What new Mazda is coming?

The announcement was for the whole world.
In some other countries, vehicle tax depends on engine displacement, 2.0L is more popular.
 
Here's the press information from Geneva:
https://insidemazda.mazdausa.com/press-release/2019-geneva-auto-show-press-information-mazda-cx-30/

As was also mentioned during the presentation, the CX-30 is targeted for the European market first, so specs will reflect that incl. engine choice, which will be 2.0 Sky-G (likely with 122hp same as the new 3), 1.8 Sky-D (116hp) and the upcoming Sky-X.
Both Sky-G and Sky-X will be mild-hybrid.
No mention of the 2.5, as that would likely be to big for the European market.
 
Here's the press information from Geneva:
https://insidemazda.mazdausa.com/press-release/2019-geneva-auto-show-press-information-mazda-cx-30/

As was also mentioned during the presentation, the CX-30 is targeted for the European market first, so specs will reflect that incl. engine choice, which will be 2.0 Sky-G (likely with 122hp same as the new 3), 1.8 Sky-D (116hp) and the upcoming Sky-X.
Both Sky-G and Sky-X will be mild-hybrid.
No mention of the 2.5, as that would likely be to big for the European market.

That article is so full of bull s***.
Bottom line for me is its ugly to look at, the extra wide black wheel arch covers destroy the looks, its too small with poor power?

And its not a SUV.
 
After watching that video, the rear seat is still way too small and cargo space is laughable. Mazda cant get it right. I dont care whats under the hood.

If the vehicle isnt usable, no one will buy it. Mazda has every opportunity to build a better Crosstrek and failed. They just dont learn from their mistakes.

If Mazda wants to know why Subaru is so successful, pay attention to passengers other than just the driver when engineering a vehicle. The Crosstrek sucks at driving dynamics but is virtually SOLD OUT nation wide because of every other buying metric. Geez.
 
After watching that video, the rear seat is still way too small and cargo space is laughable. Mazda can*t get it right. I don*t care what*s under the hood.

If the vehicle isn*t usable, no one will buy it. Mazda has every opportunity to build a better Crosstrek and failed. They just don*t learn from their mistakes.

If Mazda wants to know why Subaru is so successful, pay attention to passengers other than just the driver when engineering a vehicle. The Crosstrek sucks at driving dynamics but is virtually SOLD OUT nation wide because of every other buying metric. Geez.


Actually, the interior dimensions are going to be very similar to the Crosstrek. Just looks at how the Crosstrek compares to the Mazda 3. The CX-30 is a wee bit bigger than the 3, making it almost identical to the Crosstrek.

I think the AWD will help sell both the 3 and the CX-30. People buy Subaru's for the AWD.

Also, Crosstrek sales are down 20% from last year, so I don't know why they are so difficult to get.
 
Last edited:
Like I said, I like it, with a 2.5 anyway.

https://youtu.be/mPg5tIItDns

This thing looks very similar to a Mazda 3 (overall size, backseat, cargo space shape). Assuming it is really similar then in that regard, it is very similar to the Crosstrek being a raised Impreza.
Being an owner of a Mazda 3 as well, it is a great vehicle. Consumer appetite for crossovers defies logic in many cases, as the Impreza is superior in weight, center of gravity, gas millage, 0-60. handling and price though lacks ground clearance and slightly elevated seating position.
The CX-30 will probably be in similar situation compared with the Mazda 3 and the first comparison the video should have done is to the Mazda 3.

Also note that the 2L SkyActiv G is 155HP. which is very well suited to the size and weight of the Mazda 3. Now days, I think the Mazda 3 is only available with the 2.5L G, which makes it almost sporty, but is less fuel efficient than the 2L (and the competition). SkyActiv-X in this will be even better.

Since the Mazda 3 will be available with AWD, I'd prefer it to a CX-30 because I don't really need the ground clearance and prefer all the other advantages.
 
Last edited:
Also, Crosstrek sales are down 20% from last year, so I don't know why they are so difficult to get.

Call your local Subaru dealer and try to get one. Good luck.

They had two production stoppages due to paint issues and defective parts from suppliers.

The sales percentages are not due to demand but rather availability.
 
After watching that video, the rear seat is still way too small and cargo space is laughable. Mazda cant get it right. I dont care whats under the hood.

If the vehicle isnt usable, no one will buy it. Mazda has every opportunity to build a better Crosstrek and failed. They just dont learn from their mistakes.

If Mazda wants to know why Subaru is so successful, pay attention to passengers other than just the driver when engineering a vehicle. The Crosstrek sucks at driving dynamics but is virtually SOLD OUT nation wide because of every other buying metric. Geez.

If you don't mind driving a sled, knock yourself out. Some people will sacrifice a little space to feel something a little less yawn- inducing when they get behind the wheel. Rear seat and storage capacity aren't always at the top of everyone's priority list.
 
If you don't mind driving a sled, knock yourself out. Some people will sacrifice a little space to feel something a little less yawn- inducing when they get behind the wheel. Rear seat and storage capacity aren't always at the top of everyone's priority list.

You said it right there some people. Not very many. Which is why the CX-3 sells in such small numbers.

As the owner of a CX-9, and several other Mazdas over the years, I appreciate their direction towards rewarding driving dynamics, but lately they seem to be sacrificing a lot of usability for design proportions. That eliminates many buyers right off the bat. I wish they did a little more with function.
 
If you don't mind driving a sled, knock yourself out. Some people will sacrifice a little space to feel something a little less yawn- inducing when they get behind the wheel. Rear seat and storage capacity aren't always at the top of everyone's priority list.

I agree. Honestly cargo space factored in very little to not at all in my buying experience.

CX-5 looks nice, has good pep, AWD, and sat higher off the ground which is what I was used to. Instant sell for me. Cargo space was a handy thing to have as an aside. But I've maybe filled my car twice in 6 years of ownership.
 
I agree. Honestly cargo space factored in very little to not at all in my buying experience.

It's actually near the bottom for most people. Some people read consumers reports and like moths to a flame "Consumer Reports said the trunk is bigger... must buy....." I mean, how many more grocery bags you going to fit in a CRV vs a CX5? 4? :D
 
It's actually near the bottom for most people. Some people read consumers reports and like moths to a flame "Consumer Reports said the trunk is bigger... must buy....." I mean, how many more grocery bags you going to fit in a CRV vs a CX5? 4? :D

Right? Unless you're stacking those grocery bags from floor to ceiling, cargo space in terms of cubic feet is rather pointless.

More usueful is the dimensions so you know if you can haul a keyboard or a desk or something.
 
Last edited:
Subaru's recent changes have accented a "plush" ride that is better than some luxury vehicles' ride. For those who drive in snow country areas, pot holes and resulting very rough roads play a big part in their choice of vehicle. Mazda has realized that in order to be considered upscale and benefit from attributes associated with more expensive vehicles, it had to soften the ride and quiet the interior to go along with cosmetic improvements.
 
Local Subaru dealer has four pages of Crosstreks in stock. They claim to have 50 available.
 
Back