Now with the CX-70 "revealed", what is everyone buying?
- Thread starter Muggs1
- Start date
The CX90 reminds me of the regular MDX w/its side "dimples" whereas the intakes on the CX70 is channeling the sportier MDX Type S!
In a few years, I think you might get several good options to choose from in a Plug In Hybrid SUV. You might even get a proper midsize CX-70 by then with 400lbs less mass to move around and better electric range. Good luck to you.
Last edited:
That's what I'm hoping for. I don't care what they call it. CX-5, 50, 60, 70 or whatever else.
My preference is the top. The Bottom looks exactly like what it is. We stuck a bunch of sporty looking stuff on the land yacht to make you think it is sporty. Don't get me wrong, the BMW guys are forever spending gazillions of dollars trying to pretend their SUV is a sports car. I laugh cause I would be embarrassed if I opened the door of my X5 M Sport and this happened.
Even BMW has ugly intake grills. I guess the advantage with them is that they actually work!
Attachments
- :
- 2024 Toyota GHH MAX
2016 Mazda CX-5 GT (Wife)
1990 Miata (Zoom Zoom!)
I may have gotten the CX-70 PHEV if I waited a bit longer as I did not want captain chairs for the second row. However with it being the same powertrain and same weight, I would have been disappointed with the performance just like the CX-90.
Toyota just has the lead right now in the Hybrid world and the GHH Max fits me much better. Still hate the captain chairs (big dog that travels with me daily) though.
Toyota just has the lead right now in the Hybrid world and the GHH Max fits me much better. Still hate the captain chairs (big dog that travels with me daily) though.
The GH is a humongous car! Do you really need the 3rd row?
I'm finding the 2024 Lincoln Nautilus hybrid version interesting.
- 0 - 60 expected to be about the same as a CX-90/70 Turbo S, but it can use regular as well as premium gas.
- eCVT planetary gear transmission, an upgraded version of one that's been around for some time.
- The base engine likewise has been around.
- A little more 2nd row headroom, multiple inches more 1st/2nd row legroom, than the CX-70.
- Cargo capacity 36.4/71.3 vs. 39.6/75.3 for the CX-70.
- 193.2" length (to me a fair trade for the only slightly smaller cargo capacity of the 201" CX-70)
- 30/31/30 combined MPG
- 19" wheels available on the base Premiere trim (20" optional) (personal preference - I like 19"; 21/22" are the wheel choices for higher Nautilus trims)
- Luxury type warranty/concierge service (longer warranties, pickup/loaner vehicles,...)
Last edited:
Very attractive features! Is this the redesign that's coming from China?
Almost all modern cars can use regular 87 octane gasoline. Mazda reports HP/Torque for both 91 and 87 on their website. The penalty is a loss of performance. The Nautilus power and mileage ratings are based on Premium Fuel.
Plus Mazda is generally in the top 3rd for reliability while Lincoln is in the bottom third. Seems like a decent vehicle, just make sure to take everything in consideration.
Last edited:
Yes, since they shut down their NA production of the Nautilus.
You're comparing the base CX engine, lower power, which can indeed take regular.
The Nautilus mild hybrid engine variant, a $1500 upper that can be gotten in any Nautilus trim, is expected to have 0 - 60 about the same as the Turbo S CXs. Turbo S recommends premium (per Mazda's manual); they "allow" regular, but caveat it about performance and engine knock (if they specifically call out engine knock, to me that indicates it isn't really designed for 87 as a normal use gas).
From a reliability standpoint, the engine sounds like it's a current, pretty decent one, with the transmission a good one, update of a proven implementation, and it's got warranties consistent with classic luxury/premium vehicles (BMW, Lexus,...).
I've been active on a Lincoln forum, it looks like Lincoln is being responsive to issues being found.
Last edited:
- :
- Canada
Turbo S models can use regular as well, they just recommend using premium to achieve maximum engine performance.
Premium is the listed fuel for the Turbo S. Saying it's possible, in text below the fuel recommendation box, but caveating with "reduced engine output, and engine knocking." means Mazda really doesn't recommend using lower octane.
(No Turbo S owner responded in my 87 in a Turbo S thread)
That's notably different from the Nautilus hybrid, which is clear that 87 is fine.
Attachments
Last edited:
- :
- Canada
I was just clarifying, as you stated that the Turbo S requires premium fuel. It does not.
Thanks, fixed!
I was a little torqued when the CX-70 dropped as it necessitated the X5 40i MSport which cost me probably $16K more than I would have spent otherwise. But after life with the BMW B58 3.0l inline 6 all I can say is I'm glad it worked out this way. This think can be quite pedestrian if you choose, but once you put your foot down it scoots bringing 400HP and 398lb-ft of torque to bear through a lighting quick ZF 8 speed (even though it is a torque converter instead of a dual clutch). 0-60 is 5.3s.
I am so engaged by this motor I am trying to decide if I will add to my Supercharged ND Miata with a M340i with the same B58 at 1200lbs less weight or replace my ND with a 2025 6SP Manual Z4 with that same B58 at 1650lbs less weight than the X5.
