It doesn’t feel like it’s been nearly a decade since the current Mazda CX-5 debuted, but that speaks volumes to the refinement of the design. We’re talking about a crossover that’s handsome, restrained, tasteful without being expensive, all attributes that will make it a tough act to follow. However, it’s almost time for a new CX-5, and we just got our first good glimpse of what it’ll look like.
It’s a single blown-out photo posted to the CocheSpias forum with credit to the Car Design News Instagram page, although it appears to have been taken down from Instagram. Regardless, this certainly looks like a photo of a monitor, and not only does the crossover on the monitor line up with spy shots of the next CX-5, all of the set design is very on-brand for Mazda. There’s an overwhelming likelihood that this is a leak of an official photo, so let’s dig into what we’re looking at.
Right out of the gate, this is an extremely evolutionary design, although it does appear to show significant changes compared to the current CX-5. The arc over the front fender has been flattened out, with a single character line running the entire length of the profile.
The biggest changes are up front, where an entirely new down-the-road graphic featuring L-shaped headlights that flow into a filler panel around the grille might take some getting used to. Admittedly, the filler panel is a way of allowing for a narrower grille without making the front end look too tall, and it serves as a place to put the headlight washers. As for the bumper cover of the new CX-5, it features corner reliefs and a far larger lower grille than the outgoing model, although much of that bottom opening is blanked off. Keep in mind, the low-hanging front fascia that may not be used in the U.S. market, as EPA light truck classification requires an approach angle of 28 degrees.
While the limited resolution of this leaked photo blows out details on the hood and in the wheels, there appear to be small rectangles atop the glossy fender cladding, a strong diagonal character line on the lower part of the front door, and play in overlapping the painted and plastic surfaces.
While we don’t know much about what’s under the skin of the next Mazda CX-5, widespread reports suggest a hybrid variant is in the cards. Considering many competitors already offer hybrid variants, and that Mazda’s offering Toyota’s hybrid system in the Alabama-built CX-50 and sells plug-in hybrid variants of the CX-70 and CX-90, it makes sense for electrification to come to the brand’s bread and butter compact crossover.
Given that this looks to be a leak of an official shot, don’t be surprised if we learn more about the next Mazda CX-5 over the coming months. Considering the current model’s been on sale for eight years and is still a competitive product, expect the next one to be a fixture on our roads for a relatively long model cycle.
Top graphic credit: Instagram/cardesignnews
Support our mission of championing car culture by becoming an Official Autopian Member.
The new CX-5 looks neither great nor awful, so I guess we should be grateful. I think that the existing nose treatment is better looking than this new, upcoming one, but per usual, nobody at Mazda saw fit to consult with me during the preliminary design work. 🙁
While I’d not be surprised to see them offer this new gen of CX-5 with the same mass-market, apparently somewhat boring hybrid powertrain that they source from Toyota and use in the CX-50, I hope to Glob that they see fit to retain/continue offering the regular/naturally aspirated 2.5 liter Mazda-designed-and-built powerplant that’s been available in the CX-5 (and many other models) for ages, along with the turbo variant of that 2.5. These are GOOD, well known engines, and they’re relatively simple (especially the regular, non-turbo version, when compared to hybrids) which IMO is a big plus for owners who want a lower lifetime cost of ownership vs. a hybrid system (that usually provides only modest MPG gains at the cost of increased complexity and cost).
I’ve always really liked the CX-5… even the very early 2 liter ‘weak’ ones that were briefly available with a stick. Of course, the revised ones (2017 and later, I think?) cleaned it up and refined it, but the fact is that Mazda got so much RIGHT with the CX-5 from the beginning (and in the 2017 revamp) which accounts for it being around for so long and selling so well. It’s just an all-around very good vehicle IMO, assuming that the person buying it actually enjoys the act of driving.
I’ve never actually test driven one, but I’ve driven a few that belong to friends/neighbors/etc… It’s ‘right-sized’ (for my needs, though my own cars hold a bit more cargo, which is probably more than I require 90% of the time) and compared to pretty much every other compact crossover I’ve ever driven, they drive pretty well: you can actually feel the steering feedback and there’s some actual pleasure to be had in the driving experience, per usual Mazda. Admittedly, I’ve never driven a Porsche Macan, though I haven driven various BMW X5s and X3s, but they all cost more than the average Mazda CX-5 anyway, so apples and oranges.
Provided that I don’t drop dead in the upsettingly near future, there’s still a good chance that I’ll own a CX-5 at some point (a 2017+ version probably, just because it’ll probably be impossible to find an early manual version that hasn’t been beat to death already) even though I just bought a 240 wagon last week (manual, with 167Kmiles on it, so a relatively low-mile one 😉 ). I sincerely look forward to CX-5 ownership. 🙂
Well, that’s not…really an improvement.
The current CX-5 is still quite handsome. This looks like The Crimson Chin.
I thought the “CX-5 [was] dead, long live the CX-50”? I don’t see how having both cars available in the same market segment in the same market would be helpful for a company as small as Mazda
Slightly different segments. CX-5 is more mass-market, CX-50 is a bit more stylish but also advertised to the “outdoor adventure” crowd. The ads for the CX-50 show it going off-road and even towing a trailer.
Looks Nissan-esque, not Mazda…
CX-5 Habsburg Edition?
Damn, beat me to the joke!
Jay Leno edition
I sat in a CX-50 at a car show when my wife and I were looking for a new car. I hit my head trying to get in because the roof line is so low and the windshield sloped back do far compared to seat height. Later I got my wife to sit inside it and she did exactly the same thing – hit her head trying to get it. She decided she hated it and that was it.
Later on I had a Mazda 3 as a rental and had the same roof line issues and again had to really bend my neck to get in. The CX-5 doesn’t have this problem and the roof line is generous with plenty of headroom – which is one of the reasons people have gravitated to SUV’s: very comfortable ingress/egress, roomy and airy cabins with good visibility. I feel like that was sacrificed to an extent for style and it’s a bad trade off. The CX-5 is their CR-V / RAV4 / Rogue / Equinox / Forester / Bronco Sport competitor and it needs to be right. This amorphous blob styling has run its course and looks dated, Mazda needs to come up with something better.
” I hit my head trying to get in because the roof line is so low and the windshield sloped back do far compared to seat height. Later I got my wife to sit inside it and she did exactly the same thing – hit her head trying to get it.”
LOL!
I see what you did there, pretty slick.
I was gravely disappointed to discover this as well. I really like the CX-50’s overall design and appearance and was strongly considering one as my next vehicle. I took one home on an extended test drive, and after getting into it and sitting in it I was devastated to discover that it was shorter (height-wise) than my wife’s CX-5, and also that I was sitting down into the seat, whereas on her car and my cars the H-point (hip location) are about the same as my normal height, so I can just slide horizontally in, which I find pleasant. I hadn’t really noticed these until it was parked next to hers, but after the discovery the differences were glaring, to my dismay.
There are too many new cars that have that short roof height and/or heavily-slanted A-pillars. I get that it’s probably for crash safety (and aero), but goodness does it make it difficult for some of us. I shouldn’t risk a concussion just getting into or out of a vehicle. Worst one is probably the Chrysler Pacifica/Voyager minivan, as I have to literally squat to get into the front seats, regardless of where the seat is set.
Not an improvement. Visually, anyway.
That jawline. The jowls. Is it finally, after all these years, a car with the face of the Burgermeister Meisterburger?