Miata With Bmw Z4 Stylings - Low Reserve- on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Why is it called Mazda CX-30? Plus other questions answered

GENEVA — Mazda just introduced its latest crossover, the CX-30, and it left us raising an eyebrow. It's planned for a global release, including the United States, and it's supposed to slot between two compact crossovers that one might not think had room for another model. Plus it has a name that doesn't fit Mazda's typical nomenclature. So we thought we'd take a little time to explain some of those things, starting with the name. Mazda arrived at the CX-30 name because of a self-created problem: the Chinese Mazda CX-4. The CX-4 name would be perfect for the CX-30, since it would fall right between the CX-3 and CX-5 where it's positioned. But with the name taken, and evidently no plans to discontinue, replace, or rename that Chinese model, Mazda needed something else, and fractions and decimals weren't on the table. So appending a zero was the plan. Talking with a Mazda representative, there were hints, though no concrete confirmation, that this naming scheme could possibly spread throughout the Mazda line. There would be advantages to such a system, such as bringing the CX-30 into line with other Mazda products, but it would also provide room for other in-between models named CX-35, CX-25, etc. Now for the size. Mazda says it fits between the CX-3 and CX-5, both of which will be sold alongside it for the foreseeable future. But is it closer to one than the other? Length-wise, the CX-30 is 4.7 inches longer than the CX-3 and 5.9 inches shorter than the CX-5. It's also an inch wider than CX-3 and 1.8 inches narrower than CX-5. Interestingly, the CX-30 and CX-3 are the same height, which is 5.9 inches shorter than the CX-5. The CX-30 does have a bit more ground clearance than the CX-3, but only by a few hundredths of an inch. To add some context outside the Mazda brand, the CX-30's size also puts it on par with crossovers such as the Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross, Subaru Crosstrek and Jeep Compass. All of those are sort of in-betweeners themselves. By contrast, the CX-3 is one of the smallest subcompact crossovers and aligns more closely with a Hyundai Kona. In other words, there actually was a segment gap Mazda could fill as the CX-30 fall pretty squarely between the CX-3 and CX-5. As such, we also imagine that pricing will fall between the two. The CX-3 starts at $21,435 and the CX-5 at $25,395. So about $23,000 seems reasonable for the base Skyactiv 2.0-liter engine, and probably more for the Skyactiv-X engine.

Mazda on sales upswing in Europe but won't build there

Auto sales in Europe have been a tricky proposition for some years, but Mazda has seen some success on the backs of the CX-5 and new Mazda6. According to a report form Automotive News Europe, though, that doesn't mean we should be looking for the Japanese manufacturer to set up production operations there.
Mazda's European CEO, Jeff Guyton, explained to AN that "Our intention is to have manufacturing scale. That gives you scale economy and quality through repeatability." In other words, a big honking plant in one part of the world is preferable to a half dozen small factories building the same vehicles.
European sales for Mazda are up 5.4 percent in the first half of 2013, with 74,000 units sold. That kicked the Zoom-Zoom brand's market share up from one to 1.2 percent. Small gains, but gains nonetheless. According to Guyton, Mazda would need to sell 200,000 units of just one model in Europe for local production to make sense. Mazda's best European year saw 320,000 units sold across the entire range.

Infiniti QX60 AWD vs. Mazda CX-9 Signature

In certain ZIP codes around Dallas, Chevy's Suburban remains the Official SUV of Texas, but Infiniti's QX60 could be the Official Crossover. The Pathfinder-based three-row is everywhere. And while its popularity is based on transporting kids and their stuff, the QX60 is a more urban Suburban. Mazda's CX-9 is not as ubiquitous as the QX60 in McMansion driveways, but it has been making inroads into the near-luxury segment with its near-luxury spec. The CX-9's second generation has obviously upscale intent, in the sheetmetal and throughout the top-line Signature interior. And the prices of these two cars are surprisingly close. INFINITI QX60 AWD: The sheetmetal differentiating Infiniti's QX60 from its volume-oriented Nissan donor is attractive. The changes are subtle, and in profile the Pathfinder and Infiniti are almost identical, but the eye is drawn to the differences in the grille and D-pillar. The Infiniti has a luxury vibe with a more athletic stance. The QX60's interior surfaces seem upscale, but if you want wood it will cost you. In "building our own" and opting for graphite leather with maple trim, the wood requires another $12,000(!) of mandatory packages, including Infiniti's Premium and Premium Plus packages ($1,800 and $2,900, respectively) and $7,300 of Deluxe Tech. So, wood? We wouldn't. But if you do, know the QX60 won't match the larger QX80 in presence or passion, but it is certainly something beyond a rebadged Pathfinder. For you and your passengers, there is 156 cubic feet of interior room; with the second and third rows folded, you can accommodate 76 cubic feet of cargo. Like in most crossovers, that third row is best used by young kids, but taking six adults to lunch won't require too much gymnastics – or chiropractics. On the road, the QX60 is known more for comfort than composure; this isn't an old Buick, but neither is it a BMW. Nissan's 3.5 liter V6 produces generous power (295 horsepower and 270 pound-feet of torque), but it's transmitted to either the front wheels or all wheels via a CVT (continuously variable transmission). Nissan has tried to mitigate the quirkiness, but it's a CVT all the same. At a well-equipped base of $44,000, we like the QX60. But start adding options, and you can approach $60,000, which is real money even in the better ZIP codes. MAZDA CX-9 SIGNATURE: This, ladies and gentlemen, is dramatic. Mazda has absolutely nailed it. Using Mazda's KODO design language on a large platform could have gone wrong.