Just saw a 2012...

[millhouse]

...in Southern California but with Michigan plates. It looked pretty used...I wonder how they got it so soon?

Mazda USA headquarters are here as well, so maybe an employee?

 

[dmesthetic]

They hit the dealer last week, and i saw it at the car show here. I am pretty disappointed, inside was only a refresh with the console but 75% of the dash is the same
As for the Exterior, the 3 sharp lines in the side panels.... good luck with dents and rear light make it looks like a mini van. I won t get a new 5.

 

[acb13013]

Took a 2012 Sport for a test drive on Sunday. Maybe the 2.5l will be noticeable under a full load, but not in an empty vehicle driving around the block. Otherwise, yeah, very little difference from the previous years.

My new 5 will be a 2009, I think.

 

[Silentnoise713]

Took a 2012 Sport for a test drive on Sunday. Maybe the 2.5l will be noticeable under a full load, but not in an empty vehicle driving around the block. Otherwise, yeah, very little difference from the previous years.

My new 5 will be a 2009, I think.

You wouldn't happen to be looking at a blue one in NJ would ya?

I would agree with this due to the added torque. But based on the MT review, the car should be about 1 sec faster to 60 overall. No one area has a major improvement by any means but the 'slightly' improved gearing (help to lower NVH and increase MPG), max HP/TQ comes in about 500 RPM lower, 9' less from 60-0 (this is pretty good improvement, can save a life or avoid an accident), and slight weight/size reduction are nice 'little' improvements. Still ugly tho... If it weren’t' so ugly, I say the improvements are worth it b/c you are also getting one year's free ride on depreciation as well!

Btw, anyone know the '06-10's F/R weight distribution?


http://motortrend.automotive.com/152388/1101-2012-mazda5-test/specs.html
2012 Mazda5 Touring
Base price $21,990
Price as Tested $23,180
Vehicle layout Front engine, FWD, 6-pass, 4-door van
Engine 2.5L/157-hp/163-lb-ft DOHC 16-valve I-4
Transmission 5-speed automatic
Curb weight (f/r dist) 3399 lb (56/44%)
Wheelbase 108.3 in
Length x width x height 180.5 x 68.9 x 63.6 in
0-60 mph 9.1 sec
Quarter mile 17.0 sec @ 81.5 mph
Braking, 60-0 mph 128 ft
Lateral Acceleration 0.79 g (avg)
MT Figure Eight 28.7 sec @ 0.63 g (avg)
EPA city/hwy fuel econ 21/28 mpg
Energy consumption, city/hwy 160/120 kW-hrs/100 miles
CO2 emissions 0.82 lb/mile

 

[DKaz]

56% front?? Surprising. I think 06-10 would be similar, the 2012 is more of a refresh than redesign. I had a feeling that there was not enough weight on the front because of all the tire spin compared to other cars which may have 60%+ on the front wheels. Great for handling characteristics though.

 

[thaxman]

56% front?? Surprising. I think 06-10 would be similar, the 2012 is more of a refresh than redesign. I had a feeling that there was not enough weight on the front because of all the tire spin compared to other cars which may have 60%+ on the front wheels. Great for handling characteristics though.

And tire wear, too.

1 sec better to 60 is a big deal, IMO.

I saw a pre-production C5 Vette in AZ with MI plates the Christmas before they began selling them. When I see MI plates, I think 2 things: pre-production mules out testing or auto 'zine journalists flogging a car some poor sap will evenutally buy "used."

 

[EVL WAGN]

Living as close as I do to Detroit...many of the manufacturers have cars driving around well before they are released with manu plates on them. Chances are the 5 you saw fits into that category for sure. I remember seeing a Fiat 500 cruising around Windsor this past summer as well.