1998 Mazda Rx7 Convertable / 76,051 Orig Miles on 2040-cars

Auto blog

This map reveals the cleanest vehicles based on location

Naysayers love to point out how dirty the electricity grid mix is when it comes to charging electric vehicles. Curmudgeons are eager to jump into any conversation about EVs to enlighten the lucky listeners about how plug-in cars contribute to pollution, sometimes even throwing in a dash of climate-change denial for good measure. (Thanks, buddy. Pray, tell me more about the plight of oppressed SUV owners.) Unless someone buys an EV just because they think they're cool (which, yeah, they often are), they probably have at least a passable understanding of their environmental pros and cons. As many EV owners are already aware, location has a lot to do with any particular plug-in car's carbon footprint. Still, there's always more to know, and knowledge is not a bad thing, especially if one uses it to do the right thing. That's why this handy-dandy map from Carnegie Mellon University is so interesting. CMU researchers have compiled information about the lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions of various EVs based on where they're charged, as compared to gasoline-powered vehicles. The researchers looked at the Nissan Leaf, Chevrolet Volt, and Prius Plug-In Hybrid versus the gasoline-dependent Toyota Prius hybrid and the stop-start-equipped Mazda3 with i-ELOOP and compared grams of CO2 emitted per mile. CMU takes into account the grid mix, ambient temperature, and driving patterns. CMU takes into account the grid mix based on county, as well as ambient temperature and driving patterns in terms of miles traveled on the highway or in the city. For instance, if you drive a Nissan Leaf in urban areas of California, Texas, or Florida, your carbon footprint is lower than it would be if you were driving a standard Toyota Prius. However, if you charge your Leaf in the Midwest or the South, for the most part, you've got a larger carbon footprint than the Prius. If you live in the rural Midwest, you'd probably even be better off driving a Mazda3. Throughout the country, the Chevrolet Volt has a larger carbon footprint than the Toyota Prius, but a smaller one than the Mazda3 in a lot of urban counties in the US. The Prius and Prius Plug-In are relatively equal across the US. Having trouble keeping it straight? That's not surprising. The comparisons between plug-in and gasoline vehicles are much more nuanced than the loudest voices usually let on.

2016 Mazda CX-5 [w/video]

It's difficult for me to get excited about crossovers. I try hard not to be the stereotypical car guy: ignoring the fact that the rest of the world loves these tall hatchbacks, while yelling, "station wagons make more sense!" until I've voided my lungs of air. Deep down I am that guy, but I work around it. Historically the Mazda CX-5 is one crossover that has been quasi-immune to my knee-jerking. It doesn't weigh two tons, offers a manual transmission (in poverty spec, but still...), and looks faster than its competitors. Most importantly, the CX-5 can round a corner without wobbling like a Slinky at the top of the stairs. No item on that list of plaudits would likely crack the top ten "desirables" for average small CUV shoppers. So, for the 2016 update, Mazda instead upgraded the in-cabin experience along with the requisite nips and tucks to the exterior. I borrowed a 2016 model CX-5 to see whether or not those concessions to comfort affected the car-nerd stuff. And to see if the Mazda could still be my go-to CUV recommendation. Driving Notes The engine options are unchanged for 2016. You can still have the fine, 2.5-liter four-cylinder engine, with its 184 horsepower and 185 pound-feet of torque, or its wimpier 2.0-liter lil' brother. My fully spec'd Grand Touring came with the bigger engine, which feels adequately powerful for the class, but not quick. In an era where turbocharged engines are everywhere, revving the Skyactiv 2.5-liter up to its torque peak at 3,250 rpm takes some commitment. I'm annoyed that there's no manual offered with the 2.5L (a combo I can have in both the Mazda3 and Mazda6), but I don't hate the automatic transmission. The six-speed unit is unobtrusive 99 percent of the time; something I regretfully can't tell you about certain nine-speed autos. There are no paddles to play with, but you can tap the shift lever up and down if you're struck by a need for total control. With a new center console and dash, and the addition of the Mazda Connect infotainment system, the '16 CX-5 feels like a new vehicle from behind the wheel. An attractive, pliant, leatherish material swaths the neat console and surrounding real estate. And the perforated leather seats feel damn near upscale. I think that Mazda Connect's version of the central control knob (with handy adjacent volume knob) is almost luddite-proof in its simplicity. There's no latency between twisting and reaction on the screen.

Mazda3 five-door vs. Mazda CX-3

As a talking point, it won't rival North Korea, world hunger or Mideast peace, but the ongoing tug between car and crossover continues to resonate in the hallways of Autoblog HQ. And it might also generate some discussion on Mazda showrooms, where the Mazda3 five-door and Mazda's CX-3 crossover are parked within a few feet of each other. Not only do they enjoy proximity on the showroom, but they enjoy/suffer (your choice, depending on POV) pricing proximity on the window sticker. The Mazda3 five-door is the more mature model of the two, having been introduced to a world market in fall 2003. With a commonsense footprint enclosed by almost-organic, upscale sheetmetal, the Mazda3 – especially in 5-door form – punches well above its weight in the still-nascent hatchback category. With a redesign (third-generation) introduced in 2014, along with a more recent refresh, the newest sedan and hatchback merge Mazda's KODO design philosophy with a responsive platform, available 2.5-liter drivetrain and a comfortable – if not expansive – interior. What the Mazda3 5-door (photo at left) does not give you is the crossover's high hip point, despite having ground clearance almost identical to the CX-3 subcompact crossover. And while the stated passenger volume of the Mazda3 and CX-3 is almost identical, those cubes are arranged differently; the Mazda3 offers an interior package more linear, while the CX-3 is more upright. Mazda's subcompact CX-3 (photo at top) is a more recent entry, having been developed from the Mazda2 architecture and hitting the street two years ago. It sits below Mazda's CX-9 and CX-5 in the Mazda pecking order. And it is tiny, on a wheelbase of just 101 inches and offering an overall length of just 168 inches. It is seven inches shorter than the Mazda3, with a wheelbase five inches shorter. The net effect is a more compressed environment for passengers, along with the very real challenge of fitting something inside – such as a bicycle – even when that something has its front wheel removed. In the city, I like the CX-3's compactness, and relatively unrestricted visibility when compared to the Mazda3's overall length and lower seating. But when both are equipped with their six-speed automatics, and the Mazda3 is spec'd with its available 2.5 liter DOHC four, there's almost no comparison in their performance. With that spec the hatchback has Mazda's well-hyped zoom, while the CX-3 makes do with nothing but a 4-cylinder boom.