Help me off the forum ledge

[sm1ke]

Ok guys, back on track - this thread concerns the potential purchase of a 2021 CX-5.


Regarding paint thickness, Mazda has stated the following in this article:

Mazda Soul Red body paint is only 0.08 millimetres thick. That translates to a thickness of just 1 photocopying paper.

I encourage you to read the rest of that article to see what each of the 4 layers of paint are designed for.


Regarding the folding mirrors, note that there is a very detailed TSB available for this issue, but it is applicable only to 2019 CX-5s produced before June 11, 2019 (and 2019 CX-9s produced before August 28, 2019). Mazda states that the problem is due to insufficient water tightness that allows water to get into the electric motor, resulting in corrosion damage, but according to some users here, it seems that even after replacing the motors and sealing the mirrors properly, the issue remains.

One user reported that each mirror replacement by the dealer would cost approximately $741 USD. That cost includes Mazda's dealership labour rate, plus the MSRP cost of all parts that need to be replaced (which, to my understanding, is the electric fold-in unit/motor).

With the detailed instructions provided in the TSB linked above, a handy do-it-yourselfer would just need to source the fold-in motor replacements in order to do this repair themselves. Another user (@cz5gt) found these replacement fold-in mirror motors for $55 USD each on Aliexpress (link here). So even if you're out of warranty, there is a fairly low cost solution available. You can also just order the electric motors and have a reputable independent shop deal with the install - that would be cheaper than having Mazda do the repair as all dealership labour rates are much higher than independent shop labour rates.

I don't know if the auto-folding mirror problem has been reported on any 2020 models yet. Anyone else know? I assume that if the issue is still prevalent on 2020 models, they will simply update the existing TSB to include 2020 models.

 

[ColoradoDriver]

Your 2016 CX-5 is 6 years old? I got my 2016 CX-5 GT AWD with Tech in March, 2015 when they just started available in early February 2015. Mine has had 4 safety recalls so far. I accumulated 3 recalls and 8 other problems mostly from TSBs I saw here, and took my CX-5 in for one warranty service right before my new-car warranty ended, The cost to Mazda on my bill for that warranty service was near $5,500 including 2 expensive LED headlights、Automatic Climate Control panel、Bose 9” door woofers、and the whole rear brake system with revised calipers from critical rear EPB dragging issue TSB.

Pending problem now is the leaky belt tensioner since 40K miles and waiting for a stable version of OEM tensioner (MSRP $147.86) and then will replace it with my own expense. There’s a TSB for it too. Check yours and most likely yours is leaking too.

Belt Tensioner - Shouldn't this be a warranty item?

I had to replace mine. It seems these tensioners are all destined to fail. I currently have an issue with the locks on rear-liftgate and passenger door. I've been lazy on getting these addressed.

Those are really the 2 big issues I've had, but hey we're not talking transmission or engine failures here. I'm otherwise pretty happy with my CX-5 after 7 1/2 years of ownership and now at 95k miles.

 

[Steve1]

Thanks to you all. Lots of great information. Learned about the paint process from the article sm1ke posted. And yes things will break but good to hear for the most part the stuff that breaks is not the big stuff. That's what happens when you buy the higher end models, more gadgets to go wrong. And that is any vehicle. I am a low millage driver and garage kept. I just have to deal with salt in the winter harming the car.

 

[Buzzman12]

I am a low millage drive with garage kept. I just have to deal with salt in the winter harming the car.

Well now, my next comment will not be popular here, but if you live in a snow and salt zone (like I do) and you worry about rust, then don't buy the Mazda.
I was told when I bought mine that the newer Mazda's were more rust resistant than the older rust buckets.
Looks like that is not the case. I'm in the same boat as you: low mileage drive and garage kept.
It hasn't worked. I have plenty of rust areas under the car, and I need new rotors already.
Very disappointed in Mazda.

 

[Steve1]

Well now, my next comment will not be popular here, but if you live in a snow and salt zone (like I do) and you worry about rust, then don't buy the Mazda.
I was told when I bought mine that the newer Mazda's were more rust resistant than the older rust buckets.
Looks like that is not the case. I'm in the same boat as you: low mileage drive and garage kept.
It hasn't worked. I have plenty of rust areas under the car, and I need new rotors already.
Very disappointed in Mazda.

That could be the case if you drive ultra short trips in the winter. If your car does not have enough time to warm up and dry out with the heat from the car you will have rusted routers. Happens to my old Honda Accord when my kid went to collage the car sat for months. Then i needed new calipers and rotors due to rust. The shop told me i need to dive the car for at least a half hour at one time per week in the winter.

 

[yrwei52]

⋯
I just have to deal with salt in the winter harming the car.

I’m with Buzzman12 about rust issue on CX-5. There’re plenty of rust complaints here either under-carriage or interior, especially from snow-belt area. I believe some sort of rust-proofing at least for under-carriage is needed for a new CX-5 in snow-belt area. And those who live in Northeast and Midwest should know better, so as those Canadian CX-5 owners. I’m glad I’m in Texas and road salt is not giving us too much problem.

Just joined the club and question on rust

Rustproofing & Undercoating...is it necessary?

A recent rust complaint on rear suspension area and brake calipers:

I was very surprised at the amount of rust in some areas but the dealership mechanic assured me it is normal. ⋯
Photo of the rust I was talking about:

Another recent very rusty undercarriages after two or three years from a CX-5:

previous year, un treated.
North east US.

I dont honestly believe Mazdas have good rust resistance even today. yeah may be better than 10 years ago but not the best.

This CX-5 should be from Illinois:

Just spent 3 hours under my 3 year old CX-5. Did AT, Engine and 2x TC oil changes.

Rust level in various spots on 36 month car was tad too much. Mark this post, but in 4 season weather I don't see this version last 10 years.

If this is CA/FL type of no salt climate - all should be fine, but winter states beware.

This CX-5 is from Toronto area in Canada:

View attachment 216610
View attachment 216611
View attachment 216612
View attachment 216613

Here is the underside of my car after 4 winters.

Here is comparison pictures between his CX-5 and Toyota Matrix from Southern New Hampshire:

Rust like that after a few years even with heavy use of salt I believe is unacceptable with today's coatings and materials to look worse than a car that is 13 years old is not acceptable. How can Mazda get away with this? I love how this car drives and looks but also want one that will last. Also very happy with fuel economy so far getting around 30.5MPG on my 100 mile round trip commute.

2005 toyota matrix/pontiac vibe - 225K miles driving 100 miles a day

View attachment 216618

2014 CX-5 (seen 2 winters) -28K miles

View attachment 216616
View attachment 216617

 

[Natey]

 

[sm1ke]

Well now, my next comment will not be popular here, but if you live in a snow and salt zone (like I do) and you worry about rust, then don't buy the Mazda.
I was told when I bought mine that the newer Mazda's were more rust resistant than the older rust buckets.
Looks like that is not the case. I'm in the same boat as you: low mileage drive and garage kept.
It hasn't worked. I have plenty of rust areas under the car, and I need new rotors already.
Very disappointed in Mazda.

It won't be popular because it's very misleading. What is happening with your car seems to be more of an exception than the rule. You've admitted this in a previous post. Your statement "if you live in a snow and salt zone (like I do) and you worry about rust, then don't buy the Mazda" suggests that all Mazda vehicles have the same problems you do. They do not.

IMO rust is not an issue if nothing is failing. I live in Manitoba, and we get plenty of snow and salt. I am no stranger to rust - I had a 1991 Honda Accord that was daily driven until 2012. That 21-year old car had a LOT of surface rust on the underbody, but nothing failed (no perforations or leaks). It was just a cosmetic issue, really. I have a 2006 Civic right now that has a bunch of rusty undercarriage parts - apart from the eyesore, no issues to report. For rust to be a concern to me, I would need to see more reports like Buzzman12's, where excessive rust requires component replacement in order to restore function. As it stands, I have seen a lot of examples of cosmetic surface rust, and one example of rust necessitating component replacement. But that's just my $0.02 - if these pictures of rust scare you off, then I would just have a rust-proofing treatment done every year or two.

I drive my car every day. It spends half the day on the road or in the parking lot. The other half of the day it is garage kept. I also rinse the undercarriage periodically. It has never had any kind of rust-proofing done to it. My rotors, brake pads, and everything else under the car is fine after 49k kms.

 

[181962]

It won't be popular because it's very misleading. What is happening with your car seems to be more of an exception than the rule. You've admitted this in a previous post. Your statement "if you live in a snow and salt zone (like I do) and you worry about rust, then don't buy the Mazda" suggests that all Mazda vehicles have the same problems you do. They do not.

IMO rust is not an issue if nothing is failing. I live in Manitoba, and we get plenty of snow and salt. I am no stranger to rust - I had a 1991 Honda Accord that was daily driven until 2012. That 21-year old car had a LOT of surface rust on the underbody, but nothing failed (no perforations or leaks). It was just a cosmetic issue, really. I have a 2006 Civic right now that has a bunch of rusty undercarriage parts - apart from the eyesore, no issues to report. For rust to be a concern to me, I would need to see more reports like Buzzman12's, where excessive rust requires component replacement in order to restore function. As it stands, I have seen a lot of examples of cosmetic surface rust, and one example of rust necessitating component replacement. But that's just my $0.02 - if these pictures of rust scare you off, then I would just have a rust-proofing treatment done every year or two.

I drive my car every day. It spends half the day on the road or in the parking lot. The other half of the day it is garage kept. I also rinse the undercarriage periodically. It has never had any kind of rust-proofing done to it. My rotors, brake pads, and everything else under the car is fine after 49k kms.

Amen.

As mentioned previously, seven years ago the brake assemblies on my 2006 Accord started rust-spotting a brand new garage floor. They kept doing it until I traded it this past August. I never had a problem with the brakes other than routine maintenance. That's in the Buffalo region, and in the Chicago area before that. And this is a vehicle that sat in the garage undriven for two months in Feb. - March every winter while we were in Florida. Sure, the rotors had a rust patina upon return and the brakes screeched when first pulling it out of the garage after those two months, but after a bit of driving they were back to normal.

You mentioned uncarriage wash. That's important especially in the winter months. I'm not a fan of running a vehicle through a car wash when the temps are below freezing but you seem to be able to get it done in the Great White North. I'd make a point of getting that done on the Accord just before leaving for those two months. Others mentioned getting the car heated up periodically, 15 min. or so once per week, which might be in order for for retirees or folks working from home in our time of Covid when not getting out much.

As for my 2020 CX-5 Touring with 5,500 miles, which was a dealer loaner, the Car Fax shows that between the time the dealer put it up for sale in June 2020 and my test drive in Aug. 2020, the vehicle had been driven about 10 miles. I didn't put a flashlight on the rotors but the brakes were fine in the test drive and have been fine since. The rust on the brake assemblies at this time is limited to washers. Other than that, not much. A couple of tiny spots on the exhaust. Meh.

 

[Muggs1]

Well now, my next comment will not be popular here, but if you live in a snow and salt zone (like I do) and you worry about rust, then don't buy the Mazda.
I was told when I bought mine that the newer Mazda's were more rust resistant than the older rust buckets.
Looks like that is not the case. I'm in the same boat as you: low mileage drive and garage kept.
It hasn't worked. I have plenty of rust areas under the car, and I need new rotors already.
Very disappointed in Mazda.

Ok, that's weird. I have the same 2017 Mazda6 GT full options like you, kept in an underground garage and used it every winter in GTA, so a lot of salt too, not to mention commuting approx 30km one way to work. My car does not shown any signs of what you are describing. My dealer just made a video inspection of my car beneath, as part of the oil change, and there are slight marks of rust on the rear arms, which I found very reasonable for a car 4yr old, but other than that, it looks perfectly fine. I haven't change absolutely ANYTHING to my car until now and everything works fine.
Grantly, for the past 2 winters I used to wash my car at least once a week during the winter to get rid of the salt, so it might have something to do with the way you are maintaining your car.

 

[181962]

For rust to be a concern to me, I would need to see more reports like Buzzman12's, where excessive rust requires component replacement in order to restore function.

One of the attractions to me of the 2020 CX-5 with the normally aspirated 2.5L was the fact it is the 4th. year of the generation and 3rd. year for the motor since cylinder deactivation was added. I wouldn't buy a first year of a generation of anything, or the first year of a drive train introduced mid-generation.

Even Detroit practices some incremental improvement. Some models we'd normally think of as lousy builds start showing decent reliability ratings when they get a couple of years into the generation.

When one buys the first year of a generation he should think of himself as a beta tester.

That's not to say something might get worse in a subsequent year of a generation as a new part or system is introduced that hasn't been real world tested by us beta testers. But on balance, the odds go up as the years on the generation tick by.

 

[sm1ke]

One of the attractions to me of the 2020 CX-5 with the normally aspirated 2.5L was the fact it is the 4th. year of the generation and 3rd. year for the motor since cylinder deactivation as added. I wouldn't buy a first year of a generation of anything, or the first year of a drive train introduced mid-generation.

I'm the same way. Didn't really have much of a choice with my 2018 CX-9 (debuted with a new powertrain in 2016), but thankfully it has proven to be reliable so far, and I still have the powertrain warranty that expires at the end of 2022.

I would have no problem buying a 2021 CX-5 at this point - I'd just pay a bit more for PPF on the front and learn how to apply Fluid Film to the undercarriage.

 

[181962]

I would have no problem buying a 2021 CX-5 at this point...

Me neither. When the CX-50 pops out of the womb that's another matter. Of course manufacturers and the auto media don't like to hear that. If there were no early adopters nobody would buy new models! But there will always be plenty of early adopters to beta test. People like the new sheet metal to distinguish themselves from older versions. I just wouldn't be one of them.

I'd just pay a bit more for PPF on the front and learn how to apply Fluid Film to the undercarriage.

Whatever helps you sleep at night. I won't be rustproofing or putting film on my Soul Red. Nu Finish and call it good is the way I go. We puts down our money (or time), or not, and takes our chances.

 

[181962]

Ok, that's weird. I have the same 2017 Mazda6 GT full options like you, kept in an underground garage and used it every winter in GTA, so a lot of salt too, not to mention commuting approx 30km one way to work. My car does not shown any signs of what you are describing. My dealer just made a video inspection of my car beneath, as part of the oil change, and there are slight marks of rust on the rear arms, which I found very reasonable for a car 4yr old, but other than that, it looks perfectly fine. I haven't change absolutely ANYTHING to my car until now and everything works fine.
Grantly, for the past 2 winters I used to wash my car at least once a week during the winter to get rid of the salt, so it might have something to do with the way you are maintaining your car.

We tend to think of the instances of a particular model/version/year as clones. They are not. Now, if a particular instance is riddled with rust across a variety of parts when another is not, that's probably envrionmental or related to driving/cleaning/storage habits. Beyond that, though, you have to ask why there are instances of lemons, or interations with a number of small nagging problems, across all makes/models/years when many other owners have no such experience. Here are some possible reasons:

• Identical parts are not necessarily identical. I recently had a dealer do a routine brake pad replacement on a Toyota. The brakes started squealing after about 1,000 miles under a very specific set of conditions. After two trips to the dealer they couldn't figure out the problem despite recreating it. They reckoned the pads might have had an impurity so they replaced them under their service warranty. No problem since. I think they were right. Two sets of pads coming off the same shelf, one good and one bad--sh*t happens.
• Cars have some 40,000 parts, or many more than that depending on how you define "part". Manufacturers source many of them from suppliers. They may have multiple suppliers for a part or require a source to have multiple factories in different geographies. Or the manufacturer may have multiple factories of their own for a particular part. Nobody wants to have to shut down production for lack of a $25 widget because of a factory fire, a natural disaster, whatnot. This is a particularly acute consideration in a world of just-in-time inventory. That $25 widget problem has happened, at which point I'd assume the manufacturer did a reassessment of their supply chain. Multiple sources can be routine, one vs. the other depending on who can get a production run going on time. The point being parts are not necessarily just parts. One on one day out of one factory may not be as good as another from a different factory on another day.
• Robots are not infallible. I'm reminded of Subaru swapping out buyers of 200-some very early interations of the 2019 Ascent into a replacement when they discovered they had missing welds, B-pillar if I remember correctly, compromising crash worthiness. Those may have been the very first of this new model that came off the line. Whether the cause was mechanical, software related, or human error in configuring the robot I couldn't say. Any tweek on the line over the course of a model run, hardware or software related, would also be suseptilble to error. Robots are machines that wear out. As they wear they may miscalibrate. If somebody doesn't catch it right away, will the manufacturer say, "no biggie"? Maybe it isn't, maybe it is.
• Humans are not infallible, as if that needs to be said. Whether they are setting up, monitoring or servicing robots or other tools, or hands-on in manufacturing or assembly, mistakes can be made. Back in the day the old bromide said don't buy anything from Detroit built on Mondays (hangovers) or Fridays (sick day call-ins). Robots have taken care of a lot of that; attention to quality control is far better than it once was; incremental improvement is required for reliability competitiveness. Some makes and models are better than others, but cars are way, way more reliable than the junk coming out of the 1970's and 1980's before Toyota started on the road to eating Detroit's lunch.
• Your software is not my software. As we saw with the cylinder deactivation issues, one comes out with one version, later there is a new version. This kind of thing could happen mid-year. I don't know how many discreet microchips my CX-5 has, but I've read some high end German rigs with every bleeding edge tech loaded on it can have as many as 40 chips. How many software tweeks are made over the course of model year run that don't reach the level of recall? We presume they make things better; sometimes they could make things worse.
• Consider TSBs. If they are issued in the middle of a model year run in some cases the problem is fixed in subsequent iterations.
• Consider recalls. It's uncommon for every iteration of a make/model/year to be recalled. By implication they fixed the problem sometime during the model year. Or there was no problem to start, then a problem hit, then a fix.

So, how do you get a lemon? Bad luck--a confluence of multiple problems, or one big problem that can't seem to get fixed, for any number of reasons some of which are cited above. At the same time others have trouble free experiences. It's why you get a wide range of anecdotal experiences. People with problems are more likely to talk about them than people who drive and come home every day without incident.

In the end, troubling anecdotes can be highly misleading in terms of the odds of getting a good one. You'll likely to get a clearer picture of your odds from aggregated data, such as Consumer Reports among others whose reliability ratings are compiled from subscriber trouble reports along with reports of lack thereof.

 

[Buzzman12]

Ok, that's weird. I have the same 2017 Mazda6 GT full options like you, kept in an underground garage and used it every winter in GTA, so a lot of salt too, not to mention commuting approx 30km one way to work. My car does not shown any signs of what you are describing. My dealer just made a video inspection of my car beneath, as part of the oil change, and there are slight marks of rust on the rear arms, which I found very reasonable for a car 4yr old, but other than that, it looks perfectly fine. I haven't change absolutely ANYTHING to my car until now and everything works fine.
Granted, for the past 2 winters I used to wash my car at least once a week during the winter to get rid of the salt, so it might have something to do with the way you are maintaining your car.

OK, so just to clarify again my driving habits and situation: the first winter of it's life was spent in Florida. No salt there.
The second and third winter of it's life were here in Ottawa, but as I've said before in other posts, I don't drive it in salty road conditions. I have an old Nissan Pathfinder that I drive in bad winter weather, and the Mazda stays tucked away in the garage.
The 6 has seen very little, if any, salt since I bought it.
It has nothing to do with how I'm maintaining the car either. I try to maintain it as if it were new, and keep it as clean as I can. I don't like a dirty car any more than the next guy.
I'll be installing my winter tires this weekend, so I'll take a few pics for everyone.
I hope I can post them....lol. I've never tried it since photobucket crapped their drawers.

 

[Buzzman12]

It won't be popular because it's very misleading. What is happening with your car seems to be more of an exception than the rule. You've admitted this in a previous post. Your statement "if you live in a snow and salt zone (like I do) and you worry about rust, then don't buy the Mazda" suggests that all Mazda vehicles have the same problems you do. They do not.

IMO rust is not an issue if nothing is failing. I live in Manitoba, and we get plenty of snow and salt. I am no stranger to rust - I had a 1991 Honda Accord that was daily driven until 2012. That 21-year old car had a LOT of surface rust on the underbody, but nothing failed (no perforations or leaks). It was just a cosmetic issue, really. I have a 2006 Civic right now that has a bunch of rusty undercarriage parts - apart from the eyesore, no issues to report. For rust to be a concern to me, I would need to see more reports like Buzzman12's, where excessive rust requires component replacement in order to restore function. As it stands, I have seen a lot of examples of cosmetic surface rust, and one example of rust necessitating component replacement. But that's just my $0.02 - if these pictures of rust scare you off, then I would just have a rust-proofing treatment done every year or two.

I drive my car every day. It spends half the day on the road or in the parking lot. The other half of the day it is garage kept. I also rinse the undercarriage periodically. It has never had any kind of rust-proofing done to it. My rotors, brake pads, and everything else under the car is fine after 49k kms.

Well, I'm going to respectfully disagree, and that's fine. We are all entitled to our opinions after all.
Just in this thread alone there are pictures of rusty undercarriages on Mazda's that are worse after only a few years than most other cars have after more years on the road.
Try googling Mazda rust issues, and the net is full of verified examples of just how bad the rust issue is/was with Mazda for in the not too distant past vehicles.
Like I said, just driving around Ottawa and seeing all the older gen Mazda 3's with holes in them should be proof enough of the seriousness of the problem.
I'm actually not concerned with a little surface rust on some undercarriage components, like washers or bolt heads. I am concerned with rust covering structural members after only 3 years of careful driving and care.
There have also been more than one thread on here about rust bubbles showing up on roofs and places on Mazda's that are only a year or two old. That should be worrisome as well.
Anyway, I'll leave it at that for now, and just move on with life and my Mazda.
As mentioned before, I'll try and post a pic or two from this weekend when I pull my wheels off, and then I'll shut up about the rust issues.
Cheers.

 

[MyFirstMazda]

I think any car in the snow belt needs some preventative maintenance to slow down rust or it will get rusty. Can wash the undercarriage to remove the salt or go a step further and coat the undercarriage with an anti rust agent a few times a year. In this video is a 7 year old car living in NY.

 

[Unobtanium]

The gears in the mirrors are fine, it's the mechanism/motor that slows down over time. I've got 53K miles on mine, and each mirror motor has been replaced twice. The first time it cost more, this last time it was around $550/ea. I have a warranty for 150K miles though, so I really don't care.

The Mazda wins when it comes to transmission as well as valve deposits/turbo.

The paint on every Japanese car sucks for durability but they're very pretty with lots of depth. So 3M wrap that.

If my CX5 got totalled today, and I lived and could still drive, I'd either buy a used Audi Sq5, a RAV4 Prime, or a total beater and wait another 2-3 years until either an electric SUV that met my criteria came out, or until the RWD CX5 came out with the 3L SA-X.


All vehicles can rust. A friend of mine bought a Lexus RX350 or something similar (this was about 10 years ago) and it rusted so bad that suspension parts could not be properly adjusted or aligned. My last CX5 with 106K miles on it was fine though. No rust issues. My 2019 isn't old enough yet IMO to have to worry about.

 

[sm1ke]

The 6 has seen very little, if any, salt since I bought it.
It has nothing to do with how I'm maintaining the car either. I try to maintain it as if it were new, and keep it as clean as I can. I don't like a dirty car any more than the next guy.

I hope I can post them....lol. I've never tried it since photobucket crapped their drawers.

To be fair, humidity and ambient conditions can cause rust too. It may very well be a combination of factors as HardRightEdg mentioned - bad run of first MY rotors that were changed out in newer models, and the only reason you're seeing problems with yours and others aren't is because of the differences in driving habits. Who knows.. all I know is that rust that causes component failure isn't common on the current gen Mazda6 or any CX-5.

Well, I'm going to respectfully disagree, and that's fine. We are all entitled to our opinions after all.
Just in this thread alone there are pictures of rusty undercarriages on Mazda's that are worse after only a few years than most other cars have after more years on the road.
Try googling Mazda rust issues, and the net is full of verified examples of just how bad the rust issue is/was with Mazda for in the not too distant past vehicles.
Like I said, just driving around Ottawa and seeing all the older gen Mazda 3's with holes in them should be proof enough of the seriousness of the problem.
I'm actually not concerned with a little surface rust on some undercarriage components, like washers or bolt heads. I am concerned with rust covering structural members after only 3 years of careful driving and care.
There have also been more than one thread on here about rust bubbles showing up on roofs and places on Mazda's that are only a year or two old. That should be worrisome as well.
Anyway, I'll leave it at that for now, and just move on with life and my Mazda.
As mentioned before, I'll try and post a pic or two from this weekend when I pull my wheels off, and then I'll shut up about the rust issues.
Cheers.

The aforementioned issues need relevant context to be part of the discussion at hand (concerning the purchase of a new CX-5). You're talking about older Mazda3s, and googling an extremely broad phrase. I'm pretty sure that if you were to google "_____ rust issues" you'd find tons of pictures of rusty vehicles. If that was all I did when doing the research on my current car, I wouldn't be in a Mazda (thankfully I did a bit more than search google for "CX-9 rust issues", but it definitely was one of my first searches). Regarding the Mazda3 - this Reddit thread details experiences from a bunch of owners in North America. There are a handful of owners from Ontario who report that their cars are rust free (notably Mazda3s as old as 2007 and Mazda6s as new as 2016). One guy even says that parking inside a garage provides the optimal temperature and humidity for corrosion to occur during snowy/damp weather, but I don't really know how true that is.

Also, the roof bubbling was due to a manufacturer defect, and I'm pretty sure the number of reported cases here was less than I could count on one hand.

The gears in the mirrors are fine, it's the mechanism/motor that slows down over time. I've got 53K miles on mine, and each mirror motor has been replaced twice. The first time it cost more, this last time it was around $550/ea. I have a warranty for 150K miles though, so I really don't care.

Based on the bulletin, the gears probably are fine (bulletin only calls for replacement of the electric motor).

I don't know if they changed suppliers for the 2020-2021 models since the TSB hasn't been updated for those MYs, and I haven't seen any reports of mirrors failing on newer models yet. But if they have switched to better units, I would hope that they swap yours out with the good ones (again, if they've changed anything at all).

 

[ColtX-5]

How many CVTs did your Nissan get?

I have a CX-5 because the 2015 Rogues STILL have CVT failures.