Now THAT I could see. Very similar to what happened to Ford when they decided that 5W20 was appropriate for ALLTHETHINGS! regardless of use case or design due to fleet mileage averages imposed on them by CAFE.

Welcome to the year 2016 where fossil fuel efficiency is more important than how good your car feels.

Inclined to agree here. Can't tell you how many brand new subarus I start up on the lot to move and the engines sound like they've got 200k miles on them. No bueno.

Just go drive one after driving a comparably equipped Highlander or Pilot. You do realize they get over $40k for a loaded Kia FFS, right?

CX-7 wasn't any bigger inside than the new CX-5. It (CX-7) was heavy, unreliable, and noisy though, so it had that going for it.

Tell me more.

You botched the Edit. The subject of the previous sentence was the CX-7. The CX-7 was unreliable, heavy and noisy.

The CX-5 is fantastic. I sell a ton of them and so far haven't had anything but rave reviews from my customers.

Gm is having all sorts of oil consumption issues. We have been replacing truck engines constantly. Mostly the aluminum blocks with cylinder deactivation. Supposed to put updated pistons in them but you just replace the whole thing if you find a scratch in the cylinder wall. They seem to have fixed it by the 2012 models. Can't wait to see what happens with the gen 4 v8s once they get some miles on them. (they started using 0w20 with those) The equinox 2.4 are sludging up and blocking pcv ports. Also having to put pistons in them. They don't scratch up bores though.

Also seen a lot of problems with 2.4 (2az engine code iirc) toyotas. The guys in my shop have been doing a bunch of pistons in those.

Not sure what youre talking about :)

So what was unreliable about the 7s?

interdasting. a female coworker of mine actually just told me she had her engine rebuild on her scion. I though it was from negligence. maybe not

As far as I understand, mostly turbos, high pressure fuel pumps, and the rest of the engine as well. they come in on tow trucks fairly regularly. That's what you get when you put a 4 cyl turbo in a heavy SUV with people not letting them cool after hard running. the techs hate them.

Hmm. Sounds like the new CX9 too. I sure hope they're reliable and durable.

So ours is a 2013, which apparently most of the problems are with. I took it to the dealer at 12k and complained about the oil consumption. They told me it was a boxer engine thing and the piston rings were not broken in yet. When I went online I found lots of people with the same problem. Tried switching from 0w20 to 5w20, slowed down consumption slightly, not enough to make me happy.

We have under 40k miles on it now. Should be paid off soon, and we are debating selling it. It really is a good car, the oil consumption is my only complaint.

I just hit 60k miles in my 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatch with 6 speed manual and 2.0l engine. No issues, gets about 34MPG combined driving and up to 40 on highway. Great daily driver. I have 17x8" RPF1's on it and was thinking about some of the Eibach lowering springs, something mild, just 1 inch drop.

Mazda has been putting out some solid cars as far as practical commuters go.

I have 80k on my 2012 Mazda2. All I have done so far to it is change the oil. I have front brakes pads and rotors on the way as I started hearing some noises from them. I am extremely happy with my car and plan on keeping it until it dies.

I would love a little toss-around car like this. But there is no way I can get a baby seat, my wife, and our dog in there. And if I could, I bet I don't want to make the 13hr journey to Chicago stuffed in there.

The Miata sits in the garage most of the year. Probably would have sold it if it wasn't so damn fun to drive. Even the wife steals it when the weather is nice. My Silverado is just way more comfortable for the daily commute, especially since it has AC. 18mpg, like a boss.

This is why I had to trade in my mazda2 for the a 3. Rear facing car seats take up way too much space.

I wish the Mazda2 had the sky active motors that came in the 3 and 6. I am sad that I am in a smaller car and get less MPG then the 3/6. I went with the 2 because I do no need or want a bigger DD. I have been driving small cars for the past 10 years and just feel odd in bigger vehicles. Also never planning on having kids makes it so I don't have to worry about hauling them and their shit around.

I actually don't disagree that it's an awesome vehicle from the specs / price alone, even in full trim.

I just couldn't afford a new one with said trim. Nor do I need something that large for daily use. Our kids fit in our tiny cars for pickup/dropoff just fine.

We don't take other people with us much and if we absolutely need to, we rent something bigger that we only have to hate for a few days.

But it still looks great. I'm totally pro mazda. I think they have some secret sauce that works very well and they make some nice shit and cheap prices.

I would love to own the new CX9. I have gotten too used to the creature comforts of our (now sold) CX5 Grand Touring. I simply couldn't justify spending $15-20k more for a new CX9 with the same options versus what I could find on the used car market for $20-30k. Used large SUV prices are ridiculous enough as it is. The new prices are simply outrageous IMHO.

I am praying for the CX9 engine to be dropped into a new Mazdaspeed3. I would definitely consider that if it gets over 30mpg highway. I usually got about 22 mpg on the old ms3 engine. :(

This this this this thisss...... :likecat:

Would you consider awd or have it stay the same with fwd?

Since when is there going to be a new MS3? Last I heard that was never going to happen and the Genpu was the final generation.

I have the 2.5 with a manual transmission and its noticeably quicker than the 2.0. It's not mazdaspeed quick but it might be enough for you.