C&D: Best Crossovers and SUVs: Mazda: 2; Honda and Kia: 0!

[Dr Kev]

Check out the Nov '16 issue of Car and Driver for why they love the '16 CX-5 and CX-9! I understand their love!

 

[Kaps]

In Australia, Mazda is 2nd best selling automaker
YTD sales of 155K - that is a great market close to Japan.

I think in US it will need to innovate and keep doing better.

>> Aussie numbers.

Pos Brand Sep-16 % /15 Aug 2016 % /15 Pos FY15
1 Toyota 16,716 16.3% 1% 1 155,175 17.5% 4% 1 1
2 Mazda 12,009 11.7% 11% 2 90,700 10.2% 5% 2 2
3 Hyundai 9,319 9.1% 0% 5 77,808 8.8% 0% 3 4
4 Holden 8,564 8.3% -8% 3 71,312 8.0% -7% 4 3
5 Ford 7,280 7.1% 25% 4 61,406 6.9% 18% 5 6
6 Mitsubishi 6,701 6.5% -3% 6 55,514 6.3% 4% 6 5
7 Nissan 5,177 5.0% -1% 7 49,870 5.6% 4% 7 7
8 Volkswagen 4,380 4.3% -15% 8 42,275 4.8% -10% 8 8
9 Subaru 4,050 3.9% 12% 10 34,829 3.9% 9% 9 9
10 Honda 3,783 3.7% 5% 12 29,704 3.3% -2% 12 10

 

[Unobtanium]

In Australia, Mazda is 2nd best selling automaker
YTD sales of 155K - that is a great market close to Japan.

I think in US it will need to innovate and keep doing better.

>> Aussie numbers.

Pos Brand Sep-16 % /15 Aug 2016 % /15 Pos FY15
1 Toyota 16,716 16.3% 1% 1 155,175 17.5% 4% 1 1
2 Mazda 12,009 11.7% 11% 2 90,700 10.2% 5% 2 2
3 Hyundai 9,319 9.1% 0% 5 77,808 8.8% 0% 3 4
4 Holden 8,564 8.3% -8% 3 71,312 8.0% -7% 4 3
5 Ford 7,280 7.1% 25% 4 61,406 6.9% 18% 5 6
6 Mitsubishi 6,701 6.5% -3% 6 55,514 6.3% 4% 6 5
7 Nissan 5,177 5.0% -1% 7 49,870 5.6% 4% 7 7
8 Volkswagen 4,380 4.3% -15% 8 42,275 4.8% -10% 8 8
9 Subaru 4,050 3.9% 12% 10 34,829 3.9% 9% 9 9
10 Honda 3,783 3.7% 5% 12 29,704 3.3% -2% 12 10

Honestly, I don't think Mazda is capable of competing with Toyota and Honda. Toyota and Honda have been solid choices for so long, while Mazda still gets "Doesn't Ford own them?" quite often. It doesn't even have to do with product, but rather, perception.

An example is my friend Katherine. She just bought a RAV4. She has ridden in and likes my CX5. But, her Grandpa told her if she wanted a vehicle that isn't going to cause issues...Toyota. And ya know? Odds are, he's given her darn solid advice. It doesn't matter a hill of beans what the vehicle is about, if it doesn't have the Saturn emblem on it, she wants nothing to do with it.

 

[myke232]

^^ Yeah... but then you see Jeep suvs and cuvs all over the place. Do any research on that brand and there are well documented quality issues... yet people still buy them...

 

[jhu8]

Honestly, I don't think Mazda is capable of competing with Toyota and Honda. Toyota and Honda have been solid choices for so long, while Mazda still gets "Doesn't Ford own them?" quite often. It doesn't even have to do with product, but rather, perception.

An example is my friend Katherine. She just bought a RAV4. She has ridden in and likes my CX5. But, her Grandpa told her if she wanted a vehicle that isn't going to cause issues...Toyota. And ya know? Odds are, he's given her darn solid advice. It doesn't matter a hill of beans what the vehicle is about, if it doesn't have the Saturn emblem on it, she wants nothing to do with it.

Right on the money. Mazda could put in the best of everything in the cx5 an i guarantee it will still sell less than the CR-V and rav4. I think really Mazda needs to cut prices. That's one thing that could gain peoples attention quickly and easily. Who doesn't like more affordable and loaded cars. Just look at Hyundai an what they've done the last 5 years.

 

[Unobtanium]

^^ Yeah... but then you see Jeep suvs and cuvs all over the place. Do any research on that brand and there are well documented quality issues... yet people still buy them...

Because you can't touch the features for less, and they have a good warranty. A Touring CX5 GT w/Tech is about where the Grand Jeep Cherokee was 5 years ago amenity wise, not to mention power, towing, ride quality, the list goes on and on and on for the Grand Cherokee.

The Wrangler? It's built a reputation all its own for offroading.

The new Cherokee? Meh. I've nothing for you, there, except it's nicer than the CX-5 from a NVH standpoint and has way better luxury options.

Jeep's other stuff, I dunno about.

 

[Unobtanium]

Right on the money. Mazda could put in the best of everything in the cx5 an i guarantee it will still sell less than the CR-V and rav4. I think really Mazda needs to cut prices. That's one thing that could gain peoples attention quickly and easily. Who doesn't like more affordable and loaded cars. Just look at Hyundai an what they've done the last 5 years.

Mazda is not big enough, or new enough, to do that.

 

[ALafya]

So people buy Toyota / Honda because they are reliable while others buy Jeep because it is "American", though the latest Cherokee is a Fiat global platform. Actually, other than maybe the Trailhawk trim (if offroad is critical) I don't see why you'd get a Cherokee. Motor Trend ranked it 9th (last) in a comparison test and this test does not include reliability scores. There is also much less utility with a Cherokee, with its small cargo volume and its definitely does not handle well as the CX-5 (or RAV-4 or the CR-V).

The Subaru Forester forum says this test is biased and they should have used the '17 MY Forester (which is a refresh).

 

[jhu8]

Mazda is not big enough, or new enough, to do that.

They if they just allocate their money more appropriately. I appreciate Mazda and their dedication to the driving experience but for example the g-vectoring or whatever it's called, very cool but spend that money into improving other areas. Or perhaps just adding in the little missing things that are missing from the cx5. Now, I'm not saying abandon the "driving matters" philosophy, but I feel they can allocate their money a little differently until they can meet some basic areas there are still lacking. Which are very few so it shouldn't be terribly difficult to do.

 

[Unobtanium]

They if they just allocate their money more appropriately. I appreciate Mazda and their dedication to the driving experience but for example the g-vectoring or whatever it's called, very cool but spend that money into improving other areas. Or perhaps just adding in the little missing things that are missing from the cx5. Now, I'm not saying abandon the "driving matters" philosophy, but I feel they can allocate their money a little differently until they can meet some basic areas there are still lacking. Which are very few so it shouldn't be terribly difficult to do.

G vectoring is a few lines of code in the ecu...

 

[sillyxone]

G vectoring is a few lines of code in the ecu...

Well, it does cost effort/money to experiment, collect data, test/QA, ... but yes, it's a low hanging fruit with relatively high benefit/cost ratio. The employee came up with that idea should get a bonus.

 

[Ricsta]

G vectoring is a few lines of code in the ecu...

A few lines of code but it took the lead engineer 8 years to develop and as slilyxone states, it takes testing to tune it to the each vehicle in their line up.

 

[jhu8]

G vectoring is a few lines of code in the ecu...

As others have said, much more than that.

 

[Unobtanium]

A few lines of code but it took the lead engineer 8 years to develop and as slilyxone states, it takes testing to tune it to the each vehicle in their line up.

Seriously? ROFL! Wow. I'd never admit that. Most companies design entire vehicles (G-vectoring included...) with entirely new drivelines in nearly a decade. Speaking of a decade...this happened a decade ago, roughly, and I saw it debuted while I worked for Ford selling vehicles. The videos of SUV's hauling refrigerators (on top of the roof-rack) around through violent S-curves and the like were neat.
http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/esv/esv20/print4.pdf

Mazda...you late bro!


How Mazda G Vectoring Works:

The way G-Vectoring works is interesting enough. It only activates when computer used records your driving habits. These are the position of throttle and angle of steering. This data are then sent through a certain algorithm which helps to reduce the torque of the engine and provide wheels with more grip.

http://carsintrend.com/mazda-g-vectoring-technology-review/


How Ford RSC worked...a decade ago, lol...

This paper presents the Roll Stability Control ™
system developed at Ford Motor Company. It is an
active safety system for passenger vehicles. It uses a
roll rate sensor together with the information from the
conventional electronic stability control hardware to
detect a vehicle's roll condition associated with a
potential rollover and executes proper brake control
and engine torque reduction in response to the
detected roll condition so as to mitigate a vehicular rollover.

*Taken from my link above.


So...ummm...I'm ashamed for Mazda just now re-inventing what amounts to Ford's 2004 RSC system, and re-naming it. After 8 years of hard re-inventing of the wheel, apparently...

 

[yrwei52]

G-Vectoring Control

... Most companies design entire vehicles (G-vectoring included...) with entirely new drivelines in nearly a decade.

You need to remember that Mazda is a small car company and they have limited resources...

BTW, nice find on a similar system from Ford.

 

[yrwei52]

G-Vectoring Control

They if they just allocate their money more appropriately. I appreciate Mazda and their dedication to the driving experience but for example the g-vectoring or whatever it's called, very cool but spend that money into improving other areas. Or perhaps just adding in the little missing things that are missing from the cx5. Now, I'm not saying abandon the "driving matters" philosophy, but I feel they can allocate their money a little differently until they can meet some basic areas there are still lacking. Which are very few so it shouldn't be terribly difficult to do.

Agreed. G-Vectoring Control, GVC, is a nice innovation from Mazda but it may not help its sales. Mazda has always been offering vehicles that provide driving pleasure, but people who enjoy the driving fun don't want too much intervention from car computers. That's why we see those car enthusiasts testing cars always turn the traction control off if possible. For average drivers, they simply don't care this new-generation vehicle motion control technologies. They want more quality、reliability、amenities、features、convenience、safety、fuel efficiency、and of course, lower price. Mazda really needs to spend money wisely, but I'm afraid this GVC thing will fall into "penny wise, pound foolish" catagory again!

 

[Ricsta]

So...ummm...I'm ashamed for Mazda just now re-inventing what amounts to Ford's 2004 RSC system, and re-naming it. After 8 years of hard re-inventing of the wheel, apparently...

Stability control and G-Vectoring are two different technology. The current CX-5 has stability control. this link explains g-vectoring: http://insidemazda.mazdausa.com/newsroom/g-vectoring-control/

 

[finch204]

I can't remember which article or video it was, but it said that Mazda has been waiting years to release G-vectoring control. If my memory serves me right, they had this tech way before 2008. Their problem was they didn't have a responsive enough engine and ECU to use G-vectoring control on. This finally changed with the SkyActiv engines and so they are only now releasing this new tech.

They mainly focus on creating cars that are fun to drive while still being fuel efficient. Hence their focus on releasing G-vectoring control versus say 360 degree camera, or other convenience features that people want. They will prioritize features/technology that will make the car more fun to drive, versus say amenities. I mean the new ND MX-5 Miata is a perfect example, it doesn't even get a glove box. They are also pretty good at loading up their cars with cool tech features while still keeping the price in check, which is why I don't think they can cut prices and still make a profit. Their cars in Touring trim with tech package, are some of the best bang for the buck deals available.

Mazda will be Mazda and I hope they won't decide to chase after sales volume at the cost of driving fun.

 

[Unobtanium]

You need to remember that Mazda is a small car company and they have limited resources...

BTW, nice find on a similar system from Ford.

I used to sell them, and had all the promo material on it when they came out with RSC. Had to sit in a room and watch videos about it. how could I ever forget? lol

 

[Unobtanium]

Stability control and G-Vectoring are two different technology. The current CX-5 has stability control. this link explains g-vectoring: http://insidemazda.mazdausa.com/newsroom/g-vectoring-control/

Ah! Gotcha. It's more like the 2000 Honda Prelude. *sigh*

Mazda needs to not hype this too much, everyone else has more or less had it shortly after OBDII became the standard...

http://news.honda.com/newsandviews/article.aspx?id=20010221001322

THE PRELUDE TYPE SH WITH ACTIVE TORQUE TRANSFER SYSTEM
Historically, the Prelude has served as a technology demonstrator for promising Honda automotive technologies (many of which, such as double wishbone suspension and 4-wheel steering, have been designed to enhance vehicle handling and stability). The Active Torque Transfer System on the Prelude Type SH is the latest example of this practice.

Much like the fly-by-wire control systems used in modern aircraft, Active Torque Transfer uses a microprocessor to process information from driver inputs (Honda calls this "Feed-Forward Control") as well as vehicle status data from various sensors (Feedback Control). It then uses this information to augment the driver's control of the vehicle, thereby optimizing vehicle control and stability when turning.

With Active Torque Transfer the Prelude Type SH exhibits a significant increase in handling control and steering response and practically no vehicle understeer and oversteer. This is especially noticeable if the driver alters the cornering dynamics of the Prelude Type SH by lifting off the throttle, braking or applying more power while cornering. The Prelude's cornering line will not change in response to lateral acceleration and speed, and its handling response will remain neutral and linear.

The Prelude Type SH Active Torque Transfer System is not like a traction-control system that limits torque to a tire already overworked by the demands of drive traction and lateral acceleration. Active Torque Transfer steers the Prelude Type SH and increases drive torque to the outside wheel in a turn. Normally, a steered-wheel vehicle, such as an automobile, must depend entirely upon the phenomenon of tire slip to generate the lateral acceleration that makes it yaw and turn. By rotating the outside wheel faster than it would normally rotate in a turn, Active Torque Transfer adds an additional steering assist to this yaw moment in much the same way a tracked-vehicle such as a tank or bulldozer turns.

The system consists of the actual drive-torque distribution unit called a Moment Control Unit (MCU), the microprocessor-based Engine Control Module (ECM) and various sensors located throughout the car. The sensors send vehicle attitude information to the ECM, including right- and left-wheel speed data, steering-angle information, gear ratio and engine torque data, yaw (turning) rate and lateral acceleration (G-sensor). The ECM then uses this data to determine how much torque should be applied and how much faster the outside wheel should rotate. It then commands several electrically controlled hydraulic-solenoid valves in the MCU to open and close. The solenoid valves send hydraulic oil to whichever clutch is controlling the outside wheel in a turn (the clutch for the inside wheel is disengaged). When this occurs, drive torque from the inside wheel is transmitted via the differential to the engaged clutch and then to a planetary gear set in the MCU that multiplies its rotational speed.

The additional rotation is then fed back through the differential to the outside wheel. This turns the outside wheel at a faster speed than it would normally turn in a corner, resulting in the creation of a yaw (turning moment). Depending on conditions, the MCU can raise the outside wheel speed by as much as 15% and distribute up to 80% of the drive force to the outer wheel and 20% to the inner wheel.

The MCU also contains a hydraulic pump, oil filter and hydraulic fluid. The system is fail-safe, in that if for some reason it should stop working, the Prelude Type SH will revert back to the handling characteristics of a normal Prelude. The system will also not engage until its hydraulic fluid has reached operating temperature. A warning light on the instrument panel alerts the driver when the system is not operating.

The system is very compact, and fits under the engine, between the differential and the left and right driveshafts, where it adds only around 40 pounds to the vehicle's weight. The only periodic maintenance it needs is replacement of the hydraulic fluid at about the same interval as an automatic transmission's-- around 100,000 miles.

Honda has designed and built both 2WD and 4WD Active Torque Control Systems and is the first company to present it as a completed system for mass production, regardless of drive system. Together, the two systems have generated 99 new patents.

Seriously...this is all old technology, and Mazda has just named it something else and added a sensor or two and so forth. It's far from "cool new feature", and more like "'bout time, Mazda, you want a cookie?"

Yes, Mazda may arrive at the same point Honda did a decade and a half ago in a slightly different manner, but my main point in all of this is that I am absolutely unimpressed with their shiny "new" thing, given that it was played out by the mid 2000's and everyone simply EXPECTS it in some form or another.

Acura has also been doing it, with the 1997 Prelude being the rough proto-version
http://acura.wikia.com/wiki/SH-AWD