2022 CX-5?

What’s the difference between the CX-5 platform and the CX-30 (now adding CX-50)?
It will be stiffer and lighter than the older platform in the CX-5. They also designed the structure of the platform to transfer less noise and vibration. The new platform ended up being much quieter. In addition the new platform can support all future electrification options.
 
:
2019 CX-5 Signature
It will be stiffer and lighter than the older platform in the CX-5. They also designed the structure of the platform to transfer less noise and vibration. The new platform ended up being much quieter. In addition the new platform can support all future electrification options.
Thanks! I assume it has body size limitations so the CX-50 will ride on it rather than the new platform. Makes me wonder how the CX-50 will compare in length to the CX-5?
 
Sounds like the inline 6 is for the large architecture.

"Following the CX-50, Mazda will introduce two additional Crossover SUVs built on an all-new larger platform: the three-row CX-90 and the CX-70. These models will feature Mazda’s new longitudinal architecture with new inline-six-cylinder and plug-in hybrid powertrains. This shared layout provides both vehicles Mazda’s next-level performance, handling, technology, and design."

lol I got too excited with the cx-50 !
 
Thanks! I assume it has body size limitations so the CX-50 will ride on it rather than the new platform. Makes me wonder how the CX-50 will compare in length to the CX-5?
The press release mentioned that the CX-50 would be on the same new platform as the Mazda3/CX-50. Based on the leaked Camouflaged CUV the CX-50 looks to be slightly larger than the CX-5. We will find out next month, likely at the LA Auto Show (virtually).
 
Last edited:
:
2019 CX-5 AWD
The CX-50 sharing the same platform as CX-30/Mazda 3 very likely means the same torsion beam rear suspension those use instead of an independent rear suspension as on the CX-5 and last gen Mazda 3. Fewer parts and cheaper to build, but every bump on one side is transmitted to the other unlike an independent suspension. It makes a noticeable difference in ride quality. Independent rear also handles better than a torsion beam, since each rear wheel moves independently of the other.
 

HardRightEdg

US 2020 CX-5 Touring AWD Soul Red
The press release mentioned that the CX-50 would be on the same new platform as the Mazda3/CX-50. Based on the leaked Camouflaged CUV the CX-50 looks to be slightly larger than the CX-5. We will find out next month, likely at the LA Auto Show (virtually).
You meant to say "Mazda 3 / CX-30", I'm sure.

Could be a bit bigger than the CX-5 I suppose. The Mazda 3 is actually 4.4" longer with a 1.1" longer wheelbase than the CX-5 whereas the CX-30 is shorter with a shorter wheelbase than the CX-5, so there's evident flexibility in the chassis design. Or it could be a bit smaller or the the same as the CX-5 but marketed to be the off-roader's choice. Like you say, in due time.
 
You meant to say "Mazda 3 / CX-30", I'm sure.

Could be a bit bigger than the CX-5 I suppose. The Mazda 3 is actually 4.4" longer with a 1.1" longer wheelbase than the CX-5 whereas the CX-30 is shorter with a shorter wheelbase than the CX-5, so there's evident flexibility in the chassis design. Or it could be a bit smaller or the the same as the CX-5 but marketed to be the off-roader's choice. Like you say, in due time.
Yes, typo on my part
 
:
2019 CX-5 Signature
The CX-50 sharing the same platform as CX-30/Mazda 3 very likely means the same torsion beam rear suspension those use instead of an independent rear suspension as on the CX-5 and last gen Mazda 3. Fewer parts and cheaper to build, but every bump on one side is transmitted to the other unlike an independent suspension. It makes a noticeable difference in ride quality. Independent rear also handles better than a torsion beam, since each rear wheel moves independently of the other.
Yes, that’s what I was thinking. The CX-50 is supposed to be more upscale but it looks like the CX-5 will have better ride quality.
 

sm1ke

Work In Progress..
Moderator
Contributor
:
Canada
:
'18 CX-9 Signature
Yes, that’s what I was thinking. The CX-50 is supposed to be more upscale but it looks like the CX-5 will have better ride quality.

Mazdas in general are primarily known for their sporty handling. I'm sure they would not have switched to a torsion beam suspension without first ensuring that it would be just as good (or better) than the outgoing suspension (regarding the Mazda3). On paper, the independent suspension is supposed to be better, but maybe that is only realized when the car is at or near it's limits, or maybe only in a few specific scenarios. I haven't actually driven one to compare, so I don't know for sure.
 
Article from Car & Driver...
https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a37894503/mazda-new-suv-models-2023/

The most concerning comment is they expect the CX-50 to have hideous black plastic body cladding similar to the CX-30.
Given what happened to the CX-3, and their plans to replace the CX-9, I would say the CX-5 will be gone after the next model year.

The CX-50 will be the first to arrive, debuting in November, and it will be a mid-size crossover, like the CX-5 (pictured), that will share a platform with the CX-30, so expect some black body cladding. It will enter production at Mazda's factory in Huntsville, Alabama in January. Mazda will sell the CX-50 alongside the CX-5, and we think it will likely start a few thousand dollars higher the current CX-5's $26,545 starting price.
The CX-70 will be introduced as a new model like the CX-50, but Mazda says the CX-90 will replace the CX-9 in its lineup.
 
But not really wrong. The rumors said Mazda was releasing a SUV called the CX-50 and also something about a new CX-7 (Future Cars: The 2023 Mazda CX-7 Is the Cavalry the Brand Needs). They also mentioned that the new upscale SUV that would be getting the inline 6. We assumed the CX-50 and the new "CX-7" were the same thing, instead they are two different vehicles - and one is not even the CX-7 but rather the CX-70.

So you could make the argument that mosts of the rumors were right but were only looking at a small piece of the puzzle.

You will be able to buy a 5 seater Mazda with an inline 6 just as we all were hoping. Won't be a CX-50 but a CX-70.
I think the rumors were accurate for non-US markets. CX-60 seems like it will be replacing CX-5 in Europe and Asia.
 
:
2019 CX-5 AWD
Mazdas in general are primarily known for their sporty handling. I'm sure they would not have switched to a torsion beam suspension without first ensuring that it would be just as good (or better) than the outgoing suspension (regarding the Mazda3). On paper, the independent suspension is supposed to be better, but maybe that is only realized when the car is at or near it's limits, or maybe only in a few specific scenarios. I haven't actually driven one to compare, so I don't know for sure.

A torsion beam/twist beam rear suspension is demonstrably inferior to an independent rear suspension at all times, not just at the limit (but certainly at the limit).

Twist-beam rear suspension - Wikipedia

You could make an argument, for example, that a double-wishbone is better than the Macpherson strut in the front of the CX-5, but you might not notice the difference in normal driving. You'll definitely notice when the rear wheels are connected by a solid beam, every pavement imperfection is transmitted into the rear subframe and then the cabin. The move to a torsion beam in the Mazda 3 (and CX-30 and MX-30) was most certainly due to cost cutting. It adds up over millions of vehicles.
 

sm1ke

Work In Progress..
Moderator
Contributor
:
Canada
:
'18 CX-9 Signature
A torsion beam/twist beam rear suspension is demonstrably inferior to an independent rear suspension at all times, not just at the limit (but certainly at the limit).

Twist-beam rear suspension - Wikipedia

You could make an argument, for example, that a double-wishbone is better than the Macpherson strut in the front of the CX-5, but you might not notice the difference in normal driving. You'll definitely notice when the rear wheels are connected by a solid beam, every pavement imperfection is transmitted into the rear subframe and then the cabin. The move to a torsion beam in the Mazda 3 (and CX-30 and MX-30) was most certainly due to cost cutting. It adds up over millions of vehicles.

Oh I agree, it was absolutely a cost-cutting measure, with slightly improved cargo space as a secondary benefit. As I wrote in my pervious post, on paper one is arguably better than the other. That said, I haven't driven a Mazda3 or CX-30 to compare, so I don't know for sure. Maybe a torsion beam rear suspension is perfectly fine for the majority of these drivers, and they would never notice the difference. Until I've driven either of these cars to see for myself, all I have to rely on are the auto reviews/articles that have been published so far.
 
1

186746

Oh I agree, it was absolutely a cost-cutting measure, with slightly improved cargo space as a secondary benefit. As I wrote in my pervious post, on paper one is arguably better than the other. That said, I haven't driven a Mazda3 or CX-30 to compare, so I don't know for sure. Maybe a torsion beam rear suspension is perfectly fine for the majority of these drivers, and they would never notice the difference. Until I've driven either of these cars to see for myself, all I have to rely on are the auto reviews/articles that have been published so far.
I believe you are likely right with the idea that the majority of drivers would never notice the difference. In a vast majority of driving conditions, with the better tuning of modern torsion beam axles, they seem to be perfectly fine and don't deliver nearly the volume or magnitude of impact to the cabin as older designs. Mazda claims that with the fewer variables of this design they were actually able to keep the transitions smoother up to the ultimate limit. Probably marketing speak, but I'd imagine it's not nearly as detrimental to normal driving as some would like us to think.
 

sm1ke

Work In Progress..
Moderator
Contributor
:
Canada
:
'18 CX-9 Signature
I believe you are likely right with the idea that the majority of drivers would never notice the difference. In a vast majority of driving conditions, with the better tuning of modern torsion beam axles, they seem to be perfectly fine and don't deliver nearly the volume or magnitude of impact to the cabin as older designs. Mazda claims that with the fewer variables of this design they were actually able to keep the transitions smoother up to the ultimate limit. Probably marketing speak, but I'd imagine it's not nearly as detrimental to normal driving as some would like us to think.

Yes, that's my hope at least. Maybe one of these days I'll get around to test driving a 2.5T Mazda3 just for fun.
 
:
2021 CX-9 Sig
:
2014 CX-5 GT
I believe you are likely right with the idea that the majority of drivers would never notice the difference. In a vast majority of driving conditions, with the better tuning of modern torsion beam axles, they seem to be perfectly fine and don't deliver nearly the volume or magnitude of impact to the cabin as older designs. Mazda claims that with the fewer variables of this design they were actually able to keep the transitions smoother up to the ultimate limit. Probably marketing speak, but I'd imagine it's not nearly as detrimental to normal driving as some would like us to think.

100% agree. I have a 2017 Mazda 3 and also drive a 2021 Mazda 3 2.5T three days a month and honestly, the new Mazda 3 blows the old car out of the water in every aspect. In normal everyday driving, on terrible roads no less, the new car is much, much better. The torsion beam is a non factor.
 

sm1ke

Work In Progress..
Moderator
Contributor
:
Canada
:
'18 CX-9 Signature
100% agree. I have a 2017 Mazda 3 and also drive a 2021 Mazda 3 2.5T three days a month and honestly, the new Mazda 3 blows the old car out of the water in every aspect. In normal everyday driving, on terrible roads no less, the new car is much, much better. The torsion beam is a non factor.

That is interesting to hear. I thought for sure that the difference would be noticeable on terrible roads. Are the roads you drive on better or worse than these?

road.JPG

road2.JPG
 

HardRightEdg

US 2020 CX-5 Touring AWD Soul Red
It's kind of interesting the FWD Corolla Cross sold in Asia has a rear torsion beam suspension while the AWD has an independent rear. I'd presume the versions out of the Alabama plant will be the same. It's not a shared platform but could be one of those part sharing deals.

These days rear torsion beam is a more down-market set-up. The last sporty car outside of Mazda that I can find that used this set-up was the Civic Type-R FN2 generation sold internationally going back a decade. That gen replaced a double wishbone and was subsequently replaced by an independent suspension.

I've not driven the 3 or CX-30. Car & Driver likes the way these vehicles handle, generally loving all things Mazda. Consumer Reports has some issues. Motor Trend calls the CX-30 ride "on the stiffer side". As others have said, the difference from an independent rear may not be noticeable in daily driving, maybe some difference on rough roads and situational in aggressive driving.

How many heads would explode if the CX-50 is actually a bit smaller and down-market from the CX-5, shoe horned between the CX-30 and CX-5 as Toyota is shoe horning the Cross between RAV4 and C-HR, taller with a bit more cargo space than the lower model, a bit smaller and less expensive then the upper model?
 
Last edited:
:
2019 CX-5 Signature
It's kind of interesting the FWD Corolla Cross sold in Asia has a rear torsion beam suspension while the AWD has an independent rear. I'd presume the versions out of the Alabama plant will be the same. It's not a shared platform but could be one of those part sharing deals.

These days rear torsion beam is a more down-market set-up. The last sporty car outside of Mazda that I can find that used this set-up was the Civic Type-R FN2 generation sold internationally going back a decade. That gen replaced a double wishbone and was subsequently replaced by an independent suspension.

I've not driven the 3 or CX-30. Car & Driver likes the way these vehicles handle, generally loving all things Mazda. Consumer Reports has some issues. Motor Trend calls the CX-30 ride "on the stiffer side". As others have said, the difference from an independent rear may not be noticeable in daily driving, maybe some difference on rough roads and situational in aggressive driving.

How many heads would explode if the CX-50 is actually a bit smaller and down-market from the CX-5, shoe horned between the CX-30 and CX-5 as Toyota is shoe horning the Cross between RAV4 and C-HR, taller with a bit more cargo space than the lower model, a bit smaller and less expensive then the upper model?

Interesting thought. It’s already moved down-market from a week ago when our heads were filled with rumors of the new CX-50 “BMW-beater” LOL.
 

HardRightEdg

US 2020 CX-5 Touring AWD Soul Red
Interesting thought. It’s already moved down-market from a week ago when our heads were filled with rumors of the new CX-50 “BMW-beater” LOL.
Yup. It's evident from this recent report that the premium vehicles with be the CX-6 or CX-60 or above.

As far as shoe horning goes, Kia seem to be setting the trend. In the US market, there's Soul, Seltos, Sportage and Niro squeezed together in length between 165" and 176". They're differentiated by a bit more room from one to the other, styling, ride height, available drive trains and other features and, of course, price. CUV's are becoming like the old days when cars were king--three mainstream sedan models (e.g. Tercel, Corolla, Camry) with coupe or coupes and maybe a convertible variation (e.g., Solara) tossed in. A little something for everybody in the high volume segments.

Of course the global market is much bigger than back in the day, chiefly but not exclusively because of China approaching double US consumption when there isn't a pandemic and chip shortage, while at the same time makers are more globalized. That allows for more variation and along come hybrids and EVs of various stripes.

Toyota is always slow to move, conservative. Corolla Cross is one answer. It looks like Mazda is following suit but that remains to be seen.
 
Last edited: