The challenge Mazda faces is, in many ways, the same one this website does. A part of me would love to be a website that everyone on the planet reads every day, as it would make me immensely powerful and wealthy. At the same time, the sense that people have that The Autopian is this wonderful and unique thing that they enjoy with a select group of in-the-know enthusiasts is a big part of why I also love this website.
Mazda is not Toyota, and it builds cars for exactly the kind of people who, I think, read this website. At the same time, it’s a business and, as the latest Mazda CX-5 shows, the planners would like to grow that business. Unlike most other major automakers in the United States, Mazda is mostly alone. It’s partially owned by Toyota, sure, and while that gives it access to some powertrains, it’s fundamentally its own independent company.
This means Mazda has to be careful. It has to make hard choices because it can neither leverage a larger carmaker for everything, nor afford to make too many mistakes in this suddenly very uncertain environment. That’s how we ended up with Mazda embracing Big Screen. I think it’s one of the best versions of Big Screen, if that matters to you. It may matter a lot, or it may not matter at all.
Mazda still makes the CX-50, a car that’s also a two-row crossover of roughly the same size serving roughly the same market. This either makes a lot of sense or no sense at all.
[Full disclosure: Mazda flew me to Los Angeles, put me up at a beachside resort for two nights, and fed me delicious pie. In retrospect, I should have skipped all the meals just to save room for the pie. -MH]
The Basics
Engine: 2.5-liter inline-four
Transmission: 6-speed automatic transmission
Drive: All-wheel drive
Output: 187 horsepower, 186 lb-ft of torque
Fuel Economy: 24 MPG city, 30 MPG highway, 26 MPG combined
Base Price: $31,395 (including $1,495 destination charge)
Price As-Tested: $40,485 for S Premium Plus (including $1,495 shipping/handling)
How New Is This, Exactly?
The biggest question I had revolved around how much this car counts as a new generation. As with a lot having to do with the 2026 Mazda CX-5, the answer is open to interpretation. It looks different and, mostly aft the B-pillar, it’s 4.5 inches longer, which is obvious when you sit in the back seat or look at the cargo area. It’s also half an inch wider, though if you can feel that much space, you’re either lying or you’re a pair of calipers that’s taken on human form after being cursed by a genie.
Almost every part of this car has been changed to make it friendlier for normal humans. The doors open wider. The cargo area is larger and more accessible. There are more airbags and more standard safety equipment. Curiously, this means it’s got the same wheelbase as the Mazda CX-50, albeit a little shorter and taller.
If you enjoyed the old base, naturally aspirated powertrain, you’ll like the new one, because it’s mostly identical. Because the whole car is heavier, fuel economy has dropped a little bit, although not by much. It even has a six-speed transmission. In 2026! Can you believe it?
It looks like a refined version of the outgoing model, with some visual refinements that do work well here. It’s aesthetically similar enough that I get why people kept asking me if it was a new generation or just a refresh, and I’d argue that this is the least you can do to call something a new generation of a car, but it is a new generation. Toyota does the same thing all the time, and no one complains.
Let’s Just Get It Out Of The Way And Talk About The Screen
Some of you are just not going to be able to deal with this. I know this, you know this, and I think deep down, Mazda knows this as well. Car development cycles take years, and when this car development cycle was happening, Big Screen was the thing. Now that the car is ready, there’s been a huge backlash against Big Screen in some circles. Unfortunately for the brand, the Venn diagram of People Who Like To Talk About Mazdas Online and People Who Hate Big Screen might as well be a circle.
I can’t quite be that upset, and that’s for a few reasons. First, the “commander knob” that some people seemed to love was just never that appealing to me, even if it got better when paired with a small touchscreen. Second, the fine gentleman from Mazda, who showed me the new system (also an Autopian member, so he has great taste), made a point about the system now being updatable over-the-air, and trying to match all new features to what is basically an eight-way input device isn’t going to always result in the best HMI experience. Finally, most people like Big Screen, and I just dont’t think the old system works well when there’s a giant screen in your face.
This is all to say that I’ll leave being upset over a commander knob to the Ken Starrs of the world.
Mazda went for it, though. Maybe too hard. The screen itself is fine, but the lack of buttons is going to make people mad.
Would you like to adjust the temperature? Screen. Would you like to change where the air is coming from? Screen. While there are good, redundant steering wheel controls, it’s almost all screen. Mazda understands most people don’t love this, so the control bar at the bottom is there, no matter what you’re doing (unless you’re parked and watching YouTube or playing a game, where full screen is possible).
In the Premium Plus trim, you get the largest version of this screen, but we were told the smaller version is basically the same interface, just not as wide. In traditional Mazda form, it works better than almost any other big screen from any other automaker I’ve tried. Everything is fast and easy to find. Compared to the Polestar 4 I had, which also featured Google Built-In, this might as well be the cockpit of a 747.
View this post on Instagram
Oh, right, Google Built-In. I don’t like Google Built-In. This is where Google takes over the interface and, in my experience, it’s always a little buggy. This was the least annoying version, but I still prefer using Apple CarPlay.
A lot of the appeal of Google Built-In is that Mazda doesn’t have to develop a whole system, and Google brings AI tools like Gemini (eventually) and Google Assistant (currently). Will people on this continent follow Chinese consumers and decide to utilize voice activation more? Maybe. I’m not sure. Asking the car to do basic things like adjust the temperature, choose new music, and change navigation worked just fine.
If you’re a conquest target for Mazda and are coming out of a Nissan Rogue, or even a gas-powered CR-V, I think you’ll look at the Mazda’s screen and probably think it’s cool. Given the competitive pricing of the CX-5, it is a lot of technology for the money.
If you’re a returning Mazda CX-5 purist who also drives an NA Miata on the weekends, it’ll be a bit harder to adjust to, and it’s hard to argue that the same interface, but with a row of buttons, wouldn’t be better. It would be better. There’s really no argument.
The Mazda rep seemed excited to jump in the car to show me one thing. “Tell Jason, the glovebox is just a normal glovebox!” Points to Mazda for that one.
Does It Still Drive Like A CX-5?
I’ve owned a Subaru Forester. I currently own a Honda CR-V. I don’t think there’s a popular car in this class I haven’t driven. I would still rather have this new CX-5 on twisty back roads, like the ones I drove on this trip, more than any other car in this class.
Because the car got bigger and heavier, this took some tweaking. There’s a guy named Dave Coleman who used to be a journalist, and, for that reason, every car writer credits Dave Coleman with the feel of Mazdas. It’s his job to be keeper of the zoom zoom flame, but not his job alone, so maybe this isn’t fair. Either way, Dave Coleman (and company) didn’t screw this up.
If you ask Mazda, the old steering was a little heavy, and that resulted in less steering feel, so the electronic power steering was tweaked to lighten it a bit. At the same time, the car’s damping force is “front-loaded,” which means you don’t need as much progressive damping on the back end. This is then combined with softer springs, which give it a more forgiving ride without being too floaty. It’s smart. Given that driving the CR-V is like feeling up your romantic partner with oven mitts (totally cool if that’s what you’re into), the Mazda is noticeably more interactive.
It’s not fast, though. While 187 horsepower is totally adequate, and the six-speed has been adjusted to (mostly) hold gears and not annoy you, it feels kinda slow. Select “Sport” mode and try to twist as much power out of it as you can, and it’s not bad, I suppose. At least that naturally-aspired inline-four sounds better than any naturally-aspirated four you can rent at a Hertz is going to ever sound.
I didn’t get to drive the cheapest version of the CX-5 on the launch, but other than wheel size, it’s mechanically the same car. At around $30,000, there just isn’t any crossover this size that drives this well. In this extremely important category, the Mazda CX-5 is a winner.
It’s Way Better At Normie Stuff
I’m a dad. I’m probably a normie. I’ve got my Patagonia fleece. I talk a lot about credit card points. I have a favorite season of Justified. The dad in me deeply appreciates the changes that Mazda made to the interior and overall usability of the vehicle, as well as safety.
As you can see in the image above, the CX-5 gets a lot of airbags, and the Mazda folks on hand made a big deal of pointing out that it had airbags my CR-V lacked. My CR-V Hybrid also has the annoying thing where there’s a little lip between the rear cargo area and the rear seats when I fold them down. The CX-5 is just flat across. Grrr… stop making me jealous, Mazda product experts!
Even better, the CX-5 has the one feature I wish every crossover had:
No, not a Yeti cooler and a surfboard (although…). It has a rear seat that can split down the middle or on the sides. Most vehicles in this class allow you only the 2/1 combo; the 1/1/1 here is aces. While we’re back here, the larger and taller cargo area is easier to load into with a wider opening and has a lower entry point. I’m tall, so I don’t care, but not everyone is tall.
The rear doors open super wide, which means getting a car seat into the vehicle to take advantage of one of the open latch points for a car seat is easier. My kid is now out of the booster seat, but there was a time when this was important. Even subtle things, like there being dark surfaces where little gremlins (or big ones) are likely to smudge everything with their sticky little fingers is just smart.
If you can see past the screen, there isn’t anything about the interior of this car that doesn’t feel at least a little improved. Look, it even has a full-sized spare:
Again, screen aside, this is a better car in most ways, and I think regular people will enjoy those changes.
This Is Probably Not The Best CX-5 There Will Be, It’s Just The Best CX-5 There Is
Mazda wisely did not put all of its eggs in one Egg Basket. If you don’t like the screen, you can just buy a CX-50. It’s basically the same size, it looks just as good, and has the CX-5’s now-abandoned 2.5-liter turbo motor and a hybrid version. Mazda will sell you one. It’s easy. At $38,000, the 2.5-liter Turbo CX-50 is probably preferable in most ways to the CX-5 in top trim.
What I can’t answer is what to do about the hybrid. The current shoehorned version of Toyota’s hybrid system in the CX-50 is a bit of a compromise, whereas Mazda is developing a whole new SkyActiv-Z hybrid system for the new CX-5. I bet that’s good. Taking this basic car, giving it a better hybrid system, and charging a price that’s competitive with the RAV4 and CR-V Hybrids is an alluring idea. I am probably here for it.
If you live somewhere warm, the approximatley $34k you’ll pay for a 2.5 S Select gets you wireless CarPlay and Android Auto as well as just about everything else you’ll need. If you live somewhere cold, the Preferred adds a wiper de-icer and power liftgate, but at nearly $36k delivered, we’re venturing into CR-V Hybrid and RAV4 Hybrid territory.
If you’re averse to either buying a hybrid or waiting for one, the non-hybrid versions of most crossovers in this class are hampered by uninspiring driving and CVTs, which the new CX-5 delightfully lacks. If you want a crossover and care about driving, you really can’t do much better than the CX-5 for the price, unless you hate Big Screen, in which case you can’t do much better than a certified pre-owned CX-5 for an even lower price.
Top photo: Matt Hardgiree
This is a major factor. Mazda always seems to lag a few years behind everyone else, hence why their hybrid offerings are so limited. That said, I find it hard to believe that they conducted the market research, even a few years ago, and determined that consumers actually preferred a television in their line of sight. I find it vastly more likely that they let the bean counters talk them into saving some money by nixing the physical controls and putting everything on the screen. Remember, Honda learned this lesson 10 years ago when they tried to remove the volume knob. Going all in on the giant screen was a calculated risk, and I bet Mazda knew that at the time. Hopefully, customer feedback will demonstrate that it was the wrong decision, and Mazda can course-correct quickly.
I think Big Screen is Mazda’s way of trying to get buyers to finally let go of the CX-5 so they can discontinue it for the CX-50 instead. They keep facelifting it because it’s so profitable, but at this point it’s the only CX-# car they have left (other than the decade-plus CX-3 Down Under) and it fits poorly into their lineup at best—even if it does still offer enthusiast benefits like the independent rear suspension. Perhaps they’ll bring us the CX-60 at some point?
Honestly not bad, real door handles, real glovebox. If this had a smaller screen and maybe better gas mileage I would consider it for my spouses next car.
Cmon Mazda!? Ok fine, I understand giving into the touchscreen thing (some newer models have touchscreen capabilities with CarPlay and AA, including my CX-50) – but getting rid of the command knob (or really any sort of physical controls) is maddening to your loyal customers.
I had a Fiata with obviously the Mazda touchscreen and iDrive-alike knob. I never once touched the screen, because the knob is *infinitely* superior in a moving car – and Mazda’s implementation was GOOD. Not as good as BMW, but on par with Mercedes, and better than any other Japanese attempt at it
. If they can’t make it work in this new nonsense, then they have put too much bullshit in the screen to start with. So not that I would have the slightest interest in this car to start with, this user interface is an absolute HARD no.
If the CX-90 PHEV is any indication, the Toyota hybrid system will be far better. Though I guess they do need their own *good* hybrid drivetrain eventually, so I get it.
At *least* give me a fucking volume knob!
If they have access to Toyota drivetrains, why on Earth would they not just use the best hybrid drive system that exists? Even if they bolt their own ICE to it as a differentiator? Baffling. And a mere 6spd autotragic feels decidedly 15 years ago (though it’s probably better to actually drive).
The CX-50 hybrid has a copy/paste rav4 powertrain, but its the least Mazda-y Mazda ive ever driven. I was ready to buy one – until i drove it.
I think they even modified the subframe and bodywork to take the RAV4 powertrain. I’ve noticed that CX-50 hybrids don’t feel very similar to their ICE-only counterparts and look taller and stubbier. It’s very hard to notice in pictures, but weirdly obvious in the flesh.
Toyota hybrids are a completely zero-fun zone – but if you want a hybrid in the first place why would you care? Cars I respect immensely yet have absolutely zero desire to ever own. But if I were interested in fun the very last place I would seek it is a jacked up two-box blob of a CUV to start with, so might as well go with the most dull but worthy powertrain option. At least the Mazda probably had a nicer interior than the equivalent Toyota, and historically they look better on the outside too.
Though now that someone said it has pre-Camry dented bumpers, I will never be able to unsee that, LOL.
Adjusting anything on a touchscreen on a rough road is annoying. As is looking for those adjustments on said touchscreen. It’s an ergonomic mistake that Mazda, of all companies, really should have known better than to make.
Also, why does it have “Camry Dents” on the front bumper? Seems like they should be on the rear?
And Season 2 is the best season of Justified. Margo Martindale is a goddamn national treasure.
*Character Actress Margo Martindale is a goddamn national treasure.
This is the correct answer.
She won’t be in heaven, but her movies will!
To me, putting a non-competitive engine in this with poor gas mileage is a head scratcher.
The 2.5 actually LOST 5hp for 2026. It was rated at 191hp in 2025.
10 or so years ago, I rented a few Mazda 6’s. I liked them a LOT, felt they were overall as nice as my ’10 Acura TSX. Was seriously considering buying one to replace the Acura. Ended up with a less plush but more effiecient Toyota Hybrid.
I really liked getting the last couple gens of Mazda 6 as rentals. But we can’t have nice things anymore, evidently. more like 15+ years ago now though.
I’m breezing along, reading this nice review of a car that is fine, eating my dinner, when WHAM! I’m hit with a nsfw metaphor.
I’m either concerned for Matt’s relationship with his partner, or maybe his CR-V. We don’t kink shame here at the Autopian, but, um… brings new meaning to the phrase, “Get your mitts off of me.”
Also, where’s my napkin? Got some projectile mac & cheese to deal with here.
mmm, pie…
For the record, Hertz carries some Mazdas, so at best it’s one of the best sounding naturally aspirated fours you’ll get from them (not better than).
I have strong feelings about the loss of the command knob though, and more importantly, all the physical controls that were lost. I think the command knob is great, it’s a better solution than s touchscreen, but I get there’s a learning curve, however small it is. But no physical controls after years of more physical controls than average being a selling point? Really hoping they’ll at least restore a volume knob or something with a midcycle refresh, or they’re forced into it with government legislation somewhere.
I’m not thrilled about it growing, but it makes sense I guess (long, wide opening doors are great for car seats right up to the point someone parks too close to you), but everything else looks fine. I wish I had wiper de-icers on mine (between how badly the wipers ice up and a single defroster vent for the entire windshield, its cold weather cred is questionable), but more than anything the hybrid option is exciting.
TLDR, I have no plans to replace mine until it’s like 15 years old, but I’d really be holding off until the hybrid comes out and it gets a volume knob.
My last Mazda expeinence was 10 or so years ago, The command knob was similar and better than the one in my ’10 Acura.