Mazda CX/MX range discussion

[Keef]

Generally impressed with the CX-90, definitely exudes the premium feel that Mazda has been trying to encapsulate over the last few years. The sloping rear-end is pretty attractive, and it's refreshing that interior seems to prefer physical controls over endless screens.

Though, I hope the gas mileage for this is at least somewhat competitive. Mazda has been behind the curve on efficiency which matters more and more everyday. Hopefully they can deliver on price- it would really be a shame if this has a starting price of upwards of $50k, definitely would alienate a significant chunk of potential buyers.

Disagree on the efficiency argument. Mazda is the only one decoupling the torque converter at idle and the i-eloop system is clever and cheap. Their skyactive tech is legit. Pretty routine for a Mazda 6 2.5 to cruise the freeway at 40 mpg ad the 3 can do about the same. That's as good as a miserable base-model Nissan Altima with a CVT. Mazda's cars get top-tier real world fuel mileage, screw the EPA tests.

 

[Omnis]

I think what bothers me is that the CX-60 and CX-90 are very chin-forward (proud lower fascia), whereas the CX-50 and CX-5 are very brow-forward (recessed lower fascia). The result is that the 60 & 90 look a little slab-faced whereas the 50 and 5 have a more dynamic appearance. This is very likely an intentional differentiator to make the rwd platform cars seem more imposing/stately, but in reality I think it makes them look a little goofy because it conflicts with the design language for me. I think the current CX-9 does it better.

Agreed, but when you look at the car from standing height, it's really not as pronounced.



It should age pretty well. The 6 looks modern and classic at the same time. It will always be a good-looking car. This has a similar vibe. It really is their version of the E53 X5.

Though, I hope the gas mileage for this is at least somewhat competitive. Mazda has been behind the curve on efficiency which matters more and more everyday. Hopefully they can deliver on price- it would really be a shame if this has a starting price of upwards of $50k, definitely would alienate a significant chunk of potential buyers.

The only thing that held Mazda back in the mpg department was gearing. I get 25mpg city in a turbo with 310 ft lbs of torque on tap. In suburban driving, if I can keep the car in 45mph areas without too many stop lights, I get around 45-47mpg. Driving 85-90mph on the highway yields 26-28ish. I suspect it would be 30ish with a 7th highway gear. The 6th gear in the Mazda is not a massive leap and at 90mph you'll be around 3k rpm. The engine has so much torque that I think it could handle something around 2k and sip a little less fuel. I'm sure this is a big part of how BMWs with ZF's 8HP turn out such great fuel economy. Though I've never driven a car with the ZF unit, Mazda's 6-speed is fantastic. The only place I've seen it struggle is around intermediate speeds where it wants to fully lock up. You'll sometimes feel the software locking and unlocking while at a coast. This is all a moot point with the new 8-speed. I wonder if they were able to nest cluthches to save space like in Ford's 10R. Makes you wonder why they invested in developing the transmission if the layout is the same as ZF's.

 

[GranTurNismo]

CX-90 to start at $39,575, with the range-topping trim starting at $60,000. Seven trims are available. Configurator is live:

2025 Mazda CX-90 Inline 6 3-Row SUV | Mazda USA

The CX-90 features harmoniously crafted details, a rear-biased i-Activ AWD® and plenty of space for passengers for any journey.

www.mazdausa.com

 

[ProjectWHaT]

CX-90 to start at $39,575, with the range-topping trim starting at $60,000. Seven trims are available. Configurator is live:

2025 Mazda CX-90 Inline 6 3-Row SUV | Mazda USA

The CX-90 features harmoniously crafted details, a rear-biased i-Activ AWD® and plenty of space for passengers for any journey.

www.mazdausa.com

That's interesting, I don't remember hearing about a base model with only 280hp? The CX-90 Turbo Select has 280hp while the CX-90 Turbo S has 340hp.

Looking at an old Motor1 article on the previous page, the Australian CX-60 has a 280hp inline 6 so it's probably the same drivetrain as that one?

But on the comparison page, the engine between the Turbo and Turbo S appear to be exactly the same? The only difference is the recommended fuel and type of electric motor. Does that mean you can also get 340hp if you fuel your base model with premium?

	CX-90 Turbo Select	CX-90 Turbo S
TOTAL HORSEPOWER WITH RECOMMENDED FUEL	280 hp @ 5,000 rpm	340 hp @ 5,000 rpm
TOTAL TORQUE WITH RECOMMENDED FUEL	332 lb-ft @ 2,000 rpm	369 lb-ft @ 2,000 rpm
ENGINE TYPE	e-SKYACTIV®-G 3.3L Turbo Inline 6*	e-SKYACTIV®-G 3.3L Turbo Inline 6*
REDLINE	6,500 rpm	6,500 rpm
DISPLACEMENT (CC)	3,283	3,283
BORE X STROKE (MM)	86.0 x 94.2	86.0 x 94.2
COMPRESSION RATIO	12.0 : 1	12.0 : 1
FUEL SYSTEM	Advanced Direct Injection	Advanced Direct Injection
RECOMMENDED FUEL	Regular unleaded	Premium unleaded
ELECTRIC MOTOR
TYPE	M Hybid Boost (Mild Hybrid)	AC Synchronous e-SKYACTIV® motor
HORSEPOWER	16.6 hp @ 900 rpm	16.6 hp @ 900 rpm
TORQUE	113 lb-ft @ 200 rpm	113 lb-ft @ 200 rpm
BATTERY CAPACITY	0.33 kWh	0.33 kWh

 

[05XR8]

We’re getting choices of petrol and diesel versions. So, I guess it’ll be both those spec versions.

CX model proliferation not confusing: Mazda

Mazda defends concurrent model strategy, claims customers are not confused by naming

www.goauto.com.au

The smaller CX-60 model line - also with the choice of petrol and diesel six-cylinder engines, and a PHEV model, is due to arrive around the middle of 2023, with pricing starting from $59,800(about $41,500USD).

 

[Keef]

We’re getting choices of petrol and diesel versions. So, I guess it’ll be both those spec versions.

CX model proliferation not confusing: Mazda

Mazda defends concurrent model strategy, claims customers are not confused by naming

www.goauto.com.au

I haven't heard of half the models listed in this article so I assume the convolued naming is an Australian-market thing. Here in North America Mazda only sells a few different models and they're all quite distinct both on paper and in the showroom. I'd say they actually have plenty of room in between for German-style lifestyle models with more style and less practicality, although they need to be careful with the profitability of such models. I think Mazda has done well so far to be cautious and watch the market as they ralign their products with wealthier consumers.

 

[05XR8]

I haven't heard of half the models listed in this article so I assume the convolued naming is an Australian-market thing. Here in North America Mazda only sells a few different models and they're all quite distinct both on paper and in the showroom. I'd say they actually have plenty of room in between for German-style lifestyle models with more style and less practicality, although they need to be careful with the profitability of such models. I think Mazda has done well so far to be cautious and watch the market as they ralign their products with wealthier consumers.

From what I can recall since arriving here in 2007, Australia had lots of “poverty pack”/base models. It’s grown to people wanting everything in a car, but like the article explains, this market prefer choices with configurations. Definitely aligns with how Australians buy top spec models, like the German market you mentioned.

 

[ProjectWHaT]

We’re getting choices of petrol and diesel versions. So, I guess it’ll be both those spec versions.

CX model proliferation not confusing: Mazda

Mazda defends concurrent model strategy, claims customers are not confused by naming

www.goauto.com.au

There's a typo in this article

Among these are two more SUV models under consideration for australia – CX-70, and CX-80 – the former best considered as a five-seat version of the CX-90 with a swooping roofline and slightly shorter body whereas the CX-80 will be a stretched seven-seat version of the CX-6, similar to the relationship between CX-5 and CX-8.

That should be CX-60 I think. The typo makes the article x10 more confusing since there's no such thing as a CX-6 lol

Looking at the Mazda AU page, there's not many AU specific models, other than the CX-8 and BT-50 pickup

Imo, once Mazda retires the CX-_ models and replace them with the CX-_0 models, the lineup will be less confusing, as long as they are consistent with the original plans

Mazda Confirms 5 New SUVs For 2022 And 2023, Including US-Only CX-50 | Carscoops

The new range of SUVs will get two body types (narrow/wide) and two seating layouts (two/three rows)

www.carscoops.com

5 new SUVs will be released in 2022 and 2023.

Starting with the CX-50, it will be a part of the Small Product group, sharing its platform with the Mazda3 and the CX-30. It will available solely in the US market with production starting in January 2022 at the Mazda-Toyota joint venture factory in Huntsville, Alabama. Despite earlier rumors, the CX-50 will not be a successor to the recently facelifted CX-5, but an additional core model for the brand’s lineup.

The rest of the SUVs that were announced belong to the Large Products group, which means they will be based on Mazda’s new platform. Mazda mentioned a wide price range above the CX-5/CX-50, two body types (narrow/wide), and two seating layouts (two/three rows).

More specifically, the two-row CX-60 and the three-row CX-80 were designed for the narrow roads of Europe and Japan. On the contrary, the wide-bodied two-row CX-70 and the three-row CX-90 are destined for North America and other markets “where larger models with a big presence are preferred”. Given the timing of its market launch, the CX-90 flagship could work as a direct replacement for the CX-9 which was first introduced in 2015.

Mazda will be electrifying its whole range by 2030, so the new range of SUVs coming in 2022 and 2023 will offer some kind of hybrid system. The CX-60 and CX-80 will have plug-in hybrid powertrains with four-cylinder gasoline engines. They will also get the new generation of straight-six Skyactiv-X (petrol) and Skyactive-D (diesel) engines fitted with 48V mild-hybrid systems.

The CX-70 and CX-90 will be offered with turbocharged six-cylinder gasoline engines and as plug-in hybrids. Finally, in Japan, Mazda will offer the mild-hybrid six-cylinder Skyactive-D diesel, plus plug-in hybrid variants.

Specifically:

the two-row CX-60 and the three-row CX-80 were designed for the narrow roads of Europe and Japan. On the contrary, the wide-bodied two-row CX-70 and the three-row CX-90 are destined for North America and other markets “where larger models with a big presence are preferred”.

It is interesting that Australia is going to get a wide NA market CX-70 and a narrow EU market CX-80

 

[05XR8]

I thought that CX-6 may have been a China only model, like the CX-4. I didn’t even look it up.

 

[Omnis]

That's interesting, I don't remember hearing about a base model with only 280hp? The CX-90 Turbo Select has 280hp while the CX-90 Turbo S has 340hp.

Looking at an old Motor1 article on the previous page, the Australian CX-60 has a 280hp inline 6 so it's probably the same drivetrain as that one?

But on the comparison page, the engine between the Turbo and Turbo S appear to be exactly the same? The only difference is the recommended fuel and type of electric motor. Does that mean you can also get 340hp if you fuel your base model with premium?

	CX-90 Turbo Select	CX-90 Turbo S
TOTAL HORSEPOWER WITH RECOMMENDED FUEL	280 hp @ 5,000 rpm	340 hp @ 5,000 rpm
TOTAL TORQUE WITH RECOMMENDED FUEL	332 lb-ft @ 2,000 rpm	369 lb-ft @ 2,000 rpm
ENGINE TYPE	e-SKYACTIV®-G 3.3L Turbo Inline 6*	e-SKYACTIV®-G 3.3L Turbo Inline 6*
REDLINE	6,500 rpm	6,500 rpm
DISPLACEMENT (CC)	3,283	3,283
BORE X STROKE (MM)	86.0 x 94.2	86.0 x 94.2
COMPRESSION RATIO	12.0 : 1	12.0 : 1
FUEL SYSTEM	Advanced Direct Injection	Advanced Direct Injection
RECOMMENDED FUEL	Regular unleaded	Premium unleaded
ELECTRIC MOTOR
TYPE	M Hybid Boost (Mild Hybrid)	AC Synchronous e-SKYACTIV® motor
HORSEPOWER	16.6 hp @ 900 rpm	16.6 hp @ 900 rpm
TORQUE	113 lb-ft @ 200 rpm	113 lb-ft @ 200 rpm
BATTERY CAPACITY	0.33 kWh	0.33 kWh

They're the same engine and motor, but the S has different turbo bits and a different tune.

This puts me in a $55,000 dilemma. Think I'd rather go with a Model Y at that price. Still, wouldn't even be sure if I wanted to go with I6 vs Hybrid. Either option is really compelling.

 

[ProjectWHaT]

I thought that CX-6 may have been a China only model, like the CX-4. I didn’t even look it up.

I decided to look at the Chinese Mazda page and I was surprised to see a CX-30 EV which I don't recall hearing about elsewhere?

When compared to the normal CX-30, it is 15mm longer, 55mm wider, and 150mm taller. It has a 19mm longer wheelbase. Under Chinese testing, it has a range of 450km (for comparison, the Tesla Model Y has a 660km range according to their Chinese site) from a 61.1kWh battery

They're the same engine and motor, but the S has different turbo bits and a different tune.

I'm surprised they didn't mention that on their comparison website

 

[Keef]

Jesus. I love Mazda's blue but that thing is attrocious lmao.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

It reminds me of one of those wheelchair-modified vans. Or like this windows error applied to the poor poor Mazda3

 

[ProjectWHaT]

Mazda exec explains why Europe is a 'front-runner' for brand's EV shift

Full-electric cars could account for as much as 70 percent of the Japanese brand's sales in the region by 2030, Mazda Europe CEO Martijn ten Brink said.

europe.autonews.com

CX-80 to be revealed later this year. The CX-3 has been discontinued in Europe.

They expect to sell 10,000 MX-30 BEVs and 10,000 - 20,000 MX-30 PHEV this year. By 2030, they expect 40% - 70% of their vehicles sold to be BEV. By 2025, there'll be another BEV based on the MX-30 and it'll be developed with several partners who will supply motor inverter technology and battery technology

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

CX90 first drives starting to appear



Seems like a pretty impressive vehicle. Still not in love with the look of the front. Also love the west Marin drive location!

 

[ProjectWHaT]

Comparison with seven other three-row SUVs

https://www.autoguide.com/car-comparisons/best-3-row-suv-new-mazda-cx-90-vs-7-rivals

Their conclusion puts the CX-90 in second place, after the Palisade in first and before the Pilot in third

 

[GranTurNismo]

Comparison with seven other three-row SUVs

https://www.autoguide.com/car-comparisons/best-3-row-suv-new-mazda-cx-90-vs-7-rivals

Their conclusion puts the CX-90 in second place, after the Palisade in first and before the Pilot in third

I love how they didn't even bother to include the Outlander. Just goes to show how far off Mitsubishi genuinely is from relevance and competitiveness...

 

[c172fccc]

I love how they didn't even bother to include the Outlander. Just goes to show how far off Mitsubishi genuinely is from relevance and competitiveness...

The Outlander is much smaller and so is the VW Tiguan that also has 7 seats. That’s probably why they weren’t included.

 

[Keef]

They also didn't include the VW Atlas which is plenty worthy and might actually be a bargain.

But what we really want to see is the Mazda compared to the luxury brands. I think the Mazda is easily better than the Acura and Infiniti and probably compares well to the BMW X5, Merc GLE, and Audi Q7 although I expect them to be more premium still. The Mazda's top tier is comparable in price to the entry prices of those SUVs and frankly I'm not sure the BMW and Merc even offer 3 rows. I'd rather have a GV80 than any of those anyway.

I'm getting the sense that the Mazda's top trim is priced in between segements. It's definitely more expensive than the mainstream offerings in that video but is cheaper than even the Genesis much less the Germans. The Acura can be had at a similar price but also offers more expensive sport trims that Mazda does not. Really curious to see how it compares with all these.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

I personally don't get 3-row SUVs. If you honestly can't fit the amount of people you regularly need to move in a normal SUV, you very likely need a van. The only real purpose I can see for a 3-row SUV is to have an imposing car.

 

[Keef]

I personally don't get 3-row SUVs. If you honestly can't fit the amount of people you regularly need to move in a normal SUV, you very likely need a van. The only real purpose I can see for a 3-row SUV is to have an imposing car.

As an old-school first-gen Sequoia owner, I agree. The third row in my truck doesn't fold flat so I constantly drive around with it removed. I've only had to install it to carry people one time but I use the large cargo space way more often than I carry people. And that's fine - the problem with fold-flat seats is that the entire floor is raised up way higher reducing overall cargo space by a huge amount. My buddy struggled to fit a 65 inch TV box in his Pilot earlier today. His load floor is the same height as my body-on-frame full-size truck, but my cargo height is a whole foot taller because I'm not constantly carrying around a useless seat under the "floor". To be clear, the actual body thickness of the two vehicles is about the same, the Pilot might actually be thicker from sill to roof.

These mid-size three-row SUVs are neither as capable as a truck-based SUV, nor as useful as a minivan. I agree that all these people should have minivans.

 

[ProjectWHaT]

According to Drive (Australia) (not The Drive), the next generation CX-5 will come in 2025 or later. It's unclear whether it'll have any hybrid drivetrains, but it is unlikely due to price

The CX-50 is currently available in hybrid form in China and will likely come to the US as well. It shares Toyota's hybrid technology as they own 5% of Mazda

Next-generation Mazda CX-5 confirmed, due 2025

Mazda's best-selling model globally will not be a casualty of the company's new range of higher-priced, six-cylinder SUVs.

www.drive.com.au

There will be another generation of the top-selling Mazda CX-5 family SUV – but it is not due in showrooms until 2025 at the earliest.

It will be the third generation of the CX-5 nameplate, which was Australia's best-selling SUV for seven years straight (2012 to 2019) – and remains Mazda's top-selling model in Australia and overseas.

Showroom arrival timing is yet to be locked in, though Mazda has indicated it is not due this year or next year. Come 2025, the current CX-5 will be eight years old.

While yet to be confirmed, it is expected the new Mazda CX-5 will retain a familiar layout to the current model, with four-cylinder engines and a choice of front- or all-wheel drive.

But it remains to be seen if it adds the option of hybrid power, and if it is a system designed in-house by Mazda – or purchased from Toyota.

The Mazda CX-50 – a CX-5-sized family SUV available in the US and China, on underpinnings shared with the smaller CX-30 – is set to introduce a hybrid version using Toyota technology.

Toyota owns five per cent of Mazda – and the two companies have previously worked together on shared models and hybrid technology.

The new CX-5 is expected to resist the shift to the CX-60's rear- and all-wheel drive underpinnings – and dearer mild-hybrid or plug-in hybrid versions – to keep the price down.

"Senior management have confirmed there will be a next-generation CX-5, that's coming. It's a top selling model globally, so it makes sense," Mazda Australia marketing director Alastair Doak told Drive.

When asked if Mazda will introduce a hybrid version of the CX-5, Mr Doak told Drive: "That would be telling, wouldn't it? But as I said before, there's a new-generation car eventually coming. But it's not next year, it's [further away]."

Mazda has previously announced plans for three electric vehicles, five plug-in hybrids and five traditional hybrids by 2025, but it has not stated which models will offer which technologies.

I'm surprised to hear both that Mazda has been offering hybrids in China and Japan that we don't get any in the US and that the CX-5 is the best selling SUV in Australia

 

[Keef]

It's unclear whether it'll have any hybrid drivetrains, but it is unlikely due to price

ALmost guarantee it'll be hybrid and hybrid only. Mazda absolutely has to take that step to remain competitive in the market, and frankly a Toyota-designed hybrid system is an excellent way to do it because in the US the vast majority of the market is still not ready for EVs and won't be until like 2030. For the next 5+ years, hybrid CUVs will be the sweet spot in the new car market.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

ALmost guarantee it'll be hybrid and hybrid only. Mazda absolutely has to take that step to remain competitive in the market, and frankly a Toyota-designed hybrid system is an excellent way to do it because in the US the vast majority of the market is still not ready for EVs and won't be until like 2030. For the next 5+ years, hybrid CUVs will be the sweet spot in the new car market.

I agree. Unless you need genuine off road capability or your car is purely a commuter special (which, you should obviously get a Prius Prime if that's the case) it's really hard to argue with the flexibility and general usefulness of a hybrid CUV. They do everything really well. I've got my AWD CR-V up to an average of 36.5mpg...in a car with 77 cubic feet of cargo space while having a smaller footprint than a 1999 Honda Accord. My 1.5L Mazda 2 couldn't match that average fuel economy. PHEV CUVs are theoretically even better, but they are practically impossible to get right now. I would have likely gone with a CX-50 hybrid if it has been available, so kind of a loss for Mazda being so late to the party.

 

[05XR8]

Another manual option bites the dust.

Updated Mazda CX-3 priced for Oz

New safety and standard equipment for Mazda CX-3 but manual transmissions and AWD out

www.goauto.com.au

 

[ProjectWHaT]

the european CX-80 seen out and about, the 3-row version of the CX-60

Mazda CX-80 Spy Photos Catch SUV Testing In Europe Ahead Of Its Launch

Mazda CX-80 spy photos catch the three-row SUV, based on the Mazda CX-60, testing in Europe under heavy camouflage ahead of its launch later this year

www.motor1.com

The CX-80 is basically a three-row version of the Mazda CX-60, sharing the same rear-wheel drive-based platform. From what we can tell, the wheelbase is slightly longer, and the window between the C and D pillars is larger than the CX-80. The profile appears very similar to the Mazda CX-70, wearing the same front-end styling as other Mazda SUVs.

No official date has been set yet for the CX-80; however, the automaker confirmed it will be sold in Europe as well as Japan.

 

[Keef]

Weird. It looks like a stretched limo lol. China would love it, not sure how European tastes will accept a limo Mazda.

 

[ProjectWHaT]

Deep dive with engineers and an interesting conclusion from Savage Geese



They really disliked it. They feel that since it is a 3-row SUV, most buyers wouldn't care for Mazda's philosophy of driving dynamics. They prefer the ride of the Pilot and Telluride/Palisade for a 3-row SUV. In the case of the "sportier" inline 6 Turbo S, they had many mechanical issues where they felt the car was broken. They said the car probably needed a few more years of development.

It's interesting to hear how negative they felt about this car compared to all the other reviewers who mostly praised it. Did they just happen to get two problematic cars or are other people lying about how much they enjoyed it?

 

[Keef]

That is extremely interesting and a clear outlier among all the reviews, including the "real" reviewers of which I consider Savage Geese.

While I haven't driven the CX-90, I have rented a couple newer Mazdas recently including the CX-5 turbo. I loved it. It had typical Mazda ergonomic quirks but after about an hour of driving it I figured them out and developed a system. That's usually the biggest complaint of reviewers with limited time available, ergonomic quirks, and I've been convinced for years that they're all wrong simply because they're testing it from a surface level. Anyway, the weirdest quirk was that the turbo powertrain in the CX-5 is not great for "sporty" driving in my opinion. It's immensely torquey and impressive but not also very surgey - power builds like a skyscraper in the midrange but tapers off up high, followed by a smooth shift, followed by another monster surge of power. If it were a manual the driver could prepare their neck to deal with that but in an automatic it's just wonky. Kind of like how it feels to be a passenger in an STi or something. It only does this at or near full throttle.

But then again it's not a Mazdaspeed. It does the job of being a grunty daily driver very very well. I can only assume the bigger engine is that much smoother.

 

[Omnis]

Well, @Keef, that's the whole appeal of the 2.5 turbo for me. If you're cruising on the highway or doing any kind of driving around town, you always have 310 ft-lbs underfoot, and it's instant. You can launch yourself to the gap you need to get to... no need to wind up the engine or anything. It's fantastic. The car feels really light, so much so that when you load it with 4 people it feels twice as heavy. You get a luxurious grand tourer feel, but the light feel is where you get the sensation of sportiness. I imagine that is totally absent in the CX-90 and probably even in the CX-5 as well.

IMO, Mazda kind of screwed the pooch with the CX-90. The product planning was off the mark from the start. They tried to make it an X5, when they should have made it as large as they physically could manage on the new platform. Like new Acadia, Atlas, Grand Highlander territory. The CX-70 should have been the tweener 2-row that slots in between the X3 and X5, going for sporty feel.