I can merge onto the highway (not are america's gay speed limits) with a 800cc, 40hp daewoo matiz with no problems.
What I get from this argument is that most american drivers are handicapped and have trouble finding the right speed to merge or keep a constant speed during a travel with no cruise control, hence the need for MOAR GRUNT!

Screw that, and screw gasoline SUVs.

Also keep in mind that mazda had to detune the cx5's skyactiv engine because of the shitty 87 octane gas you have there... 14:1 vs 13:1 compression ratio and according tune makes a world of difference.

 

bse, they still don't actually use the extra power

Or if they are, they have bought something that is easily 1,000lbs heavier than it should be, if not more.



Yesterday, I was crawling down a ~1/2 mile long ramp toward a 65mph 4 lane freeway behind a Jaguar XJR...ggoinng 10mph. The dashed line turned dotted before we eclipsed 15mph.


He clearly was underpowered and needs a bigger engine under the hood to solve his merging problems.

 

The only reason most people want more power is to be able to whip out their spec sheets at the bar and see whose is bigger. It like when Mazda said that the Rx-8 had 250hp, almost everyone was happy and had no problem with how it accelerated and performed. But then some people put it on the dyno and showed it had less hp than advertise, suddenly this made the car worse even if the actually performance didn't change. Its as simple as this for most car buyers, the bigger the numbers the better, just like camera's and their megapixels.

 

I'll agree for a lot of times, not-enough-omph is ok, if not optimal for everyday humdrum driving/comuting. BUT - there are many times when slow accleration is not only a pain, but also potentially dangerous to life and limb, e.g., merging onto a freeway with cars going 65-80mph esp. when others don't exceed 25 mph until ON the freeway; trying to go cross traffic on a freeway to exits/splits with everyone going at speeds, almost any passing situation with oncoming traffic, to just name the most common. It may only be 10% or 5% or 1% of the time, but it does matter. Beyond those concerns, still borne acceleration simply takes away from the driving experience, as the test editors of Motor Trend so ingraciously highlighted. They weren't being picky, the car was dog slow, noticeably slow and so what were they supposed to say, "We loved the car BECAUSE it was the slowest one of ALL the competition."? No, they told their trueful experience as they should and said it as a good car in spite of lacking power (compared to ALL the competition). If only.

Oh and gas here in the US (91 & 93 octane) is just fine. The ONLY reason Mazda went with a detuned SkyActive here is marketing - expensive gas in an economy engine doesn't make much sense, even to me, and the small HP increase isn't worth the added running cost difference. But that's not the point. A good, yea even great engine it may be. The engine is simply weak for the SUV's size/weight, and so perhaps not the BEST engine for THAT vehicle. That's a Mazda CHOICE, not the engine's problem.

The point someone earlier made IS the point - Mazda habitually releases models that are otherwise great, but noteably underpowered vs similar offerings IN THEIR CLASS. This is a competitive disadvantage for Mazda, no matter how you rationalize it or sugar coat it. Think Mazda 5, this SUV, the RX-8, Mazda 2. Many sell well enough, but Mazda should be aiming higher, aiming for class leader, as all aspects of performance, not just handling, to get a leg up in the automotive world.

Bottom line, Mazda didn't get to be on financial intensive care ONLY because of Japan production costs. At least SOME of the blame is that consumers choose other competing brands over Mazda for various reasons, accelerative performance being one.

 

You don't need power to change 4 lanes... just move to the right line for the right exit earlier.

The cx5 wasn't designed with a skyactiv G engine in mind anyway, that's just for our dumb oversea cousins. Just like the Tiguan. You see thousands of them on the road... none with gasoline engines though.

On a heavy suv torque is the answer.

 

If you are driving 80 mph here, you will quickly be tailgated by someone wanting to drive faster. If you are behind someone doing 70 mph and you pass them, they will immediately speed up and then drive your speed. Some people drive courteously and some don't. None of it has anything to do with the car but rather the person behind it. I assure you that if you tried to drive a 40 HP Daewoo on the road here, you'd get completely run over and no one would notice. That little thing would even get stomped on by a Smart car which is probably most pathetic of all.

I do agree that Americans drive heavier more powerful cars than they need to. However WANT is a key word that shouldn't be discounted. They have the freedom here to drive whatever they want, even if that means someone somewhere else driving something else doesn't agree with them. Get over it.

 

Exactly my point! Mazda bill itself as the sporty division. In my opinion they need to inject more zoom into their vehicles. I want to see Mazda succeed. People are reading the Motor Trend article and seeing that the Mazda was over a second slower than some of the other CUVs. They are already talking things like "the Mazda is nice but too slow so I'll think I'll get the Honda". I want Mazda to dominate all categories they're in.

 

People from all over the world are reading motor trend's article and think that americans are stupid for not testing the diesel version, which is a whole different car performance wise.

 

Perhaps Mazda should've waited and released the diesel version 1st. We can't test what we don't have

 

That's the point, they're testing a whole class of SUVs that were meant to be diesels. That's the case for both the Tiguan and the CX5.
Again, the Kia sportfag is a common car here and is a bag of crap on wheels. The tiguan is more comfy than the cx5 but driving "pleasure" wise the cx5 is clearly ahead.

Mazda did an extremely stupid thing delaying skyactiv D's whole platform.

 

I'd buy a diesel, if I liked it. You can get diesel easy enough anywhere these days. I don't know the average cost though. I believe it's more, but you get better mileage though, right? I don't know anything on diesel reliability though.

 

Just like anything else in life, a diesel engine can either be really reliable (think 18 wheeler engine), or horrible (think late 70's GM diesel). It all depends on the overall design, and owner usage.

Today's engines are designed way better than they were in the 70's and 80's, so that's less of a concern. Ultimately, it will be up to the consumers to make the cars reliable or not.

If the owners don't properly take care of the engines, then they will break, and then the owners will complain, and ruin the reputation of the car company. Sound familiar?

BC.

 

Diesel fuel costs less here and cars get extremely better mileage. I know it's a bit more expensive in the states though but it should still prove to be more cost effective.

Diesel engines are almost bulletproof, as long as you change their filters (especially the fuel\water separator) and take care of the turbo.

 

Hate to burst your bubble, but I grew up in NYC, which has some of the shortest on ramps on its major highways on the entire east coast. I learned to drive on a 1981 Pontiac Grand Prix with a Buick built 231 ci 3.8 liter V-6, that had a whopping 110 hp, and a craptastic 3 speed auto transmission. I'm faily certain that it outweighs the CX-5 by A LOT, and was considerably slower, and its top speed was somewhere around 100 mph, IIRC.

I never got run over in my PGP, and I was a teenager, with a serious case of leadfoot-itis.

So, the CX-5 is fine, even for east coast traffic, in my opinion.
Up there in NH, you have pretty decent merge lanes for the bulk of your high speed highways. The CX-5 won't have any issues merging with traffic.

Also, I live here in Colorado.
Well above 5k feet in altitude.
The hp of the CX-5 drops from its 155 down to about 124 hp here, and the car still performs rather well. Down at sea level, it only performs better.
I would love to take it up to 10k feet and run some acceleration tests at that altitude. Its still not going to get run over by a 6 year old girl on her tricycle, I would bet.

BC.

 

Diesel costs more when you're buying one, it costs slightly more to service but it all comes even compared to petrol cars because you save on fuel with a diesel. Also keep in mind that diesel has more things that can break down and give you a headache, like turbo, EGR valve, injectors and fuel pump if you tank it with low diesel quality for a period of time and many other things. Most of the people who drive them shift at 2,000rpm in city driving, and that's what gets you a clogged up turbo, EGR and catalytic converter along with a special diesel particle filter that can get very expensive to replace if you don't drive it hard sometimes and give him a chance to regenerate itself.


When it comes to SUV's, like someone above said, there are almost no people who drive those with petrol powered engines. Our gas prices are growing every day, so almost no one wants to spend more money just on fuel. Another side of the story is the torque which petrol NA engines just don't have. I understand Mazda with their Skyactive engine, and it would be my choice also if I would not make many kilometers a year, but still have the SUV practicality.

In general, downsizing is the trend, and that's the other thing to keep in mind.

When it comes to the new Mazda 6, I would definitively go with a wagon and a diesel in it. It's just a must, unless if they don't have an option of turbo powered petrol engine, which I surely doubt. Big advantage of a diesel is just it's torque, and overtaking without shifting down makes you smiling.


Here's an example of the actual 6 with a 2.2 diesel in it. It's chipped to 215 from original 185hp, but you can see the point, and the best thing is that you have the factory declared consumption when you drive it normally, but with 215hp and almost 500nm of torque you can count on.

 

Americans are stupid because Mazda didn't give us a diesel? I don't get it? Mazda is stupid? What's your point? If I ran the world you can bet things would be different too. But we all own it collectively, with Mazda not selling us diesels for some reason, Motor Trend testing what we get in America acouple months ago, other makes coming to the table with different product, etc. etc. Reality trumps "what we want". Surprise!

 

Motor trend was unfair in testing several SUVs in their lower trims (again, tiguan and cx5) and americans are retarded when it comes to cars but that's a given. Everybody in the world knows how lame america is when it comes to cars and wars lol.

Seriously, how can you even compare a tiguan and a kia sportfuckingage? just sit in them to see what I mean.

 

The first vehicle to come off the line was a Mazda6 wagon built to European specifications and powered by the SKYACTIV-G 2.0 gasoline engine.

"Incorporating everything we have learned about quality improvement through the production of nine million vehicles over 30 years at Hofu, we are determined to deliver a new generation Mazda6 that will outperform the previous model in every respect and stir the emotions of customers around the world."

The new Mazda6 will be introduced to Europe and Japan before the end of 2012, followed by other markets starting with the US at the beginning of 2013. Mazda is planning to produce approximately 120,000 units of the Mazda6 per year at the Hofu Plant.


Here is a side view of the Mazda 6 Wagon...

There will be NO Mazda 6 Hatch made, just the Sedan and Wagon.

As I said months ago, there will be a 2.0 SA-G and 2.2 SA-D Turbo Diesel.

There is NO 2.5l G for American market...you also get the 2.2 Diesel which will have more than enough grunt...more torque actually than any 2.5 G.

Both Gas and Diesel will be launched in the US at the exact same time.

 

Now that's a very nice wagon!

 

Awesome on the release of both the SA-G and D at the same time. Still waiting on exactly when the SA-D engine will arrive on showroom floors in 2013, be it the CX or 6.

 

God I hope they bring the wagon to the US!! Can we all email them requesting the wagon?

 

German Magazine "Auto motor und sport" say there is a "crossover" version on the way...

 

2013, not 2014 like the FB bit suggested a few weeks back. Awesome!

I'm thinking the 6 is going to bump the CX-5 out of the top spot for me then...

 

same for me...

 

That wagon looks HOT!