Advertised Cargo Volume

A

AIMWO4

Member

:

Mazda5 Sport 5-Speed

• Jun 21, 2007

• #1

I'm not sure how the "powers that be" are measuring this, but something's not right. I have about as much cargo area in my M5 as I had in my Saab 9-5 wagon. The Saab 9-5 is advertised as having 73 cu ft, and the M5 with 44.

A conservative estimate (some quick measurements I took) reveals I can get about 33 cubic feet behind the 2nd row seats (stacked above the seats), when they are all the way back. I'd venture this is the area that is advertised at 44 cu ft.

I calculate over 60 cu ft of cargo area if you fold the 2nd row down. If you fill up all the nooks and crannies, you could probably get 70-ish.

Has anyone crunched the numbers?

 

Attachments

• 
  Volume.JPG

  81 KB · Views: 232

Last edited: Jun 21, 2007

C

coolmazda5

Member

Contributor

:

2008 Mazda5 5MT Sport w/ Popular Package

• Jun 22, 2007

• #2

AIMWO4 said:

I'm not sure how the "powers that be" are measuring this, but something's not right. I have about as much cargo area in my M5 as I had in my Saab 9-5 wagon. The Saab 9-5 is advertised as having 73 cu ft, and the M5 with 44.

A conservative estimate (some quick measurements I took) reveals I can get about 33 cubic feet behind the 2nd row seats (stacked above the seats), when they are all the way back. I'd venture this is the area that is advertised at 44 cu ft.

I calculate over 60 cu ft of cargo area if you fold the 2nd row down. If you fill up all the nooks and crannies, you could probably get 70-ish.

Has anyone crunched the numbers?

Click to expand...

Huh? Here are the results of my last "number crunching" (see links):

Now, being serious, to me the numbers are trivial if the cargo area is not a real box with a full opening on top. Ive seen a lot cars advertising tons of cargo space, but the problem is, How in the heck you get the stuff in there?

 

A

AIMWO4

Member

:

Mazda5 Sport 5-Speed

• Jun 22, 2007

• #3

I've seen your pics before. Nice job! I guess I should carry a camera with me at all times. I had a Home Depot load a few weeks ago that would have made a good shot.

I just think our Mazda5 is getting short-changed in the cargo capacity reports.

 

S

starlightmica

Member

:

2007 Mazda5 Sport

• Jun 24, 2007

• #4

Consumer Reports got 39 cu ft, similar to coolmazda5's method but using an expandable metal frame and then measuring the volume of the frame.

I'm not sure what the VDA method (volume displacement analysis?) is, but these are the numbers via VDA on both the Mazda UK and HK sites:
behind 1st row: 857 liters = 30.24 cu ft
behind 2nd row: 426 liters = 15 cu ft
behind 3rd row: 112 liters = 3.96 cu ft

 

P

Prodigy

G15M-R guru

:

'02 protege LX, (3, yes 3) '99 protege ES', '90 Miata, '89 240sx

• Jun 24, 2007

• #5

Time to get the weather balloon.

 

S

starlightmica

Member

:

2007 Mazda5 Sport

• Jun 25, 2007

• #6

Had to Google that one - cute.

It's probably this: http://www.vda.de

 

5

5phreak

Member

:

2007 5 Touring Whitewater Pearl

• Jun 29, 2007

• #7

this is my regular cargo load and main reason for buying the 5

 

Attachments

• 
  DSCN1735 post.jpg

  128.5 KB · Views: 307
• 
  DSCN173 post7.JPG

  154.1 KB · Views: 304

C

coolmazda5

Member

Contributor

:

2008 Mazda5 5MT Sport w/ Popular Package

• Jul 27, 2007

• #8

Mazda5 vs. E-150 Comparison

Prodigy said:

Time to get the weather balloon.

Click to expand...

LOL, Well Prodigy, you may actually be not that far from the idea (lol2)

Once again, when I thought I've seen it all for Mazda5 cargo space comparisons, I came across this one the other day.

http://www.newcars.com/mazda/mazda5/reviews/ford-e150.html

My only question is: Does the E-150 offer a 5MT by any chance?

 

B

bulwnkl

:

'15 6, '06 5

• Jul 27, 2007

• #9

Cubic footage (like interior volume) measurements are done a specific way and are not the same as you'd get by filling the interior with water or just measuring and calculating things. Could there be much difference with the middle seats all the way back vs. all the way forward? I don't know the measurement protocol so I don't know.

 

M

monsta

Member

Contributor

:

06 5 Touring, 07 Sport

• Jul 30, 2007

• #10

coolmazda5 said:

Once again, when I thought I've seen it all for Mazda5 cargo space comparisons, I came across this one the other day.

http://www.newcars.com/mazda/mazda5/reviews/ford-e150.html

Click to expand...

(lol)(lol)(lol)(lol) That guy (the one in the link...nigel or something) is a fuggin idiot! I wonder why he has so many different and stupid car comparos!? (uhm) If he's serious then he deserves this --> (wedge)

 

D

DE31

In search for a life.

:

Pee 2+3

• Jul 30, 2007

• #11

http://www.newcars.com/mitsubishi/lancerevolution/reviews/buick-lucerne.html

evo good turning radius? BAHAHAHA

 

0

07MZ5SA

Member

:

2007 Mazda 5

• Jul 30, 2007

• #12

monsta said:

(lol)(lol)(lol)(lol) That guy (the one in the link...nigel or something) is a fuggin idiot! I wonder why he has so many different and stupid car comparos!? (uhm) If he's serious then he deserves this --> (wedge)

Click to expand...

That's comparing apples and melons. Might as well compare Tacoma with Hino 268.

Even pic for E-150 is wrong. Current generation E-150 is only available in short box.