TrueDelta Reviews the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2015
2015 Seat Room and Comfort: Pros
Year
Comment
2016
The CX-3's driving position is very good, more car-like even than the HR-V's. The view forward is open. The view rearward, not so much, as the racy styling yields rear windows that are quite a bit smaller than the front ones. To help compensate, the outside mirrors are large plus blind sport warning is standard on the Touring and Grand Touring.
The CX-3's driver seat is very comfortable and provides good lateral support in turns. The cloth center pocket is cushy without being mushy. Unlike in the HR-V and some others, the headrest does not jut uncomfortably far forward. But the lumbar bulge is not adjustable. As is, it fit my back well, but many people will wish for more of a bulge. The HR-V's also non-adjustable lumbar bulge was too pronounced for my taste. The JUKE's seats are comfortable, but for effective side bolsters (and then some) you must step up to the NISMO.
Worth noting for those of you who get your coffee to go: the cup holders are located beneath the armrest (optional on the Sport, standard on the others). If you want to use them, then you can't use the armrest.
see full review
2015 Seat Room and Comfort: Cons
Year
Comment
For people who have no interest in a manual transmission (the great majority), the Mazda CX-3's largest shortcoming is a rear seat that is tight even by small car standards. Sitting behind my 5-9 self, my knees pressed lightly against the front seat backs. I wasn't uncomfortable, but felt a little closed-in. A shame, as rear headroom is relatively plentiful and the rear seat is otherwise very comfortable.
The HR-V provides about four inches more rear legroom, a big difference.
According to their specs, the JUKE has three inches less rear legroom than the Mazda. In reality, though, I had perhaps an inch more rear knee room, but less rear headroom. The Nissan's rear seat might be slightly more adult-friendly than the Mazda's, but neither is a good choice if people taller than me will be sitting in both rows.
see full review
What Our Members Are Saying about the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2015
None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2015 .
TrueDelta Reviews the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2014 Mercedes-Benz GLK
2014 Mercedes-Benz GLK Seat Room and Comfort: Cons
Year
Comment
Expect the GLK to grow when it is next fully redesigned. A smaller MLK is on the way to battle the upcoming Audi Q3 and just-arrived BMW X1. For 2013, the GLK's body structure remains essentially the same, so rear seat knee room remains just sufficient for a man of average height sitting behind another such man. (Headroom, on the other hand, is abundant.) Among competitors, only the Infiniti EX37 has a tighter rear seat. The Audi, BMW, and Volvo all offer knees another inch or three. Seat comfort is debatable. To my bottom, the GLK's seats feel overly firm.Cargo space is similarly short of the segment average. The GLK's 54.7 cubic feet isn't far behind the Audi's 57.3 but well below the X3's 63.3. That truncated tail has a downside beyond aesthetics.But do these shortcomings really matter? For most people nearly all of the time, there's enough space.see full Mercedes-Benz GLK review
What Our Members Are Saying about the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2014 Mercedes-Benz GLK
2014 Mercedes-Benz GLK Seat Room and Comfort: Cons
We are a couple with no kids and we rarely have visitors so the cramped rear seating is not a problem. Someone with teenage kids will want to seriously reconsider before getting a GLK.
I know my Mom would not appreciate the ingress/egress ease as she has some limited mobility.
see full Mercedes-Benz GLK review
