2017 Honda CR-V vs 2017 Mazda CX-5: Which is Best?

2017 Mazda CX 5 vs 2017 Honda CR V ・ Photo by Honda and Mazda

The crossover market is arguably the most competitive segment in the automotive space. It seems like everybody drives a crossover now, but with such good fuel economy, even better utility and some of the best creature comforts you can find in a vehicle these days, who can blame them? We decided to take two popular compact crossovers, the 2017 Honda CR-V and the 2017 Mazda CX-5, and compare them head-to-head to find out which was best. It was a tough battle — the Honda CR-V almost seems synonymous with “crossover,” and the Mazda CX-5 is one of the fastest-rising stars in the segment. Since both received major updates for the 2017 model year, the two crossovers were primed for the competition. Read on to see which crossover we proclaimed as the winner.

Pricing

Locking horns right from the start, the Honda CR-V and Mazda CX-5 both have an identical entry-level starting MSRP of $24,045. That’s right, a CR-V LX and CX-5 Sport have the same exact base price. However, as you move up the ranks, the Hondas cost a tad more than their direct Mazda competitors. We tested top-tier models from both brands, a CR-V Touring and a CX-5 Grand Touring, both with all-wheel drive, and the price difference was minor. The Honda, with bells and whistles like push-button start, leather-trimmed interior, and a power moonroof cost $34,595. The Mazda, also equipped with the same, cost $34,380. At just a $215 difference, we’ll call it a wash. Tie

Photo by Honda and Mazda

Fuel Efficiency

Gone are the days of gas-guzzling SUVs — the compact crossovers available today give even four-door commuters a run for their money. Both the Honda CR-V and Mazda CX-5 offer respectable fuel economy, but when comparing EPA fuel economy estimates for both, the CR-V ekes out a win by 3 mpg. When looking at overall combined city/highway fuel ratings, the CR-V offers 29 mpg while the CX-5 returns 26 mpg. The Honda performs even better with highway-only estimates, offering 33 mpg compared to the Mazda's 29 mpg. During our test, we mainly drove both the CR-V and CX-5 on city (well, mostly suburban) roads, and found the Honda to be a little better when it came to gas mileage. We blame it on the fun-to-drive nature of the CX-5, but more on that next. Honda CR-V

Photo by Honda

Behind the Wheel

While we were quite impressed with how much more premium the CR-V’s drive character has become, the CX-5 just can’t be beaten here. The Mazda exudes a more spirited and confident vibe behind the wheel, rather than coming off as a steady workhorse. The CX-5 steers and attacks corners with fervor, yet it's able to smother bumps in a way that far more expensive luxury crossovers do. The CR-V has greatly improved in driving refinement over the last generation in terms of quietness and lack of vibration, and it retains its notable Honda-like handling precision. Yet it ultimately lacks the CX-5’s expensive feel on the road. The CR-V feels great — but ultimately much more pedestrian. Mazda CX-5

Photo by Mazda

Styling

We’ll cut to the chase here: We think the Mazda CX-5’s design is unbeatable in the segment. It’s drop-dead gorgeous both inside and out. The exterior has a subtle athletic vibe; the curved lines read like the well-toned muscles of a yoga master, and the protruding front grille adds a hint of aggressiveness. We love the clean, modern look the CX-5 exudes. Based on looks alone, this crossover can be confused for something much more expensive. However, we think that the Honda CR-V deserves high praise for some of the changes made in this newest generation. The rear view looks a lot less awkward — previous generations featured a silhouette that wasn’t so flattering. And while we see a broader appeal across the board from the CX-5, the design of the CR-V still seems to get stuck in the “mom-mobile” category. Mazda CX-5

Photo by Mazda

Interior Design

Again, the Mazda CX-5 shines for having a simply gorgeous, upscale interior. Thoughtful details and quality materials throughout the cabin rival even the luxury brands. There was no plasticky fake-wood trim in our CX-5 test car, just a handsome leather-wrapped dash with contrast stitching and aluminum accents. Clean lines, minimal buttons and trapezoidal air vents keep the CX-5 looking sharp. The CR-V has also significantly improved inside with the changes for 2017, but it just doesn’t look as contemporary as the CX-5. While we find the functionality of the CR-V’s interior to be better than the CX-5’s, the Mazda is the clear winner when it comes to design. Mazda CX-5

Photo by Mazda

Technology

While the CX-5 is good-looking, the CR-V manages to look much better through the lens of both technophobes and technophiles alike. How is this even possible? Simply put, the CR-V has a simpler interface, even though it offers more than the CX-5. The CR-V has a large, full-color 7-inch touchscreen display right in the center of the dash. It’s simple to use and offers smartphone integration via Apple CarPlay or Android Auto.

The CX-5’s display protrudes from the dash, controlled by a knob that rests between the seats in front of the cupholders. While we got used to dealing with it as the week wore on, we found it frustrating at first and felt we had to remove significant hurdles to beat the learning curve it required. Simple operations, like setting radio presets, was confusing and cumbersome and the biggest letdown was the absence of Apple CarPlay and Android Auto. Both of our test vehicles offered upgraded premium sound systems with nine speakers, but the CR-V had four USB inputs while the CX-5 had just two. Honda CR-V

Photo by Honda

Family Friendliness

The Honda CR-V pulls ahead when it comes to family friendliness. Overall, the cabin feels roomier than the CX-5 and offers more wiggle room for bulky child safety seats. The cargo area in the CR-V is cavernous — it could handle sports equipment and Little League snack shack goodies effortlessly. It even comes with a conversation mirror up front to keep an eye on the kids during squabbles. Materials inside aren’t flimsy and can undoubtedly hold up to the wear and tear that busy family life puts on a vehicle. The CX-5 is no slouch when it comes to family duty, either. While it has the chops to be a proper family shuttle, the interior is noticeably tighter than the CR-V, and the cargo hold is much smaller. For those who need to see the numbers, the CR-V offers 39.2 cubic feet of available space behind the rear seats, where the Mazda offers just 30.9 cubic feet. If you need to pack it in, the CR-V can swallow 75.8 cubic feet of cargo when the seats are folded, while the CX-5 has a much smaller capacity of 59.6 cubic feet. Honda CR-V

Photo by Honda

Safety

Today’s vehicles are extremely competitive, and very comparable when it comes to safety. And neither CR-V or CX-5 is an exception. Both crossovers can be had with all the latest in safety technologies. Both of our loaded test cars came with popular systems like blind-spot monitoring, lane-departure warning, and parking assist, and key features are available even on less expensive models. We call a tie here because while the CX-5 impressed us with its head-up display offering, the CR-V countered with a 360-degree camera system. Tie

Photo by Honda and Mazda

The Verdict

While both the Honda CR-V and Mazda CX-5 are both popular, safe and desirable five-seat compact crossovers, the similarities end there. The CR-V is almost the perfect family vehicle — combining utility with reliability and convenience, while the CX-5 brings style and performance to the forefront. Although the two share a segment, we feel like their customers are different people entirely. We hate to generalize, but we feel that if your priority is shuttling people and stuff, the CR-V wins, but if you’re the type who likes the ride height of a crossover but still want the maneuverability and excitement of a car, the CX-5 is a better fit. 

However, with an improved drive experience, extra wiggle room, and superior smartphone integration, we have to concede that the CR-V has wider appeal, even if our design sensibilities and driving personalities lean in the direction of the CX-5.

Photo by Honda