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

I'm late to the conversation, but I was one of those affected by the got-damned ridiculous Ford engineering of the 2nd Gen 3.7 engine. Water pump blew and ran me $3,700 to fix...to replace a $250 part because the whole engine has to come out. And it wasn't just the 6 that had this problem. Ford Edge shared same type engine as did Lincoln MKX and MKZ. I paid, so I must be a deranged 6 fanatic. Would I consider another 6? To that, I say f@#k Ford. Now, that's not to say that other car manufacturers aren't doing some crazy s***, like having to tear apart all the unders to get to a starter on a Toyota Tundra. I drove a '17 6 GT loaner while getting some recall work done and I do say it feels underpowered. Gorgeous car, aggressive, but no balls to back it up. My 111k mile 6s has more breathe left in it than a brand spanking new 6 coming straight off the lot this afternoon. But that's just my 2 cents. When a car company gets it right, it's right, bottom line.The wife's Tahoe of 15 years is going on 300k miles...biggest expense was a $2,400 trans rebuild. Would I buy another Tahoe, hell yeah. So niche market, niche customer base...nothing baffling about that.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 
I'm late to the conversation, but I was one of those affected by the got-damned ridiculous Ford engineering of the 2nd Gen 3.7 engine. Water pump blew and ran me $3,700 to fix...to replace a $250 part because the whole engine has to come out. And it wasn't just the 6 that had this problem. Ford Edge shared same type engine as did Lincoln MKX and MKZ. I paid, so I must be a deranged 6 fanatic. Would I consider another 6? To that, I say f@#k Ford. Now, that's not to say that other car manufacturers aren't doing some crazy s***, like having to tear apart all the unders to get to a starter on a Toyota Tundra. I drove a '17 6 GT loaner while getting some recall work done and I do say it feels underpowered. Gorgeous car, aggressive, but no balls to back it up. My 111k mile 6s has more breathe left in it than a brand spanking new 6 coming straight off the lot this afternoon. But that's just my 2 cents. When a car company gets it right, it's right, bottom line.The wife's Tahoe of 15 years is going on 300k miles...biggest expense was a $2,400 trans rebuild. Would I buy another Tahoe, hell yeah. So niche market, niche customer base...nothing baffling about that.

Of course the new 6 is going to feel underpowered to you, coming from your V6 6. But it's pretty much the quickest economy midsize on the market, and quicker or as-quick as some of the competitor's 2.0 turbos. It's only about a second behind your V6 to 60 .

And it gets a whopping 10 mpg (50%) better fuel economy than your V6. For the mainstream like me who want to have a little fun on their commute but not spend a lot on gas, it's the perfect commuting car.

I have no idea what you mean by niche market, niche customer base. What makes the 6 more niche than the Accord, Camry, etc?
 
Of course the new 6 is going to feel underpowered to you, coming from your V6 6. But it's pretty much the quickest economy midsize on the market, and quicker or as-quick as some of the competitor's 2.0 turbos. It's only about a second behind your V6 to 60 .

And it gets a whopping 10 mpg (50%) better fuel economy than your V6. For the mainstream like me who want to have a little fun on their commute but not spend a lot on gas, it's the perfect commuting car.

I have no idea what you mean by niche market, niche customer base. What makes the 6 more niche than the Accord, Camry, etc?
Here's the definition of niche; denoting or relating to products, services, or interests that appeal to a small, specialized section of the population.

The main population gravitates toward the cliche "reliable or tried and true" brands like Toyota and Honda. They'll run forever, is what they say. And they offer a V6 by the way, on most models. Even though I own two Mazdas, they don't exude boring, reliable, run forever, or tried and true. What it does exude is uniqueness. I stand out of the crowd. And what does that mean; my car ain't mainstream. And if it ain't mainstream, then it must be made for the niche customer base that prefers something different.

If you don't believe this theory, you must not have watched the latest Mazda commercials. They don't portray a longtime reliable brand. It's an old guy handcrafting an interior. That ain't mainstream by no means. So yes, they're appealing to a much smaller crowd.

In regard to mpg and V6. An extra $20 per tank doesn't bother. Especially when I have a family of 5 and can breeze up to 5,000 feet uphill at less than 2,300 rpm doing 80 mph.

I'm not the economy market, I'm the V6 type power market and Mazda has lost me for now. Therefore, while most would have tossed the V6 as they stared at a $3,700 bill to replace a $250 failed water pump, I was deranged enough to pony up and keep my V6.

The Mazda service advisor put it best to me. Mazda is like Subaru; true fanatics that love their cars and are diehard to the end.



Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
I was just going to say simply: 3% of a global market, that's niche.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
Here's the definition of niche; denoting or relating to products, services, or interests that appeal to a small, specialized section of the population.

I understand your point, but in my opinion you're misusing the phrase niche market, hence my confusion. The Mazda6 competes in the mainstream economy midsize sedan market, same as the Accord. They just have a small market share in that market due to several factors, the primary one perhaps being small marketing budget. And your comparison of your V6 6s to today's 4-cylinder 6 is not apples-to-apples. The current 6 is pretty much the quickest in its class, if you're comparing apples to apples.
 
The market isn't niche, the brand is.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
 
I guess we can debate ad nauseum whether a brand that happens to have relatively small market share is by default a niche brand. I don't believe it is. Being niche is different than trying to differentiate one's self. Mazda doesn't say it's NOT about reliability, roominess, efficiency etc. and just wants to be THE driver's car in any of its marketing materials. They simply try to differentiate themselves a little bit by making their cars a little more fun to drive than, say, the Camry. I don't believe that attempt at differentiation is the reason their midsize sedan offering has very small market share in its class, despite Car and Driver et al saying it's a better mainstream family sedan than the Accord, Camry, etc.

The CX-5 sells about as well as the Patriot, Journey, Santa Fe, and Renegade. The Mazda3 sells about as well as the Golf and about half as well as the Focus and Forte. That doesn't seem like a niche brand to me but hey, that's just my opinion.
 
I guess we can debate ad nauseum whether a brand that happens to have relatively small market share is by default a niche brand. I don't believe it is. Being niche is different than trying to differentiate one's self. Mazda doesn't say it's NOT about reliability, roominess, efficiency etc. and just wants to be THE driver's car in any of its marketing materials. They simply try to differentiate themselves a little bit by making their cars a little more fun to drive than, say, the Camry. I don't believe that attempt at differentiation is the reason their midsize sedan offering has very small market share in its class, despite Car and Driver et al saying it's a better mainstream family sedan than the Accord, Camry, etc.

The CX-5 sells about as well as the Patriot, Journey, Santa Fe, and Renegade. The Mazda3 sells about as well as the Golf and about half as well as the Focus and Forte. That doesn't seem like a niche brand to me but hey, that's just my opinion.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fo...ction-as-small-player-in-changing-u-s-market/

Forbes refers to Mazda as a "niche player".

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 
I guess we can debate ad nauseum whether a brand that happens to have relatively small market share is by default a niche brand. I don't believe it is. Being niche is different than trying to differentiate one's self. Mazda doesn't say it's NOT about reliability, roominess, efficiency etc. and just wants to be THE driver's car in any of its marketing materials. They simply try to differentiate themselves a little bit by making their cars a little more fun to drive than, say, the Camry. I don't believe that attempt at differentiation is the reason their midsize sedan offering has very small market share in its class, despite Car and Driver et al saying it's a better mainstream family sedan than the Accord, Camry, etc.

The CX-5 sells about as well as the Patriot, Journey, Santa Fe, and Renegade. The Mazda3 sells about as well as the Golf and about half as well as the Focus and Forte. That doesn't seem like a niche brand to me but hey, that's just my opinion.
And here's another post from Mazda6club.com...

Again, nothing baffling about Mazda being small, that's what they want, apparently.

Mazda wants to become a "niche company" . . .
https://r.tapatalk.com/shareLink?ur...share_tid=256937&share_fid=90767&share_type=t

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 
Here's how I see it. I could have done no research and just gone to Honda and bought a mainstream CR-V. That's not me. I hate "the most popular things". I don't like seeing my car every time I turn around. When there are 2 teams I don't I care for in the Super Bowl, I root for the under dog. I hate the Steelers & Patriots. I drove Saabs before this. I looked at the smaller "nichey" brands: Subaru, Mazda, and the less nichey (but owner loyal) Jeep. I don't see Mazda or Subaru making Super Bowl commercials. I like that.
Although it backfired. I see Mazdas everywhere. I promise Mazda has more then 3% of the Cleveland market.
Good discussion here.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
 
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fo...ction-as-small-player-in-changing-u-s-market/

Forbes refers to Mazda as a "niche player".

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

It doesn't really. It says "a company whose overall volume might suggest it's only a niche player." Little bit different. That's the line between us - I'm saying they simply have low volume but aren't doing anything radically different than Honda (whose cars are also lauded for being very good drivers). You're saying they're a niche player. Forbes can't decide whose right.

Good discussion here.

(drinks)
 
Mazda is trying to distinguish itself from Honda and Toyota and move a bit upper end.
Their target positioning is likely Volvo. (near luxury, and somewhat sporty)
It won't be easy for them to overcome image problem and get there....

If you check out the HCCI engine (30% more efficient, no spark plugs), Mazda is a company that demand respects.
While Toyota moves toward hybrid, hydrogen, and electric, Mazda remains committed to gas/diesel engines.
There is a chance that Toyota might acquire Mazda since these two are cooperating in many fronts.
 
In a way this is a response to a thread on the CX-5 thread, but, this thread started the line of thinking and it fits here, even if it's a bit of a necro.

I have a commute, that because of family issues and work, I sometimes drive 7-days/week. Almost always 6. The commute comes in 3 flavors.

1. Noisy freeway with a cross-wind. This is about the worst place you can put a CX-5. It gets a lot of road and wind noise. Very loud.

2. Depending on the time and day, the entire commute can be stop-and-go. It also picks up speed and has erratic and unexpected stops. My CX-5 is a 2015 Touring so it doesn't have adaptive cruise control or any advanced safety stuff which could be useful during the stretch.

3. If I'm smart, I take a very curvy back-road. The CX-5 is fun on this drive, except, it's not the best road, so it's very jarring in places. But, the CX-5 is a decent car for the handling.

Because of the noise, the rough ride, and a fluke decision to drive an Accord Hybrid (can't fit in the damn Honda's) I realized that maybe I should be in a sedan rather than a crossover. Sure, the storage is nice, but it's a couple of times a year nice to have, rarely a need.

You'd think a 6 would be a great alternative. A sedan should cut down on the wind and possibly have a better ride than my CX-5. A GT would have the safety and adaptive cruise control. Finally, the 6 does corner well.

Yet, I barely considered it. Why? Because it's the same car as my CX-5. Sure, it's a tiny bit faster, gets a bit better mileage, handles better but I bet it's just as noisy and jarring as the CX-5. Why go here when the new CX-5 is out there?

The second problem is that there's no way I can test drive a 6 on my commute unless I rent a 6. There's a Mazda dealer close but this would be a 30 mile round trip, not gonna happen. So, I'm relegated to the freeway for a test drive, not even the same freeway, where the 6 won't excel, and certainly won't beat out most competing sedans. It's strength is handling and most dealers aren't located somewhere that shows that off.

The poor car is barely under consideration and I'm a two-time Mazda owner including a Speed6 and my CX-5.

Oh, and that HUD screams cheap, even if it isn't.
 
30 mile round trip? So...15 miles each way? That's too much?
As to the HUD looking cheap, I haven't actually seen it so can't comment. I do think the way it works is odd, buying would hope it doesn't look cheap. However, who else in this segment (in the US anyway) even offers a factory HUD. Not. One. Car.
 
30 mile round trip? So...15 miles each way? That's too much?
As to the HUD looking cheap, I haven't actually seen it so can't comment. I do think the way it works is odd, buying would hope it doesn't look cheap. However, who else in this segment (in the US anyway) even offers a factory HUD. Not. One. Car.

In the crossover, no one, several do it at the sedan level now (both 2018's from Toyota and Honda, for example).

It's longer than that but it's not a hard commute by any stretch. I did 4 hours round trip for a few months. That was awful. But, in these parts, 15 miles can be an hour or more.

My point though is that those drives, which I pretty much do 7-days/week, and others in these parts, would seem to be ideal for a 6 vs my CX-5. A lot of sedans suck at winding roads, the 6 doesn't. Yet, barely on my radar.
 
Last edited:
The '17 6 apparently got thicker glass and improved door seals to cut down on noise. I don't find it THAT noisy on my 50 mile round trip commute including time on an elevated expressway. It's probably slightly noisier than a Camry. Nor do I consider it harsh. I'd insist the dealer let you take a '17 on your 30 mile commute. With sedan sales decreasing, especially the 6's, they should be more than willing to accommodate you to make a sale.
 
I should probably shorten and restate my primary premise(s).

1. People are buying crossovers because they better fit their needs than a sedan.
2. The difference between the 6 and the CX-5 are there, but not dramatic, at least to this Mazda owner, so why get a 6?
3. The sales process of "drive around the block with a salesperson in the backseat", is a negotiating/control process, that is ill-suited to sell a 6. Or, in other words, trying to sell a 6, the same way you sell a Camry or Altima, isn't going to sell many 6's, assuming there's even a decent market for the 6.
 
At my Mazda dealer, the salesman doesn't go with you. One of the many reasons they got my business.
 
I should probably shorten and restate my primary premise(s).

Ah I see, I thought you were seriously considering a 6 sedan.

I disagree that crossovers better fit their needs in general. I think it's just a fad to sit higher off the road. After decades of driving sedans, people welcome the change to sit higher now that crossovers are so well designed as to drive almost as well as the average sedan. Oh, and that one time per year they wanna buy a grill or lawnmower and they can put all the rear seats down.

The 6 is like a foot longer than the CX-5 and 5 inches longer wheelbase. Pretty sure the 6 has a roomier back seat which many families are willing to ignore since the CX-5 rear seats are higher off the ground and maybe a little easier to get an infant in and out of the back seat. I actually went in the reverse direction - drove two Mazda Tributes and a Ford Explorer before downsizing to two Focus's and now the 6.
 
Back