2002 Mazda Mpv Mini Van-needs Transmission on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2016 Mazda CX-9 First Drive

Automotive enthusiasts tend to obsess over spec sheets. How else could we know which cars and trucks are the quickest in a straight line, hold the road with the greatest tenacity, or tow the biggest trailers? More succinctly, what ammunition would we have in the seemingly endless back-and-forth of Internet forums if it weren't for specifications? Mazda's engineers think they've found a better way. The 2016 CX-9 has less horsepower than its primary competitors. The only engine available is a turbocharged four-cylinder, hooked to a six-speed automatic. Drivers won't miss the 23 horsepower (or more, as we'll soon explain) lost in the changeover from 2015 to 2016, because Mazda applied its holistic Skyactiv approach to the largest vehicle it offers. That means less weight and, ultimately, more fun. Or so they say. Are they right? Yes. And no. Most of the time, in normal on-road driving conditions, the 2016 CX-9 is the most fun you can have with three rows. But the real-world tradeoff didn't go off completely without a hitch. Reasoning that real-world performance is more important than ultimate horsepower, Mazda specified a four-cylinder for its big, three-row SUV instead of a more traditional V6. Let's get those all-important specifications out of the way: All 2016 Mazda CX-9s are fitted with a 2.5-liter turbocharged four-cylinder with 250 horsepower and, impressively, 310 pound-feet of torque at just 2,000 rpm. Unless you decide to use 87 octane, in which case you'll be limited to 227 horsepower. Mazda doesn't think owners will actually notice the difference in power levels, so there's no Premium Fuel Recommended sticker on the back of the fuel door. Mazda utilized some clever turbo trickery to deliver a diesel-like torque curve from its gasoline-fueled engine, which makes the small-displacement powerplant feel lively at low engine speeds. The flipside is that the CX-9 runs out of breath as the needle swings across the upper reaches of the tach. While that simply wouldn't do for a sportscar like the MX-5, in the CX-9 it's not necessarily a deal breaker. One benefit to the downsized engine is that it doesn't guzzle fuel. The EPA rates the CX-9 at 22 miles per gallon in the city and 28 on the highway. Drop one mpg all around for the all-wheel-drive model. Those figures beat out all the CX-9's most natural competitors, including the Honda Pilot and Toyota Highlander. The turbo-four Ford Explorer matches the 28-mpg highway figure, but loses by three in the city.

2016 Mazda CX-3 First Drive

If there's any doubt in your mind about the importance of B-segment crossovers, consider this: our review of the 2016 Mazda CX-3 arrives on your screen less than 24 hours after our first test of the 2016 Honda HR-V. Both of these vehicles are hugely important entries for their respective automakers. And while they take a similar shape and will compete head to head, the truth is, they're very different products. The HR-V is a knockout because of its excellent packaging and added versatility over Honda's own Fit and Civic. It's a wholly competent product, and we imagine it'll be one of, if not the best-selling vehicle in the class. In terms of being desirable for customers, it checks all the necessary boxes: frugal, functional, efficient, and affordable. Mazda takes a similar approach, but focuses instead on its key strength of offering cars that are great to drive, and look damn good. What's more, the CX-3 won't have to share showroom space as the HR-V does with the Fit – the all-new Mazda2 isn't slated for the US right now. Instead, the new CUV will serve as an entry point into the brand. Because of this, Mazda is betting big on the CX-3. That all starts with a product that's appealing to the eye. Design director Derek Jenkins says Mazda "didn't want to do the funky route" with its compact CUV – a nudge to the Nissan Juke and Fiat 500X, right there. Instead, the CX-3 uses the Kodo design language that Mazda has perfected since its production debut on the CX-5 in 2012. Across the board, the company's products look incredible, and the CX-3 is right at home amongst Mazda's latest beauties. Notice the long hood with a flowing character line that runs over the front fender and down the body side, chiseled off at the end with tight rear proportions and a small overhang. Huge arches draw focus to the premium 18-inch wheels found on our Grand Touring CX-3, but swallow up the 16-inch rollers used on lesser models. The glass area is kept to a minimum, but visibility from inside is still quite good. Details like the LED accents in the head- and taillamps look premium and aggressive. From all angles, this is an attractive crossover. It's a bold, dynamic entry in a class filled with cutesy, oddball, and bland designs. Underneath the CX-3 is the Skyactiv chassis found in the new Mazda2. At 168.3 inches long, 69.6 inches wide, and 60.7 inches tall, the CX-3 is smaller than the Mazda3 in every dimension except height.

World Car of the Year finalists announced

To say the 2014 Geneva Motor Show was packed full of news is an understatement as big as the show's home at the Palexpo convention center. Despite everything that we were able to cover during this year's show, there's still more coming out of Switzerland, including the announcement of the finalists for the 2014 World Car of the Year Awards.
We reported on the original list of finalists over three weeks ago, and now, that initial list has been pared down to three finalists for each of the five awards. The finalists were announced at a press conference by frequent Autoblog contributor and co-chair of the awards, Matt Davis (above).
The finalists for the overall title of 2014 World Car of the Year are the Audi A3, the BMW 4 Series and the Mazda3. The World Luxury Car of the Year will be either the Bentley Flying Spur, the Mercedes-Benz S-Class or the Land Rover Range Rover Sport, while the Performance Car of the Year will be awarded to the Chevrolet Corvette Stingray, the Ferrari 458 Speciale or the Porsche 911 GT3 (which, um, yeah...).