All NEW MAZDA CX-** Everywhere in 2 years
10-06-2021, 09:58 PM
#1
Super Moderator
Thread Starter
All NEW MAZDA CX-** Everywhere in 2 years
HIROSHIMA, Japan -- Mazda Motor Corporation today
announced plans to expand its SUV lineup starting from 2022.
The new models will include the Mazda CX-50 to be produced in
our new MTM AL plant, as well as models in our Large Product
group, including the Mazda CX-60, Mazda CX-70, Mazda CX-80
and Mazda CX-90, all of which are slated for introduction over
the next two years between 2022 and 2023. We aim to offer
customers a diverse choice of SUVs able to provide both the
driving pleasure and the latest environmental performance to
meet demands in the continuously growing global SUV segment.....cont..Making full use of development and production technological assets, such as Skyactiv technology, bundled planning and flexible production, which have been accumulated over time based on our Building Block strategy2, we are able to expand our SUV lineup efficiently and with low investment, ensuring stable business growth over the medium to long-term.
The Mazda CX-50 is a crossover SUV that will be added as a new core model to the lineup and be introduced in the U.S. market, where a strong SUV presence as well as off-road performance are in high demand. This model belongs to the Small Product group3 just like the Mazda3 and Mazda CX-30. The production of the CX-50 will begin in January 2022 at the new Mazda-Toyota joint venture factory, Mazda Toyota Manufacturing, U.S.A., Inc. (MTMUS), built in Huntsville, Alabama, in the U.S.
Having a wide price range coming in above that of the CX-50 or currently available CX-5, models from the Large Products group, i.e., the CX-60, CX-70, CX-80 and CX-90, will offer two body types with two seating arrangements: two rows and three rows.
Markets with narrower roads and smaller parking lots such as Europe and Japan, will welcome the introduction of the two-row seat CX-60 and the three-row seat CX-80. Meanwhile, the CX-70 and CX-90 will hit the road in North America and other markets where larger models with a big presence are preferred. Both models feature the wide body type, with the CX-70 having two rows of seats and the CX-90 having three. These models will expand our mid-size crossover SUV lineup.
Crossover SUVs to be introduced from 2022 onwards
announced plans to expand its SUV lineup starting from 2022.
The new models will include the Mazda CX-50 to be produced in
our new MTM AL plant, as well as models in our Large Product
group, including the Mazda CX-60, Mazda CX-70, Mazda CX-80
and Mazda CX-90, all of which are slated for introduction over
the next two years between 2022 and 2023. We aim to offer
customers a diverse choice of SUVs able to provide both the
driving pleasure and the latest environmental performance to
meet demands in the continuously growing global SUV segment.....cont..Making full use of development and production technological assets, such as Skyactiv technology, bundled planning and flexible production, which have been accumulated over time based on our Building Block strategy2, we are able to expand our SUV lineup efficiently and with low investment, ensuring stable business growth over the medium to long-term.
The Mazda CX-50 is a crossover SUV that will be added as a new core model to the lineup and be introduced in the U.S. market, where a strong SUV presence as well as off-road performance are in high demand. This model belongs to the Small Product group3 just like the Mazda3 and Mazda CX-30. The production of the CX-50 will begin in January 2022 at the new Mazda-Toyota joint venture factory, Mazda Toyota Manufacturing, U.S.A., Inc. (MTMUS), built in Huntsville, Alabama, in the U.S.
Having a wide price range coming in above that of the CX-50 or currently available CX-5, models from the Large Products group, i.e., the CX-60, CX-70, CX-80 and CX-90, will offer two body types with two seating arrangements: two rows and three rows.
Markets with narrower roads and smaller parking lots such as Europe and Japan, will welcome the introduction of the two-row seat CX-60 and the three-row seat CX-80. Meanwhile, the CX-70 and CX-90 will hit the road in North America and other markets where larger models with a big presence are preferred. Both models feature the wide body type, with the CX-70 having two rows of seats and the CX-90 having three. These models will expand our mid-size crossover SUV lineup.
Crossover SUVs to be introduced from 2022 onwards
The following users liked this post:
Jedi54 (10-06-2021)
10-06-2021, 11:08 PM
#2
Administrator
iTrader: (7)
CX's for EVERYBODY!
10-07-2021, 08:27 PM
#3
///// Upscale Zoom-Zoom
and an Inline 6!
The following users liked this post:
Jedi54 (10-13-2021)
10-08-2021, 08:23 AM
#4
never give up
"...I've seen things you little people wouldn't believe...Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate...Mazda producing rotary sports vehicles...
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain."
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain."
The following users liked this post:
Jastreb (10-13-2021)
10-13-2021, 01:41 PM
#5
Smoking turbo yay
So Mazda just became Buick/Lincoln while I wasn't looking?
I get it, Porsche has Macan/Cayenne and Lamborghini has Urus. Everyone needs SUV's in their lineup to survive. Mazda is way overdoing it, though, and in combination of the death of Mazdaspeed and just in general the lack of anything sporty outside of MX-5, the brand is essentially becoming vacuum cleaners to me. Mazda thought they are comedians with the vacuum cleaners on April Fools. They are not funny because it is becoming the truth.
I don't see how that's making anything better if it lands in an SUV.
This is especially given that there are brands like BMW with tons of more experience and knowledge in I6 than Mazda ever has.
I get it, Porsche has Macan/Cayenne and Lamborghini has Urus. Everyone needs SUV's in their lineup to survive. Mazda is way overdoing it, though, and in combination of the death of Mazdaspeed and just in general the lack of anything sporty outside of MX-5, the brand is essentially becoming vacuum cleaners to me. Mazda thought they are comedians with the vacuum cleaners on April Fools. They are not funny because it is becoming the truth.
I don't see how that's making anything better if it lands in an SUV.
This is especially given that there are brands like BMW with tons of more experience and knowledge in I6 than Mazda ever has.
Last edited by UnknownJinX; 10-13-2021 at 01:44 PM.
The following users liked this post:
Federighi (10-14-2021)
10-13-2021, 03:00 PM
#6
Administrator
iTrader: (7)
this is the natural progression of the brand as they continue to go upmarket with the fleet.
I think back to my 1999 Mazda 626 with its cheap interior and clunky automatic transmission that didn't have much going for it other than being cheap and getting decent fuel mileage.
Now Mazda designs far better vehicles both from a visual and mechanical perspective but their engines were outdated for the US Market. Their turbo 4's are good but consumers want more options and Mazda just didn't have that going for them. With an inline 6 they should be able to more directly compete with the more expensive brands here and that is something that is sorely needed.
If I'm reading the press release correctly the US Market should get the CX-50 (replacing the current 5) and adding in the CX-70 to go alongside the CX-90
the CX-60 and 80 are destined for other markets.
As long as they don't offer all of them here in the US a la BMW X1 thru X-whatever-the-heck-they're-up-to-now I think this move makes sense.
I think back to my 1999 Mazda 626 with its cheap interior and clunky automatic transmission that didn't have much going for it other than being cheap and getting decent fuel mileage.
Now Mazda designs far better vehicles both from a visual and mechanical perspective but their engines were outdated for the US Market. Their turbo 4's are good but consumers want more options and Mazda just didn't have that going for them. With an inline 6 they should be able to more directly compete with the more expensive brands here and that is something that is sorely needed.
If I'm reading the press release correctly the US Market should get the CX-50 (replacing the current 5) and adding in the CX-70 to go alongside the CX-90
the CX-60 and 80 are destined for other markets.
As long as they don't offer all of them here in the US a la BMW X1 thru X-whatever-the-heck-they're-up-to-now I think this move makes sense.
The following users liked this post:
Federighi (10-14-2021)
10-13-2021, 05:02 PM
#7
Smoking turbo yay
BMW still has their myriad of M cars, however. That's the key here. I get sporty brands have to do SUV's to survive, but Mazda isn't doing it so they can get some R&D money to make exciting cars; they are shifting their entire focus to SUV's.
And remember, even for the non-M cars, M package is a thing. I think it's a bit silly to add it on SUV's, but for the cars it could be a good compromise. Where is the Mazda equivalent? Mazda doesn't even have an equivalent to M package, let alone full on M cars.
Before anyone says Miata, I get it, it's a very fun car. If it's not for the number of aggressive pickup truck drivers I encounter, it would have been a serious consideration for me, but you also have to admit, big power is fun, especially on tracks. I think something like an M2/M2C could be great flagship. Still relatively small, but has some punch to it. Or heck, if you don't want to make a luxury performance car, where is Mazda's equivalent of 8-series or LC500?
Another thing: Mazda's SUV's are all soccer mom city SUV's. If they are a bit more like Subaru then that's also fine, and if you look at Subaru's SUV's, a lot of their promotional photos show unpaved roads and gravel. Real SUV with good off-road capability is cool. Mazda' CX? All photos with paved roads. City soccer mom stuff that's oversaturated.
And remember, even for the non-M cars, M package is a thing. I think it's a bit silly to add it on SUV's, but for the cars it could be a good compromise. Where is the Mazda equivalent? Mazda doesn't even have an equivalent to M package, let alone full on M cars.
Before anyone says Miata, I get it, it's a very fun car. If it's not for the number of aggressive pickup truck drivers I encounter, it would have been a serious consideration for me, but you also have to admit, big power is fun, especially on tracks. I think something like an M2/M2C could be great flagship. Still relatively small, but has some punch to it. Or heck, if you don't want to make a luxury performance car, where is Mazda's equivalent of 8-series or LC500?
Another thing: Mazda's SUV's are all soccer mom city SUV's. If they are a bit more like Subaru then that's also fine, and if you look at Subaru's SUV's, a lot of their promotional photos show unpaved roads and gravel. Real SUV with good off-road capability is cool. Mazda' CX? All photos with paved roads. City soccer mom stuff that's oversaturated.
Last edited by UnknownJinX; 10-13-2021 at 05:15 PM.
The following users liked this post:
Federighi (10-14-2021)
10-14-2021, 12:56 PM
#8
the people who run mazda: a diminishing light
I get it, porsche has macan/cayenne and lamborghini has urus. Everyone needs suv's in their lineup to survive. Mazda is way overdoing it, though, and in combination of the death of mazdaspeed and just in general the lack of anything sporty outside of mx-5, the brand is essentially becoming vacuum cleaners to me. Mazda thought they are comedians with the vacuum cleaners on april fools. They are not funny because it is becoming the truth.
This is especially given that there are brands like bmw with tons of more experience and knowledge in i6 than mazda ever has.
This is especially given that there are brands like bmw with tons of more experience and knowledge in i6 than mazda ever has.
this is the natural progression of the brand as they continue to go upmarket with the fleet.
I think back to my 1999 mazda 626 with its cheap interior and clunky automatic transmission that didn't have much going for it other than being cheap and getting decent fuel mileage.
Now mazda designs far better vehicles both from a visual and mechanical perspective but their engines were outdated for the us market. Their turbo 4's are good but consumers want more options and mazda just didn't have that going for them. With an inline 6 they should be able to more directly compete with the more expensive brands here and that is something that is sorely needed.
I think back to my 1999 mazda 626 with its cheap interior and clunky automatic transmission that didn't have much going for it other than being cheap and getting decent fuel mileage.
Now mazda designs far better vehicles both from a visual and mechanical perspective but their engines were outdated for the us market. Their turbo 4's are good but consumers want more options and mazda just didn't have that going for them. With an inline 6 they should be able to more directly compete with the more expensive brands here and that is something that is sorely needed.
bmw still has their myriad of m cars, however. That's the key here. I get sporty brands have to do suv's to survive, but mazda isn't doing it so they can get some r&d money to make exciting cars; they are shifting their entire focus to suv's.
And remember, even for the non-m cars, m package is a thing. I think it's a bit silly to add it on suv's, but for the cars it could be a good compromise. Where is the mazda equivalent? Mazda doesn't even have an equivalent to m package, let alone full on m cars.
Before anyone says miata, i get it, it's a very fun car. If it's not for the number of aggressive pickup truck drivers i encounter, it would have been a serious consideration for me, but you also have to admit, big power is fun, especially on tracks. I think something like an m2/m2c could be great flagship. Still relatively small, but has some punch to it. Or heck, if you don't want to make a luxury performance car, where is mazda's equivalent of 8-series or lc500?
Another thing: Mazda's suv's are all soccer mom city suv's. If they are a bit more like subaru then that's also fine, and if you look at subaru's suv's, a lot of their promotional photos show unpaved roads and gravel. Real suv with good off-road capability is cool. Mazda' cx? All photos with paved roads. City soccer mom stuff that's oversaturated.
And remember, even for the non-m cars, m package is a thing. I think it's a bit silly to add it on suv's, but for the cars it could be a good compromise. Where is the mazda equivalent? Mazda doesn't even have an equivalent to m package, let alone full on m cars.
Before anyone says miata, i get it, it's a very fun car. If it's not for the number of aggressive pickup truck drivers i encounter, it would have been a serious consideration for me, but you also have to admit, big power is fun, especially on tracks. I think something like an m2/m2c could be great flagship. Still relatively small, but has some punch to it. Or heck, if you don't want to make a luxury performance car, where is mazda's equivalent of 8-series or lc500?
Another thing: Mazda's suv's are all soccer mom city suv's. If they are a bit more like subaru then that's also fine, and if you look at subaru's suv's, a lot of their promotional photos show unpaved roads and gravel. Real suv with good off-road capability is cool. Mazda' cx? All photos with paved roads. City soccer mom stuff that's oversaturated.
So let's indulge the hypothetical here, if mazda were about to bring 1000 units to production at a base offering of $100k each, that would generate a very very large amount of profit. But I digress...
Last edited by Federighi; 10-16-2021 at 11:36 AM. Reason: typo edit
10-14-2021, 02:16 PM
#9
never give up
Eh, M models nowadays are expensive huge heavy super tanks riddled with electronic trickery. Gone are the quirky z3 m coupes, e46 csl m3s and such.
I am biased, I really don't like the direction automobility has taken. I don't like what mazda is doing. What the Industry is doing. Just let me be in my dream garage with old mazda sport cars I guess.
I am biased, I really don't like the direction automobility has taken. I don't like what mazda is doing. What the Industry is doing. Just let me be in my dream garage with old mazda sport cars I guess.
The following users liked this post:
Federighi (10-16-2021)
10-17-2021, 11:14 PM
#10
Smoking turbo yay
0
I realize that it's not fair, but such is life. Mazda is the new kid on the block of I6, there are going to be problems.
IMO a brand like Mazda needs ways to differentiate itself. Subaru does a great job at that. I think there need to be people like the 47 Samurai in Mazda again to have an idea that could set Mazda apart. For a very random example(not guaranteed to work, I realize), they could make affordable-ish yet sporty wagons with the RWD I6 platform. That could very well fill up a vacuum in North America and could capture a crowd. Doesn't have to be a big crowd, that's what the big brands are good at, just a very loyal one is good for a small brand that can't bring the cost down as much as the big brands do. Or K cars that could be used on American roads like you mentioned. That also could be something.
Sure, these performance cars have changed and become heavy, but they put down impressive times at the track and they have power. Different kind of fun, but fun regardless. And electronics aren't the only thing that can make a heavy car dance. The experience automakers have over the years on top of the improvement in materials also plays a big part.
I didn't say they need to replace the MX-5. That would be silly. I just think they need something that can "do the numbers" to show off that Mazda means business. I know I make fun of Zupr4 but that is a very good car and it is still relatively nimble - with the 2.0T option now if you want the car to be even lighter. M car is just an example of how you can do it. Didn't say it's the only way.
Older Japanese sports cars are great when it comes to nostalgia, but you have to face it, chassis technology has come a long way. The combination of limited material tech in the 90s and age means those older cars have the chassis rigidity of soggy noodles by modern standards, sorry. Even with FD and RX-8, there is already some gap in terms of chassis. ND and NA are also worlds apart in terms of chassis rigidity, stock for stock. You have to do a lot of work to make the old guys really competitive(which goes without saying, that adds weight) and even then, newer cars with their naturally great chassis still have an edge. Not all progress is bad.
Couldn't agree more about BMW making fine I6 engine's (not a fair comparison given that this is mazda's 1st attempt) and I just shared a very similar perspective on anther thread. I agree about the Miata having its' place but misses all kinds of marks for a consumer like myself. If you guys remember I suggested mazda make something similar to RE-Amemiya's AutoZam AZ-1 or a production Furai with a base price offering around $100k plus performance packages offerings, etc. This would then allow mazda to offer a new limited production run 'high-end / luxury' flagship model and I'd be willing to bet there would not only be a ton of genuine interest (not just the usual internet, auto journalist, video game bs) but I'd be a real customer in line. Something someone of my age would readily welcome as I don't fall for headlines, sales pitches, hype, influencers or anything of that nature and imo, a big part of the disconnect with consumers.
So let's indulge the hypothetical here, if mazda were about to bring 1000 units to production at a base offering of $100k each, that would generate a very very large amount of profit. But I digress...
So let's indulge the hypothetical here, if mazda were about to bring 1000 units to production at a base offering of $100k each, that would generate a very very large amount of profit. But I digress...
IMO a brand like Mazda needs ways to differentiate itself. Subaru does a great job at that. I think there need to be people like the 47 Samurai in Mazda again to have an idea that could set Mazda apart. For a very random example(not guaranteed to work, I realize), they could make affordable-ish yet sporty wagons with the RWD I6 platform. That could very well fill up a vacuum in North America and could capture a crowd. Doesn't have to be a big crowd, that's what the big brands are good at, just a very loyal one is good for a small brand that can't bring the cost down as much as the big brands do. Or K cars that could be used on American roads like you mentioned. That also could be something.
Eh, M models nowadays are expensive huge heavy super tanks riddled with electronic trickery. Gone are the quirky z3 m coupes, e46 csl m3s and such.
I am biased, I really don't like the direction automobility has taken. I don't like what mazda is doing. What the Industry is doing. Just let me be in my dream garage with old mazda sport cars I guess.
I am biased, I really don't like the direction automobility has taken. I don't like what mazda is doing. What the Industry is doing. Just let me be in my dream garage with old mazda sport cars I guess.
I didn't say they need to replace the MX-5. That would be silly. I just think they need something that can "do the numbers" to show off that Mazda means business. I know I make fun of Zupr4 but that is a very good car and it is still relatively nimble - with the 2.0T option now if you want the car to be even lighter. M car is just an example of how you can do it. Didn't say it's the only way.
Older Japanese sports cars are great when it comes to nostalgia, but you have to face it, chassis technology has come a long way. The combination of limited material tech in the 90s and age means those older cars have the chassis rigidity of soggy noodles by modern standards, sorry. Even with FD and RX-8, there is already some gap in terms of chassis. ND and NA are also worlds apart in terms of chassis rigidity, stock for stock. You have to do a lot of work to make the old guys really competitive(which goes without saying, that adds weight) and even then, newer cars with their naturally great chassis still have an edge. Not all progress is bad.
10-18-2021, 03:17 AM
#11
never give up
I guess, if you're into big hp and such. I am of a different mindset. Lighter/smaller constructions mean less energy needed and spent, less resources, etc etc. That could be one path to progress but never got traction vs the current state of things. I don't think that you can keep a modern vehicle for 30 years down the road. As I wrote, I am biased though.
10-18-2021, 02:44 PM
#12
Smoking turbo yay
I guess, if you're into big hp and such. I am of a different mindset. Lighter/smaller constructions mean less energy needed and spent, less resources, etc etc. That could be one path to progress but never got traction vs the current state of things. I don't think that you can keep a modern vehicle for 30 years down the road. As I wrote, I am biased though.
There is a limit to everything, though. For one thing, newer cars have to be safer and unless your car is strictly a track car, that's not something to be overlooked. You can be the safest driver in the world but it only takes one idiot in their SUV or pickup to squish you. Also, as I mentioned, chassis rigidity is pretty important to not only performance but also the driving experience. Light material that's rigid = $$$. To keep the cost down, you just have to use more material to ensure the rigidity is there.
I have mentioned this in I think B@W once but I drove my friend's NA Miata and it is a very enjoyable experience as it is a very analog car and driving feel. I get that. The trouble is, NA is getting expensive if you look past nostalgia and just see the car for what it is. That applies to a lot of classics. The chassis does flex quite a bit during turns. And the valve cover leaks oil. And there are squeaks and rattles. And the thermostat was stuck closed. And the timing belt probably needs work at some point... It is an old car, after all. Nothing hard to fix in the list, but as time goes on, you will have to constantly stop and repair things as they wear. Good experience to drive from time to time, but I feel that it is not like an FD RX-7 that's special enough for me to put up with it, and I would take an ND or even NC(which is actually a good bang for the buck because everyone hates NC unfairly) as a DD.
As for not lasting 30 years, I get what you are trying to say with the electronics, but here are a few factors to consider:
- Any old cars are largely at the mercy of part availability. There are things outside of computers that need to be worked on, after all.
- You can keep an older car for 30 years, true, but at that point, it's really only good either for either nostalgia or as a starting point of a project race car. Even from a value proposition standpoint, some of those cars don't make a lot of sense because of nostalgia tax. In terms of performance and even driving experience without the nostalgic rosy glasses, the newer cars will be better.
- For a daily driver or even a roadtrip fun car, having more QOL features could be a worthy tradeoff to have little comfort features for maximum life.
I mean yeah we are all biased, just trying to take a fair whack at it, but that's just a try.
10-18-2021, 05:44 PM
#13
never give up
Alpine a110 is a modern product that's somewhat representative of what I mean, even that gets canned.
Gordon Murray has some interesting ideas regarding modern automobility but they're not mainstream.
The market demands certain solutions so any unconventional approach becomes niche.
Kei cars were a good idea for urban environments. I don't feel comfortable with 2.5 ton 500hp suvs roaming neighborhoods or 1000hp 2ton bevs with instant acceleration doing the same.
Mazda mx30 is a more honest product for urban mobility with its 130km range and small battery.
Just trying to convey my point of view. I get what you're saying, trust me, no nostalgia here.
And also I live in a small country, my experiences are on a much smaller scale.
A 7 seat 2.5ton suv might not make sense to me but it makes sense on a different part of the planet. 130km of range might mean squat in huge metropolitan areas.
A light nimble agile mechanical fast vehicle might only make sense in a track and nowhere else anymore.
But we'll see where it gets us down the road. Maybe we'll get teleportation and all this will seem trivial.
Gordon Murray has some interesting ideas regarding modern automobility but they're not mainstream.
The market demands certain solutions so any unconventional approach becomes niche.
Kei cars were a good idea for urban environments. I don't feel comfortable with 2.5 ton 500hp suvs roaming neighborhoods or 1000hp 2ton bevs with instant acceleration doing the same.
Mazda mx30 is a more honest product for urban mobility with its 130km range and small battery.
Just trying to convey my point of view. I get what you're saying, trust me, no nostalgia here.
And also I live in a small country, my experiences are on a much smaller scale.
A 7 seat 2.5ton suv might not make sense to me but it makes sense on a different part of the planet. 130km of range might mean squat in huge metropolitan areas.
A light nimble agile mechanical fast vehicle might only make sense in a track and nowhere else anymore.
But we'll see where it gets us down the road. Maybe we'll get teleportation and all this will seem trivial.
10-19-2021, 03:56 PM
#14
Smoking turbo yay
Alpine a110 is a modern product that's somewhat representative of what I mean, even that gets canned.
Gordon Murray has some interesting ideas regarding modern automobility but they're not mainstream.
The market demands certain solutions so any unconventional approach becomes niche.
Kei cars were a good idea for urban environments. I don't feel comfortable with 2.5 ton 500hp suvs roaming neighborhoods or 1000hp 2ton bevs with instant acceleration doing the same.
Mazda mx30 is a more honest product for urban mobility with its 130km range and small battery.
Just trying to convey my point of view. I get what you're saying, trust me, no nostalgia here.
And also I live in a small country, my experiences are on a much smaller scale.
A 7 seat 2.5ton suv might not make sense to me but it makes sense on a different part of the planet. 130km of range might mean squat in huge metropolitan areas.
A light nimble agile mechanical fast vehicle might only make sense in a track and nowhere else anymore.
But we'll see where it gets us down the road. Maybe we'll get teleportation and all this will seem trivial.
Gordon Murray has some interesting ideas regarding modern automobility but they're not mainstream.
The market demands certain solutions so any unconventional approach becomes niche.
Kei cars were a good idea for urban environments. I don't feel comfortable with 2.5 ton 500hp suvs roaming neighborhoods or 1000hp 2ton bevs with instant acceleration doing the same.
Mazda mx30 is a more honest product for urban mobility with its 130km range and small battery.
Just trying to convey my point of view. I get what you're saying, trust me, no nostalgia here.
And also I live in a small country, my experiences are on a much smaller scale.
A 7 seat 2.5ton suv might not make sense to me but it makes sense on a different part of the planet. 130km of range might mean squat in huge metropolitan areas.
A light nimble agile mechanical fast vehicle might only make sense in a track and nowhere else anymore.
But we'll see where it gets us down the road. Maybe we'll get teleportation and all this will seem trivial.
*Sticker price of $100k+
*No manual trans option
Gee, I wonder why it got canned.
For the same money, you can pick up a Cayman GTS 4.0. High-revving NA H6 engine(over the generic turbo I4 of the Alpine - they could at least just supercharge it like Lotus Elise S so you don't get turbo laaaaaaaggggggg) and it offers a stick-shift option. The Cayman is heavier, true, but still very nimble by today's standards.
Alfa Romeo 4C suffers more or less the same problem, IMO. It gets into that awkward spot of "people who like it can't afford it, but people who can afford it don't like it." It tries to be an enthusiast's car but lacks many things that qualify for an enthusiast's car like responsive NA/supercharged engines and manual trans.
I have seen Gordon Murray's video on T50. I think what he is missing is that most cars nowadays are made with modular designs in mind. For a limited run $2 million supercar, that's not an issue. You can design a dedicated chassis and dedicated engine to squeeze everything out of it. For us peasants, though, the cost gets in the way and that's where modular design comes in. When you make a modular platform and modular engine, it reduces the cost, but there is obviously the downside that you can't optimize the platform or engine 100% perfectly for the specific application.
Kei cars are pretty much Japan-specific. I have seen them on sale outside of a car store when I was in Japan and IIRC the sticker was about 2 million Yen on average which is roughly US$20k. Also, bigger Japanese manufacturers with a global presence actually don't enjoy the fact K cars do well in Japan because, again, it only works in Japan and it's not something they can sell globally(see the modular design point above). Even in Europe, I don't think that's gonna be a good business case where you are paying more for less. It's kind of like why Smart flopped in North America.
As for MX-30's range... While I think Mazda has a point with smaller batteries polluting less during production, they are overlooking the fact that smaller batteries get more deeply discharged over the same range, and that wears out the batteries faster. You may think Tesla's 500-km battery range is a waste in a city where you drive maybe 50 km a day, but that means you can always leave the batteries at 60% to 80% charge level. Batteries are happy in this range and wear very minimally. With an MX-30, we are talking about 1/3 of the total range so that's a charge level of 45% to 80%. Still not horrible, but it's gonna wear faster than Tesla batteries. 1st Gen Nissan Leaf provided a very good amount of data regarding this issue, as the short-range model batteries wear a lot faster than long-range model ones because of this exact problem.
BTW, as far as road-legal cars go, lightweight actually doesn't matter as much anymore on tracks. MB GT-R weighs a lot but the electronics in it are so advanced, it can beat a lot of lighter cars even in tight turns. With the materials, chassis, tires, suspension, and electronics nowadays, you can start to "bend physics" to a certain degree. Not saying lightweight isn't important, it's just not that important anymore on tracks. If anything, I would debate that lighter road-legal cars are more about having fun, feeling the nimbleness, and enjoying the mechanical connection, therefore would be better for more casual settings.
If I live in Europe or Japan then I would be happy in a Miata. It's just that I got bullied and heard/saw stories of people with small cars being bullied too much by pickups here to daily drive a Miata.
Last edited by UnknownJinX; 10-19-2021 at 03:59 PM.
10-22-2021, 03:19 PM
#16
Smoking turbo yay
0
I read the article. This really looks like a Smart Fortwo which can work in some parts of the world, but given how Smart Fortwo flopped in North America, I'd guess it probably won't fly here. Again, I can't even imagine how much I will be bullied in traffic from driving this thing, and if something crashes into this thing... Supercars don't need to do IIHS crash tests, but mass-produced cars do.
And again, a small battery isn't like a small gas tank. Gas tanks don't wear out from refuelling and it doesn't matter how full you keep the tank. A smaller battery with a 160-km range will wear faster unless you only drive like 30 km every day, which I can see in somewhere like Europe or Japan, but for me to drive from Richmond to Burnaby, and then back, that's 50 km to 60 km and that will definitely eat into the battery capacity over time. It pollutes less to produce, but what is the point of that when you have to replace it more often? This is not to mention that battery replacement will cost companies money(in warranty claims - in North America, it's legally required that HEV and BEV have a battery warranty of at least 8 years) and PR. It could certainly be a good idea in the future when batteries aren't crap.
Was not about t50 per se: https://insideevs.com/news/506742/go...evs-supercars/
Just for clarification.
Just for clarification.
And again, a small battery isn't like a small gas tank. Gas tanks don't wear out from refuelling and it doesn't matter how full you keep the tank. A smaller battery with a 160-km range will wear faster unless you only drive like 30 km every day, which I can see in somewhere like Europe or Japan, but for me to drive from Richmond to Burnaby, and then back, that's 50 km to 60 km and that will definitely eat into the battery capacity over time. It pollutes less to produce, but what is the point of that when you have to replace it more often? This is not to mention that battery replacement will cost companies money(in warranty claims - in North America, it's legally required that HEV and BEV have a battery warranty of at least 8 years) and PR. It could certainly be a good idea in the future when batteries aren't crap.
10-22-2021, 07:10 PM
#17
Grand Chancellor
So Mazda is going SUV frenzy? Are these CX-nn going to replace the current CX-n lineup? Or being sold in parallel which will bring a whopping 8-9 SUVs to Mazda's portfolio!
Sad that there's no mention of any I6 sport sedan that means only the Mazda3 and Miata being the only non-SUV in the stable.
Sad that there's no mention of any I6 sport sedan that means only the Mazda3 and Miata being the only non-SUV in the stable.
10-23-2021, 04:33 AM
#18
never give up
And again, a small battery isn't like a small gas tank. Gas tanks don't wear out from refuelling and it doesn't matter how full you keep the tank. A smaller battery with a 160-km range will wear faster unless you only drive like 30 km every day, which I can see in somewhere like Europe or Japan, but for me to drive from Richmond to Burnaby, and then back, that's 50 km to 60 km and that will definitely eat into the battery capacity over time. It pollutes less to produce, but what is the point of that when you have to replace it more often? This is not to mention that battery replacement will cost companies money(in warranty claims - in North America, it's legally required that HEV and BEV have a battery warranty of at least 8 years) and PR. It could certainly be a good idea in the future when batteries aren't crap.
Never liked smarts, I think of them as cash grabs.
I am secretly excited with all the synthetic fuel talk now.
A rotary hybrid burning some unicorn sauce? Very cyberpunk. But as we showed throuh this dialogue, there is no cure all solution, there are lots of good ideas, lots of challenges, lots of different parameters to consider.
The industry is at a stalemate? If you could say that.
My fear is that we may go to a direction where human driving experience will be obsolete, my hope is that we will have choices. Let's take a breath, a step back for 20-30 years. Then I will be too old to drive
10-25-2021, 01:34 PM
#19
Smoking turbo yay
Agreed, not a fan of bev, and I understand the difference in scale. I wouldn't be comfortable in a small city vehicle surrounded by bigger vehicles. But it would fit the conditions you mention. Been using public transport for over 20 years to go to work which is 8 km away, no family,.no pets, you can see why I could live only with a miata/fd/8 etc. And an escooter for commuting.
Never liked smarts, I think of them as cash grabs.
I am secretly excited with all the synthetic fuel talk now.
A rotary hybrid burning some unicorn sauce? Very cyberpunk. But as we showed throuh this dialogue, there is no cure all solution, there are lots of good ideas, lots of challenges, lots of different parameters to consider.
The industry is at a stalemate? If you could say that.
My fear is that we may go to a direction where human driving experience will be obsolete, my hope is that we will have choices. Let's take a breath, a step back for 20-30 years. Then I will be too old to drive
Never liked smarts, I think of them as cash grabs.
I am secretly excited with all the synthetic fuel talk now.
A rotary hybrid burning some unicorn sauce? Very cyberpunk. But as we showed throuh this dialogue, there is no cure all solution, there are lots of good ideas, lots of challenges, lots of different parameters to consider.
The industry is at a stalemate? If you could say that.
My fear is that we may go to a direction where human driving experience will be obsolete, my hope is that we will have choices. Let's take a breath, a step back for 20-30 years. Then I will be too old to drive
As for synthetic fuel... Porsche's one is very expensive now. Ultimately, I think it will be the aviation industry that will decide this. Aircrafts don't have the luxury of being supported by asphalt/dirt or water so weight(and thus, energy density by weight of the energy source) matters a lot. It will be a race between scaling the production up and bringing the cost down for the synthetic fuel, and making batteries not suck by making solid state batteries practical.
Rotary hybrid is not a bad idea and if they can fit the system in all the CX's and they are successful, that could mean the return of a rotary sports car, maybe. It needs to have the economy of scale, like most other engines in production nowadays.
The industry has stockholders they need to please, so they will hold onto the milk cows for sure.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
ASH8
General Automotive
0
07-16-2007 11:17 PM