Harrier 2017

[fungyee77]

U gotta hold the car for 6mths before u can sell plus pay instalment? Also the interest penalty from the car loan

 

You dun lose 10k considered lucky liao

 

Yes, the loan prepayment will cost c. SGD3-5k depending on your quantum. Hard to make money, taking such frictional costs into account. 

[BlueSwifts]

Maybe all hiding in shame after realizing lose out to forester and CRV at traffic light grand prix

Not when I experienced it. I have a friend who owns a Harrier Turbo. There is no turbo kick like the Forester or Conti Turbo cars, just feels like a fast accelerating NA engine rocket. Although butt feel cannot feel the kick, but it definitely accelerates in approx 7+ seconds.

[therock]

Harrier vs the CX5:

http://www.todayonline.com/lifestyle/cars/road-test-mazda-cx-5-vs-toyota-harrier

[fungyee77]

Harrier vs the CX5:

http://www.todayonline.com/lifestyle/cars/road-test-mazda-cx-5-vs-toyota-harrier

 

"When it comes to performance, however, it must be said that the Mazda CX-5 had a definite edge over the Toyota Harrier."

Hard to believe this point when the difference in torque is so stark at 350Nm for the Harrier to 257Nm for the CX-5, even allowing for the weight differential...  

[Dynax505]

I test drove both the CX-5 and the Harrier Turbo on the same route. Harrier Turbo has far more effortless acceleration.

CX-5 has far better steering feel and it's handling gives you confidence. Harrier Turbo steering is vague and car feels clumsier.

But that motoring journalist is entitled to his opinion.

[Earthboy]

I test drove both the CX-5 and the Harrier Turbo on the same route. Harrier Turbo has far more effortless acceleration.

CX-5 has far better steering feel and it's handling gives you confidence. Harrier Turbo steering is vague and car feels clumsier.

But that motoring journalist is entitled to his opinion.

And their advertising

[AFWE69]

I test drove both the CX-5 and the Harrier Turbo on the same route. Harrier Turbo has far more effortless acceleration.

CX-5 has far better steering feel and it's handling gives you confidence. Harrier Turbo steering is vague and car feels clumsier.

But that motoring journalist is entitled to his opinion.

 

I am driving the old CX5 and your impression is correct.

[richard_crl032]

 

"When it comes to performance, however, it must be said that the Mazda CX-5 had a definite edge over the Toyota Harrier."

Hard to believe this point when the difference in torque is so stark at 350Nm for the Harrier to 257Nm for the CX-5, even allowing for the weight differential...  

 

"The Toyota Harrier, in comparison, felt like a car to relax in. Its vault-like cabin lets nary a sound in and makes its engine sound like it is far, far away compared to the Mazda, which makes you feel more connected to the car."

 

Hi Fungyee77, 

 

Indeed sounds like another kelong .... mazda which makes you feel more connected to the car almost sounded like a positive.  Review can wind down windows and feel connected to road also then ...keke !!  

 

Connected to the car is typically reserved for handling but this must be a first on highlighted sound/noise :(

 

Cheers,

 

Richard

I am driving the old CX5 and your impression is correct.

 

"I test drove both the CX-5 and the Harrier Turbo on the same route. Harrier Turbo has far more effortless acceleration. 

CX-5 has far better steering feel and it's handling gives you confidence. Harrier Turbo steering is vague and car feels clumsier. 

But that motoring journalist is entitled to his opinion."

 

Hi AFWE69,

 

Had not the opportunity to test drive the CX-3 but the highlights in RED is also my experience despite improved suspension for the harrier turbo.

 

Cheers,

 

Richard

Edited August 28, 2017 by richard_crl032

[Tohto]

I test drove both the CX-5 and the Harrier Turbo on the same route. Harrier Turbo has far more effortless acceleration.

CX-5 has far better steering feel and it's handling gives you confidence. Harrier Turbo steering is vague and car feels clumsier.

But that motoring journalist is entitled to his opinion.

It is a Toyota, so the steering must behave like a Toyota.

[clement229]

It is a Toyota, so the steering must behave like a Toyota.

True. Mazda cars are generally more fun to drive , Toyota cars are more for sit back and relax.

But I feel that for looks and interior, CX5 wins it. Hands down. Harrier's design is more for 2014-2016. CX5 design is more driven for 2017-

[Fcw75]

CX-5 design is definitely nicer but the interior is too cramped. 

 

It's like the interior of a Mazda 3.

[AFWE69]

I test drove both the CX-5 and the Harrier Turbo on the same route. Harrier Turbo has far more effortless acceleration.

CX-5 has far better steering feel and it's handling gives you confidence. Harrier Turbo steering is vague and car feels clumsier.

But that motoring journalist is entitled to his opinion.

I would also add the CX5 is not suitable for "19 inches wheels, the car is too hard and jittery. Seat comfort also not at the same level as Harrier, in fact the seat on CX5 not even as comfortable as my old RAV4.

Edited August 28, 2017 by AFWE69

[Earthboy]

True. Mazda cars are generally more fun to drive , Toyota cars are more for sit back and relax.

But I feel that for looks and interior, CX5 wins it. Hands down. Harrier's design is more for 2014-2016. CX5 design is more driven for 2017-

That's why it will be interesting to see how the next gen Harrier will be when it goes to the new platform.

[AFWE69]

True. Mazda cars are generally more fun to drive , Toyota cars are more for sit back and relax.

But I feel that for looks and interior, CX5 wins it. Hands down. Harrier's design is more for 2014-2016. CX5 design is more driven for 2017-

You want really fun handling, Audi Q3, Subaru Forester, and VW Tiguan are even more fun than CX5. I test drive all of them. Edited August 28, 2017 by AFWE69

[Soya]

Harrier is basically the Camry of SUVs

[Mkl22]

I test drove both the CX-5 and the Harrier Turbo on the same route. Harrier Turbo has far more effortless acceleration.

CX-5 has far better steering feel and it's handling gives you confidence. Harrier Turbo steering is vague and car feels clumsier.

But that motoring journalist is entitled to his opinion.

What a crock of crap from our half past six so called local motoring journalist!

Performance is obviously better in the turbo with much better torque figures.

No standard to review cars properly then they should keep their trap shut!

What a disgrace! He is singing the same tune as our dear transport minister!

Or maybe He probably forgot he tested the cx5 alone and the harrier with 4 persons.

Edited August 28, 2017 by Mkl22

[fungyee77]

I test drove both the CX-5 and the Harrier Turbo on the same route. Harrier Turbo has far more effortless acceleration.

CX-5 has far better steering feel and it's handling gives you confidence. Harrier Turbo steering is vague and car feels clumsier.

But that motoring journalist is entitled to his opinion.

 

That's a more precise representation.  

 

But handling is not the full measure of performance - I frankly do not see how a car with almost 30% less torque, is 1.6s slower to 60mph, is deemed to have clearly superior performance. More fun to drive maybe, but certainly not better performance. 

 

A journalist should be a reporter, not a brand cheerleader. CX-5 has plenty of positives going for it - as aptly pointed out by @clement229, @afwe69, etc - no need for a reporter to try to skew the narrative in its favour.  

Edited August 28, 2017 by Fungyee77

[therock]

Well local journalists cannot write things like

" it was a total washout.. the harrier left the CX5 in its wake, and has better sound proofing, smoother ride and won't cost you more at the pumps or when it comes to tax time. The CX5 fights back with a sweet conti like interior and a snazzy exterior, but ultimately the fact that it's based on a smaller car and the weaker engine lets it down."

 

Not unless they wish to be blacklisted from future test drives...