Skoda Yeti or Mazda CX-5
Skoda yeti or Mazda CX-5Posted 1 year ago
Hi, anyone had any time living with either of these? Space and access to boot important, looking at the £30 a year RFL looking to spend about 10k
Yetis have tiny boots. Never had a proper look at a CX5 but they’re supposed to be good. If space is important would an estate not make more sense than an SUV?Posted 1 year ago
Went through the same procedure myself.Posted 1 year ago
Yeti has small boot. Mazda has big boot but is a big, big car. We settled on a Mazda CX3. Big enough for our needs and boot, using lower shelf and especially with seats down is massive.
Got a 2.0 petrol and boy does it drive nicely.
Yetis have tiny boots. Never had a proper look at a CX5 but they’re supposed to be good. If space is important would an estate not make more sense than an SUV?
You would get a very nice Mazda 6 for the budgetPosted 1 year ago
We loved our Yeti but the boot is small. Moved on to a Mazda3, much bigger boot, nicer drive and bullet proof build quality. Cx5 didn’t seem worth the extra fuel costs for the bit more space it would have given us tbh.Posted 1 year ago
Had a CX5 and was over the moon the day I got rid of it. Frequent regens for the cat (even on long motorway runs) meant it never delivered close to the economy it promised, and the issue with diesel contaminating the oil meant oil changes every 10K or sooner. Other problems with connectivity for the ICE system and a generally crap dealer didn’t help. Changed it for an Octavia estate and the whole experience is just so much better.Posted 1 year ago
I love our Yeti, never really felt the boot was small either – though we do have a roof box for long trips.Posted 1 year ago
Does the CX5 come with their Skyactiv-X petrol engines? I seem to think they’re still very, very new so perhaps not.
I’m a Skoda driver myself, but I didn’t like the Yeti when I went to look at one, looks massive on the outside and tiny on the inside. My next door neighbour has a CX5 he loves it, seems to have enough room for 3 of them on camping trips etc.
Personally, I’d buy an Octi, try to find a Scout if you must have a Faux by Faux.Posted 1 year ago
I was dead set on a yeti.
Ended up with a Subaru Outback instead.Posted 1 year ago
Had a yeti now have a cx5. Mazda is a nicer car from the bells and whistles point of view. Yeti was a better drive. Both were 150 bhp diesels. As above cx5 services seem to be far more often than expected.Posted 1 year ago
Of the two I preferred the yeti.
I have a 4 yr old Yeti, 2ltr diesel, tows a caravan no probs, seats come out to make it into a small box shape van if I want, plenty boot space for me.
I use it for work and did 18k last year, rarely dropping below 53mpg other than when towing.
I do like the look of CX5 but the costs were too much when I was buying last May.Posted 1 year ago
We looked at a yeti, the boot is really quite small, however it’s a really practical car, you can fold or remove the rear seats.Posted 1 year ago
We looked at an octavia estate too, and a superb estate, the superb is huuge.
Bought a subaru forester instead, doesn’t quite have the premium (interior) feel of the skodas we looked at, but the build quality feels better.
All the cars we looked at were 4×4.
We’ve got a Yeti 4×4 1.4 tsi. Previous cars were an Octavia 1.4tsi hatch and Fiesta, oh, and before those an Octavia VRS estate. On the plus side, the Yeti is pretty nippy and handles really well (for this type of vehicle). Better MPG than we were expecting. Golf sized, so easy to park. Comfortable seats and driving position. Feels really solidly built. You can completely remove the back seats to create a small van.
Downsides – if it’s got the optional spare wheel under the boot floor, the boot is actually smaller than the Fiesta! (though the seats do fold flat for easy bike loading). If you’re carry tall teenage kids/adults in the back seats, there’s not much legroom. The price for the ‘sporty’ handling is the jiggly ride quality – mediocre at best.
No experience of the Mazda SUVs.Posted 1 year ago
p.s. if you want a left field bike carrier that’s a bit of a giggle, I can recommend the Octavia VRS estates.Posted 1 year ago
Bike carrier + giggle factor = 240hp Smax ecoboostPosted 1 year ago
Rfl might be a bit more than £30 thoughPosted 1 year ago
I looked at quite a few mini-suv things when we bought ours (not the yeti though – it was rejected by Mrs Batfink as looking like a “postman pat van”).
The CX5 was huge on the outside, but no bigger inside than others. The interior also felt really flimsy. Subaru was written-off because of the price (they are expensive in Australia). I’ve also heard bad things about the longevity of Subaru engines…. but not sure if that’s true or not.
In the end we went for a Honda HRV – as big on the inside as the CX5, but smaller on the outside. Big boot, and the interior felt really german. It was also significantly cheaper than the Mazda (but that might be an Australian pricing thing). We’ve been really happy with it. I’ve currently got a Qasqai while some bodywork gets done on the HRV…. which is terrible in comparison. If I was shopping used, I’d be looking at the newer Rav 4s – driven a few of those and quite liked them.Posted 1 year ago
If space is important would an estate not make more sense than an SUV?
They normally have as much space than the equivalent estate but have a shorter footprint, which can be useful (it is for us). More crucially, the shape/height allows stuff that becomes a faff in an estate, ie carrying 2 bikes inside the car with only the front wheels off. You just use the dropper to secure the bike, perfect. The added travel/clearance can be very useful too, not to mention the balloon tyres. I have an estate too but never use it for carrying bikes, it’s a pain. Others may have a different experience.
Posted 1 year ago
My dad has a CX5 diesel. Drives well and crammed with toys but his mechanic insists on interim oil changes, presumably connected to the fuel in the oil issue. As with many 4x4s, huge wheel arches compromise passenger and boot space. It really is a reverse tardis, big exterior but surprisingly cosy inside. The boot is disappointingly small for such a large car. On a recent airport run, we couldn’t get 3 cases into it so had to use my Superb estate. It took 4 cases and 3 pieces of hand luggage without difficulty. Unless you must have both 4×4 capability and an elevated driving position, a traditional estate or people carrier are better tools for swallowing people and luggage. Usually cheaper to tax as well. As an aside, the Yeti and VW Touran, both Golf derivatives, have removable rear seats and high driving positions but the Touran has masses more interior space for a similar sized car.Posted 1 year ago
Thanks all, I think the Yeti is looking the more promising, I do like the more upright driving position compared to a estate.Posted 1 year ago
They normally have as much space than the equivalent estate but have a shorter footprint
No they don’t. They have more height but everything else tends to be smaller insidePosted 1 year ago
I had a leased CX5 from 2013 to 2017. 2.0d 2WD.
Not too many niggles, excluding the requirement for new turbo and inlet camshaft at a little over 10k miles.
Arnold Clark were local dealer, so not exactly a frills included service.
When it came time to replace, I did not consider the newer model.
It did the job adequately, albeit I was very grateful to have a warranty….
Oh, the replacement dipstick simply had the high level mark higher up the dipstick.Posted 1 year ago
No they don’t. They have more height but everything else tends to be smaller inside
Not in my experience, as everything else tends to be bigger. Compare a Golf Estate to a Tiguan or a 5 series Touring to a X5 etc… I am sure there are exceptions.Posted 1 year ago
You would get a very nice Mazda 6 for the budget
You might, but anyone considering choosing between a Yeti or a CX-5 really isn’t in the market for a 6! I’ve driven all three, and my choice would be the CX, the Yeti, while a decent drive, is just not pleasing to look at, is an old, outdated design, and I have zero desire anymore for anything saloon/hatch based, I struggle to get out of my Octavia these days, the higher seating position offered by modern SUV/crossovers is something that appeals to greater and greater numbers of people, who simply do not need loads of load space!Posted 1 year ago
Skoda no longer make the Yeti, but there are a bunch of VAG alternatives, like the Arona, Ateca, Karoq, Tiguan and T-Roc, and all of them are great to drive, the auto ‘box used is the DSG, which has faultless shifts, and are all pretty quick.
The CX-5 is a big car, though, the CX-3 probably more suited to most people.
Oddly, we get very few of them, they don’t seem very popular with the Enterprise/Motability lease clients for some reason, but we’ve got half a dozen 5’s on site at the moment, and I just love the styling, and the overall comfort and drive quality, a beautiful deep metallic red one came in the other morning, and I wanted to take it straight home, it’s a beautiful looking car.
But yes, it’s a big car
I’m probably going to go for a Mokka X 1.4 Turbo 4×4 to replace the elderly Octavia; the seating position suits me perfectly, the 1.4 is surprisingly nippy, and I love its compact size. Seeing as plenty of people seem to cope perfectly well with a Polo, a Jazz, or any number of small four seat hatchbacks, I can’t see what the obsession is with large estates or hatchbacks instead of a crossover/SUV, except for those who have to accommodate a family along with bikes and the other paraphernalia of the active family life – a very large number of people like me no longer need or require that sort of vehicle any more.
Yetis have tiny boots.
Ah. How cute.Posted 1 year ago
I have a Yeti with the spare wheel kit and can fit 2 bikes in. Upright with the forks mounted onto the boot floor (re made with 18mm Ply). Removing 2 of the rear seats makes this easier and dont even have to drop the post.
It’s a great car, BUT be warned of the appalling service from Skoda UK. If you are willing to fix any faults yourself then its fine. I wont go into details but will not be buying another.Posted 1 year ago
a beautiful deep metallic red one came in the other morning, and I wanted to take it straight home, it’s a beautiful looking car.
That Mazda red is drop dead gorgeous, especially on the CX-3/5. We thought about it, but have some friends who are diehard Man U fans (Yes they live in Brighton and travel to every match!) so wouldn’t entertain one. In the end we went for boring old white on a CX-3. No choice as it was pre registered – 10 miles on the clock – but nearly £7k off list price!Posted 1 year ago
It’s a great car, BUT be warned of the appalling service from Skoda UK. If you are willing to fix any faults yourself then its fine. I wont go into details but will not be buying another.
So is it a great car or a problematic car?Posted 1 year ago
Going to be that guy and say… why not get a duster?Posted 1 year ago
So is it a great car or a problematic car?
Design wise its great, and when it works its great but ive been battling with Skoda for 3 months with an intermittent fault that I cant prove.
Similar issue with my last car (Fiat) and they were great at investigating and trying different things to solve it which they did all under warranty.
why not get a duster?
If they were a little more powerful I’d have one.Posted 1 year ago
Not in my experience, as everything else tends to be bigger. Compare a Golf Estate to a Tiguan or a 5 series Touring to a X5 etc… I am sure there are exceptions.
A lot of manufacturers seem to have made their estates a lot less useful in recent years. Our old Golf 4 had a squareed off tailgate and a decent amount of interior space. The next gen had a sloping rear. Seems true of BMW, Volvo and others.
IME interior space of SUVs is nearly always disappointing. A chunk of extra height is lost to ground clearance, another chunk to the rear wheel drivetrain, then add the fashion for ‘bulbous’ round sided SUVs and the interior space gets squeezed a lot from the exterior dimensions.
Other alternative to the Yeti (which I don’t get the hate for the looks of) is the Roomster. Lots of the same mechanicals as the Yeti but without the 4×4 stuff. A proper little car-van. Take the rear seats out and bikes go in upright minus the front wheel. The Roomster *does* look odd but these sort of cars would really suit a lot of people if they weren’t so obsessed with having an SUV (which seems even weirder for mtbers – we actually go to the country and dive into the mud, we don’t need something that pretends we do.
I’ve not had a look at one in the flesh but the old Golf Plus and now the Golf SV look interesting – higher roofline and seating position without the un-necessary SUV stylings and disadvantages. I wonder if it’s big enough to get bikes in upright with front wheels off and seat dropped?Posted 1 year ago
these sort of cars would really suit a lot of people if they weren’t so obsessed with having an SUV (which seems even weirder for mtbers – we actually go to the country and dive into the mud, we don’t need something that pretends we do.
I’ve not had a look at one in the flesh but the old Golf Plus and now the Golf SV look interesting – higher roofline and seating position without the un-necessary SUV stylings and disadvantages. I wonder if it’s big enough to get bikes in upright with front wheels off and seat dropped
Nope, I have tried. But our Karoq does (see photo earlier in the thread) hence the fact that IME SUVs have been more spacious and practical. I don’t care about image so that doesn’t bother me. There are no disadvantages to speak of as the clearance and travel allows me to go places my estate doesn’t so I don’t how a car could be better for a mountain biker. It’s also on small wheels and balloon tyres which makes it ideal for those pot holes.Posted 1 year ago
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.