I do get your point but at the end is the same platform. CX60, 70, 80 and 90 are all on the same platform. Being scalable, will easily adapt shorter, longer, smaller or wider sizes. The price should reflect the added/reduced material cost for manufacturing plus not to mention that the margins that they make on this vehicles are quite big, if you read the reports. Making a car same size as cx60 but wider at a lets say 3-5k lower price than cx90 and nobody would complain about this. Keep the same size as the cx90 but with 5 seats at $1500 less than cx90 and nobody will buy the cx70 anymore.My guess is that they felt the difference in price between the CX-90 and a wider CX-60 would not be that great as the costs for the drivetrain/battery is the bulk of the total cost. A CX-70 on the same platform as the CX-90 would allow them to share costs.
That covered car is at an angle. For me the overhang looks identical as the cx90. If you look at the cx60 that C pillar and acompaning window is wayyy smaller. In the covered one you could see how big is the rear window.![]()
If this is indeed the CX-70, the rear overhang is obviously shorter... not the same dimension as the CX-90.![]()
Same.I was really hopeful for a CX-60ish vehicle with the CX-90 powertrains.
Well its doing the job, otherwise we wouldn't be posting here. And we are several months away, as I think it will be revealed in January.How ridiculous is it that so much mystery is wrapped up in the dimensions. Another reason to dislike (hate?) Mazda's long teaser periods.
For all I care, keep the damn thing under wraps and embargo the info until your'e a few months away. I like reading about the minutiae of cars as much as anyone, but this is just silly.
As would be having them the same dimensions, silly.
Fair enough, the buildup and mystery around the length will def keep me watching.Well its doing the job, otherwise we wouldn't be posting here. And we are several months away, as I think it will be revealed in January.
I think you’re right!The way Japanese understand the term "BODY" might be different from English speakers.
We will see. He could mean "chassis".
.
Jonathan did not provide more info about size actually.
The so-called official document was released in Feb/2023 in a Japan stock holder Q&A session.
I read the Japanese version, the term "BODY" was used in Japanese pronunciation.
There was a chance of getting lost in translation here.
The way Japanese understand the term "BODY" might be different from English speakers.
We will see. He could mean "chassis".
BTW, can Mazda legally call this a new model when the only difference in number of seats?
This could be the first in auto industry.
Maybe someone can correct me with other examples.
Furthermore, why hide the CX-70 if it looks exactly the same as the CX-90?
Pointless.
BTW, can Mazda legally call this a new model when the only difference in number of seats?
This could be the first in auto industry.
Maybe someone can correct me with other examples.
Furthermore, why hide the CX-70 if it looks exactly the same as the CX-90?
Pointless.
Platform and size are 2 different things. The CX-60, 70, 80 and 90 are all on the same platform! The calculus is the increased cost of a midsize 2 row and full size 3 row or a 2row and 3row variants of the fullsize CX-90. The latter would obviously be cheaper fixed cost, but also sell 1/2 to 1/3 as well.My guess is that they felt the difference in price between the CX-90 and a wider CX-60 would not be that great as the costs for the drivetrain/battery is the bulk of the total cost. A CX-70 on the same platform as the CX-90 would allow them to share costs.
The screw up was the CX-50 which I actually like for what it is. But you don't use it to replace the the CX-5 (the vehicle that outsells everything else you make combined)
I believe the CX-5 sales would have dropped further if they were able to ramp up CX-50 production earlier. The big shift will occur next year once they introduce the CX-50 Hybrid.Just as clarification, the CX-5 now represents about 35% of all Mazda sales. They are slowing working to even out the sales of all their models so that the loss of the CX-5 won't sting so bad.
There will be the CX-30, the CX-50, the CX-70 and the CX-90. I predict the CX-5 will be gone the year after the CX-70 is released (2026-2027).
Model for model they are also more expensive and of a lesser quality compared to the completely sorted-out CX-5. After comparing them side by side the 5 was an easy choice for me, but for those seeking a more rugged lifestyle the 50 would likely be a no-brainer.I believe the CX-5 sales would have dropped further if they were able to ramp up CX-50 production earlier. The big shift will occur next year once they introduce the CX-50 Hybrid.