CX-4 Photos

[ALafya]

Even the 2016 front is tad less pleasing than previous gens.
However, I would highly prefer a lower center of gravity, better fuel economy with same utility as the CX-5. Perhaps even cheaper and lighter. The CX-4 could be an ideal vehicle for me. Or, simply bring the AWD 6 Wagon to the US...

 

[vroom]

Even the 2016 front is tad less pleasing than previous gens.
However, I would highly prefer a lower center of gravity, better fuel economy with same utility as the CX-5. Perhaps even cheaper and lighter. The CX-4 could be an ideal vehicle for me. Or, simply bring the AWD 6 Wagon to the US...

Looking at how the back swoops down, you probably loose a lot of trunk space. I was looking at the Kia Sportage when I got the CX-5. It has a similar profile, which I like a lot, but the trunk space (and cheap feel) made me go with the CX-5.

 

[craigo]

wow.. placing it next to the CX-5 suddenly makes the CX-4 look really bad. way too much bling and shiny bits on the CX-4

I think that's the concept from last year - note the different air dam from the latest images. There's far less chrome on the real car.

EDIT: I'm 80% sure that's a rendering. It's well done, but weird light transitions.

 

[axel2078]

It looks really nice, but I would still choose the CX-5 over it.

 

[Dee0121]

It looks really nice, but I would still choose the CX-5 over it.

I agree. One of the reasons I chose the CX5 over other crossovers is the fact that it sits up higher. I live in the land of pickup trucks (bang) and driving behind 2-ton blind spots all the time made me really anxious. The CX5 has brought back the enjoyment of driving. I've had it for 6 months now and I still love it!

 

[dougal]

wow.. placing it next to the CX-5 suddenly makes the CX-4 look really bad. way too much bling and shiny bits on the CX-4

Not my opinion. I think the CX-4 looks like the small sports wagon that the CX-5 aims to be. Me likes. A lot.

 

[paris1]

I agree. One of the reasons I chose the CX5 over other crossovers is the fact that it sits up higher. I live in the land of pickup trucks (bang) and driving behind 2-ton blind spots all the time made me really anxious. The CX5 has brought back the enjoyment of driving. I've had it for 6 months now and I still love it!

Really? Maryland??? Whenever I visit my brother in law in Silver Spring I always notice how nobody drives pickups in that neck of the woods!

 

[Kedis82ZE8]

http://www.carnewschina.com/2016/03/09/spy-shots-mazda-cx4-is-naked-in-china/

I wonder if NA versions will be from China, Japan or Mexico?

"The car on the photos is the Chinese-made variant of the CX-4. It will be manufactured by the long running FAW-Mazda joint venture, based in the cold north eastern city of Changchun. Price will start at 159.800 yuan and end at 198.900 yuan.

There will be two four-cylinder petrol engines available:a 2.0 with 158hp and a 2.5 with 192hp. Mazda strangely stays put with this big engines, instead of going for the popular and tax-friendly smaller turbocharged engines.

Size: 4633/1840/1535, and wheelbase is 2700."

 

[Scythe024]

In the past 4 years. Mazda has managed to cram 10 lbs of CX s*** in a 5 lb bag.
Am I the only one here lost on this? I kind' feel like the CX-3 was a mistake. Now this? Seems like a very small niche. Thoughts?

Completely agree. I don't see the point of the CX-3. It's build on a Mazda 2 platform, less room than the Mazda 3, IMO not worth the savings on money and mpg compared to what you get for moving up to a CX-5. I think most people would of rather have had a AWD Mazda 3 than a CX-3. Especially if they came out with a AWD Mazdaspeed 3 next year. It would make it like R32.

 

[CX5_Pete]

So.... is this a wagon? Kinda like an Outback? It looks like Mazda is targeting Subaru's Line-up. Minus the WRX and STi models.

 

[CX5_Pete]

Completely agree. I don't see the point of the CX-3. It's build on a Mazda 2 platform, less room than the Mazda 3, IMO not worth the savings on money and mpg compared to what you get for moving up to a CX-5. I think most people would of rather have had a AWD Mazda 3 than a CX-3. Especially if they came out with a AWD Mazdaspeed 3 next year. It would make it like R32.

Ya know, I was between the CX-5 and CX-3. My CX-5 sport came out to barely more than a CX-3. The extra space was a no brainer.

 

[sillyxone]

I just stared at the side-by-side pic for 10 minutes, then realized that the CX-4 is slightly disproportional sitting next to the CX-5 due to its ground clearance being a little too tall comparing to its height. But then, after that same 10 minutes, I started to like the CX-4 better. I think its body is sportier, its front is slimmer and depicts a predator face clearer, especially the headlights/eyes showing a meaner face (squinting eyes focusing on its prey). The bold trim around the front grill does a good job acting as the eyebrow.

The wheel well definitely looks better as it's more circular and curves around the wheel better, but I think it does need that low-profile wheels to look good. Soul Red does look really good on it, adding the aggressiveness to the beast. Assuming it still has all the pluses of the CX-5 (handling, AWD, made in Japan, ...) and addresses the minuses of CX-3 (mainly space), I think it'll sure be a big hit. If I can trade the CX-5 for it just for the look, I'll definitely would. Kudos to Mazda for keeping on innovating.

Edit: I know I've seen that fog light design, and I think it looks really close to the 2016 Miata's.

It doesn't look much difference from the concept last year, Mazda has a reason to worry about it eating into CX-5 market.
http://www.goauto.com.au/mellor/mellor.nsf/story2/341B50C6577D8A5ACA257EC20080E68F#!prettyPhoto

 

[ramius]

Mazda's XV Crosstrek?

 

[ALafya]

Looking at how the back swoops down, you probably loose a lot of trunk space. I was looking at the Kia Sportage when I got the CX-5. It has a similar profile, which I like a lot, but the trunk space (and cheap feel) made me go with the CX-5.

You could be right. However, CX-4 will be longer and wider, so may be not.
While CX-3 is definitely too small for our needs, the 3 we owns is only a tad small, OK for most needs. If an AWD 3 (hatch) existed, I would most likely own one. The CX-5 has a very useful cargo space, though we could do with a bit smaller. In any case, I'd gladly lose a little cargo volume for better handling and fuel economy. I am actually worried the CX-4 could be too large, e.g. Nissan Murano size (except for height). We'll see.

 

[52804x4]

I dig it.

 

[Scythe024]

I'm not a fan of all that chrome

 

[tibimakai]

My lowered CX5, looks like a CX4.

 

[paris1]

My lowered CX5, looks like a CX4.

No, it doesn't. The proportions are very different.

 

[Kedis82ZE8]

Maybe a replacement for my Infiniti.... not CX-5 though as that is the minimum I can utilize for serious cargo runs.

 

[tibimakai]

No, it doesn't. The proportions are very different.

Just kidding.