Top Safety Pick +

2016 Mazda CX-5

small SUV / 4-door SUV

Award applies only to vehicles with optional front crash prevention

2016 Mazda CX-5 4-door SUV

Crashworthiness

Rating overview
Small overlap front: driver-side
Moderate overlap front
Side
Roof strength
Head restraints & seats

Crash avoidance & mitigation

Headlights (varies by trim/option)
Front crash prevention
Optional system
Superior
Optional system
Advanced

Child seat anchors

LATCH ease of use

Other available safety features

  • Standard daytime running lights
  • Optional blind spot detection
  • Optional lane departure warning

Key

  • G
    Good
  • A
    Acceptable
  • M
    Marginal
  • P
    Poor
  • Superior
  • Advanced
  • Basic

Some ratings use a scale of Poor to Good. Others range from Basic to Superior.

Small overlap front: driver-side

Rating applies to 2014-16 models built after October 2013

Tested vehicle: 2014 Mazda CX-5 Sport 4-door 4wd

The Mazda CX-5 was introduced in the 2013 model year. Beginning with 2014 models built after October 2013, the front and side airbag programming and the front structure were modified to improve occupant protection in small overlap frontal crashes. (Information about when a specific vehicle was manufactured is on the certification label typically affixed to the car on the driver door or adjacent B-pillar.)

Overall evaluation
Structure and safety cage
Injury measures
Head/neck
Chest
Hip/thigh
Lower leg/foot
Restraints and dummy kinematics

Action shot taken during the small overlap frontal crash test.

The dummy's position in relation to the door frame, steering wheel, and instrument panel after the crash test indicates that the driver's survival space was maintained reasonably well.

The frontal and side curtain airbags worked well together to keep the head from coming close to any stiff structure or outside objects that could cause injury.

Intrusion into the driver's space was reasonably well controlled, and risk of injuries to the dummy's legs and feet was low.

Moderate overlap front

Rating applies to 2013-16 models

Tested vehicle: 2013 Mazda CX-5 Sport 4-door 4wd

The Mazda CX-5 was introduced in the 2013 model year.

Overall evaluation
Structure and safety cage
Injury measures
Head/neck
Chest
Leg/foot, left
Leg/foot, right
Restraints and dummy kinematics

Action shot taken during the frontal offset crash test.

The dummy's position in relation to the steering wheel and instrument panel after the crash test indicates that the driver's survival space was maintained very well.

Smeared greasepaint indicates where the dummy's head contacted the side curtain airbag, headliner, grab handle, and head restraint during rebound.

Intrusion into the driver's space was minimal, and all leg and foot injury measures were low.

Side

Rating applies to 2013-16 models

Tested vehicle: 2013 Mazda CX-5 Sport 4-door 4wd with standard front and rear head curtain airbags and standard front seat-mounted torso airbags

The Mazda CX-5 was introduced in the 2013 model year.

Overall evaluation
Structure and safety cage
Driver injury measures
Head/neck
Torso
Pelvis/leg
Head protection
Rear passenger injury measures
Head/neck
Torso
Pelvis/leg
Head protection

View of the vehicle and barrier just after the crash test.

View of the vehicle after the crash with doors removed, showing the side airbags and damage to the occupant compartment.

Smeared greasepaint shows where the driver dummy's head was protected from being hit by hard structures by the side curtain airbag.

Smeared greasepaint shows where the rear passenger dummy’s head was protected by the side airbag.

Roof strength

Rating applies to 2013-16 models

Tested vehicle: 2013 Mazda CX-5 Sport 4-door 4wd

Overall evaluation
Curb weight 3,330 lbs
Peak force 18,209 lbs
Strength-to-weight ratio 5.47

Head restraints & seats

Rating applies to 2013-16 models

Seat type: Manual cloth seats

Overall evaluation
Dynamic rating
Seat/head restraint geometry

Front crash prevention

Ratings are given for 2 different trim variations available on this vehicle.

System details

  • Optional Smart Brake Support
  • optional Smart City Brake Support

Package name

  • Optional i-Activsense Package

Applies to 2016 models

Overall evaluation

  • This system meets the requirements for forward collision warning.
  • In the 12 mph IIHS test, this vehicle avoided a collision.
  • In the 25 mph IIHS test, impact speed was reduced by 22 mph.
Superior
Superior
with optional equipment

System details

  • Optional Smart City Brake Support

Package name

  • Optional Grand Touring Technology Package or Touring Technology Package

Applies to 2014-16 models

Overall evaluation

  • Not available.
  • In the 12 mph IIHS test, this vehicle avoided a collision.
  • In the 25 mph IIHS test, impact speed was reduced by 0 mph.
Advanced
Advanced
with optional equipment

How front crash prevention is evaluated

Headlights

Ratings are given for 3 different headlight variations available on this vehicle.

Trim level(s)

  • Grand Touring trim equipped with Grand Touring Technology and i-ACTIVSENSE packages
Low-beam headlight type LED projector
High-beam headlight type LED reflector
Curve-adaptive? Yes
High-beam assist? Yes
Overall rating

Low beams
On the straightaway, visibility was fair on both sides of the road. On curves, visibility was good on both right curves and inadequate on both left curves.

The low beams created some glare.

High beams
On the straightaway, visibility was good on both sides of the road. On curves, visibility was good on the gradual left and both right curves and fair on the sharp left curve.

High-beam assist compensates for some limitations of this vehicle's low beams on the straightaway and on both left curves.

Trim level(s)

  • Touring trim equipped with Touring Technology package
  • Grand Touring trim equipped with Grand Touring Technology package
Low-beam headlight type LED projector
High-beam headlight type LED reflector
Curve-adaptive? Yes
High-beam assist? No
Overall rating

Low beams
On the straightaway, visibility was fair on both sides of the road. On curves, visibility was good on both right curves and inadequate on both left curves.

The low beams created some glare.

High beams
On the straightaway, visibility was good on both sides of the road. On curves, visibility was good on the gradual left and both right curves and fair on the sharp left curve.

Trim level(s)

  • All trims
Low-beam headlight type Halogen projector
High-beam headlight type Halogen reflector
Curve-adaptive? No
High-beam assist? No
Overall rating

Low beams
On the straightaway, visibility was good on the left side of the road and fair on the right side. On curves, visibility was inadequate in all 4 tests.

The low beams created some glare.

High beams
On the straightaway, visibility was good on both sides of the road. On curves, visibility was fair on the gradual right and gradual left curves and inadequate on the sharp left and sharp right curves.

How headlights are evaluated

Child seat anchors

Applies to 2015-16 models

Overall evaluation
Vehicle trim Touring
Seat type cloth

This vehicle has 2 rear seating positions with complete child seat attachment (LATCH) hardware.

It has 1 additional seating position with a tether anchor and the ability to borrow lower anchors from the other seating positions.

Note: When anchors are borrowed, they aren't available to use in their designated positions.

1 2 3
G Good
A Acceptable
M Marginal
P Poor
Seating positions that rely on borrowed lower anchors or have only a tether anchor available are not rated.
thether anchor symbol
Tether anchor
lower anchor symbol
Lower anchors
shared lower achors symbol
Lower anchor(s) can be borrowed from adjacent positions(s)
No hardware available

Details by seating position

1
Tether anchor
easy-to-find location
other hardware could be confused for anchor
Lower anchors
too deep in seat
not too much force needed to attach
easy to maneuver around anchors
2
Tether anchor
easy-to-find location
no other hardware could be confused for anchor
Lower anchors
Can be borrowed from 1 and 3
3
Tether anchor
easy-to-find location
other hardware could be confused for anchor
Lower anchors
too deep in seat
not too much force needed to attach
easy to maneuver around anchors

How child seat anchors are evaluated