Is Mazda winning the SUV market?

[CKN]

Originally Posted by Jake_J
Let me say that as a former Mazda6 owner and a fan of Mazda, Mazda is definitely not winning the SUV market. In north america Mazda is unfortunately a niche brand with meagre sales, and while their SUV offerings are probably their most market competitive offerings to the average new car buyer Mazda is hardly on the radar. The last time Mazda was winning in North America was in the mid 2000's when the new 3 and 6 (which where huge improvement of their predecessors) caught the competition off guard and ate up market share.

I don't think not building certain models in Japan or the past tie up with Ford did any harm to Mazda. For most of the time Ford had a ownership stake in Mazda, Ford made some lousy cars but the partnership benefited both companies. Ford got access to Mazda's superior 4 cylinder engines, Mazda got access to Ford's Duratec and Cyclone V6's and they cooperated on developing new car platforms. My old Mazda6 was build in Flat Rock, Michigan at the then 50/50 JV plant with a Mazda modified version of the Duratec 30 V6 and it was a great car.



I had a Mazda sedan- a "626" with the 6 cylinder option and that was a great car.

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted by miden851
You buy a Mazda with your heart while a Toyota or a Honda with your head; those sold units from the above, simply reflect that

Eh, depends on the model. The CRV is definitely not a smart buy. The RAV is, and maybe the RAV Prime can be both.

 

[jimbrewer]

Mazda seems to have an "every day low price " strategy.

A CX5 awd is about 25K for a pretty well appointed car.

 

[PimTac]

Equating the old Mazda to the new is definitely a apples to oranges comparison.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by Trav
You own a 5 year old Toyota in CO is it rotten? At least Toyota stood behind the rusted frames unlike Ford who blamed it on road salt and told their owners in a nice way to go scratch their backsides with a broken bottle.

In CO nothing rusts. Though, I am afraid to lean on it considering thickness of body panels.

 

[Trav]

One thing I notice when you get the outside skin off the Subaru and Toyota vehicles is the very well constructed and strong unibody skeleton. I cant say the same for Mitsubishi, last generation Mazda, Isuzu and Suzuki vehicles. I deal mostly with rust and collision damage although I don't do much heavy reconstruction anymore due to my age but once in a while I get the urge to really tear into one for my own enjoyment, I find body work very relaxing and challenging.

The newer Mazda may be different as I haven't worked on one in quite a while I cant say, IIRC the last on was a Mazda 6 for rotten rear quarters, it wasn't very impressive under the outer skin. Honda also makes a very good unibody on most of their vehicles, the small cars are a bit flimsy but not horrible.

 

[PimTac]

Originally Posted by Trav
One thing I notice when you get the outside skin off the Subaru and Toyota vehicles is the very well constructed and strong unibody skeleton. I cant say the same for Mitsubishi, last generation Mazda, Isuzu and Suzuki vehicles. I deal mostly with rust and collision damage although I don't do much heavy reconstruction anymore due to my age but once in a while I get the urge to really tear into one for my own enjoyment, I find body work very relaxing and challenging.

The newer Mazda may be different as I haven't worked on one in quite a while I cant say, IIRC the last on was a Mazda 6 for rotten rear quarters, it wasn't very impressive under the outer skin. Honda also makes a very good unibody on most of their vehicles, the small cars are a bit flimsy but not horrible.




Are you referring to the pre-SkyActiv Mazda vehicle's?

 

[wag123]

Originally Posted by Danh
For compact SUV/Honda skeptic shoppers, wait for the CRV Hybrid: no direct injection, no CVT, drivetrain proven in the Accord for a couple years, great fuel economy and MSRP uptick of only $1,500 or so (at least once initial demand is fulfilled).
The Accord Hybrid has a CVT.
Mazda and Subaru also have Hybrids and EVs under development as we speak. They both have full access to Toyota's Hybrid engineering expertise as well as Toyota's suppliers.

 

[Virtus_Probi]

Originally Posted by PimTac
Originally Posted by jayjr1105
I'll admit the new Rav4 is actually good looking. I haven't seen one in a while. At first glance though I thought it was a Subaru Crosstrek

It's a good seller. I see a lot of them already on the roads.

I guess I haven't looked closely at a new RAV4, the nose and grill remind me a bit of my FXT.
The FXT's look at the time was ridiculed some as being reminiscent of the space fighters from the old Battlestar Galactica series.
My vehicle has a blackout grill that is at least very similar to the one in this photo...

 

[PimTac]

Interesting observation. Toyota seems to be using the same style of front on their Tacoma pickups too.

The first thing I noticed about the new RAV4 is the size of the vehicle. It is much larger than before.

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted by Trav
One thing I notice when you get the outside skin off the Subaru and Toyota vehicles is the very well constructed and strong unibody skeleton. I cant say the same for Mitsubishi, last generation Mazda, Isuzu and Suzuki vehicles. I deal mostly with rust and collision damage although I don't do much heavy reconstruction anymore due to my age but once in a while I get the urge to really tear into one for my own enjoyment, I find body work very relaxing and challenging.

The newer Mazda may be different as I haven't worked on one in quite a while I cant say, IIRC the last on was a Mazda 6 for rotten rear quarters, it wasn't very impressive under the outer skin. Honda also makes a very good unibody on most of their vehicles, the small cars are a bit flimsy but not horrible.


Here:
https://www.mazda.com/en/innovation/technology/skyactiv/skyactiv-body/


http://youwheel.com/home/2016/06/20/car-body-torsional-rigidity-a-comprehensive-list/

You will note the cx5 is extremely rigid. You can tell when driving these cars. I could tell a huge difference in my z06 and 370z, etc. The numbers don't lie, and they do translate directly to how the car feels from behind the wheel and how it moves over irregular surfaces.

 

[javacontour]

We went Toyota Rav4 for an SUV in 2016 and I bought a used Mazda3 in 2017. Both have been good cars for us.

I'm partial to Mazda for driving dynamics as this is the 3rd Mazda I've owned. oilBabe seems to like Toyota. She took a brief flyer on a 2010 Altima that was(is) a reliable car. Our son has it with over 180k miles on it. The only repairs was an early refitting of an AC condensation drain hose and an AC compressor somewhere around 90-100k miles IIRC. The darn thing just keeps going.

I got rid of the 2003 Protege5 because it was starting to rust, so that is a known issue going in.

These days, I'd say buy what you like. Other than **SOME** FCA offerings and similar that don't seem to match up in terms of reliability to more mainstream offerings in North America, there are very few horrible to own cars out there.

Some are better buys as used cars as depreciation is worse. But you don't see burning hulks of broken down cars clogging the roads.

When it happens to you, it's a crisis. But your crisis isn't a trend.

If you don't like your car, they sell 15 million new ones as well as used cars counted in the tens of millions every year, so get out and buy another one if it doesn't work out.

 

[Vikas]

Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by Trav
One thing I notice when you get the outside skin off the Subaru and Toyota vehicles is the very well constructed and strong unibody skeleton. I cant say the same for Mitsubishi, last generation Mazda, Isuzu and Suzuki vehicles. I deal mostly with rust and collision damage although I don't do much heavy reconstruction anymore due to my age but once in a while I get the urge to really tear into one for my own enjoyment, I find body work very relaxing and challenging.

The newer Mazda may be different as I haven't worked on one in quite a while I cant say, IIRC the last on was a Mazda 6 for rotten rear quarters, it wasn't very impressive under the outer skin. Honda also makes a very good unibody on most of their vehicles, the small cars are a bit flimsy but not horrible.


Here:
https://www.mazda.com/en/innovation/technology/skyactiv/skyactiv-body/


http://youwheel.com/home/2016/06/20/car-body-torsional-rigidity-a-comprehensive-list/

You will note the cx5 is extremely rigid. You can tell when driving these cars. I could tell a huge difference in my z06 and 370z, etc. The numbers don't lie, and they do translate directly to how the car feels from behind the wheel and how it moves over irregular surfaces.


I read through the skyactiv-body and looked for "rust" or "corrosion" words; they were NOT mentioned. I was expecting Mazda to claim the new skyactive bodies are twice corrosion resistant or something which will
- acknowledge the problems with the old body
- specifically show how they have been handled in this generation

Alas, no such luck.

 

[Dwight_Frye]

I was in the market for an SUV last summer. I did not need 3 row seating or huge cargo space so a mid-size model was going to work for me. I needed AWD as I recently moved to a mountain community with occasional snowfall. I was prepared to pay cash for any model in the sub-$50K range that I liked. I wanted good power, not a gutless econobox that squeezed every mile out of a gallon of gas. I wanted some luxury features like a leather interior.
I ruled out any vehicle that had a CVT (goodbye Infiniti and Subaru). I ruled out any model that had a poor reliability record. I ruled out any model that had high maintenance costs (like a BMW) . I especially ruled out any model that was ugly (especially the Lexus') which is most of them.

I bought a Mazda CX 5 GT Reserve. They were offering 0.9% financing so I saved my cash as took advantage of their program. It has the 2.5 liter Skyactiv turbo engine with 250 hp (on premium fuel which is not an issue to me) and 310 ft/lbs of torque, tuned to deliver it below 4000 rpm's.
It drives very nicely. I don't care that it has a few less cubic feet of storage capacity than the competition. It is in my opinion also a heck of a lot better looking than the other models in the price range.
Would I have preferred a normally aspirated V6 or I6 with about 300 HP ? Heck yes. But I sure wouldn't have been happy with any less power.

Regarding the sales figures, you have to remember than many buyers are brand loyal or buy a car based upon perceived performance and past reliability. We also know that a lot of the manufacturers that once had a rather stellar reputation have produced some seriously crummy SUV's in the last couple of years. I wager that a good many buyers didn't do much in the way of homework before buying all of those CRV's, RAV4's and Rogues.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by wag123
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by Vikas
Originally Posted by Trav
I would buy a Highlander before a Mazda anytime. Better engine and a nice solid well built body, rust through is not a real issue.

I am with you; I will wait another decade before accepting that Mazda has fixed the rust through. To be fair, I have come across too many Mazda 3 with premature body rust but not any Miata with corroded body. CX series is relatively young.

Pinnacle of rust protection: Toyota.
I bet those Tundra and Tacoma owners were not aware of this.
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by Trav
You own a 5 year old Toyota in CO is it rotten? At least Toyota stood behind the rusted frames unlike Ford who blamed it on road salt and told their owners in a nice way to go scratch their backsides with a broken bottle.

In CO nothing rusts. Though, I am afraid to lean on it considering thickness of body panels.
Toyota bashing again? Haven't you learned your lesson yet? Enough already Edy!

Toyota is part of the discussion. Is this Toyota fetish forum? If not, than just lear to live with the fact that people discuss Toyota too.

 

[PimTac]

Only two things are certain on BITOG, thick versus thin arguments and edy bashing Toyota.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by Trav
One thing I notice when you get the outside skin off the Subaru and Toyota vehicles is the very well constructed and strong unibody skeleton. I cant say the same for Mitsubishi, last generation Mazda, Isuzu and Suzuki vehicles. I deal mostly with rust and collision damage although I don't do much heavy reconstruction anymore due to my age but once in a while I get the urge to really tear into one for my own enjoyment, I find body work very relaxing and challenging.

The newer Mazda may be different as I haven't worked on one in quite a while I cant say, IIRC the last on was a Mazda 6 for rotten rear quarters, it wasn't very impressive under the outer skin. Honda also makes a very good unibody on most of their vehicles, the small cars are a bit flimsy but not horrible.

You indicated in your post that 5 year old Toyota does not rust, but with that you are implying that Mazda will? I am not aware of any 5yr old Mazda's being rusty unless in accidents or something. I had 1998 Mazda Millenia 2.5 V6 that never rusted, made some 256k miles, never used drop of oil, though it went through batteries like crazy, could not start if it was not driven 10 days or so (and this is in Alabama) and had some really insignificant quirks. Overall, was really good car.
One thing that Mazda SUV's did not have issues, and Toyota, Honda and Subaru had plenty, is transmission.

 

[KrisZ]

For such a small company that many wrote off after they split from Ford, I think they are doing very well. And arguably the introduction of CX-5 model saved the company. Their Skyactiv engines and transmission also seem to be holding up very well despite being brand new designs after the break up with Ford. Something that cannot be said about many other car manufacturers. But Mazda has its faults, just like any manufacturer.

 

[grampi]

Originally Posted by PimTac
Only two things are certain on BITOG, thick versus thin arguments and edy bashing Toyota.


Yep, people love to bash Toyota, and gravitate to anything the Koreans make like a heard of sheeple...

 

[Trav]

Originally Posted by PimTac
Originally Posted by Trav
One thing I notice when you get the outside skin off the Subaru and Toyota vehicles is the very well constructed and strong unibody skeleton. I cant say the same for Mitsubishi, last generation Mazda, Isuzu and Suzuki vehicles. I deal mostly with rust and collision damage although I don't do much heavy reconstruction anymore due to my age but once in a while I get the urge to really tear into one for my own enjoyment, I find body work very relaxing and challenging.

The newer Mazda may be different as I haven't worked on one in quite a while I cant say, IIRC the last on was a Mazda 6 for rotten rear quarters, it wasn't very impressive under the outer skin. Honda also makes a very good unibody on most of their vehicles, the small cars are a bit flimsy but not horrible.




Are you referring to the pre-SkyActiv Mazda vehicle's?


Yes I have no experience with the newer ones but I see them in parking lots rusting bad enough. In the salt belt a Mazda isn't a car I would even consider.