mazda’s Nagare which looked like a clown that wanted to kill you.
One thing I didn’t see mentioned here and am too lazy to look for elsewhere is the rear suspension. Did Mazda retain the full IRS from the current CX-5, or did they pick up the torsion beam from the CX-30, CX-50 and 3?
I see it’s Mazda’s turn to ruin their interiors. Which is especially sad to me because I had every intention of looking at their hybrids next time I was in the market. I’m not setting foot in their showroom for this crap though.
I really hate the elimination of physical controls, just as others are learning to bring them back. WTH?! With the 2025s, I like the 5 over the 50 all day long.
Meanwhile, we bought a CX-30. Small is great in the city.
I really thought the CX-50 was the “replacement” for the CX-5. I guess in this world of all things CUV, there is space for them to be sold side-by-side?? Why would I pick one over the other?
Read the Car and Driver piece on this reveal, it discusses this segment duality expkaining why it’s a success for Mazda and its customers.
not an improvement, but not a disaster. pretty much the same. the “ugly black wheels” trend continues. : (
It’s a real shame Mazda has confused negative feedback about their little knob with negative feedback about all physical controls.
A little passive aggressive?
“You don’t like my master control knob? You want more touch screen? Fine.”
This is new? I swear it looks identical to the current version. The fact that it’s the same color definitely contributes to that feeling. That touchscreen is awful though, pendulum swung way too far on this one.
It would also look better with the emblem on the back and not Mazda written out, but overall it’s fine.
Maybe that’s because the top image literally is the current version!
(The Drive made that mistake, too, but has since corrected it. And Motor Trend may also have done it)
Now it looks slightly different. I feel justified now though because clearly I’m not the only one struggling to find the differences haha
Definitely not! I did a double take as well…
Well at least they avoided the ugly floating roof trend. On the other hand, I’m getting real sick of seeing black plastic hexagonal mesh grills and vent inserts. Such a lack of imagination.
I think I may have bought my last new car. I don’t want anything with AI ‘built in’ thank you very much.
My MIL just bought a 25 Rogue with the Google system in there. Barely 1k miles and they are already having to replace it. But while it was working, what a cluster. I am the families resident tech guy by default (unfortunately most of the time) and I could not figure that crap out for the life of me. Hearing its in the new Mazda is disappointing.
I have always liked that Mazda seemed to be a little behind the times on tech as everything seemed to just work and was simple.
So they made the CX-5 bigger… So now, what’s the point of having the CX-50 again?
It strikes me as a completely pointless investment.
Instead of making a new CUV that overlaps a CUV they already have, I would prefer if Mazda put their resources into making a small pickup along the lines of the Ford Maverick and maybe bring back the Mazda 5/Primacy minivan.
I don’t know about a pickup, but I think you’re bang on with the assessment of making the car bigger because that’s “what customers wanted.”
Customers who actually want a bigger Mazda can buy the CX-50 — which is now almost exactly the same size as a CX-5! Mazda should have followed up with the customers who wanted a bigger CX-5 and asked why they didn’t buy the CX-50 (I bet the answer would be “oh, it wasn’t available when I bought the CX-5”)
I think it’s more that the 50 targets like the passport and bronco sport, whereas this is in the CR-V, Escape class. Similar sizes, but different focus.
Please, Mazda. Please do not do this “everything behind a screen” nonsense for the next Miata.
I’ve had a 1st gen CX-5 as the family hauler for years and not once have I ever thought ‘this needs to be larger’, and it’s used for skiing and camping trips. Also, my 83-year-old mother doesn’t seem to have any trouble with ingress and egress.
I honestly wonder what is wrong with people? This is why we can no longer have fun, cheap, compact hatchbacks like those from the ’80s and ’90s.
Have you tried to fit two booster seats and an infant seat in it at the same time?
No, but if I needed that much room I probably wouldn’t be trying to fit it into a ‘compact’ SUV. There are bigger vehicles out there, so why force CUVs to do jobs meant for full-size SUVs?
And 4.5″ longer and 0.5″ wider is ruining it for you?
No, but the fact that all that’s available new are increasingly larger SUV-variants at the expense of compact hatches and wagons is absolutely ruining it for me. I got my CX-5 because it was the CUV I hated least, not because I actually wanted a CUV.
Yeah, because everyone has stopped making Crosstreks, CX30s, HRVs, and Corolla Crosses…
That’s what minivans are for.
You must be in the smaller percentile for height/weight. The current gen, while not a pain to drive, was passed by me a few times as a daily driver. I convinced my MIL into one but she is the opposite of 6’4″, 215 lbs. Sure, I can almost get into a good driving position but no one else will ever be comfortable behind me.
I’m 6′ tall, and my 6′ tall son can sit behind me.
I originally wanted a CX-5, but got a CX-50 entirely because the CX-5 was a bit too tight. The overall volume of each car is very similar, but the CX-50 trades height for length, giving it just a bit more useable space. Having child seats in the outer rear seats of the CX-5 meant both driver & passenger were cramped; the 50 was just big enough to mean I could keep my seat where I actually wanted it and didn’t have to amputate my kids legs. Mazda is generally bad at efficient packaging from a usability standpoint and their cars are usually on the small end of the segment. Upsizing is needed.
I wish, if Mazda is following the word mark trend, that they’d stick with their classic blocky word mark that essentially was their whole logo (no emblem) from the mid-70s to the early 90s.
I own a current-gen (2017) CX-5, which I bought used. I actually preferred the CX-30 when I was shopping – for its smaller size – but they were very difficult to find without AWD, and also because I prefer “Made in Japan” over “Made in Mexico”.
I don’t understand why Mazda is making the new CX-5 even bigger. Isn’t that what the CX-50 is for?
Nope. IIRC when I was researching the two, the CX-5 actually has more cargo space. The lower roofline and higher ground clearance of the CX-50 hurts it in that respect. They are meant to appeal to different market segments. City/street oriented vs outdoor/offroad oriented. At least, that’s the explanation Mazda gives.
Yep. Which makes sense, Ford has the escape and bronco sport, Honda has the CR-V and Passport, Chevy has something or other or 5 other things, etc. Nearly every brand has this at this point.