Where Is Mazda Headed Next?
- Thread starter GJ-Molestor
- Start date
Back in the 90's Mazda made the MX3, featuring one of the smallest 6cyl engines ever mass produced. Definitely the smallest ever available in the US.
1.8L V6 that sang to 7k rpms!
It was called Eunos 30X here!
mazdadude
ZOOOOOOOOOM ZOOOOOOOOOM
- :
- '16.5 Mazda CX-5 Touring
Yes, that was a fun motor. Smooth as silk, but I always wished it had some more torque. I had the Raspberry Metallic Special Edition like this one. Could always find my car in the parking lot very quickly. (detect) I HATED the slick and stiff leather interior.
So sick. I've always had a soft spot for a nice MX3, and yours was pretty cool. I dunno if I could have dealt with the pink, but damn the car sure looked clean. Remember the Geo Storm? Like half of em were pink too. Musta been something in the water back then. lol
I have a friend who delivers newspapers for a living (don't be hatin', he makes over 6k a month!!) and drove a 4 cyl MX3 for years. It never died. He put over 750k on it before some drunk driver plowed into it while it was parked. That B6 engine is a tank! Now he drives a Honda Fit with about the same miles by now. It's never hiccuped either.
His latest is a Fiat 500. It's a complete POS. It's left him stranded multiple times and it's only a couple years old. Electrical issues mostly, but it's had mechanical crap happen too. I told him to get rid of that pile and check out the Mazda2 (which btw is one of the most underrated cars on the road).
I have a friend who delivers newspapers for a living (don't be hatin', he makes over 6k a month!!) and drove a 4 cyl MX3 for years. It never died. He put over 750k on it before some drunk driver plowed into it while it was parked. That B6 engine is a tank! Now he drives a Honda Fit with about the same miles by now. It's never hiccuped either.
His latest is a Fiat 500. It's a complete POS. It's left him stranded multiple times and it's only a couple years old. Electrical issues mostly, but it's had mechanical crap happen too. I told him to get rid of that pile and check out the Mazda2 (which btw is one of the most underrated cars on the road).
- :
- 2005 Mazda3
Depends on the country but regardless, if they want to sell vehicles in the states they have to play by it's rules. More power=more fuel consumption which is why I don't see Mazda building anything bigger than a 2.5 4-cylinder anytime soon.
- :
- Plano, Texas, USA
Firstly Lexus RX 350 may be smaller than CX-9 but its considerably larger and much more spacious inside than CX-5:
L/W/H (inch): CX-9 199.4/77.5/69.0; RX 192.5/74.6/67.7; CX-5 179.1/72.5/66.1
Wheelbase (inch): CX-9 115.3; RX 109.8; CX-5 106.2
My friends 2017 RX 350 is only $5K more than a CX-9 Signature, but it has many features not found in CX-9.
Id much rather to have a 295hp naturally aspirated 3.5L V6 using regular gas instead of 227/250hp turbo 2.5L I4 pulling a 4,000+ pound vehicle!
To me Lexus RX definitely not drives like a boat. The quality-feel interior, although its made in Canada, is a step better than Japanese made CX-9.
With ventilated front seats、panorama glass roof, and many other features in RX, we simply cant find them in any Mazda vehicles.
Lexus Enform Remote mobile app helps you lock and unlock doors, start the engine, resume climate settings, find your vehicle in a parking lot and monitor guest drivers. On CX-9 it cant even offer a regular remote engine start on factory key fob. The Mazda genuine accessory? With a telescopic antenna on a separate key fob?
Seen many complains on our CX-5 weak charging front 1A USB data ports? Theres the same issue on CX-9. Well, in RX it offers wireless charging pad!
Lastly, Id like to present interior color selection between the two, and I digress.
Firstly Lexus RX 350 may be smaller than CX-9 but it’s considerably larger and much more spacious inside than CX-5:
L/W/H (inch): CX-9 199.4/77.5/69.0; RX 192.5/74.6/67.7; CX-5 179.1/72.5/66.1
Wheelbase (inch): CX-9 115.3; RX 109.8; CX-5 106.2
My friend’s 2017 RX 350 is only $5K more than a CX-9 Signature, but it has many features not found in CX-9.
I’d much rather to have a 295hp naturally aspirated 3.5L V6 using regular gas instead of 227/250hp turbo 2.5L I4 pulling a 4,000+ pound vehicle!
To me Lexus RX definitely not drives like a boat. The quality-feel interior, although it’s made in Canada, is a step better than Japanese made CX-9.
With ventilated front seats、panorama glass roof, and many other features in RX, we simply can’t find them in any Mazda vehicles.
Lexus Enform Remote mobile app helps you lock and unlock doors, start the engine, resume climate settings, find your vehicle in a parking lot and monitor guest drivers. On CX-9 it can’t even offer a regular remote engine start on factory key fob. The Mazda genuine accessory? With a telescopic antenna on a separate key fob?
Seen many complains on our CX-5 weak charging front 1A USB data ports? There’s the same issue on CX-9. Well, in RX it offers wireless charging pad!
Lastly, I’d like to present interior color selection between the two, and I digress.
View attachment 217517View attachment 217518
CX-9 here competes with the Toyota Kluger (your Highlander), Hyundai Sante Fe among others and not Lexus RX series. The Lexus tries to compete with BMW & Merc etc SUV's here.
3.5L RX350 is identical to what is found in the Kluger. It's good but there are better engines out there from it's competitors.
Finally Lexus is as boring as their Toyota twins.
P.S no argument from me re 1.0A front usb ports!
Last edited:
- :
- CX5
Who cares about exterior dimensions? Let's look at the interior dimensions.
Lexus RX 350
-----------------
Passenger Capacity : 5
Passenger Volume : ft 121.3
Front Head Room : in 39.4
Front Leg Room : in 44.1
Front Shoulder Room : in 57.8
Front Hip Room : in 56.6
Second Head Room : in 39.1
Second Leg Room : in 38
Second Shoulder Room : in 57.6
Second Hip Room : in 56.1
Cargo Volume to Seat 1 : ft 56.3
Cargo Volume to Seat 2 : ft 18.4
Mazda CX-5
-----------------
Passenger Capacity : 5
Passenger Volume : ft 103.6
Front Head Room : in 39.3
Front Leg Room : in 41
Front Shoulder Room : in 57.1
Front Hip Room : in 55.2
Second Head Room : in 39
Second Leg Room : in 39.6
Second Shoulder Room : in 54.8
Second Hip Room : in 55.3
Cargo Volume to Seat 1 : ft 59.6
Cargo Volume to Seat 2 : ft 30.9
The RX 350 is 1.4" wider in the front seat and has 3.1" more front seat legroom.
The RX 350 is 0.8" wider in the rear seat, but the CX-5 has 1.6" more rear seat legroom.
The CX-5 has 70% larger cargo volume with the rear seats up, and a little more cargo volume with the seats down.
So the RX 350 is bigger in the front row, it's a bit of a toss-up in the rear, and the CX-5 has a lot more cargo space.
In terms of interior dimensions, the RX 350 is in the CX-5's class. CX-9 is bigger everywhere and has three rows of seating.
Go the Lexus site and build a Lexus RX 350. If you build one with interior materials and features equivalent to what you get in the CX-9 GT, it's around $53k. If you build one with luxury interior trim, pano sunroof, 360 camera, ML sound, rear seat entertainment, etc. it's $60k. My local Lexus dealer doesn't have a single RX 350 under $50k. They have a bunch of modestly optioned RX's around $53-54k, and a bunch of luxury-trim F Sports at $60k. CX-9 Signature is $45k.
Like I said earlier, if you go for the luxury trim and all the bells & whistles, it's quite a bit nicer inside than a CX-9. But it's still a CX-5 sized car that sells for ~$10k more than a CX-9, so you ought to expect it will be a lot nicer.
Regarding the V-6 vs. turbo I-4, I don't agree with you there either. My wife and I shopped all the CX-9's competitors and drove most of them, including the Highlander with the 8-speed. They all had V-6s in the roughly 290hp range but they were all gutless at cruising RPM. In contrast, the 2.5T n the CX-9 has huge torque at cruising RPM. The V-6s pull ahead above 5000 RPM, but the only time you'll find yourself about 5000 rpm in one of those cars if you're flooring it. The extra power gets the RX 350 to 60 mph 0.1s faster than the CX-9, and the Highlander is 0.2s faster than the CX-9, which is inconsequential. The Honda Pilot and GMC Acadia do better, low to mid 6s I think, but all the power is at the top.
The CX-9 feels a lot stronger and more responsive when you drive it. If you want a little acceleration, you press the throttle a little bit and it instantly accelerates. If you want moderate acceleration, just press a little more. The response is very linear and easy to modulate. It doesn't need to downshift unless you're trying to accelerate moderately hard, and even then it usually just takes a single downshift to get into the meaty range of the powerband and doesn't feel like it's fighting you to stay in too high a gear. In contrast, the 8-speed transmission in the Toyota and Lexus, and the 9-speed in the Honda, Jeep, and Dodge are tuned to upshift early and resist downshifting. When you combine that with an engine with no low-end torque it makes for an unresponsive driving experience. When test driving them, I felt like they wanted to be either in loaf mode or drag mode, and not in between.
- :
- 2021 CX-9 Sig
- :
- 2021 CX-5 GT
One thing that does differentiate Mazda from other brands, and especially other luxury brands is the options. True luxury brands offer lots of options and methods for customization. One CX-9 Signature is just like another. I don't believe that is what people who buy luxury cars want.
- :
- Plano, Texas, USA
And 2017 CX-9 EPA passenger volume is 135.1 ft. Lexus RX has 17.7 more passenger volume than CX-5, and CX-9 has 13.8 ft more interior volume than RX. So even if you compare only interior, which side the RX is closer? When I parked our 2016 CX-5 next to friends 2017 Lexus RX 350, their size deference is very obvious. And RX is going to offer the third row seating (again) with longer wheelbase.
Most RXs in Lexus dealers are around $53K MSRP well equipped. Friends RX has $53K MSRP but easily negotiated to $47K with everything I mentioned in my previous post sans panorama glass roof. It has so many features with much better color selection and combination not found in the top-of-line CX-9 Signature! You think you can find a CX-9 Signature at $37K?
Between 227hp and 295hp using regular gas pulling 4,000+ pound vehicle, which engine do you prefer? Theres no replacement for displacement, especially the real-world fuel efficiency is not much different. And the longevity of the turbo charger on CX-9 is still unknown but Toyotas 3.5L V6 has been proven very reliable.
Of course were comparing apple to orange, comparing the Mazda to Lexus is not fair. I merely say if Mazda wants to go luxury, therere too many things need to catch up!
- :
- 2005 Mazda3
And 2017 CX-9 EPA passenger volume is 135.1 ft. Lexus RX has 17.7 more passenger volume than CX-5, and CX-9 has 13.8 ft more interior volume than RX. So even if you compare only interior, which side the RX is closer? When I parked our 2016 CX-5 next to friend’s 2017 Lexus RX 350, their size deference is very obvious. And RX is going to offer the third row seating (again) with longer wheelbase.
Most RX’s in Lexus dealers are around $53K MSRP well equipped. Friend’s RX has $53K MSRP but easily negotiated to $47K with everything I mentioned in my previous post sans panorama glass roof. It has so many features with much better color selection and combination not found in the top-of-line CX-9 Signature! You think you can find a CX-9 Signature at $37K?
Between 227hp and 295hp using regular gas pulling 4,000+ pound vehicle, which engine do you prefer? There’s no replacement for displacement, especially the real-world fuel efficiency is not much different. And the longevity of the turbo charger on CX-9 is still unknown but Toyota’s 3.5L V6 has been proven very reliable.
Of course we’re comparing apple to orange, comparing the Mazda to Lexus is not fair. I merely say if Mazda wants to go luxury, there’re too many things need to catch up!
And we're only talking about NEW vehicles. I wouldn't hesitate at buying a used Lexus at all when you consider they sit at the top of the Reliability charts
- :
- Plano, Texas, USA
Lexus RX is one vehicle requires front license plate to disguise the ugly big black “X” front fascia so that it looks a bit better!Another good thing about the Lexus is if you get stranded on a deserted island in it, you've got a nice big throw-net for fishing built right in.
I'd take an MDX over the Lexus any day.
Acura MDX finally gave up that big chrome “tooth” at front and back now it looks more ordinary and much nicer.
The passanger volume of the NX is just 71.6 ft vs 135.1 ft for the CX-5.
Also, the NX is so freaking ugly. It looks nearly identical to the CX-5, except someone slapped a bunch of random ugly creases onto it.
It also weighs and costs as much as the CX-9, so as you said yourself:
yrwei52 said:
Last edited:
RX is for older demographic. There are threads on Lexus forums confirming if it's a crime for 30 something's to own a Lexus. Lexus might offer 3 row but won't price it so low. It will eat their LX and GX sales. 3 Row RX equipped as a cx9 signature will be 62-65 or possibly more.
For me Mazda and Korean brands have pushed Acura and Honda out of the top 10 reliability club.
So great drivetrain still more reliable than a gimmicky CVT/tiny Turbo EPA fooling Honda is a good win.
For me Mazda and Korean brands have pushed Acura and Honda out of the top 10 reliability club.
So great drivetrain still more reliable than a gimmicky CVT/tiny Turbo EPA fooling Honda is a good win.
