Search results

Why not? Mazda has clearly stated they want to be compared to BMW...so lets give it to 'em! Wait...nevermind. My info is sortof dated. They are going for boring and droll, now. Well, success? https://www.motor1.com/news/233390/mazda-benchmarks-toyota-not-bmw/

So in 2015 with about half a liter less, BMW produced an engine making about 40bhp more (rated...) than Mazda in 2023...this is not exactly impressive on Mazda's behalf.

Back on topic is BMWs b58 getting 21mpg city, 26 highway, in an x3 and putting down nearly 400 awhp stock, with. Nearly half a liter less displacement. Lame Mazda...lame.

Why do I need anything? I have friends who have lived out of a backpack and hostels. Why a house? Why a car at all? Unless you're a terrible planner, you should be walking to work, or not work at all. You could live at the Salvation Army shelter and not worry a bout bills or anything. Totally...

Couple the added weight in, and if the numbers are "legit", the 2.5T CX5 might actually be quicker, lol!

if the I6 turbo was junk, and I will. A turbocharged I6 3.3L engine that makes...280bhp? Mazda. 1990 called. Even they are insulted. The article excuses this saying the 2.5L Turbo in Oz only makes 228bhp...but that's probably because it's just on their 87 octane base map tune. Even if we presume...

Mpg vs Performance vs cost. My 576hp ev6gt will cost less to own monthly than my RDX

Correct. I just refuse to identify with the c40. Ill update my tag once I replace it.

Drift mode mode isn't my thing. Doubt Ill ever even put it there.

I find myself going to the gym and training more, now that it's nearly "free" to drive. I was referring mainly to the monthly footprint, not overall. Overall, bottom line total dollars, the cx5 is cheaper, but monthly, until the last note is paid, the c40. But then, after the c40 (now ev6 gt)...

Obviously you're unaware of the Urus.

The monthly footprint is less for the c40 than the cx5. No real test drive opportunity, and its a wash financially, so I didn't bother. The ride is just louder than it should be. No acoustic glass. NVH of the powertrain is annoying. Just not smooth and refined. Like I said, it is more like my...

EV6 GT. The C40 is just way too unrefined for a $60K vehicle. I would rate it somewhere slightly above my 2015 CX5 Touring and below my 2019 GT Reserve. Literally the only thing it has going for it is the acceleration, and the fact that I paid $75 to "fuel" it last month, when my RDX (24.2mpg...

The C40 has saved me a lot of money on gasoline, and I skinned under the wire for the $7500 tax credit, but it's time to move on, now. The car never really "spoke" to me, so to speak, other than aesthetically.

I munched through a good bit having mirror motors replaced on my 2019.

I am still rocking my setup and it's still slaying everything I play, maxed settings on 1440P. i7-7700k 32g GDDR4 2400ms 1080Ti

Still not got a heat pump and falls on its face past 60mph.

I considered it, but: Mustang has no heat pump Mustang is a lot weaker performer, even the GT, which does well 0-60 and then straight up dies like a dog. Also...Ford. No thanks. Regardless of what it looks like, it's the same CMA platform with chop job on the back.

Why are we talking about xc60? I said the c40 is the coupe version if the xc40 recharge which looks identical to the xc40 ICE vehicle. Where did xc60 even come from?

Huh? This is an XC40: This is an XC40 Recharge: This is a C40 This is an X4 This is an XC60Recharge