Test drove a '19 GT-R and Signature today

Re: addind Auto-CC. They simply had to. Every other car company has it... how are you NOT going to offer it? That's all it is. No slight at all to being the 'drivers car company'. Is there any car company that DOESN'T have this now?
 
Chris_Top_Her said:
I think the target audience that mazda is traditionally known for is becoming smaller as they incorporate more gimmicks faster than performance. Now they are offering the turbo on the cx5, awd on the 3 with manual (but they jacked up the rear suspension), but from what I've seen here in the last 2 or 3 years is that the people buying are what I would usually call the appliance toyota/Honda crowd, with less interest on driving experience and more emphasis on gimmicks. It's not bashing; it's and observation that is reflected on this forum and the FB pages. I just hope the more performance oriented offering apppeal to a possibly different audience.
Click to expand...

What I think is getting lost here is that the CX-5 Signature is a really good car that is fantastic to drive. Sharp feeling, really solid power and comfortable. Mazda has listened to their customers. People complained the CX-5 was too noisy and they addressed that. They complained that the move to make it nicer and quieter hampered performance and now they have addressed that. People want tech inside and they have addressed that. You don't need to use any of it but if you want it, it is there.

If people say they want more handling options or color options, I would hope Mazda would respond to that. But I have not heard anybody (serious) about he handling of the CX5 (as compared to competition).
 
Last edited:
At this stage I would just hope the Turbo trickles down to the lesser trims. Signatures are MSRPing close to $39k around here and not everyone is a fan of brown leather and wood trim. (barf)
 
ColoradoDriver said:
At this stage I would just hope the Turbo trickles down to the lesser trims. Signatures are MSRPing close to $39k around here and not everyone is a fan of brown leather and wood trim. (barf)
Click to expand...


Yeah, but honestly, you can get the CX-5 Signature for 35-36K and the wood so minimal you will wonder where it is. The brown leather is nice but I agree, I don't understand whey they don't give you the same options that they have in the Mazda 6. Makes no sense.
 
Have you guys seen the brown leather? It's so dark that it could be mistaken for black.

I like it actually, makes it different.
 
Does anyone know if Mazda realizes more profit from a loaded Signature vs a basic Sport? Or any other trim level comparisons of profit. Wondering if that would explain offering the turbo in only higher trim levels [like Subaru does/did].
 
dougal said:
Yeah, but honestly, you can get the CX-5 Signature for 35-36K and the wood so minimal you will wonder where it is. The brown leather is nice but I agree, I don't understand whey they don't give you the same options that they have in the Mazda 6. Makes no sense.
Click to expand...
I would love to see the turbo come down to the Touring. That's more my feeling on a price for a CX-5.

I mean, I paid $25k for mine. $35-36k still not very appealing.
 
Last edited:
with that said,
when is Pano roof coming? you know Mazda has to plan for this now.

7eregrine said:
Re: addind Auto-CC. They simply had to. Every other car company has it... how are you NOT going to offer it? That's all it is. No slight at all to being the 'drivers car company'. Is there any car company that DOESN'T have this now?
Click to expand...
 
dougal said:
If people say they want more handling options or color options, I would hope Mazda would respond to that. But I have not heard anybody (serious) about he handling of the CX5 (as compared to competition).
Click to expand...

and this is why we have aftermarket ;)
if Mazda offered all the performance upgrades from factory ala AMG or M, I could see the aftermarket companies selling less and less of their products.
 
From my experience,
manufacturers and dealers seem to always make more profit from a loaded vehicle.
But with that said, it's always more of a deal to get a car that comes loaded than adding the options individually.



shadonoz said:
Does anyone know if Mazda realizes more profit from a loaded Signature vs a basic Sport? Or any other trim level comparisons of profit. Wondering if that would explain offering the turbo in only higher trim levels [like Subaru does/did].
Click to expand...
 
Young-nyc said:
From my experience,
manufacturers and dealers seem to always make more profit from a loaded vehicle.
But with that said, it's always more of a deal to get a car that comes loaded than adding the options individually.
Click to expand...
Yeah if I recall, the GT was the best selling trim (before they added GTR and Sig).
 
Rawyzf said:
Have you guys seen the brown leather? It's so dark that it could be mistaken for black.

I like it actually, makes it different.
Click to expand...


I agree, the guys whining about the brown leather and wood trim probably haven't even seen the car in person. The brown leather looks more black and the wood trim blends in and is hardly noticeable. You have to look twice to even see it. Maybe they should have left it off.
 
davefr said:
I agree, the guys whining about the brown leather and wood trim probably haven't even seen the car in person. The brown leather looks more black and the wood trim blends in and is hardly noticeable. You have to look twice to even see it. Maybe they should have left it off.
Click to expand...
Well I'm stopping at the dealer this week so I'll see in person. I've just seen pics online.
 
that would be good, but from a marketing standpoint,
trickling the turbo down to the touring trim wouldn't make the touring the affordable well packaged value that it is.
Mazda has to differentiate their premium models.
But with that said, MAYBE in the near future, who knows, the prev gen Cx-5 all had the 2.0 engines right and the whole line up was upgraded to the 2.5.





ColoradoDriver said:
I would love to see the turbo come down to the Touring. That's more my feeling on a price for a CX-5.

I mean, I paid $25k for mine. $35-36k still not very appealing.
Click to expand...
 
shadonoz said:
Just be prepared to feel less satisfied with your car if you drive the turbo.
Click to expand...
Sure... I mean faster is faster. But I can't get it in a Gen 1 package so there is less chance of me feeling less satisfied.

I've never driven a turbo before so am genuinely curious.
 
Young-nyc said:
that would be good, but from a marketing standpoint,
trickling the turbo down to the touring trim wouldn't make the touring the affordable well packaged value that it is.
Mazda has to differentiate their premium models.
But with that said, MAYBE in the near future, who knows, the prev gen Cx-5 all had the 2.0 engines right and the whole line up was upgraded to the 2.5.
Click to expand...
I mean...is there that big of a price difference between turbo and none turbo 2.5L? Didn't think there was but don't remember.
 
ColoradoDriver said:
I mean...is there that big of a price difference between turbo and none turbo 2.5L? Didn't think there was but don't remember.
Click to expand...

Seems like about $2k [for other brands as well]. Bet it doesn't cost them anywhere near that much to build it!
 
Please log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Q
    • Like
CX-5 Reliability, cost of ownership and what's been done (personal experience)
Replies
6
Views
4K
yrwei52
yrwei52
U
91 vs 93 octane and GT-R/Sg trim CX-5
2
Replies
33
Views
9K
sm1ke
sm1ke
GTXT23
    • Haha
    • Wow
Should you buy a Turbo CX-5?
2 3 4
Replies
60
Views
12K
Odrapnew
O

Latest posts

Back