• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

CX5 Vs Seat Ateca

M

Mike_S

I'm thinking of replacing my Seat Alhambra (an excellent towcar itself) with something a bit smaller. My favourites at the moment are either the Mazda CX5 or the Seat Ateca - I'd go for the most powerful model in each case.
Any opinions or recommendations out there? Thanks, in anticipation.
Mike
 
The magazine has a report on the CX5 looking at the pros and cons. Basically they have no known recurring faults but can be heavy on tyres and servicing costs are steep. They are regarded as one of the best tow cars in their class.
As the owner of my second Mazda 6 I can say that as a make it has been faultless so far and I am currently looking at the CX5 or 6 to replace the current car which has covered 45,000 miles in four and a half years.
The reports show the Seat to be an excellent tow car but it is far too early to get any long term reports on them.
Possibly the best option is try both and see what deals you can get and if you have a strong preference. The CX5 has been around a lot longer though and there are probably more deals to be done on that.
Assuming the weight point the Prof mentions is suitable then I see no real problem with either.
 
Thanks both!
Going by figures from their respective websites and with my caravan MTPLM of 1500Kg, for the CX5 : tow limit 2000Kg, KW 1703Kg = 88%. Seat Ateca tow limit 2100 Kg, KW 1589Kg = 94% (Present Alhambra tow limit 2200Kg, KW 1850Kg = 81%)

As someone who's being towing for over 40 years I'd like to think I class as experienced! Also, I don't have to worry about B&E licence problems.
Ray: Re your Mazda 6: We had a succession of it's predecessor the 626 and found them all to be good towcars. These days though, I need a slightly higher vehicle which makes getting in and out easier!

Mike
 
Not withstanding Rays personal concerns about 94%

Its all about how its loaded and driven. I have seen a poorly loaded trailer that had a towing ratio of less than 85% handle dreadfully, and a caravan where the ratio was 105% have impeccable manners!
 
I agree that the loading and driving are important but the weight ratio is a major factor. You cannot get a test drive with a caravan on the back, so cannot be sure of how effective a tow car is with that weight on tow and getting it wrong would be a major problem. The 94% ratio might work out, but as I said, personally I would not take the risk and would go for a lower one, as getting it wrong could be expensive and dangerous.
 
Getting it all right is the answer and that includes loading and weight ratio. Also driving style. We can all quote success and disaster matches from experience of ourselves and others over the years. As Ray says we don't get the opportunity to do a test tow very often so I also think to err on the side of caution where the weight ratio is concerned is the right thing to do.
 
I'm on my second 175ps cx-5.
First one had a vacuum pump fail at 14000 miles, it was also in a vin range noted for prematuring cam wear, leading to failing turbos, and both cars have had oil rise in the sump due to failed PDF burns, so faultless they are not.

These engines need oil changes no longer than 7K miles IMO, otherwise there is too much dilution leading to low oil pressure.

That aside the engine is a gem, tows 1565kg effortlessly, and I expect it to tow 1700kg max with my next caravan, a 1636kg Conqueror up plated to 1700kg. My car weighs 1703kg.
You will not be disappointed with the performance both solo and towing.

However the economy isn't great, due to PDF burns, locally around 38mpg. More on a run, but the auto uses around 3mpg over the manual, and the AWD another 3mpg.

The seat is smaller so I wouldn't consider it, so is a Tiguan, but not by much.

Forgot to mention a new cx-5 is due this year, so big discounts of the old model, I got over £4K of mine in 2015, so expect more than that.
 
Heavy on tyres, not mine

Servicing costly, i'm paying £299 for THREE services.

No known faults, were do they get their information from, perhaps they should read the Mazda forums, IMO Mazda are the most problematic Japanese cars I've owned, and I'm on about number 10 now.

Raywood said:
The magazine has a report on the CX5 looking at the pros and cons. Basically they have no known recurring faults but can be heavy on tyres and servicing costs are steep. They are regarded as one of the best tow cars in their class.
As the owner of my second Mazda 6 I can say that as a make it has been faultless so far and I am currently looking at the CX5 or 6 to replace the current car which has covered 45,000 miles in four and a half years.
The reports show the Seat to be an excellent tow car but it is far too early to get any long term reports on them.
Possibly the best option is try both and see what deals you can get and if you have a strong preference. The CX5 has been around a lot longer though and there are probably more deals to be done on that.
Assuming the weight point the Prof mentions is suitable then I see no real problem with either.
Click to expand...
 
Of the ten or so cx-5 owners on caravan talk forum two have had engine issues and ended up being towed home, both do lots of motorway miles. My car was off the road a week waiting parts, so that's three from ten, the others might have had problems but been reluctant to report them.

This is just two links of many engine failures. With this car its important that you do check the oil level weekly.

http://mazdacx5forums.co.uk/index.php?topic=618.msg4434#new
http://mazdacx5forums.co.uk/index.php?topic=598.0
http://mazdacx5forums.co.uk/index.php?board=14.0
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Back
Top