Topic: CD Article: 2008 Mazda5 GT

[editorgreg]

I wish this goof had done his homework. I own a 06 Mazda 5 GT. It came with auto A/C, ambient temp display, the instrumentation and backlighting is green, green, green, NOT RED !!!.

I don't think it's necessary or polite to call me a goof, but you are correct: I didn't do my homework, instead I relied on my memory - usually a bad idea.  I guess I was thinking of the Mazda3's instrument panel.  Thanks to Airbalancer for pointing out that I do drive at least one new car a week, and trying to remember last year's model's features can be challenging.  I strive for accuracy, detail and objectivity in my reviews, as do CanadianDriver's other reviewers.  We do listen to our reader's criticisms and often make changes based on them.  I think our readers appreciate our objectivity - one of the reasons we get almost 800,000 unique visitors a month.  Greg Wilson, Editor, CanadianDriver

[Thinking Out Loud]

I didn't know the HHR came in a three row seating config? Not same class otherwise IMO then.

The HHR is not in the same class if the miniscule third-row seat is a requirement for you.  But if you want a tall-roofed compact MPV which has plenty of room for two adults in the first row, two car seats in the second row, and a ton of cargo in the back, the HHR fills that role just as well as the Mazda5 does.

Too bad Chevy, as usual, has been a follower in the design field....PT Cruiser and retro Mustang seem to be telling the Bow Tie Guys where their future is.  Only thing they seem to get right is the Corvette - Malibu seeming to be a recent change.  

The seat is not miniscule, as I have one.  Would a tall adult sit back there for a 4 hour drive?  No.  Is it a terrific option to have as a just-in-case?  Positively.

My point is that if there is an option, I would prefer to have the option.  There is nothing wrong with the HHR, Matrix, or other wagon or hatch.   Is the third row small, sure.  Is the HHR a 4 seater, yup.  

The car segments are soooo finely split - 5 and Rondo are a completely different category.  Not better or worse, just different.

That's all, y'all.

[airbalancer]

With a Mazda 5 I could not seat in the front seat for 1 minute, to uncomfortable

[Mitlov]

I didn't know the HHR came in a three row seating config? Not same class otherwise IMO then.

The HHR is not in the same class if the miniscule third-row seat is a requirement for you.  But if you want a tall-roofed compact MPV which has plenty of room for two adults in the first row, two car seats in the second row, and a ton of cargo in the back, the HHR fills that role just as well as the Mazda5 does.

Too bad Chevy, as usual, has been a follower in the design field....PT Cruiser and retro Mustang seem to be telling the Bow Tie Guys where their future is.  Only thing they seem to get right is the Corvette - Malibu seeming to be a recent change.  

This has nothing to do with anything we're talking about.  You seem to just be looking for any excuse to bash the HHR and/or GM.

[tpl]

With a Mazda 5 I could not seat in the front seat for 1 minute, to uncomfortable

Mrs tpl could not find a comfortable position in the 5 either... so we bought the Fit instead.

[Thinking Out Loud]

Mitlov, if you READ my post, I noted that there is nothing wrong with the HHR OR Matrix OR similar.  My point, AGAIN, was:

I, PERSONALLY, took advantage of the third row option in the category of car I was looking at.  The 'minisule' seating is not as bad as it appears, and is an accepted compomise for the flexibility. For my purposes, the second row slides innovatively forward, allowing more room in the third row should you need it.

The two choices in the micro-van category are 5 (6 psgr) and Rondo (7 psgr).

The HHR/Matrix/SX4/Fit et al ARE NOT in this multi-seat capacity category. Anybody looking at an HHR/Matrix/SX4/Fit likely aren't looking at a 5 or Rondo because of the seat concerns, and the reverse is also true.

Do I personally like the look of the HHR or the Matrix? No.

And, I'm 100% certain I'm not the first to point out the lack of originality in the HHR - Cobalt underpinnings on a retro body ala the the Neon-powered PT Cruiser.  Given GM had effectively given up on the rear drive market - the the rebirth of the Camaro following only after the success of the the retro Mustang, indicate reactionary products.  Chrysler is no better with the Challenger now.

No right or wrong, Mit - it just is. 

[sirAQUAMAN64]

They've been compared, but besides cargo length don't think the HHR and Mazda5 are the same breed. I actually don't mind the exterior of the HHR, the front is a bit long and toothy, but like the wider-lower rear perspective. Yet the 5 is way ahead in the slick styling department, just fantastic with low stance and aero aggressive lines that also happen to be functional. Moving to the inside, the HHR feels small and cramped. Like they took a sedan and modified it into a micro minivan driving position - which is exactly what they did. Not much of a HighRoof at all, it's just awkward. Somehow with a more airy cabin it works in the 5. Plus I can sit in the 3rd row of the 5 somewhat comfortably - amazing what they've done. Additionally, HHR windows are small and most annoyingly you must bend forward to see traffic lights overhead as the roof extends too far in front of you. It just doesn't work for me. And I doubt it drives as well as the 5 either.

[Mitlov]

Mitlov, if you READ my post, I noted that there is nothing wrong with the HHR OR Matrix OR similar.  My point, AGAIN, was:

I, PERSONALLY, took advantage of the third row option in the category of car I was looking at.  The 'minisule' seating is not as bad as it appears, and is an accepted compomise for the flexibility. For my purposes, the second row slides innovatively forward, allowing more room in the third row should you need it.

The two choices in the micro-van category are 5 (6 psgr) and Rondo (7 psgr).

The HHR/Matrix/SX4/Fit et al ARE NOT in this multi-seat capacity category. Anybody looking at an HHR/Matrix/SX4/Fit likely aren't looking at a 5 or Rondo because of the seat concerns, and the reverse is also true.

Do you consider the five-seat RAV4 and the seven-seat RAV4 to be in fundamentally different vehicular categories from each other, because one has a small third-row seat in the cargo area?  I don't.  You may find it a necessary feature, just like I find a manual transmission a necessary feature, but that doesn't mean that any vehicle that lacks it is thus part of a different genre altogether, or that any vehicle that lacks it won't be cross-shopped with your own. 

And, I'm 100% certain I'm not the first to point out the lack of originality in the HHR - Cobalt underpinnings on a retro body ala the the Neon-powered PT Cruiser.  Given GM had effectively given up on the rear drive market - the the rebirth of the Camaro following only after the success of the the retro Mustang, indicate reactionary products.  Chrysler is no better with the Challenger now.

I still don't understand why you're trying to bash GM as a whole for "reactionary" styling when we were talking about how the HHR and the Mazda5 compare as compact vans.  It's very out of place for the thread as a whole.  But for the record, if you think that the Solstice, the Sky, the CTS, the G8 sedan, and the G8 Ute are reactionary styling jobs, then you're crazy. 

And it's not like the Mazda5 set the world aflame with its styling.  It's a predictably-styled minivan on a smaller scale.  You make like it or you may not, but I wouldn't call the styling particularly daring or innovative in any way.

[Thinking Out Loud]

I agree the RAV 4 7 passenger is not a separate category. Standard catorgization being:

-Subcompact/Compact/Midsize etc passenger
-Wagon
-Hatchback
-CUV sport cutes as they say
-SUV traditional
-COV cross overs
-Minivan
-Microvan
-etc

The RAV 4 is a 7 passenger CUV.  By definition, I guess the Rondo is a 7 passenger COV as it comes as a 5 OR 7 arrangement.  The 5 only comes as a 6 passenger.

I'm not bashing GM - similar statements could be made about VW and the Beetle/Golf and Toyota FJ/Tacoma.  And as I pointed out, Chrysler Challenger and the Mini for that matter. You brought up the HHR as a competitor in the segment, I disagree.

That simple, Mit.

[Schmengie]

The 2008 Mazda5 GT is a great car with impressive driving dynamics and amazing practicality. I fell in love with it after I took one for a test drive last fall. Too bad the dealer screwed me around, I would've bought one otherwise.

[sirAQUAMAN64]

Have seen a few more Dodge Journeys, which I think are a close competitor as well although appear somewhat larger in person than I expected.

Still prefer the 5, but agree the front seating is the biggest faux-pas.

[Rolling]

I knew I'd seen those wheels before.  I also just noticed that Mazda's styling and Euro Ford's "kinetic design" styling are remarkably similar.

How about the styling of the Ford C-Max? Very similar shape and look outside to the Mazda5, but I prefer this one’s interior to any Focus that I’ve seen lately.

[jww]

This is the way the 5 should have been packaged when it first came to our shores, imo. It was always a very interesting vehicle, and I looked at it when we bought the Sonata, but I was a bit perplexed at some of the missing things - like rear ventilation, no leather, etc. Now with most of this fixed, and with gas prices going up, up, up -- it's an excellent option for many folks.

[jww]

I wish this goof had done his homework. I own a 06 Mazda 5 GT. It came with auto A/C, ambient temp display, the instrumentation and backlighting is green, green, green, NOT RED !!!.

 
you have no right call the writer a goof, you can point out the error.
Remember writer probably looks at a different car almost every week, it is very easy to make a mistake

Agreed. Even with the number of cars Greg reviews, he rarely - if ever - gets that kinda stuff wrong.

This was hardly worth getting knickers in a twist over (instrument backlighting colour???).

[si]

I just saw the brake lights on a new 08 Mazda5 -- LED fins, absolutely dazzling