CX-70 will have same exterior dimensions as CX-90

[dwswager]

A couple of people on Reddit who mention they work for Mazda dealers in Canada posted what they know on the CX-70. It looks like the US Youtube dealer was correct and the CX-70 will be the same size as the CX-90 with a more sporty design and 2-rows.

Reddit - Dive into anything

www.reddit.com

So what they are saying is Mazda will screw up the north American market again. If they produce a 2-row full-size (minivan sized at 202") and 5000lb it will not garner lots of new sales and will cannibalize some CX-90 sales. It will also leave a hole in their lineup in the midsize at least since 2012 when the CX-7 was cancelled. If they release a 2nd fullsize SUV, I will be off to other brands to get the midsize 2-row I am looking to buy.

 

[MichalP]

2 more weeks and we are going to know for sure but maybe there is something lost in translation. Maybe they meant: the same platform with the same features like cx-90 - so it means the same engine choices and similar set up like CX-90 with MHEV and PHEV but still dimensions will be different in the end.

I also cannot believe that literally it's going to be the exact copy of the CX-90 with only different seat configuration. It does not make any sense.

 

[chickdr]

It makes zero sense the CX-70 would be the same length as the CX-90. If the CX-60 is shorter than the CX-80, it would follow that the CX-70 follows the same formula (i.e. a wider CX-60). I guess we will know at the end of the month....

 

[markfm]

Just a slightly wider CX-60, same length? CX-50...
CX-50: 186″ L x 76″ W x 64″ H
CX-60: 186.8" L x 74.4" W x 66.1" H

If Mazda comes in with literally just a slightly wider CX-60 as their CX-70, they're really going to just be throwing $ away. They need to come in with something up in that 194" +/- L zone, to play with the other medium size 2 row SUVs available in the US. It's the BMW X5, Lexus RX-350,... zone, People who want comfortable seating for 5, decent cargo capacity, premium styling, decent performance.

EDIT: Different capacity measurement methods are used in the US vs. Europe, so the following in inaccurate: The CX-60 cargo capacity is woefully inadequate by US medium size SUV standards,...

 

[cxha]

Mazda could slice off some of that big-ass rear end on the 90 yielding the same long wheelbase for more comfort, and a short rear overhang for better aesthetics and handling while still offering a good amount of interior space for their large-bodied North American clientele.

 

[MichalP]

Just a slightly wider CX-60, same length? CX-50...
CX-50: 186″ L x 76″ W x 64″ H
CX-60: 186.8" L x 74.4" W x 66.1" H

The CX-60 cargo capacity is woefully inadequate by US medium size SUV standards, at 20 cubic feet seats up, 40 down (less than a CX-30). The CX-50 has 50% more cargo space - engine orientation cuts into the available cabin space, so a longer vehicle is needed to keep things up in that 30/60 cubic foot zone.

Just to clarify. In Europe they do measure trunk capacity in different way. There is no way that CX-60 has less cargo space than CX-30. Even in Liters, the measurement is going to be different because they do not measure all the way to the roof. Based on dimensions provided in one of the European reviews the trunk space is similar to 1st gen CX-5, so it might be slightly more than CX-50.

Anyway I expect that, no matter what, CX-70 will have significantly more cargo space than CX-50.

 

[Dimcorner]

CX5 Australia cargo space: 438L
CX60 Australia cargo space: 570L
CX5 US cargo space: 29.1cubic ft (about 820L!!!)

I don't know how you almost double the cargo space in the US for the same car but hey that means the CX60 is about 25% more cargo room than the cx-5

 

[chickdr]

CX5 Australia cargo space: 438L
CX60 Australia cargo space: 570L
CX5 US cargo space: 29.1cubic ft (about 820L!!!)

I don't know how you almost double the cargo space in the US for the same car but hey that means the CX60 is about 25% more cargo room than the cx-5

I would love to know how these measurements were taken. A cubic liter is a cubic liter no mater where you are. The thing about stopping at the top of the rear seats could explain it. I assume they don't want people blocking the rearview with stuff in back?

 

[MichalP]

There is no such a thing like cubic liter. 1 liter equals 1000cm3 (1000 cubic cm) but it does not have to be necessary a square block. I think historically in Europe they measure trunk space max to the top of the 2nd row backrest, to make it more comparable to sedan's trunk space. However also in some countries they only measure the number of liters in rectangular block that can fit in the trunk - ignoring all the extra space in all nooks and crannies. When in USA and Canada it's always the whole space all the way to the roof top. That's why all the boxy SUVs have such an impressive trunk volume although it's only usable in a very specific circumstances.

Anyway CX 60 has already more cargo space than current CX-5 (based on previous post), so most likely CX 70 will have even more space and hopefully will have wider trunk space.

 

[dwswager]

I would love to know how these measurements were taken. A cubic liter is a cubic liter no mater where you are. The thing about stopping at the top of the rear seats could explain it. I assume they don't want people blocking the rearview with stuff in back?

There are 2 methods generall used to calculate cargo space. VDA uses 1litre blocks and it is how many of those blocks fit in the cargo area. The SAE method uses smaller objects which can fill odd-shaped spaces like little side cubbies. There is some merit to both. Obviously, suitcases can't fit in those odd-shaped spaces, but other things can boosting all over hauling capacity. The opening size also matters.

There used to be a woman in San Diego Miata club that made soft-sided luggage that perfectly fit the trunk of each generation of Miata. The 5-piece ND luggage set shown.

 

[dwswager]

2 more weeks and we are going to know for sure but maybe there is something lost in translation. Maybe they meant: the same platform with the same features like cx-90 - so it means the same engine choices and similar set up like CX-90 with MHEV and PHEV but still dimensions will be different in the end.

I also cannot believe that literally it's going to be the exact copy of the CX-90 with only different seat configuration. It does not make any sense.

The CX-70 was always going to get the same powertrains as the CX-90.

Supposedly, the CX-70 will get better, more sporty styling than the stick up the rear CX-90 and blackout trim pieces instead of all chrome. Seems like it will have a shorter wheel base which indicates shorter overall length, but dealers maintain that it is the same physical size overall as the CX-90. January 30th will be the day I either plan to test drive a CX-70 or order a BMW X5. BMW is not stupid enough to release a 2-row X7 and call it an X5. We will see if Mazda is that stupid.

 

[dwswager]

BTW, if the CX-70 turns out to be a MIDSIZE (190-195") and not a fullsize, Mazda's marketing head should be fired. Their dealers have been told and telling customers it is the same physical size as a CX-90 and there are not many people like me able or willing to wait to see the truth. Lots of potential buyers have moved on because of the lack of actual information from Mazda. There are too many options out there to be this cheeky about it.

 

[MichalP]

I hope they are going to keep 40-20-40 2nd row split, like in CX-5 and CX-60. The best idea in terms of preserving seats availability.

 

[markfm]

My current car has that kind of split, I really like it. Able to carry 2x boards running down the middle, and still have 2 passengers in the back.

 

[dougal]

BTW, if the CX-70 turns out to be a MIDSIZE (190-195") and not a fullsize, Mazda's marketing head should be fired. Their dealers have been told and telling customers it is the same physical size as a CX-90 and there are not many people like me able or willing to wait to see the truth. Lots of potential buyers have moved on because of the lack of actual information from Mazda. There are too many options out there to be this cheeky about it.

Dealers are saying things to get you to buy a car they have on the lot. My dealer has told me the same thing - CX-70 is the same thing as the CX-90 but with two rows. The front and second row are identical to the CX-90 but the rear cargo area is smaller.

I believe they are saying that because they are trying to push the CX90 on people.

 

[dwswager]

Dealers are saying things to get you to buy a car they have on the lot. My dealer has told me the same thing - CX-70 is the same thing as the CX-90 but with two rows. The front and second row are identical to the CX-90 but the rear cargo area is smaller.

I believe they are saying that because they are trying to push the CX90 on people.

Hadn't considered the dealers were stupid morons, but OK.

Here is the thing. Every manufacturer starts somewhere with the models they have and then have to work to get to where they should be. Acura has 2 models the RDX and MDX so both are "tweeners" sitting at the high/low end of two sizes. The RDX is 187" and the MDX is 197" Then they decided to prioritize passenger space figuring when people needed big cargo there likely would not be 5 passengers so the back seat(s) could go down. Genesis did the same.

Mazda was forced to replace the CX-3 because it was too small so they did the CX-30. They were planning 3 SUVs (CX-50, 70 and 90). We have the 50 and 90. How hard is it to figure out where the 70 should sit in the range? Personally, one would believe the 50 was the replacement for an aging CX-5 which is the only logical reason the 50 is basically the same size as the CX-5. Problem was that CX-5 sold more than their entire lineup in the U.S. Why muck with that success?

 

[GTA-CX9]

BTW, if the CX-70 turns out to be a MIDSIZE (190-195") and not a fullsize, Mazda's marketing head should be fired. Their dealers have been told and telling customers it is the same physical size as a CX-90 and there are not many people like me able or willing to wait to see the truth. Lots of potential buyers have moved on because of the lack of actual information from Mazda. There are too many options out there to be this cheeky about it.

Absolutely. Clarify this, it's not hard. Company almost seems to like leaving us hanging. Maybe they like the chatter? Corporate decisions don't always follow logic.

 

[chickdr]

We are only about 10 days out from knowing exactly what we get with the CX-70...

 

[youri]

Just Like the Hyundai line up: Tucson, Santa Fe, Palissade.

CX-50 is in the same class as the CX-5.

 

[hoodlum]

It looks like the dealers were shown a picture of the CX-70. I envision a lot of complaining once the CX-70 is announced.

Reddit - Dive into anything

www.reddit.com

From what I remember of the picture, the front bumper had larger air intakes at the lower corners of the bumper than the 90 does. Roofline will be the same as the body is going to be the same. However, changes to bumpers, trim, and wheel styling/colour can have a noticeable effect on the overall vehicle. Also, the interior will have a red leather option instead of the tan leather of the 90.