Your first bullet point wasWhat a mess they have compared to the CX-5:
Your closing sentence in your starting post wasAn engine block recall
How are Mazda CX-5 engine issues off-topic?Kinda puts things into perspective and also makes me a little skeptical of this Mazda-Toyota partnership.
Exactly. Software manipulation to minimze the occurrences of a mechanical failure that would be astronomically expensive to permanently "fix" properly via correct mechanical design. They like every other institution known to man are playing the odds. The software band-aid applied merely tilts the odds closer to 'in their favor'.More like masked it. Highly doubt a 'software' fix is going to fix it.
Masking it by treating a symptom w/o providing the cure. Broken record...I've been forced to attempt to fix mechanical design failures countless times over the past decades via controls and software after the fact when truly fixing problems was far too costly after the fact. It rarely ends well. Mask one problem, cause or irritate another issue. Why is this so difficult to comprehend? This is nothing new. New to the screwed up world of automotive automation, but nothing new at all in industry.Regarding "masking" the problem, I'm not enough of a gear-head to agree or disagree. But how do you "mask" such a thing? The rocker arm either stays on or it doesn't...there's no turning up the stereo and singing loudly when it falls off.
Big 'if', and yes, time will tell. Who knows what changes 100k miles on the engine will produce. The software weenies aren't thinking that far down the road. Not very comforting I must say. The problem that still exists is that there isn't anything mechanical preventing the rockers arms from falling off, period. Software will never be a 'proper' change to that fact. And further, I seriously doubt their software band-aid could ever possibly take in to account "all" plausible exceptions to the oil and oil pressure control of the CD as designed and implemented. They've simply minimized their exposure... by creating your "rare occasions" scenario. Again, not very comforting.What problem might still exists? I'm sure we would all like to see a physical attachment point for the rocker arm, but if Mazda has arrived at the proper oil pressure to keep it attached under "all" circumstances. I guess time will tell. Perhaps there still are rare conditions under which it might fall away...they obviously failed to foresee everything the first time around. I don't know.
My hero...and then maybe the manufacturers can get back to focusing on important car 'stuff'...ya know, like engine blocks and gas tanks aye?IMO, people need to get over complaining about the Mazda infotainment. It’s intuitive but can be slow. This is a car, not a computer for playing video games.
I tend to agree. The 2.5L N/A with CD is still a relatively new engine, so I would say that it's too early to say that it is the ticking time bomb that some people seem to think it is. CD tech may be flawed to begin with, but until I start seeing drivetrain failures related to CD post-recall, I would still consider the CX-5 N/A as a viable option. My $0.02.Once I see frequent and consistent posts about failed 2018+ engines, then I'll worry.
At this point there seems to be no more likelihood a 2.5L CD engine will fail then the previous 2.5L non-CD.
Avalon is a car I want to like. Toyota just doesn't want me to. (For that matter, maxima is the same...if either had AWD it would help the cause).I really dislike the styling on the RAV. This is not a vehicle you look back at when you park it. And the new Avalon is one of the worst looking designs on the road currently... yes, even in TRD spec!
That’s why Toyota is the best as long as quality and reliability wise. Toyota and Lexus have been ranked mostly no. 1 and no. 2 consistently in past 30+ years on Consumer Reports’ reliability ranking, while Mazda’s is up and down, recently went no.12 in 2017.Bad news for Mazda, latest CR pegs Mazda as 4th in reliability for 2020, Subaru leaped to 3rd.
Easy to hold the reliability crown when there isn't a lot that changes.That’s why Toyota is the best as long as quality and reliability wise. Toyota and Lexus have been ranked mostly no. 1 and no. 2 consistently in past 30+ years on Consumer Reports’ reliability ranking, while Mazda’s is up and down, recently went no.12 in 2017.
Actually we should feel lucky that the design team for Toyota is clueless and most of their products are ugly. If Toyota vehicles are half decent on looks like Mazda, then Toyota’s sales would be even better than right now!Easy to hold the reliability crown when there isn't a lot that changes.
IMO, the difference in reliability between 1st place and 4th place isn't big to me. With regard to quality, I think Mazda is doing well in that fight, at least based on the newer gen interiors. They are generally quieter and less squeak-prone than much of the competition. When comparing the CX-5 and the RAV4, the -5 is quieter, offers a better interior, handles better, etc.
Looks are subjective, but I'm just not a fan of some of the RAV4's design cues. For example, that silver RAV4 that Chocolate posted above. What's the black strip on the C-pillar doing there, and why isn't it angled to align with the top window edge? Why are the plastic fender arches separated from the rest of the body cladding by 2 inches? Why are they still using steel wheels and hubcaps?
I totally agree, and Toyota would deserve those sales. But I think the polarizing styling is just a way for them to show that they are "changing", at least on the outside. It's a way to continue using the same well-performing drivetrains. It's smart from a business perspective, just a shame that they can't design an exterior that isn't so polarizing (like the Avalon, or any Lexus with the spindle grille).Actually we should feel lucky that the design team for Toyota is clueless and most of their products are ugly. If Toyota vehicles are half decent on looks like Mazda, then Toyota’s sales would be even better than right now!
I have past the time of getting a good-looking cars, reliability is the most important thing to me now.
CX-9 checked both boxes for me as well.The CX-5 checked both of those boxes for me.
I bought my first brand new car (actually it was a truck) when I was in my mid 30s. Before then it was used, and always for cash. The most I ever paid was $1,000 for a '76 Pontiac Grand Prix Limited Edition: 400 in³ 4 barrel/Turbo 400 tranny, t-tops, electric velour bucket seats. I loved that car.I have past the time of getting a good-looking cars, reliability is the most important thing to me now.
I can’t agree with you on the claim that same drivetrains have been used by Toyota for many years to keep up the reliability. Toyota is one of the first providing a very reliability hybrid drivetrain. They put their first turbo engine on their Lexus NX which has been problem-free. Further, Toyota came out new Dynamic Force 2.0L / 2.5L which has the best thermal efficiency among all ICEs, including Mazda’s SkyActiv-G’s, on the market. The new 8-speed step transmission used on most new Toyota’s are also more advanced and efficient than Mazda’s SkyActiv-Drive 6-speed automatic.I totally agree, and Toyota would deserve those sales. But I think the polarizing styling is just a way for them to show that they are "changing", at least on the outside. It's a way to continue using the same well-performing drivetrains. It's smart from a business perspective, just a shame that they can't design an exterior that isn't so polarizing (like the Avalon, or any Lexus with the spindle grille).
All the new Rav4 have LED reflectors as standard. If you opt for the RAV4 hybrid model, it uses LED projectors.Surfing on autotrader for Rav4's in my area I discovered something funky....confirmed with taking a walk in my company's parking lot with some new Rav4s.....they have halogens. Even worse yet halogen reflectors. The previous gen rav4s had projectors at least.