Mazda CX-5 vs Honda CR-V vs VW Tiguan vs Holden Equinox 2018 review

The highlight of the Holden’s cabin is the seats. The fabric choice is an inspired one, possibly the only inspired element to the cockpit, in fact. Too harsh? Maybe, but to this tester the Equinox’s cabin feels a bit like sitting in a Jetstar seat when you could have been in a Qantas business class seat for not that much more. 

I say that because of things like the cheap looking dashboard that would have looked great in 2011 but, in 2018, looks out of date. Plus there’s a lot of chromed plastic, a lot of hard black plastic, dials and controls that aren’t pleasant to turn or touch, and it’s the only one without seatbelt height adjustment (some people call it a seat belt extender) for those up front. 

The steering wheel controls can take some learning (the volume and tune buttons are on the back of the tiller), and the media screen is slanted too far back at the top. I’m six-foot tall, and found myself having to reach out of a control position to tap the screen - and while some shorter colleagues had no issue, a more upright tablet-style screen would have helped a lot. 

It’s not all bad news, though: the Equinox was ranked second-best for rear-seat legroom in the patented “set the driver’s seat in your position then sit behind it and see how many fingers you can fit in front of your knees” test.

In first place was the Honda (nine fingers), the Holden scored seven fingers, while third was the Volkswagen (its clever sliding second-row seating in the most passenger-friendly setting) with a six-finger score, and last was the Mazda with barely a single finger’s width between seat-back and kneecap. 

As for headroom, all four will comfortably fit a six-foot adult or two in the back, and all four have reclining backrests. If you want to fit three people (or baby car seats) across, the Holden’s flat floor is a big bonus for foot room, but its centre console juts out from the front into the rear part of the cabin, fouling kneeroom, while the middle-seat headrest is ridiculously oversized (and it looks like E.T., not that we're docking marks for that). 

The Honda has a very slight step in the floor for a transmission tunnel, but is easily the widest across the back pew, and therefore the best suited to a theoretical three-across trip. The VW and Mazda both have quite pronounced transmission tunnel humps, but its the Mazda that is the worst for space overall (and its seat is cut away in the middle, making for an uncomfortable position if you’re seated there). 

In fact, the Mazda’s cabin is tight in comparison to the others, and would be hard to recommend if you have a growing or fully grown family. What a shame, because it has - easily - the most attractive and nicest presented cabin of these four.

The materials used in the CX-5 feel like you’re sitting in a $50k SUV, not one that costs less than $35k. There are truly thoughtful touches, like the knurled finishes on the control knobs, and the central rotary dial for the media system that allows you to quickly switch from one thing to another without having to make sure you hit the right section of the screen with your finger (that’s hard on a bumpy road!). 

Usability is one thing, but the Mazda’s media screen is a bit of a struggler: it is slow to load up when you start the car, and can be glitchy at times when playing back on Bluetooth. It’s also the only one here lacking Apple CarPlay and Android Auto extended smartphone mirroring.

Also, the Mazda is the only one that lacks a digital speedometer. In states where the width of a speedo needle could mean the difference between getting there early and getting a ticket, that’s an important consideration. We’re left perplexed as to why Mazda offers a digital readout in higher-spec models, but leaves lower-spec car buyers more vulnerable to speeding fines. 

The Honda’s driver info screen, on the other hand, is huge and bright, but the controls on the steering wheel aren’t simple, and they don’t look or feel very nice, either. The CR-V’s media system is a bit of a mixed bag, too: the fonts are a bit ungainly, and the fact you have to go into the screen to fiddle with detailed climate controls is a bit distracting.

But the Honda is undoubtedly the most roomy feeling of these four, with bigger door apertures, more glass, and a general feeling of airiness inside that no other SUV in the class can match. It’s a superbly packaged car, with very comfortable seats and straightforward ergonomics.

That’s not to say the Honda has all the boxes ticked. While all four of these models have ISOFIX child seat anchor points in the second row, the top-tether baby seat hooks for the Honda are mounted in the headlining above the boot - the rest of the SUVs here have them mounted on the seat-backs. It could make for a strapping conundrum if you load up the boot to the roof… Also, please make sure you don’t mistake the luggage hook behind the Honda’s seats for an anchor point.

Oh, and the CR-V is the only one with a ceiling-mounted middle seatbelt, too. What’s with things being attached to the ceiling, Honda? 

At least the CR-V comes with parent-friendly bits like a little convex mirror in the sunglass holder that allows you to see what the gremlins are up to behind you. For what it’s worth, only the Tiguan misses out on a sunglass holder, and in this spec you don’t get those brilliant roof storage boxes, either.

All four models have cupholders between the front seats and bottle holders in all four doors, and the VW’s door pockets are flocked, meaning you won’t hear things rattling around in the doors when you’re driving - a nice touch. But the VW falls short in other ways that could be a problem for family buyers: in this spec, you miss out on rear map pockets (the only one here without those), and there’s no flip-down centre armrest - and therefore not a single rear cup holder. The other three have an arm-rest with drink receptacles. 

While we’re talking centre storage, the Holden’s centre console lid is enormous - it’s like a chauffeur's privacy screen! And the Honda’s centre console is by far the best here, with a bin that has a massive cubby between the seats with a movable shelf that allows you to hide things if you need to. 

Both the Mazda and Honda have excellent 90-degree opening rear doors which make loading children in and out a cinch, where the other two have doors that only swing open about three-quarters of the way. The latter two may save you from having to leave a note when your kids inevitably thrust the back doors open at the shops and dent the car alongside, but the wide-opening back doors are a huge advantage for parents of very young children loading them in and out by hand.

The Honda and Mazda, too, both offer dual-zone climate control, built-in sat-nav, and rear-seat USB charge points (the Honda’s under the rear vents, the Mazda’s in the armrest, with a clever hidey-hole). The Holden and VW can’t match any of that (the MY18 Tiguan we had missed out on rear USB ports, but the MY18.5 update added two USBs in the back across the range).

The Volkswagen is super impressive in a lot of ways - cabin presentation, its massive 8.0-inch media screen with a bright crisp display, the button/switch/knob feel and placement, and generally great ergonomics. That sliding second-row seat is a really thoughtful thing, too, because - if you do have really young children - they need boot space a lot more than legroom, so you can configure it as such.

The Volkswagen's cabin presentation is very impressive.

On the topic of boot space / boot dimensions / luggage capacity — whatever you want to call it — we’ve got a bit of an issue: each company uses different measurements to claim their cargo area storage. But we figured we’d show you how easily (or with how much difficulty) you can fit a typical family’s worth of luggage - three suitcases and a pram. 

The pictures tell the story: the Honda’s lower load lip and load floor makes it the best bet here, hands-down. It’s also the only one with an electric bootlid, and despite being the roomiest boot it’s also the only one with a full-size alloy spare wheel: the rest have space-saver spare wheels.

We went with the worst-case scenario for the VW, the rear seat set for maximum occupant room, and it managed to do a fine job of swallowing our luggage, if not quite as good as the Holden. The Mazda ran last for this part of the test: look, it’s a pretty cabin, but it’s definitely not the smartest in terms of space utilisation.

If you wish to fold down the rear seats, you’ll need to remove the middle headrest in the Holden, which is a pain… I can envisage a lot of middle-seat headrests of Holden Equinoxes being pulled out and put in the shed, never to be seen again. The Holden and Honda both have 60:40 split-fold seats, while the other two both have 40:20:40 split seats. 

Again, the Honda and Mazda stand above their competitors, with the thoughtful addition of remote rear-seat release levers, meaning you can easily drop the back seats if you’re loading things in through the boot without having to go around to the side, open the door, and lower the seat from there. 

If you intend to use the boot as a storage space for bulky items, you could easily find a cargo barrier for any of these models, and all have options for a liner or tray to stop you from damaging the carpet in the back, too. All models here except the Holden come with a cargo blind / tonneau cover. And hey, if the boot space dimensions don’t offer enough luggage capacity size for you, you could always add a roof rack and cargo box.

There is no horsepower heavy hitter here in terms of power and torque specs - we’re comparing petrol vs petrol, front wheel drive 4x2 SUVs after all - but of these four it’s the Holden that offers up the most pulling power ratings. And when it comes to manual vs automatic, it seems auto has won - every model here is standard as an auto, though the transmissions vary.

Under the bonnet of the Holden Equinox LS+ was a 1.5-litre four-cylinder turbo engine with 127kW of power and 275Nm of torque, the latter figure being the highest of this group. Not only are the engine specs better, it felt quicker than all the other vehicles here on test, too. If I had to put money on one of these vehicles winning a 0-100km acceleration speed shootout, the Holden would be it.

The Holden Equinox LS+ is powered by a 1.5-litre four-cylinder turbo engine, producing 127kW/275Nm.

It has a six-speed automatic gearbox, but with no paddle-shifters (there’s a manual mode: you need to select L with the shifter, then you can toggle up and down the gears with the +/- button on top of the selector).

The Volkswagen Tiguan 110TSI Trendline is powered by a 1.4-litre four-cylinder turbo motor with 110kW of power and 250Nm of torque. Those are pretty solid specifications, and - once you get a bit of momentum - the pulling power is decent for the size of the vehicle. It proves that engine size isn’t everything.

The transmission is a six-speed dual-clutch automatic for this front-drive model, with a manual mode but no paddles, and it offered a bit to talk about in the section covering off road manners below…

The Tiguan is powered by a 1.4-litre four-cylinder turbo motor with 110kW/ 250Nm.

The Honda CR-V VTi-S is powered by the same 1.5-litre four-cylinder turbo engine you get in every single model in the CR-V range - even the ones with all wheel drive.

It has 140kW of power and 240Nm of torque, and like a lot of Honda engines it wants to rev to get the most out of it. That’s not exactly ideal when there’s a continuously variable transmission (CVT) auto in charge of propulsion - but it surprised a few of us in testing. It has no manual transmission mode at all.

The Mazda CX-5 Maxx Sport model we had was the 2.0-litre four-cylinder version, but the 2.5-litre model with AWD would be very tempting if the budget permitted.

Our Maxx Sport, though, offered up pretty low outputs: 110kW of power and 200Nm of torque, and its transmission is a six-speed automatic with a sport mode, but no paddle-shifters.

The CX-5 Maxx Sport has a 2.0-litre four-cylinder producing 110kW of power and 200Nm of torque.

The CX-5 is the only one of this quartet without a turbocharged engine, but that’s not necessarily a bad thing. There’s no turbo lag to contend with, for instance, and despite its low outputs, the drivetrain is pretty well sorted. Read more about it in the driving section below.

We get a lot of reader questions over whether their car has a timing belt or chain. For the petrol-powered models you see here, the answer for each model is a timing chain. 

Towing capacity isn’t the strong suit of any of these models, but a lot of people fit a towbar to even smaller models to help with pulling a load of weight around the place. This is no towing review, but here are the statistics for those of you who are interesting in hauling a caravan or carrying stuff in a box trailer to the tip: for an un-braked trailer the Holden, Mazda and VW are rated at 750kg, the Honda at 600kg. For a braked trailer, the Honda and Holden are rated at 1500kg, the Mazda and VW at 1800kg. Models with 4x4 / 4WD / or rear wheel drive often have higher towing capacity.

None of these SUVs come with plug in hybrid or EV (fully electric) options as yet.

Not long ago, buyers who were shopping for SUVs like these had to leave any hope of driver excitement elsewhere. But that’s definitely not the case any more, because not one of these SUVs is what I’d describe as lumbering or lacking in terms of dynamic ability.

The Honda, for example, has super direct electric power steering - meaning that if you need to duck between lanes on the highway or zip into a parking spot at the shops, there’s not much effort involved.

The suspension of the Honda is really well composed, too - the best of these four, in fact, for bump absorption over sharp-edged bumps, and that’s a good outcome especially given that it rides on bigger wheels. I really like the way it drives - it’s aimed at mums and dads and that’s what it delivers, a competent and comfortable experience on the road. To this tester’s ears, it exhibited the least road noise and cabin noise intrusion from the tyres, too.

Competent is the best description of the drivetrain, too. It mightn’t have the torque of the other three here, but the CVT does a really nice job of allowing you to make the most of the pulling power that’s available. Of course, being a Honda, it wants you to rev the guts out of it, but that’s not where it does its best work.

A couple of issues, though: there’s no engine start-stop, which is a shame, and because of that you’ll notice a bit of vibration through the cabin when you sit at the lights with your foot on the brake.

The Volkswagen has some quarrelsome elements to its drivetrain. At low speeds, like when you stop and then take off, or even just when you’re slowing down for speed-humps and the like, you might find that the dual-clutch transmission doesn’t behave as nicely as a regular auto, and it can lurch and stumble. You can easily lose your grip on the road when you plant the throttle, too, spinning the front wheels and squealing the tyres if you’re not measured with your throttle application. You’ll definitely need to watch that in the wet. 

But, if you can, you have to forgive it those quibbles because the drivetrain performance is otherwise really good. When you get above second gear it settles nicely, offering decent punch and shifts are superbly smooth and undeniably smart.

It coasts very comfortably, and that two-cylinder mode is pretty engaging - so, if the engine is under low enough load, it will run on half capacity, and a little icon shows up on the driver info display. I found myself at times trying to make sure it was running in that mode to save juice.

The rear suspension of the Tiguan is reasonably well sorted, but the front suspension is not the plushest here when it comes to sharper urban road bumps. It can be a little crunchy, but it makes up for that with true and natural steering.

I would suggest that if you’re into the Tiguan, make sure you take it for an extended urban drive to see if you can live with the low-speed issues.

The Mazda has quite a different character to the Tiguan - and not just because of its non-turbocharged engine.

That engine, though, is really annoying to listen to. At startup its buzzy and loud, and while it settles down after a minute or so, it remains audibly frustrating on the road.

As they are all front-wheel drive / 2WD SUVs, there was no off-road component to this test, and you can forget things like a diff lock or limited slip differential in these SUVs.

When you put your foot down to overtake or go up a steep hill, for example, the drivetrain will eagerly drop back a gear or two to get itself into the right torque band, but the cacophony that accompanies that is the opposite of plush. Some may posit that’s why Mazda has put a lot of effort into styling…

That said, you can rely on the drivetrain to react the same way every time, and if you flick it to Sport mode it will hold gears longer, meaning less shuffling of cogs. If you do plan to take it for a punt in Sport mode, the fact there’s no digital speedo is a pain. And of these four, I found the brake pedal feel of the Mazda to be the least convincing and reactive - next worst was the Holden, while the Honda and VW both offered confidence-inspiring results when you pressed the stop pedal.

In terms of ride composure and comfort, the Mazda is about middle-ground in this company. It doesn’t slap down on the road surface after a sharp bump as either the VW or Holden, but isn’t quite as plush as the CR-V, either. 

The downside to the Mazda is its turning circle / turning radius. It was the biggest of these four, making it harder to pivot in parking garages, and the weight at low speeds of the steering makes the arm-twirling required a bit of a workout. For what it’s worth, the Holden was next worst for its turning circle in testing, while the VW and Honda were the most carpark friendly.

The Holden was the one that I enjoyed driving least around town, but most on an open windy road. 

That’s because the suspension is more taut and terse than the rest: there’s clearly a real focus on body control, and as a result it feels as if it gets firmer the slower you’re going. And it’s not afraid to stamp its feet down hard over big bumps in the city. 

If you live in an urban area, it’s the one that’ll frustrate you the most in terms of passenger comfort.

But get out of town and you’ll enjoy steering that is really easy to judge, and has good weighting too. Plus it feels like a hatchback when you push it through corners, rather than a big practical SUV.

The drivetrain of the Equinox was pretty impressive for the most part, and there’s no doubt in my mind that it offers the quickest acceleration of these four, but it also showed up a bit of torque steer (where the steering wheel will tug down under hard acceleration).

No need to worry about hill starts in any of them - each has hill start assist, though if you don’t active Auto Hold on the Tiguan it can roll back.

As they are all front-wheel drive / 2WD SUVs, there was no off-road component to this test, and you can forget things like a diff lock or limited slip differential in these SUVs. 

If you value off road capability and you choose cars by their ground clearance (mm) ratings and wading depth, or want to know which 16-inch chrome wheels you can fit with off road tyres, you really ought to be shopping elsewhere. That’s not to say that models like the Tiguan Adventure can’t go a little off the beaten track - it just wasn’t part of the criteria for this test. 

There’s no clear ‘best buy’ of these four when it comes to ownership - if you want the best, consider a Kia.

The Holden offers the least compelling warranty plan, with three years/100,000km of coverage, though you could argue that unless you’re doing epic trips, the three-year/unlimited kilometre plans offered by Mazda and Volkswagen aren’t much better. 

It’s the Honda that wins the warranty comp, with a five-year unlimited kilometre cover. You can option extended warranty cover through all four brands if you want it.

Roadside assist is free for the warranty period for the Volkswagen and Holden, and if you service your car at Holden workshops you will get an extra two years’ cover (total: five). Mazda and Honda both ask you to pay for their company-backed roadside assist programs. 

Servicing is another point of contention.

The Holden needs maintenance every 12 months or 12,000km, and the average service costs per annum over a the first three years works out at $272. Affordable!

The Honda needs maintenance slightly more regularly, every 12 months or 10,000km. The average cost per visit for the first three years works out at $295. 

The Mazda requires servicing every 12 months or 10,000km, too, but is slightly more expensive than the Honda: the annual average for the first three years is $309.

Volkswagen offers the best intervals for those who plan to drive longer distances, at 12 months/15,000km. But the cost of servicing is high, averaging out at $458 per year for the first three years. Those are some expensive stamps in your owners manual - but they could affect your resale value in the long run.

The warranty of the Honda just manages to gets it an extra point here, while the service costs of the VW drop it below its peers.

If you are concerned over defects, durability, reliability ratings, transmission problems/gearbox problems, turbo problems, engine problems, cruise control qualms, injector issues, consumer complaints and issues, be sure to look up our problems pages for each of the models.

As for resale value, we used Glass’s Guide for the expected value of each of these vehicles after three years/50,000km. Or you can research current pricing and specs for the CR-V, CX-5, Equinox and Tiguan here.

Here are the projected values for each vehicle: the CX-5 is likely to hold roughly 56 per cent of the purchase price after that period, making it the best performer of these four. The second-best predicted value holder is the CR-V at approximately 53 per cent, while the Equinox was just behind at just on 52 per cent. The Tiguan was the least enticing mainly due to its higher purchase price, with a predicted value of about 50 per cent after three years/50,000km.