The unreliable Mazda ?

There's your answer, unob. What's the one common factor with all of those cars that have had major problems by 120k?

You, bro.

Considering I bought some of them at the past 120K mile mark and the owner who sold was honest about having replaced said parts at/before then, your theory falls apart.
 
Yep. I’d have to think someone is driving vehicles beyond their limits if they cannot get 120k from them.

Considering I've gotten 82K miles and counting on my OEM CX5 brake-pads, and got 149K miles out of my T56 manual transmission in my WS.6....I disagree.
 
So you have a data "set" of 2 and this defines how reliable the entire brand is? Uh, no, not by a long shot. That's like saying "My uncle smoked cigarettes and lived to be 90, so smoking does NOT mean you will shorten your life."

So I guess I should not share my experience with Toyota. When people ask me what car to buy. I say buy what you want. Not what other people want you to buy. You will not be happy driving someone else's favorite car.
 
The Stelvio is pushing $85,000 so it's not cheap. Also, the reliability of Alfa Romeo is not the greatest. C&D tested a Stelvio and the moonroof motor busted and wouldn't close. Alfa is owned by Fiat and Fiat is not known for long term reliability.

The Stelvio is a nice vehicle and fast but inexpensive and reliable, it is not.
 
Last edited:
Not sure how you can say that.
US News:
"When it comes to handling, the CX-5 will take the Pepsi challenge against any compact SUV. This Mazda has accurate steering and is one of the most agile SUVs in any class, making it incredibly engaging to drive."

Car & Driver:
"Mazda blends sports-car know-how into every model, and the 10Best-winning CX-5 is no exception. Sharp steering and a poised chassis make it an enthusiast’s pick"

Edmunds:
"Simply a crisper and more satisfying crossover to drive than rivals such as the Honda CR-V and the Toyota RAV4"

MotorTrend:
"Its handling chops continued to impress where it felt right at home on winding roads and didn’t exhibit much body roll."

Autoweek:
"Mazda's CX-5 may mimic the enormous population of small crossovers on sale today, but from behind the wheel the brand's trademark friskiness is immediately noticeable. It's great for the driving enthusiasts among us"

Look... I'm not even saying it's true, but to say Mazda has no 'niche'?!? I think you're mistaken.


Good point, however I just believe the RAV4 will get a significant change in terms of its handling once we start seeing the reviews come in. I doubt they're not going to significantly improve the handling of the RAV4 considering they are likely going to give it a significant increase in power(at least by CUV standard) and give it a much better transmission than the outgoing model.
 
Good point, however I just believe the RAV4 will get a significant change in terms of its handling once we start seeing the reviews come in. I doubt they're not going to significantly improve the handling of the RAV4 considering they are likely going to give it a significant increase in power(at least by CUV standard) and give it a much better transmission than the outgoing model.

and real torque vectoring, etc.
 
Good point, however I just believe the RAV4 will get a significant change in terms of its handling once we start seeing the reviews come in. I doubt they're not going to significantly improve the handling of the RAV4 considering they are likely going to give it a significant increase in power(at least by CUV standard) and give it a much better transmission than the outgoing model.
and real torque vectoring, etc.
To me, I like the latter on Toyota's new Dynamic Torque Vectoring AWD with Rear Driveline Disconnect.

When AWD isn’t required on long stretches of highway, I was always wondering why we want the drive shaft turning which wastes energy. Now new Toyota RAV4 has done it for better fuel economy with Rear Driveline Disconnect system. The disconnection features the world’s first ratchet-type dog clutches on both the front and rear wheel shafts. These clutches stop the driveshaft’s rotations, thus transmitting the driving force to the front wheels when AWD isn’t required, significantly reducing energy loss, improving fuel efficiency, and reducing rotational vibration making for a smoother ride.

In addition, significant power increase and better fuel economy are achieved by industry-best 40/41% thermal efficiency of its new 2.5L I4 Dynamic Force engine along with new 8-speed auto with torque converter direct lock-up in 2nd~8th gears. IMO the best thing is that more power and better fuel efficiency are not achieved by adding torbos、super chargers、CVTs、cylinder deactivation、or complicated SPCCI.
 
To me, I like the latter on Toyota's new Dynamic Torque Vectoring AWD with Rear Driveline Disconnect.

Wtf Fanboi!?! Have you driven it yet? What if it sucks? I love how you assume it's going to be AWESOME. You're a Toyoptimist, aren't you? Just made that up. It's good right? Bwahahahaha
:D
 
Wtf Fanboi!?! Have you driven it yet? What if it sucks? I love how you assume it's going to be AWESOME. You're a Toyoptimist, aren't you? Just made that up. It's good right? Bwahahahaha
:D
Use common sense making judgement. I've been experiencing long rear drive shaft vibration issues since my 1987 VW Vanagon Syncro days. Why we keep that long and heavy drive shaft to rear differential turning all the time even if we don't need it? Adding a couple of clutches controlling rear drive shaft is not problematic to me like adding spark-plug ignition mixing with compression ignition and a super charger like Mazda did to SPCCI.

Besides, I've been telling friends and family who are interested in Lexis NX that it has turbo which I don't recommend. But their response has always been that they trust Toyota's quality. In fact, they said the only turbo vehicle they would buy is from Toyota!
 
The Stelvio is pushing $85,000 so it's not cheap. Also, the reliability of Alfa Romeo is not the greatest. C&D tested a Stelvio and the moonroof motor busted and wouldn't close. Alfa is owned by Fiat and Fiat is not known for long term reliability.

The Stelvio is a nice vehicle and fast but inexpensive and reliable, it is not.

They start at 41k. For that you still get well over 300hp in an SUV made by Ferrari. No it's not inexpensive and reliable, but it's a target to shoot for, and a damn nice one. You can bet every other manufacturer is paying attention to that car.
I learned how to drive in an Alfa Romeo Spider. My mom drove that thing for decades and it never left her stranded. They're not ALL lemons. :)
 
You're just like my wife: $3.99 is $3 dollars.
The Stelvio starts at $42K. $41,995 is $42.
It gets worse. Go to the site: Starting at $42995. Click Build.
$43,440.
Wait, what? Click summary: $1245 destination charge.
$100 for Android Auto.
$100 for Apple Car Play.
What the? It didn't let me choose those!?
 
Last edited:
Old Rav4 isn't well thought of by the UK car mags, and our offerings give poor power and performance, but I'll look at the Rav4 again when we get the new version, I have a local dealer so it would be more convenient.

However the worst handling car I've ever owned was the only Toyota I ever had. It was well made refined, but had massive understeer, I got shut and bought a Nissan after that which for handling was on a different planet. And cheaper.

In fact I've had 4 Nissans, but only one Toyota, and one Honda, Carina2 and Accord.

As for any Alfa, unless they have changed the ones I looked had showed poor build and trim falling off. Poor sellers in the UK.
 
Back