Mazda CX-5 Reliability Report
Reviewed by the MotorRank Media editorial team · Last reviewed May 2026 · Our methodology
Photo: Ethan Llamas · CC BY-SA 4.0
Reliability Snapshot
The Mazda CX-5 is one of the most reliable compact SUVs on the market, with a strong ownership-cost profile (RepairPal lists ~$447/yr in repairs, rated "Excellent") and a high J.D. Power Quality & Reliability score (82/100 for the 2022 model, with 2022-onward cars consistently strong). Most reported issues are minor and infrequent rather than drivetrain-threatening, and the naturally aspirated 2.0L/2.5L engines paired with the 6-speed automatic are well-proven. The main caveats are early first-generation cars, notably 2014 and 2016, which drew more complaints for daytime running lights, windshields, and brake wear.
Back to reliability hubReliability by the numbers
- RepairPal Reliability Rating (CX-5 model): 4.5 out of 5.0
- 4.5 / 5.0
- RepairPal rank among midsize SUVs: 1st out of 26
- 1st of 26
- RepairPal average annual repair cost (CX-5)
- $447/year
- J.D. Power Quality & Reliability score, 2025 CX-5 (rated 'Great')
- 82/100
- iSeeCars longevity — Mazda BRAND chance of reaching 250,000 miles (no CX-5 model-specific figure is published in the 2025 study; CX-5 does not appear in any model table). Confirmed: brand rank 9 of top 10, 3.6%, 0.7x the 4.8% industry average.
- 3.6% (0.7x the 4.8% industry average); brand rank 9
- J.D. Power Quality & Reliability, 2025 Mazda CX-5 (current 2nd-gen / KF), labeled 'Great'
- 82/100
- J.D. Power Quality & Reliability, 2023 Mazda CX-5 (current 2nd-gen / KF), labeled 'Great'
- 82/100
- J.D. Power Quality & Reliability, 2022 Mazda CX-5 (current 2nd-gen / KF), labeled 'Great'
- 86/100
Common Mazda CX-5 Problems
Daytime running LED light failure (sealed headlamp unit, not a single replaceable bulb) — subject of NHTSA recall 20V063 on 2016 models
MediumTypical onset: 40k-50k mi · Repair cost: $500-$1,000 (full LED assembly)
Windshield cracks easily / stress cracks, most reported on 2014-2016 models; a separate recall (16E002) covered a detachable bracket on replacement windshields that could disable Smart City Brake Support
MediumTypical onset: 20k-30k mi · Repair cost: $500-$800 replacement (CarComplaints avg ~$780)
Premature rear brake wear — pads/rotors wearing faster than expected, sometimes with grinding noise; RepairPal lists this as the single most commonly reported CX-5 problem
LowTypical onset: 25k-40k mi · Repair cost: $300-$500 per axle (RepairPal pad replacement ~$318-$367)
Engine stall / loss of power — documented in NHTSA recalls on specific build dates (PCM software 19V497 on 2018-2019 cars; low-pressure fuel pump 21V875). Stall while driving is a safety concern
HighTypical onset: varies · Repair cost: Recall repair (free at dealer) if VIN is covered
Infotainment / electrical glitches — navigation SD card errors, Bluetooth and screen quirks reported on 2016-2017 units (minor, owner-reported, not a recall)
LowTypical onset: varies · Repair cost: $0-$300
Best & Worst Model Years
CarComplaints rates 2016 the worst year (183 complaints, engine the top category) with 2014 second-worst (123 complaints); both are first-generation cars that drew the most reports for DRL LED failure, windshield cracking, and premature brake wear. The 2017 mid-cycle redesign and the refined 2018+ second generation cut complaint volumes sharply, and J.D. Power scored the 2022 CX-5 at 82/100 ("Great"). Used buyers get the best balance of reliability and value from 2018-onward cars.
Mazda CX-5 Reliability by Generation
First generation (KE) — pre-facelift
Average to above-average (no J.D. Power numeric Quality & Reliability score published for these years on jdpower.com)Launch years of the SkyActiv CX-5. 2013 used the 2.0L SkyActiv-G; 2.5L added for 2014. CarComplaints logs roughly 60 complaints (2013) and ~123 (2014) — 2014 is among the higher-complaint early years, driven largely by the fuel-filler-pipe recall (16V064000, 268,799 units) and early electrical niggles. No major engine/transmission design defects; generally regarded as reliable once the recall is closed. Verify the recall was performed before buying.
First generation (KE) — facelift
Mixed — 2016 is the weakest CX-5 model year on complaint data; J.D. Power Quality & Reliability not numerically rated for these years2016 is the single worst year on CarComplaints, dominated by LED Daytime Running Light failure (recall 20V063000, 36,761 units; ~$1,000+ repair around 45k mi and the subject of a class-action lawsuit) plus windshields that crack easily (2015). Still covered by the 2014-2016 fuel-filler-pipe recall (16V064000). Mechanically sound powertrain, but the 2016 is the year a used buyer should scrutinize most and confirm the DRL recall was completed.
Second generation (KF) — launch
J.D. Power: Not Rated (insufficient survey data on jdpower.com)Full redesign on Mazda's Kodo platform with G-Vectoring Control, stiffer body, power liftgate. Lowest complaint volume of the early years on CarComplaints. Carryover 2.5L SkyActiv-G (187 hp). Widely viewed as one of the better used CX-5 years — new platform without the later turbo/fuel-pump-era recalls. Note recall 17V744000 affects only 2017 units fitted with the accessory trailer-hitch harness (1,076 units).
Second generation (KF) — turbo era, recall-heavy years
Generally strong long-term reliability, but the two highest-volume CX-5 recalls land hereTurbocharged 2.5L added for the 2019 model year. These years carry the engine-stall PCM recall (19V497000, 262,220 units across CX-5/Mazda6/Mazda3) and the low-pressure fuel-pump recall (21V875000, multi-model 121,038 units), plus a small 2018 side-airbag deployment recall (18V426000, 682 units). Complaint volume is low and the platform is durable, but a used buyer MUST confirm all three recalls were completed — unrepaired stall/fuel-pump units are the main risk in this range.
Second generation (KF) — mature / refreshed
Excellent — no NHTSA recall campaigns returned for these years; aligns with the carry-over J.D. Power 'Great' Quality & Reliability ratingNo NHTSA recall campaigns returned for MY2020-2022 CX-5. 2021 brought the turbo-standard Carbon Edition and a trim reshuffle; 2022 received an exterior/chassis refresh and standard AWD. Complaint volume is minimal. This is the sweet spot of the generation for a used buyer: matured platform, recall-free, strong owner satisfaction.
Second generation (KF) — final years
J.D. Power 82/100 'Great' Quality & Reliability (2025; carry-over methodology)No NHTSA recalls returned for MY2023-2025. 2024 added a touchscreen with Apple CarPlay/Android Auto; 2025 trim updates continued. J.D. Power 2025 overall 82/100 (Quality & Reliability 82 'Great', Resale 84 'Great', Driving Experience 79 'Average', Dealership Experience 82 'Great'). Final years before the redesigned 2026 CX-5 (Google Built-in, available 15.6-inch screen). The most trouble-free CX-5s to buy used.
Major Mazda CX-5 Recalls
Fuel filler pipe may rupture in a rear/crash event, risking fuel leakage and fire
239,273 (2014-2016 CX-5)Fuel filler pipe may rupture in a rear/crash event, risking fuel leakage and fire (FMVSS 301 noncompliance); CX-5-only campaign.
Liftgate
580,455 total US recall (multi-model: Mazda3/Mazda5/CX-3/CX-5); 2013-2016 CX-5 included but the 573 report does NOT break out a CX-5-specific countLiftgate (lift gate) stay damper outer tube may corrode from salt water and break, causing the rear hatch to drop suddenly or broken parts to strike a person; multi-model recall incl. 2013-2016 CX-5.
Front strut-to-steering-knuckle lower mounting nuts/bolts may be under-torqued and loosen;
578 total (multi-model incl. 2014-2016 CX-5)Front strut-to-steering-knuckle lower mounting nuts/bolts may be under-torqued and loosen; after extended use the strut and steering knuckle may separate, causing significant loss of steering control.
Inappropriate hydraulic valve clearance adjuster
304,882 total (2018-2019 CX-5, 2018-2019 Mazda6, 2019 Mazda3 w/ cylinder-deactivation engine)Inappropriate hydraulic valve clearance adjuster (HLA) software controlling cylinder deactivation/reactivation may cause loss of engine power and/or engine stall, increasing crash risk (Mazda 'Rocker Arm Concern' safety/emissions recall 3719F). Note: source attributes this to HLA cylinder-deactivation software, not a generic 'PCM software error.'
Denso low-pressure fuel pump impeller may deform/crack, causing fuel pump failure and engi
121,038 total / 81,830 of them CX-5 (MY2018 72,554 + MY2019 9,276)Denso low-pressure fuel pump impeller may deform/crack, causing fuel pump failure and engine no-start or stall (rarely at higher speed), increasing crash risk.
Side curtain air bags may not properly unfold during deployment in a crash
Not stated in source (certain 2018 CX-5)Side curtain air bags may not properly unfold during deployment in a crash (FMVSS 226 noncompliance), increasing occupant injury risk.
Recall data from NHTSA. Always check a specific VIN at nhtsa.gov/recalls.
Before You Buy
Data current as of 2026. Recall numbers (20V063 DRL lights, 16E002 replacement-windshield bracket, 19V497 PCM engine stall, 21V875 low-pressure fuel pump) are each documented in NHTSA safety-recall reports. Note the engine-stall/fuel-pump recalls apply to specific production windows, not every model year — always run a VIN recall check before buying a used CX-5, as outstanding recalls are repaired free by Mazda dealers.
What owners report
Owner communities widely regard the CX-5 as one of the most dependable compact SUVs you can buy, with many reporting trouble-free ownership well past 100k-150k miles on routine maintenance and a good number pushing toward 200k. The most commonly cited gripes are minor rather than mechanical: glitchy or 'phantom-touch' Mazda Connect infotainment behavior (often resolved by a dealer software update, and the subject of a Mazda Connect class-action settlement), occasional Bluetooth/display niggles, modest rear-seat room, and a small subset of older first-gen cars with brake-wear, oil-leak, or electrical complaints. Drivetrain and engine reliability are praised, especially on the naturally aspirated 2.5L.
Mazda CX-5 Reliability FAQ
- Is the Mazda CX-5 reliable?
- The Mazda CX-5 is one of the most reliable compact SUVs on the market, with a strong ownership-cost profile (RepairPal lists ~$447/yr in repairs, rated "Excellent") and a high J.D. Power Quality & Reliability score (82/100 for the 2022 model, with 2022-onward cars consistently strong). Most reported issues are minor and infrequent rather than drivetrain-threatening, and the naturally aspirated 2.0L/2.5L engines paired with the 6-speed automatic are well-proven. The main caveats are early first-generation cars, notably 2014 and 2016, which drew more complaints for daytime running lights, windshields, and brake wear.
- What are the most reliable Mazda CX-5 model years?
- 2018-2025 (second generation), with 2022-2025 strongest. CarComplaints rates 2016 the worst year (183 complaints, engine the top category) with 2014 second-worst (123 complaints); both are first-generation cars that drew the most reports for DRL LED failure, windshield cracking, and premature brake wear. The 2017 mid-cycle redesign and the refined 2018+ second generation cut complaint volumes sharply, and J.D. Power scored the 2022 CX-5 at 82/100 ("Great"). Used buyers get the best balance of reliability and value from 2018-onward cars.
- Which Mazda CX-5 years should you avoid?
- We'd approach these model years with extra caution: 2014 and 2016.
- How much does it cost to maintain a Mazda CX-5?
- ~$447/yr (RepairPal), rated "Excellent" ownership cost. Below-average running costs for the segment: RepairPal puts the CX-5 at about $447/year with low repair severity and infrequent shop visits, and the broader Mazda brand ranks 5th of 32 for reliability (4.0/5). Routine maintenance is conventional (no timing belt to schedule), and parts are widely available, though premium trims with the turbo engine and extra electronics carry slightly higher repair exposure.
- What are the most common Mazda CX-5 problems?
- The most frequently reported issues are: Daytime running LED light failure; Windshield cracks easily / stress cracks, most reported on 2014-2016 models; a separate recall; Premature rear brake wear.