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

[dwswager]

Given that an X5 comparably equipped to top of line CX-70 is over $15,000 more (around $62,000 vs. around $77,000) it damn well better not involve any “settling”! And yet it does involve settling for the extra money-inferior space, inferior safety performance, and BMW has this obsession with getting rid of almost all physical controls in the interior. And what is that stupid little nub instead of a shifter?!?! Fortunately, Mazda hasn’t given in to that stupidity. The beloved BMW of old is long gone! Fail!

Value is an opinion and there are no wrong opinions. I think the steering feel of a CX-90 is better than the X5. But the B58 motor and 8sp ZF transmission completely destroys the Mazda. I am an analog guage and control guy. Based on our experience with the new iDrive8 LCI platform of the 2024 X5 when I buy the M340i it will either be a new LCI or a used pre LCI 2023.

It took my wife less than 30s to feel the difference between the BMW and all the Japanese brands. Her words were "it is my favorite; it feels like more car. Of course, it is the most expensive one we have driven." I am not settling for anything with the X5. I am getting a more pleasant to drive, more functional interior volume and better overall vehicle, but am paying more money for it. She is a woman not affraid to put the hammer down. Wait till I show her launch control.

 

[ataraxia]

It's 5 hours later, no more adjustments shown on MazdaUSA.

I really can't figure out what their market is.
-If they wanted to play against the X5, the "I really want a high HP, I6" crowd, they really should have bumped the engine specs (like BMW did), and the BMW X5 sales volume is < 60K units/year in NA. (trying to scavenge some sales from a fairly small niche).

-If they wanted to compete against a Lexus RX (twice the BMW X5 sales volume, a much larger group to cross-shop), they needed to be smaller/lighter (X5 length IMO would have worked great), or boosted HP/torque for both base and S engines, or had a multi-K lower price to get a Turbo S Premium or Premium+ a couple K below the equivalent RX trims. Otherwise it's a "why bother", particularly as the RX, as a Gen 5 vehicle, simply does what it does well.

Frankly, having a 7K price differential to get to the S is a whoops to me. If they really wanted good sales they should have had the Turbo S versions priced much closer to the Turbo numbers, maybe a 2 - 3 K upgrade option vs. 7K (or else just drop the lower HP engine offering entirely).

Doing a third-row delete may have been a cheap thing on their end, but I wouldn't be surprised if the cheap way out ends up matched by bad sales volume (and/or scavenging sales from their own CX-90, hardly a win-win - they should be trying to grow market share, not cannibalize themselves).

I wish Mazda all the best, but like the X5 comment above, I'm pretty much getting pushed back to the RX. I do like the cargo capacity, but that by itself is likely a relatively small group of buyers.

I'd guess that virtually no one who went out looking at a BMW X5 is going to cross-shop a CX70/90. The Lexus crowd is much more likely to *maybe* cross-shop a Mazda.

Mazda still seems to be that kid who doesn't know what he wants to be when he grows up - except that he's 19 now and lagging behind everyone else who figured it out. I don't see how this works in their favor, long-term.

So close...

 

[N7turbo]

Doing a third-row delete may have been a cheap thing on their end, but I wouldn't be surprised if the cheap way out ends up matched by bad sales volume (and/or scavenging sales from their own CX-90, hardly a win-win - they should be trying to grow market share, not cannibalize themselves).

I agree but with the way Mazda has invested in manufacturing technology and configured their plants to be modular, I don't think they are hurt as much by cannibalization.

 

[ceric]

Mazda needs to invite more shoppers into their showrooms.
Many people do not put Mazda on their shopping lists.

I had two colleagues asking me for advices on small SUVs they were shopping.
They had Honda and Toyota on their radars.
I told them to give Mazda a chance.
They both bought CX-5 after test-drives...
"Better overall package and value", they said.

 

[dwswager]

I'd guess that virtually no one who went out looking at a BMW X5 is going to cross-shop a CX70/90. The Lexus crowd is much more likely to *maybe* cross-shop a Mazda.

Mazda still seems to be that kid who doesn't know what he wants to be when he grows up - except that he's 19 now and lagging behind everyone else who figured it out. I don't see how this works in their favor, long-term.

So close...

It is true that nobody going after a BMW X5, is likely to consider a Mazda. But if you are looking for a 6-cylinder, rear wheel drive, then the CX-90 pops up on the RADAR with the BMWs. Almost everything in the midsize and down is 4 cylinder, front wheel drive though you do find some V6, Front wheel drives as well.

I bought a X5 40i xDrive for the Turbo inline 6 (B58) with 375HP/384ftlb and rear biased all wheel drive. I did not want the 4 cylinder BMW nor the V8. When my wife considered the X3 I told she could not have the 30i (4 cylinder) and would have to get the M40i with the turbo inline 6 (B58).

And yes, Mazda can't figure out what they want to be. That is what is goofing them. They could not figure out that an upmarket midsize CX-70 was not going to compete with the down market compact CX-50.

 

[N7turbo]

It is true that nobody going after a BMW X5, is likely to consider a Mazda. But if you are looking for a 6-cylinder, rear wheel drive, then the CX-90 pops up on the RADAR with the BMWs. Almost everything in the midsize and down is 4 cylinder, front wheel drive though you do find some V6, Front wheel drives as well.

That's too bad people would overlook the Mazda inline 4's because they were designed to replace V6's with the turbo making just as much power, giving you that same driveability (or better).

 

[EWL5]

Given that an X5 comparably equipped to top of line CX-70 is over $15,000 more (around $62,000 vs. around $77,000) it damn well better not involve any “settling”! And yet it does involve settling for the extra money-inferior space, inferior safety performance, and BMW has this obsession with getting rid of almost all physical controls in the interior. And what is that stupid little nub instead of a shifter?!?! Fortunately, Mazda hasn’t given in to that stupidity. The beloved BMW of old is long gone! Fail!

I'm with you on the physical controls but every in the industry is headed in that direction (anyone ever own a Honda or Acura lately?). My DD is a 4-cylinder X3 and my wife's is a GLS450. For a NY minute (and the reason I joined Mazdas247 last year), we had considered the brand-new CX90 as the value proposition to replace our aging GL450. It being the first year of a new model and the local Mazda dealer asking for $5k ADM had us running back to Mercedes!

I've attached the latest Owner Satisfaction rankings by Consumer Reports. I feel the rankings are fair for the German brands I own. How do you folks feel about Mazda being 17th?

Those of you converting to BMW, see you around the other forums!

 

[Muggs1]

I'm with you on the physical controls but every in the industry is headed in that direction (anyone ever own a Honda or Acura lately?). My DD is a 4-cylinder X3 and my wife's is a GLS450. For a NY minute (and the reason I joined Mazdas247 last year), we had considered the brand-new CX90 as the value proposition to replace our aging GL450. It being the first year of a new model and the local Mazda dealer asking for $5k ADM had us running back to Mercedes!

I've attached the latest Owner Satisfaction rankings by Consumer Reports. I feel the rankings are fair for the German brands I own. How do you folks feel about Mazda being 17th?

Those of you converting to BMW, see you around the other forums!
View attachment 326187

Having Rivian in the first place tells you everything that you need to know about this list. lol.

 

[EWL5]

Having Rivian in the first place tells you everything that you need to know about this list. lol.

It's "Owner Satisfaction" which is completely subjective. I don't have any interest in EVs but the only EV maker who gets a bad rep is really Tesla. What does Rivian get wrong?

 

[EWL5]

Mazda saw this video last year and said "a same size CX70 would do just as well in this drag race"!

2024 Mazda CX-90 vs BMW X5 vs Mercedes GLE // DRAG & ROLL RACE (+ Surprise Contender)

The 2024 Mazda CX-90 Signature (as tested $66,078 in Canada, $61,920 in the US (Turbo S Premium Plus)) has some very stiff competition within the turbocharge...

www.youtube.com

 

[dwswager]

Mazda saw this video last year and said "a same size CX70 would do just as well in this drag race"!

2024 Mazda CX-90 vs BMW X5 vs Mercedes GLE // DRAG & ROLL RACE (+ Surprise Contender)

The 2024 Mazda CX-90 Signature (as tested $66,078 in Canada, $61,920 in the US (Turbo S Premium Plus)) has some very stiff competition within the turbocharge...

www.youtube.com

And that was when the X5 B58 had only 335hp/330ftlb and now in BB58B30M2 form it puts out 375HP/384ftlb! Not that people are drag racing their SUVs or nothing!

 

[dwswager]

That's too bad people would overlook the Mazda inline 4's because they were designed to replace V6's with the turbo making just as much power, giving you that same driveability (or better).

The 2.5T is a good motor and Mazda has done a great job getting torque much sooner in the rpm band than one would expect. But it is still a 4 cylinder with the need to rev hard and with the vibration issues. An inline 6 is just so much smoother because of the piston firing sequence is perfectly balanced. They are more civilized, smoother, sound better and are the better alternative for a premium vehicle.

Comparing the M340i with the C43 AMG. The C43 has F1technology, but is saddled with a 4 cylinder motor. It gets its butt smoked and the transmission constantly is hunting for the correct gear because the hp/tq bands are short.

 

[EWL5]

The 2.5T is a good motor and Mazda has done a great job getting torque much sooner in the rpm band than one would expect. But it is still a 4 cylinder with the need to rev hard and with the vibration issues. An inline 6 is just so much smoother because of the piston firing sequence is perfectly balanced. They are more civilized, smoother, sound better and are the better alternative for a premium vehicle.

Comparing the M340i with the C43 AMG. The C43 has F1technology, but is saddled with a 4 cylinder motor. It gets its butt smoked and the transmission constantly is hunting for the correct gear because the hp/tq bands are short.

"AMG" is no longer the same. If I were pining for one, I'd definitely get the old-school models and not the current crap they put out!

 

[markfm]

The 2.5T is a good motor and Mazda has done a great job getting torque much sooner in the rpm band than one would expect. But it is still a 4 cylinder with the need to rev hard and with the vibration issues. An inline 6 is just so much smoother because of the piston firing sequence is perfectly balanced. They are more civilized, smoother, sound better and are the better alternative for a premium vehicle.

Comparing the M340i with the C43 AMG. The C43 has F1technology, but is saddled with a 4 cylinder motor. It gets its butt smoked and the transmission constantly is hunting for the correct gear because the hp/tq bands are short.

I totally agree with that.

In Lexus' case they had a very smooth, reliable, V6 since initial launch in the late 90s, going from 3.0 to 3.3 to 3.5l (hence the designations RX-300/330/350).

It was never performance tuned, but a very comfortable drive.

For Gen 5, '23 introduction, they switched the RX "350" to a 2.5l I4 Turbo. Nominally slightly better mileage, but only about 8%. It's still a decent engine, but nowhere near the solidity of the old V6. Long-time RX drivers, who know what the V6 is like, complain consistently about the 2.5l Turbo just not being as good a ride as the V6.

Of course, they didn't bother a rebadge to the "RX 250"

Rubbing salt in, Lexus still has a 3.5l V6 in the 2024 ES 350 sedan series.

 

[GTEyes]

I did a quick and crude trim of the rear of the 70 and it's interesting how just chopping off a few inches from that rear end made such a visual difference to me.

 

[markfm]

Nice job. I'd thought that sliding the rear axle forward 5", so the wheel well is tucked closer to the 2nd row seat backs would have been good, but your approach would have been even simpler.

Ahh, well, shoulda/coulda/woulda...

(The long wheelbase never bothered me, as the turning circle on the 70/90 is decent, matching other SUV with shorter WB.)

 

[GTEyes]

Nice job. I'd thought that sliding the rear axle forward 5", so the wheel well is tucked closer to the 2nd row seat backs would have been good, but your approach would have been even simpler.

Ahh, well, shoulda/coulda/woulda...

(The long wheelbase never bothered me, as the turning circle on the 70/90 is decent, matching other SUV with shorter WB.)

That approach works well, too!

 

[markfm]

It would have worked, though what you did would likely have been lower cost to implement, simplify any re-certification.

(Mazda should have asked you how to shorten the vehicle at minimal cost.)

 

[sm1ke]

The only issue I have with this is how close the taillight is to the rear window now. Looks unnatural. But, this could also be solved by reintroducing a Hofmeister kink to the rear window, which would also make the car look a bit more sporty.

 

[Muggs1]

That approach works well, too!

View attachment 326194

Thats great sm1ke! Where can I put a deposit for this ? . Somebody should post this on Mazda official channels