And heated seats. These should always be buttons, not something like the Jeep that I need to hunt for in menus.
Agree! Why they the seats and the steering wheel heater makes no sense to me.
And heated seats. These should always be buttons, not something like the Jeep that I need to hunt for in menus.
I'd be more receptive to using a touch screen if A) the screen(s) were closer to the steering wheel, ideally with the functions/buttons in my immediate FOV, and B) if they provided haptic feedback.
View attachment 220082
Pardon the crude paintjob.. I would hope that actual implementation would look and perform a million times better (vertical adjustment, power tilt/telescopic adjustment, integrate back up cams or cross-traffic cams into the screens, etc.). Could come pre-programmed with a default setup that includes radio/audio and HVAC controls, plus cruise control. But it could also be configured by the driver to display other information as well, like engine and oil temps, boost pressure (if applicable), etc.
Maybe I'm just crazy lol
Its odd that the guy says the Mazdas engine sound is unpleasant (he said the same about the Volvo), I dont find that to be the case at all, and Ive never seen another reviewer say it either, although most say it can get a little loud under steep acceleration, which is true.
It is funny how Mazda got dinged for having too simple of a cabin. I also hate those iPad like computer devices but that might be my age. I personally like the look of the XC40, but 10K is a lot of money!
Guess I'm old school as well, but I like knobs, switches, and tactile buttons; touch screen not so much.
I feel that Mazda got it right with the CX-5 interior. I prefer that *simple* layout and you know what in 10 years it will still look good.
That's a ton of same-color. Looks very cheap. I'm sure it's quality feeling, but when I see that it reminds me of the "build your car" app on most dealer/brand sites how the base model starts before you begin adding packages or Touring model, etc.
Simple is absolutely fine, but it must be executed with elegance, a'la E92 M3.
I just pulled that pic off Google. It's probably a GT or Touring trim. Nicer interiors can be had by upgrading to GT Reserve and Signature trims.
Lol. It's definitely one of BMW's more tolerable interiors, but BMW interiors have always been one of the weaknesses of the brand IMO.
Also,
E92 Coupe, "a ton of same color"
E92 M3, "executed with elegance"
Basically, your idea of "elegance" is swapping out the only premium looking bits of the interior for some boyracer red dash/console pieces and seats. Got it.
For the record, I'm not against sporty interior trims like this. I just wouldn't class them as a luxurious interior.
To me the Mazda interiors actually look more German lol. I say that as a good thing as I generally like Audi, BMW, VW ect interiors as they are usually very clean and logically laid out. Function over form if you want to look at it that way.
Is it odd that they are comparing the XC40 to the CX5? The XC40 is a subcompact, more in line with the X1, Q3, GLA class.
Shouldn't they be comparing the XC60 to the CX5 because they have almost identical passenger and cargo room.
No, my idea of elegance is the fact that the M3's interior (the first one) has everything you need, nothing you don't, and it's laid out in a very "German" way. The M3 is not the M5 or M6. The interior speaks to this. Don't forget where the M3 came from.
I feel that Mazda got it right with the CX-5 interior. I prefer that *simple* layout and you know what in 10 years it will still look good.