Table 1 shows three common forward collision avoidance related problems of the 2025 Mazda CX-5.
| Problem Category | Number of Problems |
|---|---|
| Warnings problems | |
| Automatic Emergency Braking problems | |
| Adaptive Cruise Control problems |
While driving at various speeds, including highway speeds, the vehicle intermittently fails to slow down when the brake pedal is applied. On multiple occasions, the brake pedal was pressed but the vehicle did not respond appropriately and continued moving forward. On December 1, 2025, while traveling at approximately 65 mph on the interstate in rainy conditions, the vehicle began making a grinding sound and started sliding instead of slowing down. The vehicle briefly lost the ability to decelerate, creating a near-collision with a semi-truck. On December 22, 2025, the issue occurred twice in one day. While attempting to brake at a stop sign and in traffic, the vehicle did not slow down, nearly causing collisions with vehicles in front and adjacent lanes. In the instance where approaching the stop sign where a vehicle was stopped, the dashboard flashed “break” while I was breaking as hard as I could. Warning lights and sensor-related alerts have appeared intermittently prior to and during some incidents. The issue has continued intermittently, including additional incidents where the brakes were either unresponsive or overly sensitive. They do not respond in a consistent or predictable manner, making safe driving nearly impossible. This problem places myself and others at significant risk of collision due to loss of braking control. The vehicle has been taken to multiple dealerships for inspection. The problem has not been successfully replicated, and no repairs have been performed to resolve the issue. Dealership documentation includes customer reports of “not braking” and brake malfunction concerns.
Life-threatening, unoccupied rollaway vehicle with personal injury. Possible and/or suspected issues: "not-p" switch circuit malfunction; "false park"; lack of cross-module redundancy; lack of bcm and pcm redundancy; diagnostic blind spot; lack of occupancy-brake interlock; systematic safety failure culminating in unintended, driverless, runaway zombie vehicle with personal injury. Background info: * low mileage, mainly in-town errands driving. * not previously reported quirks, possible latent defects: liftgate opening that was hit-or-miss requiring multiple unlock trunk-unlock doors + get out of the car manual attempts; intermittent off-shutdown double-tap issue to power off car; ill-timed "rear seat alert". * reported "engine won't start" resulting in three key fob battery replacements and a locked key fob. Day of incident: * auto-lock and the ebs were not used. * driver intent was to park and unload, then permanently park. Car was in-park twice before ultimately placed in reverse and backed into position, facing downhill on a slight slope and along a left-side stone retaining wall. * driver thought vehicle was fully in park. * attempted open liftgate via "open trunk, open door" routine, which did not work, so I exited the vehicle to try the manual liftgate button, which also did not work. * three back-and-forth "unlock trunk/doors + manually press liftgate button" did not work. * note: upon opening the door or anytime after, I did not hear an audible warning that the car was not fully in park. Nor did the car move/creep in any direction. * deducing I must need to shut off the car to open the liftgate -- I leaned in and depressed the on/off button. * this caused the car to move forward, driverless, door open and scraping the stone wall, across a secondary road, over an 11" curb, and down a hill before stopping due to a tree. * I was injured. Pinned between a narrowing door and the car, I tried to turn the wheel right before being knocked down/falling.
My 2025 Mazda Cx-5 includes a traffic jam assist (tja) stop and go feature. This feature allows the adaptive cruise control to move the vehicle in traffic with minimal drier intervention. As traffic advances the vehicle moves. If traffic stops, the vehicle stops. When clear of vehicles based on the set safe space setting in the adaptive cruise control, it resumes the predetermined speed set in the adaptive cruise control. The problem: while in "traffic jam assist" (tja) mode, if changing lanes l or r to a lane that has vehicles farther away (clear lane), the cruise control radar/camera then sees a clear opening and begins accelerating to the predetermined speed on the cruise control. However - at this time the system fails to recognize a that another vehicle is farther ahead. Maybe 4 or 5 car lengths ahead, and continues accelerating dangerously close to the next vehicle (I cannot say if it will stop or not because I have intervened to apply the brakes), cannot risk a rear end to another vehicle. The system fails to recognize that another vehicle is present after a lane change has occurred and braking or slowing as expected does not take place. This is a common repeatable scenario. The failure to recognize another vehicle after changing lanes is a serious and dangerous problem that should not be taking place. This poses an accident risk from an automated system that has a inherent flaw in its logic/design. The NHTSA should investigate this system and determine what corrective action can be taken to prevent a collision while using this system.