2013 Mazda Mazda2 Touring on 2040-cars

Auto blog

IIHS Top Safety Pick and Top Safety Pick+ awards get tougher: Here are the latest winners

Automakers love to trumpet the accolades from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, but the agency keeps making its best grades harder to achieve. For 2020, it is raising the bar again, requiring a better score in the passenger-side small-overlap crash test, wider availability of top-performing headlights, and automatic emergency braking systems that effectively avoid collisions with pedestrians, in addition to its previous benchmarks. Why the 2020 criteria is harder: To be named either a Top Safety Pick or Top Safety Pick+, the required performance in the passenger-side small-overlap crash test has been raised from Acceptable to Good, meaning that the model must achieve Good ratings in all crash tests. The Nissan Rogue, for example, scored an Acceptable in the passenger-side small overlap crash, and so it loses its Top Safety Pick rating for 2020. To achieve either of the top ratings, a vehicle's automatic emergency braking system must effectively avoid hitting pedestrians as well as other vehicles. (The automatic emergency braking system can be optional, but then the award applies to the model only when so equipped.) Any vehicle whose automatic emergency braking system does not include pedestrian detection would lose its TSP or TSP+ rating for 2020, the Ram 1500 being one example. To be named a Top Safety Pick+, the model can have no variant with headlights that achieve less than an Acceptable rating (most new cars have different headlights — often LEDs — that are exclusive to upper trim levels).

2018 Mazda CX-5 spied testing in Southern California

It appears the replacement for the Mazda CX-5 is on its way. The current model, though a few years old at this point, is still one of our favorite crossovers on the market. Its combination of handsome styling, practicality, and a genuine fun-to-drive nature make it a winner in our hearts. Hopefully this new model doesn't stray too far from that winning recipe. At least on the outside, that seems to be the case. The spy photos reveal Mazda's Kodo design language in full bloom. The general shape is the same as the current model, but the curves are a little tighter and appear similar to the new CX-9 and Chinese-only CX-4. The grille loses the horizontal bars for a deep-set mesh pattern, while the whole fascia appears to be more upright. The headlights and taillights look to be slimmer and slightly re-sculpted versions of the current shape. Other details for the upcoming CX-5 are scarce. The crossover is expected to debut next year as a 2018 model. It's unknown what engines or transmissions will be available, though the current powertrains are likely to carry over. There's also the rumor of a Mazda diesel making its way over, but, as always, it seems like a long shot. Related Video:

Mazda CX-30 Luggage Test | How much cargo space?

The Mazda CX-30 is pretty much a lifted Mazda3 hatchback. Same platform, awfully similar dimensions, and the interior's a spitting image (if not identical). Ditto cargo capacity. On paper, the two have virtually the same amount of space behind their raised back seats, with the CX-30 at 20.2 cubic-feet and the 3 with just a teensy less at 20.1.  Now, before I go any further, let's see how much that 20.1 cubic-feet relates to in the Mazda3. I wasn't yet doing this test format back then, hence the video.  For reference, both tests used my standard luggage selection of two midsize roller suitcases that would need to be checked in at the airport (26 inches long, 16 wide, 11 deep), two roll-aboard suitcases that just barely fit in the overhead (24L x 15W x 10D), and one smaller roll-aboard that fits easily (23L x 15W x 10D). The bag of baseballs shown in the video is slightly smaller than my new small-bag go-to, my wife's fancy blue overnight bag (21L x 12W x 12D). So, the mark to beat is therefore all the bags minus the smallest roller.  Here is what 20.2 cubic feet looks like in the CX-30. To move beyond the Mazda3 comparison, that figure is in keeping with the CX-30's niche placement between subcompact (the teens) and compact SUVs (upper 20s to upper 30s). The Mazda CX-5 has 30.9 cubic-feet.  Now, typically, I start off by seeing how much I can fit inside with the cargo cover in place. Sadly, this particular CX-30's cargo cover is missing. We'll just have to hope it doesn't rob the CX-30 of as much space as the CX-5's does.  First off, it's immediately noticed that the CX-30's cargo area is not as long as the 3 hatchback's. The largest bag just barely squeezed inside, whereas there was some room to spare in the 3. Now, let's keep loading.  Whattya know? All of the roller bags fit inside. That includes the smallest one, which didn't fit in the 3, fitting atop the stack with perhaps 30% of it over the back seat line. Now, I could've done the same Tetris stack in the 3, but I'm virtually certain the hatch wouldn't have closed. Advantage, then, to the CX-30 and its extra height.  And surprise, the fancy bag also fits. Technically. It robs rear visibility, is pretty far above the seat line and it just barely fits under the back light. If it was filled, I have my doubts about its inclusion. Nevertheless, with or without it, there's still a bit more space on the right side for that bag of baseballs.  Now let's discuss the power liftgate.