Where are the Reserves?

Did a 200 mile search in MA area and no Reserves at all......0

I think too expensive for most buyers.
Instead of expanding trim levels (including higher price points), Mazda should probably stick to their former strategy, which was smart design , decent power with great handling vehicles, at relatively low prices.
Pursuing the "luxury market" is not something I believe makes good business sense for Mazda.
 
The funny thing about Reserves is that $3k more gives you the CX-9 GT. I would rather pay for the CX-9 than the CX-5 in that case.
 
Actually, they are the ones selling. That is why you don*t see them at dealers.
 
the turbo should be an option for the touring and GT. The standard options for the touring are fine, just need the turbo. Not for $6k more though
 
I think too expensive for most buyers.
Instead of expanding trim levels (including higher price points), Mazda should probably stick to their former strategy, which was smart design , decent power with great handling vehicles, at relatively low prices.
Pursuing the "luxury market" is not something I believe makes good business sense for Mazda.

Strongly disagree. Mazda had lost me as a customer for my next vehicle until they added the GT-R/SIG models. It's not like they cut down on their other models, either, and OP can't even find 'em in stock, which says something...
 
Strongly disagree. Mazda had lost me as a customer for my next vehicle until they added the GT-R/SIG models. It's not like they cut down on their other models, either, and OP can't even find 'em in stock, which says something...

From a business perspective, it's o.k. if Mazda loses some customers to luxury brands. What makes the best sense is that Maza establishes/maintains a position as a "good car design-driving-reliability" brand at a compelling price point.
I understand Mazda is trying to retain old customers and also attract new customers; but adding trim levels, utilizing new trim names, adding higher price points etc... just makes things too complicated (for the manufacturing, retail store distribution, and consumer as well) .Businesses that try to be "all things to all people" usually fail at same.
 
My local dealer is now showing 15 GTR's and 19 Sigs! However, their on-hand quantity is only 1 GTR. The others are all on order, but are available to purchase.
 
the turbo should be an option for the touring and GT. The standard options for the touring are fine, just need the turbo. Not for $6k more though


It is. Honestly, you can get the GT for ~31K and the GT-R for about 32.5, which is nothing but the GT but with the 2.5T engine.
 
From a business perspective, it's o.k. if Mazda loses some customers to luxury brands. What makes the best sense is that Maza establishes/maintains a position as a "good car design-driving-reliability" brand at a compelling price point.
I understand Mazda is trying to retain old customers and also attract new customers; but adding trim levels, utilizing new trim names, adding higher price points etc... just makes things too complicated (for the manufacturing, retail store distribution, and consumer as well) .Businesses that try to be "all things to all people" usually fail at same.



It's an absolutely successful formula, and it's working great for Mazda, both from my own personal perspective, and from their sales data.

http://carsalesbase.com/us-car-sales-data/mazda/mazda-cx-5/
 
Last edited:
From a business perspective, it's o.k. if Mazda loses some customers to luxury brands. What makes the best sense is that Maza establishes/maintains a position as a "good car design-driving-reliability" brand at a compelling price point.
I understand Mazda is trying to retain old customers and also attract new customers; but adding trim levels, utilizing new trim names, adding higher price points etc... just makes things too complicated (for the manufacturing, retail store distribution, and consumer as well) .Businesses that try to be "all things to all people" usually fail at same.

That's your opinion, but I think it's wrong. Mazda is pulling customers away from other entry level luxury brands with the higher trims, while still making well-designed, reliable driver's cars available to their older "niche". Sure, you'll get the few would-be buyers who don't like the upmarket feel and the slight increase in price that comes with it, but those buyers are offset by the many others who wished for more power, and those who wanted the power/design/reliability of a luxury brand without the bigger price tag. There's a reason that so many reviews of the CX-5 are largely positive.

I think Mazda's doing just fine. Things don't seem complicated for them - they appear to be managing the changes well.
 
That's your opinion, but I think it's wrong. Mazda is pulling customers away from other entry level luxury brands with the higher trims, while still making well-designed, reliable driver's cars available to their older "niche". Sure, you'll get the few would-be buyers who don't like the upmarket feel and the slight increase in price that comes with it, but those buyers are offset by the many others who wished for more power, and those who wanted the power/design/reliability of a luxury brand without the bigger price tag. There's a reason that so many reviews of the CX-5 are largely positive.

I think Mazda's doing just fine. Things don't seem complicated for them - they appear to be managing the changes well.

Absolutely. A friend of mine who pushed me HARD to get an Audi Q5, when I told him about my GT-R, said "Yeah, you made the right choice. No brainer". He did NOT feel that way before the GTR/SIG trims. A lot of people didn't. Those trims put the CX5 in the "Why shouldn't I buy it instead of an X1/Q5/GLC300? Is the badge really worth it?

Prior, the answer was "Yeah, if you can afford one of those vehicles, you should. Just floor it once and you'll understand."
 
Strongly disagree. Mazda had lost me as a customer for my next vehicle until they added the GT-R/SIG models. It's not like they cut down on their other models, either, and OP can't even find 'em in stock, which says something...

+1. I was looking at suv's from MB, Audi, Acura, Lexus, Volvo, and Cadillac. Stopped by the Mazda display at the L.A. Auto Show and realized I could get something with premium interior without the premium price. Took a Signature for a test drive a couple weeks later and found I liked it much more than the GLC300, which was my first choice up to that point. Considering Mazda wasn't even on my radar, they did a great job of reeling me in as a customer.
 
+1. I was looking at suv's from MB, Audi, Acura, Lexus, Volvo, and Cadillac. Stopped by the Mazda display at the L.A. Auto Show and realized I could get something with premium interior without the premium price. Took a Signature for a test drive a couple weeks later and found I liked it much more than the GLC300, which was my first choice up to that point. Considering Mazda wasn't even on my radar, they did a great job of reeling me in as a customer.

Exactly, and all they did was introduce one or two features, and use trickel-down technology that they had already perfected in the CX9. It really was stoopid simple and feasible, economically, to dominate even more of the market.

What CUV can you get for under $40K that can compete with a $32K GT-R/34K SIG?
 
It is. Honestly, you can get the GT for ~31K and the GT-R for about 32.5, which is nothing but the GT but with the 2.5T engine.

I agree $31k on the GT, but I'm seeing $34.5k on the reserve. $3.5k to get the turbo and a few more options I don't want or need, can't justify that.
$29k for the Touring with PP. Definitely not paying $5.5k more to get the turbo
 
If not for the turbo, I would never have considered a CX-5. We test drove a CX-5 back in Oct. While we liked the interior, we could not get over how under powered it was. We felt the same was about the Tiguan. The turbo was all it needed. Well, a pano roof would be nice, but that's a different thread.
 
Its not a bad strategy, and the preservation of lower trims and the introduction of the Cx-30 ensures there are cheaper options.

Targeting the sub premium crowd is also smart because that crowd is not only more brand loyal, but more credit worthy. For direct lending, there is less subprime underwriting as well as more capacity to upsell accessories, service plans and warranties
 
+1. I was looking at suv's from MB, Audi, Acura, Lexus, Volvo, and Cadillac. Stopped by the Mazda display at the L.A. Auto Show and realized I could get something with premium interior without the premium price. Took a Signature for a test drive a couple weeks later and found I liked it much more than the GLC300, which was my first choice up to that point. Considering Mazda wasn't even on my radar, they did a great job of reeling me in as a customer.

I did the same thing at my local auto show, and it was eye-opening to see how much cheap plastic both Audi and BMW use in their interiors. The CX-5 Signature compared favorably (especially given a $20K price gap when comparably equipped), and the Acura RDX's interior outright embarrassed the Germans while splitting the price difference between them and Mazda.

As a two-time Mazda GT-trim owner looking to move up-market, test drives and the auto show were enough to convince me that there's just not $20K of added value in buying German, even ignoring their much higher maintenance costs and lower expected reliability. The RDX is an intriguing option, at least if Acura resolves the electronics and engine reliability issues that seem typical for new-model Honda products these days.

At the very least, the Signature line is a solid effort by Mazda to hold on to customers who are willing to pay for more than what the GT trim (already their most popular) provides.
 
the turbo should be an option for the touring and GT. The standard options for the touring are fine, just need the turbo. Not for $6k more though

I bought a GTR less than a month ago.

There were two things that really attracted me to the CX-5: (1) handling and (2) the Active Display. It's that second one that takes you to the GT trim, and even at that level it's still a $1,600 upcharge.

I would have loved to keep fabric seats. I'm not a fan of leather, and am still struggling with seat discomfort.
There are other things I could have done without as well (folding side mirrors, moon roof).

During my search I was on the Toyota website building a RAV4, and they give you so many combination/permutation packages that it's overwhelming. I had a hard time keeping track of what's what. And you still cannot seem to find the one that gives you what you want without the extraneous stuff.
 
Back