if they sorted out the suspension and make 0-60 under 6.0 sec, it will sell. Skyactive engines are more efficient than other brand engines of the same size anyway.
Lol, don*t give me that crap, lol.
One car is made every minute here at BMW NA, or 100k more cars per year than every Mazda made combined...
The new Volvo plant down the road will be doing the exact same thing...
They just missed the boat again, plain and simple...
Doubtful.
If I am not mistaken, the CX-9 doesn't hit 0-60 mph under 6.0 seconds and that here, the top spec 2.5T CX-9 AWD weighs:
- 297 kg (654.77 lbs) more than top spec 2.5 NA CX-5 AWD
- 223 kg (491.63 lbs) more than top spec 2.2 D CX-5 AWD
Incidentally the 2.2D CX-5 AWD was clocked doing 0-62 mph in 7.88 seconds, this is with 140 KW (187.74 HP) 450NM (331.91 FT/LBS).
Some how an extra 30 KW (40.20 HP) less 20NM (14.75 FT/LBS) on a relatively heavy vehicle wouldn't get it below 6.0 seconds for 0-60 mph
Nobody buying the CX5 cares about 0-60.if they sorted out the suspension and make 0-60 under 6.0 sec, it will sell. Skyactive engines are more efficient than other brand engines of the same size anyway.
Also the suspension is sorted - they took the feedback on/from KE series and adjusted the KF/KG accordinglyne.
Nobody buying the CX5 cares about 0-60.
I'm specifically referring to that stat. I'm not saying we don't want performance. I just think passing power, which is what Turbos Excel at, is a feature that will appeal to many more people then 0-60.Agree for the mainstream buyers. But if they want to grow their sales numbers even further, they could create a performance trim that appeals to the fringe luxury buyers. Many of them care. Im one.
This is a good time to point out that the KE, KF/KG series designations used so often by Australians mean virtually nothing to Americans. Not sure how this developed, but those model codes have never been used by Mazda (to my knowledge) in the US.
2.5T only makes sense in two trims:
Signature AWD - price $40,000 USD - all safety tech included / ventilated seats/ napa leather / japanese wood.
GT Reserve AWD - price $37,500 some of the above luxury features but missing some important ones.
FWD versions of above at a $1200 discount.
GT with 2.5NA stays at 33,xxx as top trim.
This should cover the cost on the emissions / CARB side of things as these still wont be volume sellers (likely under 20,000) And if Mazda does meet the numbers same as Acura RDX or even 50% of RDX sales - that will tell them where their buyer's buying price point is.
Its not worth putting 2.5T at GT + Tech or for anything under 36000 USD.
Current top grade 2.5 NA Akera here is AUD $47990.00 (USD $34510.29) driveaway pricing and the 2.2 D Akera is AUD $50990.00 (USD $36667.63)
They are saying the 2.5T will be an option on this grade and the one lower (GT).
So ~ AUD $52000.00 (USD $37393.93) driveaway pricing might be it unless the slot it between the 2.5 NA & 2.2D in terms of pricing.
The 2.5T is a $3500 premium in the Mazda 6 and I think the price will be similar in the CX-5. I expect a starting price of ~$34,500 for the CX-5 Signature.
I'm specifically referring to that stat. I'm not saying we don't want performance. I just think passing power, which is what Turbos Excel at, is a feature that will appeal to many more people then 0-60.
The BMW facility in shitburg is huge and pumps out 500-1000 of those X series for the world. Very impressive facility. Volvo will not be making that same volume - heck they only sold ~50-60K cars in the USA alone and they are only currently planning on making 1 car there. Like most companies, Volvo will start small and ramp up production over the years - just like BMW did in the north.
BMW and Mazda are not the same company. Different sizes. BMW sells close to 3 million expensive cars a year and has a market cap of 55-60 billion. Mazda sells close to 1.5 million low cost cars and has a market cap of 7 billion. BMW also has one of the highest profit margins on all cars. Mazda can't build factories to compete with the likes of BMW or Toyota. If you look at the Mazda factory video's it is archaic. There are lots of people - way too many people actually involved in the car making processes. BMW does not do that. Heck, no company should be doing that.
Mazda did not miss the boat. As mentioned a 1000 times, this generation of the CX-5 is an absolute success. They are selling them in much larger numbers than the previous version- in almost every market. That is the point of producing something - to sell it. They need to make sure the 2.5T was not a bust. If they screw up the CX-5, they are done. Cooked and fried.
I do think the big problem for Mazda right now is that the 2.5 and the 2.5T is a dud of an engine. Too long of stroke and not rev friendly. They need to make a 2.0T or get the Sky-X to market ASAP.
All I was saying is that a car can be made every minute and not risk quality flaws. No crap BMW makes a crap ton of cars compared to Mazda, I mean Mazda is what the 20th biggest automaker? Also, who cares how many Volvo sells stateside, they chose the location for other than tax breaks of course, the port, as just like BMW, most of the cars will be deported, roughly half of them actually...
Also, you*re wrong about the Volvo plant, they announced last year they were doubling their investment and making another production facility. They will now make the XC90 as well by 2021. I happened to be there installing/programming the rest of the robots the day the Governor came to make the announcement, and I will most likely be back down to work on the rest and any adjustments needed...