Wrong.
Now with the CX-70 "revealed", what is everyone buying?
- Thread starter Muggs1
- Start date
- :
- '22 Mazda CX-5 Turbo
I definitely wish Mazda gave us something closer to the CX-60 for the CX-70 as that vehicle would have been a proper CX-5 upgrade that I'd easily say yes to without looking at anything else. But alas we got what we got and now I get to look at everything on the market.
So far in my quest to find something other than a fourth CX-5 (currently driving a '22 CX-5 Turbo), I've mainly discovered that nearly all cars these days have the same front seat widths of 20 inches give or take. I've sat in the driver's seat of a CX-90 and the driver's space felt identical to my CX-5 despite the CX-90 having larger interior measurements. The giant center console definitely doesn't improve comfort and I'm guessing the touch points that your knees rest against have the same widths too. So a CX-70 might not be the upgrade I'm hoping for, but it could work if I want to prioritize using the back for camping.
I've looked at other brands and it definitely appears one doesn't necessarily find better comfort in larger vehicles. The Kia Sorento and Telluride were nice, but they have nearly identical driver's seat spaces and the same knee widths so I'd probably pick the Sorento as it's size better fits my needs. I definitely appreciated that Kia has better seat adjustability tech, but the seats didn't improve my comfort as significantly as I was hoping for because of where my knees rested. I looked at a Chevy Tahoe and that felt more cramped to me than my CX-5 and the Tahoe is supposed to have one of the largest interiors out there. So far the Toyota Crown has been the only vehicle I've found thus far where the seat felt like an upgrade, which makes the Crown Signia a potential option.
Rivian's recent announcement of their upcoming R2 and R3/R3X EVs are a definite wildcard option that might motivate me to get a 4th CX-5 and get my name on the list for an R2 in 2026/2027. I never really wanted an EV until I saw those. Based off of a recent Mazda's insiders community survey on BEVs, I doubt Mazda is planning any rugged BEV models.
So far in my quest to find something other than a fourth CX-5 (currently driving a '22 CX-5 Turbo), I've mainly discovered that nearly all cars these days have the same front seat widths of 20 inches give or take. I've sat in the driver's seat of a CX-90 and the driver's space felt identical to my CX-5 despite the CX-90 having larger interior measurements. The giant center console definitely doesn't improve comfort and I'm guessing the touch points that your knees rest against have the same widths too. So a CX-70 might not be the upgrade I'm hoping for, but it could work if I want to prioritize using the back for camping.
I've looked at other brands and it definitely appears one doesn't necessarily find better comfort in larger vehicles. The Kia Sorento and Telluride were nice, but they have nearly identical driver's seat spaces and the same knee widths so I'd probably pick the Sorento as it's size better fits my needs. I definitely appreciated that Kia has better seat adjustability tech, but the seats didn't improve my comfort as significantly as I was hoping for because of where my knees rested. I looked at a Chevy Tahoe and that felt more cramped to me than my CX-5 and the Tahoe is supposed to have one of the largest interiors out there. So far the Toyota Crown has been the only vehicle I've found thus far where the seat felt like an upgrade, which makes the Crown Signia a potential option.
Rivian's recent announcement of their upcoming R2 and R3/R3X EVs are a definite wildcard option that might motivate me to get a 4th CX-5 and get my name on the list for an R2 in 2026/2027. I never really wanted an EV until I saw those. Based off of a recent Mazda's insiders community survey on BEVs, I doubt Mazda is planning any rugged BEV models.
Dwswager, your words say one thing but your reaction says something else altogether different. Go enjoy your BMW.
Thank You! I will enjoy my BMW. But then that is the secret to life...being grateful and enjoying what you have. I would enjoy a CX-90 without a back seat, just not as much as BMW X5 40i xDrive M Sport.
- :
- North of Toronto
- :
- 2019 CX-9 Sig
What's hilarious is there is nothing contentious about saying the X5 is better than the Mazdas, in fact when it comes to sporty SUVs the X5 is the one I've seen most often referred to as the best on the market. There is no shame in an SUV falling short of an X5...its not a knock on the Mazdas.
What is contentious has been the way Mazda has marketed the CX70. That's a not uncommon view of layman like us here and the automotive press as well. Now, one can say that doesn't matter, if the product is a good one, or the right one for someone's user case, who cares if the marketing is poor. But the right vehicle doesn't erase the poor marketing, it just makes people forget.
But then we come to is the vehicle the right one? Let's not pretend the CX90 has been a flawless vehicle,the drivetrain everyone was salivating over pre release has left something to be desired. One expects once the 70 is on the road, it'll be the same. New tranny programming can only go so far.
And let's not deny that the manufacturers in the industry have by and large decided that 5 seaters are best designed to be smaller than the CX70. It might suit some people to have the CX70s specs, however clearly there isn't a market where people have demanded that size of an SUV for 5.
Maybe Mazda has created a new niche. Only time will tell.
They somehow created a 340 HP inline 6 that isn't smooth, fast or impressive from an audible perspective, so anything is possible if one tries.
Yes, the X5 is considered one of BMWs best mass market products. Compared to the X3 it is significantly more polished though I assume the 2025 X3 is intended to fix that.
Mazda already has predicted the CX-70 will not sell well. They are expecting 25% of the sales of what the CX-90 does. This is what leads me to believe it was not Plan A for the CX-70. No mainline manufacturer builds a new model to sell 12,000.
It is not slow, just not quick. I will give Mazda the benefit of the doubt. It's early in their first go. The B58 started in 2015 and it has matured. Assuming Mazda sticks with it and they get a decent transmission to pair it with they can have a great basic platform from which to build various higher end products.They somehow created a 340 HP inline 6 that isn't smooth, fast or impressive from an audible perspective, so anything is possible if one tries.
- :
- North of Toronto
- :
- 2019 CX-9 Sig
That 12k expectation, whether it was plan A or B, does show they know this isn't a differentiated product. It's an add on with 12k predicted, and what's so odd is there's nothing wrong with the idea of adding on, just market it as so.
The transmission is their own, I wonder why they did that and I wonder if there would be pushback to switch it out rather than get their money's worth on the R and D. With a diff transmission, who knows what the engine character becomes.
This engine certainly has potential to become their B58, it's really quite remarkable that a small company would even take the time to develop it given where ICE vehicles are probably headed. I am happy they did it, but I do find it unfortunate that it's looking at the taillights of a top line Grand Highlander with a 4 cyl. I know it's an SUV, but speed is luxury even when it's not being driven hard, and TBH I like driving hard. Just bc I have a carseat and need to hold cargo, doesn't mean I don't kike the sporting character of this type of SUV. I do hope in the future they sort this out, since personally an X5 isn't being greenlit by my wife.
They already had developed the Inline 6 for a new upmarket Mazda 6 sedan. Shame that got killed. I am to understand in the U.S., due to CAFE regulation it was going to have to get 40mpg as a passenger car as it would not qualify for the light truck exemption. So it made sense to use it in the SUV line.This engine certainly has potential to become their B58, it's really quite remarkable that a small company would even take the time to develop it given where ICE vehicles are probably headed. I am happy they did it, but I do find it unfortunate that it's looking at the taillights of a top line Grand Highlander with a 4 cyl. I know it's an SUV, but speed is luxury even when it's not being driven hard, and TBH I like driving hard. Just bc I have a carseat and need to hold cargo, doesn't mean I don't kike the sporting character of this type of SUV. I do hope in the future they sort this out, since personally an X5 isn't being greenlit by my wife.
N7turbo
2023 CX-5 2.5T ... 2024 MX-5 RF GT
Well many complain that the CX-5 could be more roomy for the rear passengers, so I'd say Mazda is listening to that. In fact it's the basis of some of their ads right now.
Why the CX-50 does not make sense as it has less passenger volume than the CX-5. But I think he was talking of upscale vehicles like Merc, BMW, Genesis, Volvo, Audi.
cx5boo333
2021 Cx5 GT AWD
That's fair, but on the other hand Mazda is more about excitement and handling rather than straight-line speed. But then also, making the statement of a new inline-6 and furthering their luxury aspirations kinda brings assumptions of speed.. I'm conflicted, cause it's a great vehicle in it's own way, but clearly there's more to be desired.
With the Cx-9 (granted I didn't care or pay attention to cars when it came out), I feel like no one was upset with the speed because it wasn't marketed as far into the luxury field as the 90, and a turbo 4 isn't expected to be super zippy in a 3-row.
Anywho, as other people have said I'm curious to see if/what Mazda does with the inline-6 going forward. If it made it into the refreshed Cx-5, that would 1. be AWESOME, 2. be FAST, and 3. make their decision to not bring a Cx-60 sized vehicle to the US make sense, cause it would essentially fill that gap. Also, this would distinguish it largely from the 50. Honestly whatever they do though I'm excited to see, cause even when they "miss the mark" in some ways, they're still wayyyy more interesting than any other mainstream brand in my opinion - design and philosophy-wise. I'll stop rambling lol..
- :
- North of Toronto
- :
- 2019 CX-9 Sig
When I bought my CX9, I was kind of sold on it but just out of due diligence I did for a moment consider the CX5. I tried my baby seat in it, forward facing. Was a quick little exercise. So I understand they could use a more spacious 5 seater, but I feel they overshot.
- :
- North of Toronto
- :
- 2019 CX-9 Sig
I agree, I should have explained it better, maybe speed in a smooth manner is a better way of putting it. Some reviews say it does that, at higher speeds at least, but quite a few say at low speeds it's twitchy. If this was a butter smooth experience through the rev range and at most daily driving speeds, one could absolutely forgive it being a half step behind, or if it was the fastest in the class you could forgive how it got you there. But it's neither.That's fair, but on the other hand Mazda is more about excitement and handling rather than straight-line speed. But then also, making the statement of a new inline-6 and furthering their luxury aspirations kinda brings assumptions of speed.. I'm conflicted, cause it's a great vehicle in it's own way, but clearly there's more to be desired.
With the Cx-9 (granted I didn't care or pay attention to cars when it came out), I feel like no one was upset with the speed because it wasn't marketed as far into the luxury field as the 90, and a turbo 4 isn't expected to be super zippy in a 3-row.
Anywho, as other people have said I'm curious to see if/what Mazda does with the inline-6 going forward. If it made it into the refreshed Cx-5, that would 1. be AWESOME, 2. be FAST, and 3. make their decision to not bring a Cx-60 sized vehicle to the US make sense, cause it would essentially fill that gap. Also, this would distinguish it largely from the 50. Honestly whatever they do though I'm excited to see, cause even when they "miss the mark" in some ways, they're still wayyyy more interesting than any other mainstream brand in my opinion - design and philosophy-wise. I'll stop rambling lol..
I would agree, despite my criticisms of both the 70 and 90 over the last few days, they indeed are still the at or near top of the class. I would have to look at both if tomorrow I found my vehicles stolen and needed to replace.
Whether that's the engine or transmission really doesn't matter, point is there was potential here.
Agree with the dynamics, and that seems to be a much greater positive consensus with this vehicle.
We can all agree the CX-70/90 is a good vehicle that punches well above it's cost. We can also agree that though it has tremendous potential, it also has some rough edges. We also should be agreed that the CX-70 is too big to have mass market appeal. If it works for you: great. But the bulk of the market looking for a 5-seat, premium SUV want something bigger than a CX-5 and smaller than a CX-70.
The BMW X5 I bought is $20K more than a CX-70 (ignoring the CX-70 size). Is it worth that extra? Depends on your perspective and ability to pay. The whole thing is just a little better than the CX-70 in dozens of ways. And to get that incremental increase costs a significant premium. Diminishing returns are real. It is what separates a premium vehicle from a mainstream vehicle. Same as the difference between a Ferrari and a Porsche.
The BMW X5 I bought is $20K more than a CX-70 (ignoring the CX-70 size). Is it worth that extra? Depends on your perspective and ability to pay. The whole thing is just a little better than the CX-70 in dozens of ways. And to get that incremental increase costs a significant premium. Diminishing returns are real. It is what separates a premium vehicle from a mainstream vehicle. Same as the difference between a Ferrari and a Porsche.
N7turbo
2023 CX-5 2.5T ... 2024 MX-5 RF GT
Well, as the old adage goes "you can't please everyone".
N7turbo
2023 CX-5 2.5T ... 2024 MX-5 RF GT
It would be cool for us enthusiasts, but seeing that we're trending towards fewer cylinders, not more, I highly doubt we'll get more than four. Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if Mazda came out with an inline 3-cylinder engine in some future models (but please not the CX-5).That's fair, but on the other hand Mazda is more about excitement and handling rather than straight-line speed. But then also, making the statement of a new inline-6 and furthering their luxury aspirations kinda brings assumptions of speed.. I'm conflicted, cause it's a great vehicle in it's own way, but clearly there's more to be desired.
With the Cx-9 (granted I didn't care or pay attention to cars when it came out), I feel like no one was upset with the speed because it wasn't marketed as far into the luxury field as the 90, and a turbo 4 isn't expected to be super zippy in a 3-row.
Anywho, as other people have said I'm curious to see if/what Mazda does with the inline-6 going forward. If it made it into the refreshed Cx-5, that would 1. be AWESOME, 2. be FAST, and 3. make their decision to not bring a Cx-60 sized vehicle to the US make sense, cause it would essentially fill that gap. Also, this would distinguish it largely from the 50. Honestly whatever they do though I'm excited to see, cause even when they "miss the mark" in some ways, they're still wayyyy more interesting than any other mainstream brand in my opinion - design and philosophy-wise. I'll stop rambling lol..
Just so people understand how good the Mazda 3.3L turbo might get. Shown is the BMW B58 major and minor variants. As of 2025, all non-M cars will get the B58B30M2 rated at 375hp/384ftlb. (of course, it is actually producing somewhere around 400hp) This is the variant the 2024 BMW X5 I bought will have. The B58 is 3.0L and started life at 322hp and now the S58 (M-2/3/4) variant can produce 503hp. So there is a lot of learning and tuning and updating that could happen to really make the 3.3L Mazda Inline 6 a great motor. Now they just need a better transmission to mate to it.
This is true, but they are typically in sports car applications like the Honda's 320HP 2.0-Liter K20C1 in the Civic Type R or Mercs 2.0L in the C43 producing 403HP. But the Mazda produces 256HP and 320fb of torque in a mainstream application. As a comparison, the mainstream BMW X3 30i base model B48 2.0L makes only 248HP and 258ftlb and the X3 weighs 4400lbs!! But BMW has a version of the B48 that produces 302/332 in the X1 M35i that weighs 3800lb.
I don't think we will ever see Mazda stretch the limits. Both for reliability reasons and because they are looking to make better mileage. But both the 2.5T and the 3.3L should get come in variants that produce better power and torque. My daughters 2021 CX-5 has the 187HP 2.5L and that just isn't an option for me. Once you drive a car that can get our of it's own way, the lack of options in an underpowered car makes you want to blow your brains out.
In other words, Mazda is not producing anything close to exciting in terms of engines, other than maybe the 2l na from the ND2 Miata.
