Mazda Popularity

I actually don't hate the new RAV4's looks. I think it's a big improvement over last gen. And I'd love that rear view camera thing.
(The rearview mirror is actually a screen tied to a camera at the back of the vehicle. So you have an unobstructed view behind no matter what you have in the back seat or hatch area. Friggin brilliant idea).

Wanted to comment on "technology moves so fast today". It really doesn't in the automotive world.
BSM debuted in 2007 on a Volvo.
Lane Keep assist debuted in 2001 on a Nissan in China.
The backup camera debuted in... 1956. Seriously: The first backup camera was used in the 1956 Buick Centurion concept car, presented in January 1956 at the General Motors Motorama. The vehicle had a rear-mounted television camera that sent images to a TV screen in the dashboard in place of the rear-view mirror.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backup_camera
Parking sensors? The 70's.
Park assist beacons: 2003.
The first HUD was on an Oldsmobile... in the 80's.
Nicely said!
 
Of the current Mazda's only the 2.5T CX-5 is a strong competitor in its class competing with NX and RDX models from Lexus and Acura and coming ahead of various fronts including price. Everything else is pretty dang avg.

CX9 - pretty and best handling. Slowest entries and has a lot of less space. The new Koreans are going strong and this is a dated model.
CX3 - Why?
CX5 non Turbo - gained weight / got slower / more luxurious than prev gen but both the Rav and CRV look good on paper. I would never buy the choices but a 19 CX5 with CD is a no no.
Mazda3 - it felt neutered and less confident. It is more lux on the inside but again - its not a Mazda at all, I was not a fan of prev 3 and this gen kills it a notch more.
Mazda6 - great sedan and again - if it were not for CD would be a consideration in near future.
MX30 - will come to US pretty late but I really like the quirkiness and Mazda got it right. I don't think it will need to put 5-8000 on hood like Nissan / Kia had to do with its sub 100 mile car. This will pull buyers due to those doors and the form factor. But numbers will be so negligible it does not matter in US. EU might be a diff story.

Dealer network - again an overall sore point. Mazda is kind of transitioning and making better cars but to be honest having such low emissions / such good engines repeatedly is tough every 6 years and I don't think Mazda will pull another rabbit out of its hat with SPCCI. At best it will match the Civics with CVT and Corollas in mpg which is meh.

Its hard to see Mazda's future beyond 5 years.
 
Of the current Mazda's only the 2.5T CX-5 is a strong competitor in its class competing with NX and RDX models from Lexus and Acura and coming ahead of various fronts including price. Everything else is pretty dang avg.

CX9 - pretty and best handling. Slowest entries and has a lot of less space. The new Koreans are going strong and this is a dated model.
CX3 - Why?
CX5 non Turbo - gained weight / got slower / more luxurious than prev gen but both the Rav and CRV look good on paper. I would never buy the choices but a 19 CX5 with CD is a no no.
Mazda3 - it felt neutered and less confident. It is more lux on the inside but again - its not a Mazda at all, I was not a fan of prev 3 and this gen kills it a notch more.
Mazda6 - great sedan and again - if it were not for CD would be a consideration in near future.
MX30 - will come to US pretty late but I really like the quirkiness and Mazda got it right. I don't think it will need to put 5-8000 on hood like Nissan / Kia had to do with its sub 100 mile car. This will pull buyers due to those doors and the form factor. But numbers will be so negligible it does not matter in US. EU might be a diff story.

Dealer network - again an overall sore point. Mazda is kind of transitioning and making better cars but to be honest having such low emissions / such good engines repeatedly is tough every 6 years and I don't think Mazda will pull another rabbit out of its hat with SPCCI. At best it will match the Civics with CVT and Corollas in mpg which is meh.

Its hard to see Mazda's future beyond 5 years.
Agreed.

And cylinder deactivation is featured on all models of 2018 CX-5 too.
 
I actually don't hate the new RAV4's looks. I think it's a big improvement over last gen. And I'd love that rear view camera thing.
(The rearview mirror is actually a screen tied to a camera at the back of the vehicle. So you have an unobstructed view behind no matter what you have in the back seat or hatch area. Friggin brilliant idea).

Wanted to comment on "technology moves so fast today". It really doesn't in the automotive world.
BSM debuted in 2007 on a Volvo.
Lane Keep assist debuted in 2001 on a Nissan in China.
The backup camera debuted in... 1956. Seriously: The first backup camera was used in the 1956 Buick Centurion concept car, presented in January 1956 at the General Motors Motorama. The vehicle had a rear-mounted television camera that sent images to a TV screen in the dashboard in place of the rear-view mirror.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backup_camera
Parking sensors? The 70's.
Park assist beacons: 2003.
The first HUD was on an Oldsmobile... in the 80's.

Also, the first electric car was developed in the late 1800s.

Thomas_Parker_Electric_car.jpg
 
Anyone know why Mazda decided on cylinder deactivation to occur only at cruising speeds? I would think that when the engine is idling such as waiting for a traffic light to turn green, CD should be triggered as well. This would save even more gas.
 
It would probably stall if cylinders were deactivated at idle. The pistons are still moving but gas isnt being injected in the deactivated cylinders.
 
Wanted to comment on "technology moves so fast today". It really doesn't in the automotive world.
BSM debuted in 2007 on a Volvo.
Lane Keep assist debuted in 2001 on a Nissan in China.
The backup camera debuted in... 1956. Seriously: The first backup camera was used in the 1956 Buick Centurion concept car, presented in January 1956 at the General Motors Motorama. The vehicle had a rear-mounted television camera that sent images to a TV screen in the dashboard in place of the rear-view mirror.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backup_camera
Parking sensors? The 70's.
Park assist beacons: 2003.
The first HUD was on an Oldsmobile... in the 80's.

Those examples are true, but kind of beside the point. What matters is when new "features" are widely available to the average consumer. I can't think of any ten year period than the past ten when so many new things have become widespread, for better or worse. And with the pace of innovation in EVs, I expect the next ten to be just as "changey" as this past ten.
 
The backup camera debuted in... 1956. Seriously: The first backup camera was used in the 1956 Buick Centurion concept car, presented in January 1956 at the General Motors Motorama. The vehicle had a rear-mounted television camera that sent images to a TV screen in the dashboard in place of the rear-view mirror.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backup_camera

Was the TV screen a 25" console model sitting on the front passenger seat with rabbit ears.
 
Anyone know why Mazda decided on cylinder deactivation to occur only at cruising speeds? I would think that when the engine is idling such as waiting for a traffic light to turn green, CD should be triggered as well. This would save even more gas.
Theres i-stop by Mazda for this purpose but unfortunately its not available in the US. And Mazdas i-stop is better than other stop/start system utilizing engine compression to re-start the engine quicker and smoother.

Mazda CX-5's cylinder deactivation operates only at sustained cruising speed between 25 mph and 50 mph (40 km/h to 80 km/h) which means it wont be activated while were driving on the Interstate Highway.

Mazda should simply feature this already-available i-stop instead of spending much money to develop very problematic cylinder deactivation system to have minimum gain on MPG. And i-stop can be de-activated easily by a push button switch if the driver doesnt want the feature.
 
There*s i-stop by Mazda for this purpose but unfortunately it*s not available in the US. And Mazda*s i-stop is better than other stop/start system utilizing engine compression to re-start the engine quicker and smoother.

Mazda CX-5's cylinder deactivation operates only at sustained cruising speed between 25 mph and 50 mph (40 km/h to 80 km/h) which means it won*t be activated while we*re driving on the Interstate Highway.

Mazda should simply feature this already-available i-stop instead of spending much money to develop very problematic cylinder deactivation system to have minimum gain on MPG. And i-stop can be de-activated easily by a push button switch if the driver doesn*t want the feature.

I would have preferred the i-stop system over CD. In city environments, the i-stop will save more fuel than CD.

If not, assign it to a hard switch like others that use start/stop. That is a truly inexplicable omission. With this one, easy change, anyone who doesn't want it can opt out, and they'd still get the EPA or equivalent credit for it.
 
The backup camera debuted in... 1956. Seriously: The first backup camera was used in the 1956 Buick Centurion concept car, presented in January 1956 at the General Motors Motorama. The vehicle had a rear-mounted television camera that sent images to a TV screen in the dashboard in place of the rear-view mirror.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backup_camera

Was the TV screen a 25" console model sitting on the front passenger seat with rabbit ears.

Yup.

It only worked when your little brother held on to the rabbit ears with one hand and stuck the other one out the window. It didn't really matter because by the time the thing warmed up, you had arrived at your destination.
 
I would have preferred the i-stop system over CD. In city environments, the i-stop will save more fuel than CD.

If not, assign it to a hard switch like others that use start/stop. That is a truly inexplicable omission. With this one, easy change, anyone who doesn't want it can opt out, and they'd still get the EPA or equivalent credit for it.

Good to know because I wouldn't want that garbage either.
 
I would have preferred the i-stop system over CD. In city environments, the i-stop will save more fuel than CD.

If not, assign it to a hard switch like others that use start/stop. That is a truly inexplicable omission. With this one, easy change, anyone who doesn't want it can opt out, and they'd still get the EPA or equivalent credit for it.

I think it was you who posted the CX-5 review video posted by a guy in Malaysia. He has a turbo. His car has i-Stop.

So i-Stop exists in the CX-5 (including turbo models) in some markets. Unless he misspoke.

Regarding the On/Off CD switch, wouldn't you still have the Hydraulic Lash Adjuster hardware?
 
I have start/stop in my new car and absolutely hate it. Luckily there's a button to disable it, but not permanently. I have to hit the button every time I get in the car.

Apparently VW doesn't want to mess with the EPA too much at this point. Start/stop is technically an emissions device.
 
Theres i-stop by Mazda for this purpose but unfortunately its not available in the US. And Mazdas i-stop is better than other stop/start system utilizing engine compression to re-start the engine quicker and smoother.

Mazda CX-5's cylinder deactivation operates only at sustained cruising speed between 25 mph and 50 mph (40 km/h to 80 km/h) which means it wont be activated while were driving on the Interstate Highway.

Mazda should simply feature this already-available i-stop instead of spending much money to develop very problematic cylinder deactivation system to have minimum gain on MPG. And i-stop can be de-activated easily by a push button switch if the driver doesnt want the feature.


Thank you, yrwei52. I knew about Mazdas i-Loop but never heard of i-Stop. I googled the term and read about it. i-Stop seems like a better way to do it then automatic stop-and-start. AS&S uses the cars battery and starter. Think of all the extra wear and tear on these two components that AS&S causes.
 
Thank you, yrwei52. I knew about Mazdas i-Loop but never heard of i-Stop. I googled the term and read about it. i-Stop seems like a better way to do it then automatic stop-and-start. AS&S uses the cars battery and starter. Think of all the extra wear and tear on these two components that AS&S causes.
Yeah Mazda does have an excellent automatic stop/start system, i-stop, which is unique comparing to others with similar system. The engine will always be stopped at the compressor cycle of the piston. The engine re-starts with either the engine compression only or with little help of starter. Hence the engine re-start is quicker and smoother than others where they rely only on the starter to re-start the engine. Ive read several reviews about Mazdas i-stop and all of them applauded the i-stop, and believed its the best automatic stop/start system available on the market. Yeah we shouldnt use the bad experience from other automatic stop/start system to dis-credit the i-stop, and at least theres a switch to turn it off if you really dont like it.

Again Mazda should use available i-stop and i-Eloop to get minimum gain on MPG for EPA ratings for the US market, not by spending valuable research money to develop a new cylinder deactivation system which has bad reputation of long-term reliability issues. Not to mention the risk of screw-ups such as the rocker-arm falling-off problem due to this new design.



Mazda's excellent i-stop system which is not available in the US:
Mazda%252520CX-5%252520SkyActiv%252520D%252520Taipei_12%252520-%252520Driver%252520Side%252520Switch%252520Panel.jpg
 
Again Mazda should use available i-stop and i-Eloop to get minimum gain on MPG for EPA ratings for the US market, not by spending valuable research money to develop a *new* cylinder deactivation system which has bad reputation of long-term reliability issues. Not to mention the risk of screw-ups such as the rocker-arm falling-off problem due to this *new* design.

Maybe you should lend your crystal ball to Mazda. Seems like you've got all the answers. :p

You know what else has a bad reputation of long-term reliability issues? Auto start/stop. But Mazda implemented their own version, and by all accounts, it seems to be executed well. Factory turbocharged engines carry a stigma of poor reliability as well, but Mazda developed the dynamic pressure turbo engine anyway. The only way they were able to get where they are was to innovate and try new things. Now, I'll agree that CD was a bit of a let-down given the minor mpg increase and the recall that came out of the software flaw, but that doesn't mean that they should just stick to the old stuff. Obviously they thought they could reinvent CD to be better than the rest, and this time, they were wrong. "Standing still" with the non-CD Skyactiv-G engine would have done a lot for establishing reliability. But when the industry and regulations change, they have to adapt. Do you think that they should axe the SPCCI research as well? What about electrification? And the research on an inline-six engine and RWD platform?
 
Back