Mazda 6 sales baffles me..what's wrong?

My family has had a few Mazda's growing up and they have always been great cars. I've had a positive impression of them forever and yet I feel like they are getting much more popular. The new aesthetics are fantastic, amazing gas mileage, and I think they'll only get more popular when people realize what they are. So cheap, and the best quality for the price. I'm thinking about buying mazda stock actually.
 
dagrimey1 said:
All of these posts must be from new Mazda owners who have no clue what the company is about. Mazda makes cars for the car enthusiast not the popular market. Those that appreciate turning radius, handling, acceleration, etc. For those that say Mazda aren't reliable must have never seen a Miata, Protg, or the lowest cost of ownership award they have won numerous times (currently 7 years running).

Sent using Moto Fo Sho Doe
Click to expand...

Necro-post, but eh...

Mazda makes cars that the majority of Americans don't want. People that enjoy driving are few and far between. The notions of "turning radius, handling, acceleration, etc." are lost on most people. That's literally the reason the Camry sells. People want a cheap, long-lasting appliance that will ferry them from point A to point B with minimal fuss. No one wants a "loud" car with a "harsh" suspension that may or may not shift it's own gears (even Mazda's minivan had a manual option. :D). Mazda is a niche car maker. The RX7, the RX8, the MX5, the Mazdaspeed cars... Their focus on the driving enthusiast has always trickled down into all their models. "The soul of a sports car". The 6 is no exception. That's the literal reason I keep buying them. If Mazda made a bigger, heavier, plusher, quieter automobile, more people would buy them.

I wouldn't, though.
 
We Are Ninja said:
Necro-post, but eh...

Mazda makes cars that the majority of Americans don't want. People that enjoy driving are few and far between. The notions of "turning radius, handling, acceleration, etc." are lost on most people. That's literally the reason the Camry sells. People want a cheap, long-lasting appliance that will ferry them from point A to point B with minimal fuss. No one wants a "loud" car with a "harsh" suspension that may or may not shift it's own gears (even Mazda's minivan had a manual option. :D). Mazda is a niche car maker. The RX7, the RX8, the MX5, the Mazdaspeed cars... Their focus on the driving enthusiast has always trickled down into all their models. "The soul of a sports car". The 6 is no exception. That's the literal reason I keep buying them. If Mazda made a bigger, heavier, plusher, quieter automobile, more people would buy them.

I wouldn't, though.
Click to expand...
My point exactly, now if they drop the CX-9 turbo into the new 6 I would be a happy camper and would gladly trade one of my race car in for one. Switching pages but is it me or do all the new cars today resemble the 6? The Maxima, Camry, Etc.

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk
 
Yah, it's amusing to watch car makers walk that "edgy, yet conservative" tightrope. Toyota took a brief walk on the "wild" side with the last-gen Camry (IMO), but immediately went back to playing it safe with the current car. Honda is splicing their cars' DNA with Gundams, apparently. Nissan lost me completely with their last-gen cars, though I don't hate the current Maxima. And Mazda is just being Mazda, LOL.
 
I agree....the Camry.....ho hum, boring and safe styling, grocery getter at best. Honda Accord sport was my second choice but interior only came in black and the CVT sucks. There is also 6 accords at every intersection. I do like the new maxima but the models I like are out of my budget. Its funny how they do walk that "please everyone" line. The 6 has the most aggressive styling in its class IMO. They need to widen the rear end a tad I think and put some more modern looking exaust on it but thats being nit picky. I do believe the front end is much more agro than the rear though.
 
VRCX5 said:
I agree with this. The association with Ford back in the 90's and 00's when they were garbage has tarnished the brand. Slowly I think it's coming back but most people don't know/realize that Ford hasn't had influence for almost a decade. I know I had to get past my previous notions before I just bought my first Mazda in December...
Click to expand...

I disagree with this. As a new Mazda owner I had ZERO idea that Ford ever owned Mazda until I researched Mazda after I decided to consider the CX-5. And to me, an affiliation with Ford at one time was not a bad thing as I had (and pretty much still have) no idea what Mazda cars were like in those days. Apparently it wasn't good according to what I've read here.
 
EvansMazda said:
They are happy riding in their silver toyota and think mazda is still just a rebadged ford
Click to expand...

the only problem is that Ford's are rebadged Mazda's, not the other way around?

I told my dad to buy a mazda 6 back in 2015 for a reason. he would have went with a honda accord if it wasnt for the CVT trans. we will keep buying the mazda 6 in the future.
 
I just bought a soul red Mazda 6 Grand Touring and we love it.

However it's so underpowered. Mazda should offer a turbo for this car, the 227HP / 310 TQ motor from the CX-9 would ideal.

Until they can offer some choices sales will remain like this.
 
Disagree. The engine is not holding sakes back.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
 
7eregrine said:
Disagree. The engine is not holding sakes back.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

We can disagree. I wouldn't have bought it because of the motor but this is what my wife wanted.

Mazda is forcing us to buy 4 cylinder engines when they should offer options.

I actually went down a year (2016 to 2015) just to get the V6 in my CX-9 Grand Touring. I had a 2016 CX-9 that I returned because I refused to pay for a 4 banger in a truck.

Having a base 4 cylinder, 4 cylinder turbo or V6 option (or at least the 4 and 4 turbo) would help sales in my opinion. My 6 with 2.5L is rated at 184HP and most rear wheel HP numbers are in the 142-148HP range. It's so slow for the weight it's pulling.

For gearheads like me the motor can be a deal breaker is all I'm saying. The lack of options can't be helping sales.
 
Retract. Agree. I don't think that's the big thing holding them back but yea, you definitely would get more sales.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
 
jpjr50 said:
I just bought a soul red Mazda 6 Grand Touring and we love it.

However it's so underpowered. Mazda should offer a turbo for this car, the 227HP / 310 TQ motor from the CX-9 would ideal.

Until they can offer some choices sales will remain like this.
Click to expand...

I disagree with this too. The higher-power engine options in the 6's direct competitors make up roughly 10% of their sales. A turbo engine option would not be nearly enough to vault the 6 into the sales territory of the mainstream models in the segment. You might get another 500 6 sales per month. Hardly enough for Mazda to justify the R&D to fit the 2.5t into this car. The current powertrain makes the 6 pretty much the quickest of any of it's direct competitors while delivering among the best fuel economy of them. A complete WIN-WIN.

jpjr50 said:
We can disagree. I wouldn't have bought it because of the motor but this is what my wife wanted.

Mazda is forcing us to buy 4 cylinder engines when they should offer options.

I actually went down a year (2016 to 2015) just to get the V6 in my CX-9 Grand Touring. I had a 2016 CX-9 that I returned because I refused to pay for a 4 banger in a truck.

Having a base 4 cylinder, 4 cylinder turbo or V6 option (or at least the 4 and 4 turbo) would help sales in my opinion. My 6 with 2.5L is rated at 184HP and most rear wheel HP numbers are in the 142-148HP range. It's so slow for the weight it's pulling.

For gearheads like me the motor can be a deal breaker is all I'm saying. The lack of options can't be helping sales.
Click to expand...

Sorry but this seems misguided too. Car and Driver just came out with a crossover comparison including the 2017 CX-9. Despite being the only one of the 5 crossovers in the test without a V6, it was a full second quicker to 60 than 2 of them and yet had the best real world fuel economy in the test. What you may not know is that the 2.5 turbo, and this is pretty common for turbo engines, has roughly 17% more torque than any of the V6's in the test, and max torque comes on at a very low 2,000 rpms versus 4,000 to 5,000 rpm for the typical V6. The general car buying public will eventually get over their phobia of 4 cylinder engines. They're just not quite there yet.
 
I don't think anyone is saying the 4 cylinder is better than the 6 or vice versa. Leave that to the engineers to decided.

What has to be noted is that Mazda has taken motor options off the table for consumers where as the competition has not.

For American car buyers this is not the best direction. We love our big motors and to offer only a tiny motor with no power will deter buyers, I'm one.

I've had CX-9 with a 2.5L turbo (227 / 310) and now the V6 (273 / 270), the 6 cylinder at least sounds correct. The sound of a 4 cylinder pulling a CX-9 is awful, it just doesn't seem right even if it does have a turbo.

Competitors like Kia (185HP / 4 cyl, 240HP / Turbo 4, 290HP / 6) or Hyundai (184HP / 4 Cyl, 240Hp / Turbo 4, 290Hp / 6 Cyl.), etc. offer consumers motor options at least.

If I couldn't get a CX-9 six cylinder I liked I was buying the Sante Fe (V6 / 290HP).

Don't force one option down my throat. I can walk across the street to Hyundai or Kia and have 3 engine options to choose from.
 
jpjr50 said:
For American car buyers this is not the best direction. We love our big motors and to offer only a tiny motor with no power will deter buyers, I'm one.
Click to expand...

Yes you're one, and that's what make America so great. But you're in the tiny minority of midsize sedan buyers. By far the most value fuel economy over anything else. A small fraction value "performance." Based on several studies I've seen.

jpjr50 said:
The sound of a 4 cylinder pulling a CX-9 is awful, it just doesn't seem right even if it does have a turbo.
Click to expand...

In their long term test Car and Driver does say the CX-9's engine can sound strained. But in their comparison test they said it was the quietest under full load acceleration than any of the V-6 competitors. And again it offers mid-pack performance while delivering the best fuel economy.

jpjr50 said:
Competitors like Kia (185HP / 4 cyl, 240HP / Turbo 4, 290HP / 6) or Hyundai (184HP / 4 Cyl, 240Hp / Turbo 4, 290Hp / 6 Cyl.), etc. offer consumers motor options at least.

If I couldn't get a CX-9 six cylinder I liked I was buying the Sante Fe (V6 / 290HP).

Don't force one option down my throat. I can walk across the street to Hyundai or Kia and have 3 engine options to choose from.
Click to expand...

That's fine, the Mazda 6 isn't for you and the rest of the small minority of midsize sedan buyers. I still disagree with your inference that offering an upgraded engine option would have a significant impact on sales.
 
jpjr50 said:
Don't force one option down my throat. I can walk across the street to Hyundai or Kia and have 3 engine options to choose from.
Click to expand...

Oh and by the way, those upgraded engine options at Hyundai, Kia, and Ford for that matter (maybe others) don't offer significantly better acceleration than the Mazda6's power train. Most 2.0t's appear to be in the low 7-second range, right where Mazda's excellent naturally aspirated powertrain is. And the Sonata 2.0t appears to be closer to 8 seconds. Go get your Sonata 2.0t and I'll still beat you in a drag race! (five-0)(guitar)
 
DeepCrystal17 said:
Oh and by the way, those upgraded engine options at Hyundai, Kia, and Ford for that matter (maybe others) don't offer significantly better acceleration than the Mazda6's power train. Most 2.0t's appear to be in the low 7-second range, right where Mazda's excellent naturally aspirated powertrain is. And the Sonata 2.0t appears to be closer to 8 seconds. Go get your Sonata 2.0t and I'll still beat you in a drag race! (five-0)(guitar)
Click to expand...

Haha, I'll beat you with a 5000 pound CX-9 and a V6 against your 184HP Mazda 6.;)
 
DeepCrystal17 said:
Google is your friend by the way. The 6 generally beats your CX-9 by a few tenths in 0-60 and quarter mile. (dance)
Click to expand...

Google doesn't know that mine isn't 100% stock. I should run it at my local test and tune night in the 1/4 mile just for fun. It's $10 to watch or $20 to run.
 
jpjr50 said:
Google doesn't know that mine isn't 100% stock. I should run it at my local test and tune night in the 1/4 mile just for fun. It's $10 to watch or $20 to run.
Click to expand...

Definitely. I'd love to know how many tenths a K&N filter shaves off. (nailbyt)(drive2)
 
DeepCrystal17 said:
Definitely. I'd love to know how many tenths a K&N filter shaves off. (nailbyt)(drive2)
Click to expand...

Don't under estimated their claims, you love Google...that's 15% so by the numbers that's like 3 seconds...it's not tenths. I'll even get improved gas mileage going down the track.

Cat back exhaust, I'll yank the serpentine belt, take the extra weight out (spare tire, jack, I'll even vacuum the carpet). Might get a wheelie going even with front wheel drive.

Rumor has it they may enter the CX-9 into the LeMans race next year. Well maybe I just made up that rumor but if it's on the internet it's 100% legit.
 
Please log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
Mazda continues to be slow with model year changeovers - current Mazda 6 still a 2018
Replies
7
Views
3K
JPL
J
S
2nd Gen Mazda 6 - reliability and common issues
Replies
0
Views
2K
SuperCujo
S
O
    • Like
The Great Skyactiv Resuscitation Project
Replies
3
Views
1K
ofted42
O

Latest posts

Back