Mazda complaint

[JGoodish]

I looked up Mazda CX-30's, what this started with. They have Black Leatherette. Found this about Leatherette, "...what is leatherette? It's a synthetic surface, usually made of vinyl or a type of plastic that is meant to simulate the look and feel of leather..." Sounds like maybe it might get leg scorching hot

If it’s not leather and it’s not cloth, it’s probably vinyl. I had an Audi with a perforated “leatherette” interior and when I got rid of the car 7 years and 130k miles later, the interior still looked great. I don’t recall it being any hotter or colder than actual leather, but it was a lighter gray color which likely wouldn’t be as bad as black. On the other hand, we have some leather furniture that looks used and I can already tell the same will likely happen with the leather in our Mazda CX-9. There are disadvantages to the natural material.

 

[SoonerAviator]

I looked up Mazda CX-30's, what this started with. They have Black Leatherette. Found this about Leatherette, "...what is leatherette? It's a synthetic surface, usually made of vinyl or a type of plastic that is meant to simulate the look and feel of leather..." Sounds like maybe it might get leg scorching hot

It doesn't really get hotter than the genuine leather. It just wears a lot better than genuine leather since it doesn't split/dry out. My seats in the 2008 F-150 looked practically new even when I sold it with 160K+ miles on it. Granted I didn't abuse the seats and such, but still, it lasts. Just not as soft as real leather.

Pic from when I sold it:

 

[Larry in TN]

The fake leather has gotten really good. It'll fool you unless you examine it very closely and it'll wear better than real leather as the car ages.

 

[SoonerAviator]

Mazdas are sort of niche cars which people buy for the driving experience more than anything else. After driving almost everything in its class, the refinement and driving experience of the CX-9 was so noticeably better that it was an easy choice for us—but we valued those things over cargo space, towing capacity, etc. where the CX-9 is less impressive.

I really like the newer interiors on the Mazdas, but they have got to do something about the anemic power. Shoving that little SkyActive 2.0 or 2.5L-turbo 4-banger into everything no matter how large just screams underwhelming. They need a mid-300HP option for the Mazda 6 and such. Something that would compete with something like the Nissan Maxima or Infiniti Q50.

 

[Grum.Man]

I really like the newer interiors on the Mazdas, but they have got to do something about the anemic power. Shoving that little SkyActive 2.0 or 2.5L-turbo 4-banger into everything no matter how large just screams underwhelming. They need a mid-300HP option for the Mazda 6 and such. Something that would compete with something like the Nissan Maxima or Infiniti Q50.

The engine was one of my main complaints when I was shopping for a crossover a few years ago. This is before they had the turbo option on the CX-5. It was also the smallest inside compared to the competition and I didn't like the infotainment. I do like the styling though I would trade some sportiness for better ride comfort.

 

[JGoodish]

I really like the newer interiors on the Mazdas, but they have got to do something about the anemic power. Shoving that little SkyActive 2.0 or 2.5L-turbo 4-banger into everything no matter how large just screams underwhelming. They need a mid-300HP option for the Mazda 6 and such. Something that would compete with something like the Nissan Maxima or Infiniti Q50.

Personally, I am not a fan of small-displacement turbocharged engines nor of hybrids, but the truth is that most of these cars perform substantially better than mainstream comparables from years past. There is no way that a 4-door sedan needs a 300hp+ engine, and I’m not aware of any mass-market manufacturer who sells more “performance” models than traditional ones. The reality is that even the newer CX-9 has ample power despite the small turbocharged power plant. Does it perform like an Explorer ST? No, but most people don’t buy STs, either.

Mazda is supposedly working on a new 6 cylinder, which would be better for models like the Mazda6 and CX-9, but I’m not sure how that will turn out. Auto makers aren’t stuffing souped-up lawnmower engines into cars because people want them, they’re doing it to meet regulatory requirements. Quite frankly, the biggest issue I have with the engine in our CX-9 is the noise and vibration, areas where a 6 cylinder would simply be superior.

Another concern with Mazda’s 2.5T engine is that it is direct injection but does not have port injection. It seems that most manufacturers have moved to a dual-injection setup in an effort to keep the intake valves clean. Some Mazda owners have installed catch cans, but I’ve seen enough reports of those not making a material difference that I’ve never seriously considered it.

 

[JGoodish]

Since someone mentioned the infotainment, it’s worth noting that Mazda made a significant upgrade to their infotainment system over the past couple of years. The new system is based on a 10.25” screen and new software, so the look is more modern and responsiveness is improved. As with most manufacturers, the stock system has some usability quirks (and the voice assistant is lousy), but we mostly use CarPlay so we don’t rely on the stock system very much.

 

[Grum.Man]

Since someone mentioned the infotainment, it’s worth noting that Mazda made a significant upgrade to their infotainment system over the past couple of years. The new system is based on a 10.25” screen and new software, so the look is more modern and responsiveness is improved. As with most manufacturers, the stock system has some usability quirks (and the voice assistant is lousy), but we mostly use CarPlay so we don’t rely on the stock system very much.

Not being touch screen is simply a deal breaker for me. The pad and knobs just divert your attention for too long. Easier to just reach up and tap what you want. Either way you are looking at the screen to make your selection, just less so since you don't have to scroll.

 

[JGoodish]

Not being touch screen is simply a deal breaker for me. The pad and knobs just divert your attention for too long. Easier to just reach up and tap what you want. Either way you are looking at the screen to make your selection, just less so since you don't have to scroll.

The knobs themselves require no diversion of attention, especially given where Mazda places them. I’ve driven now for 2 years with a touchscreen in the F-150 and about 2 months with the knob in the CX-9, and using the same CarPlay interface, it isn’t even a close contest: the touchscreen requires more time with eyes off the road and more effort to operate while driving. After driving a rental Audi Q7 and now the CX-9 for a combined couple thousand miles, the amount of distraction required to perform the same functions through the touchscreen is quite stark, and I find myself really wishing I had the knob-based system to use in the F-150.

The Mazda has no pad, but the Q7 did. Never could figure out what the pad was used for, because it didn’t seem to work with CarPlay.

 

[SoonerAviator]

Personally, I am not a fan of small-displacement turbocharged engines nor of hybrids, but the truth is that most of these cars perform substantially better than mainstream comparables from years past. There is no way that a 4-door sedan needs a 300hp+ engine, and I’m not aware of any mass-market manufacturer who sells more “performance” models than traditional ones. The reality is that even the newer CX-9 has ample power despite the small turbocharged power plant. Does it perform like an Explorer ST? No, but most people don’t buy STs, either.

Mazda is supposedly working on a new 6 cylinder, which would be better for models like the Mazda6 and CX-9, but I’m not sure how that will turn out. Auto makers aren’t stuffing souped-up lawnmower engines into cars because people want them, they’re doing it to meet regulatory requirements. Quite frankly, the biggest issue I have with the engine in our CX-9 is the noise and vibration, areas where a 6 cylinder would simply be superior.

Another concern with Mazda’s 2.5T engine is that it is direct injection but does not have port injection. It seems that most manufacturers have moved to a dual-injection setup in an effort to keep the intake valves clean. Some Mazda owners have installed catch cans, but I’ve seen enough reports of those not making a material difference that I’ve never seriously considered it.

Cars may perform better than their predecessors, but that's not the apt comparison. They are competing against other modern manufacturers. It's not about selling more of the "performance" models than the traditional ones, that has always been the case that you sold more of the non-performance models. The point is that it's offered to that you have something to compete against other manufacturers in that segment. The Explorer ST goes up against the X5, Jeep TrackHawk, and SRT Durango-type buyers. It doesn't mean the Explorer ST has to outsell the rest of the Explorer lineup. As far as there being "no way that a 4-door sedan needs a 300hp+ engine", I could argue that none of them need a 150HP engine, either. However, having 300HP-400HP+ on tap sure brings a smile to your face when you press on the go-pedal. Mazda was associated with sportiness and being a good driver's car (Speed6, RX-7, RX-8, etc.) but I think the current Mazda 6 settled on being an Accord touring edition instead of the sport-tourer it used to be. You also have to remember that vehicles have gotten porkier over the years due to EPA/safety regs, so the HP has to go up to combat the weight increases when you're toting around 27 airbags and 30lbs of cameras, sensors, and stability control systems lol.

 

[Larry in TN]

I agree. The Mazda interface is very easy to use once you learn how it work. It works equally well with the native UI and the Android Auto UI. The control is placed were your right hand can easily rest on it requiring no reaching, as you would to touch a touchscreen, to operate.

For a rental, the touchscreen might be better as you don't have time to learn the particulars of the control and we're all familiar with touch interfaces from our phones. For a car that I own, I prefer Mazda's system.

 

[SoonerAviator]

Not being touch screen is simply a deal breaker for me. The pad and knobs just divert your attention for too long. Easier to just reach up and tap what you want. Either way you are looking at the screen to make your selection, just less so since you don't have to scroll.

Have to agree with @JGoodish on this one. There are some things that are fine/quicker to use on the touchscreen, mostly if it's a one-touch item from the home screen. If I'm having to drill down through menus and scroll through lists, the buttons/scroll wheel are a MUCH better solution. Each has its place, but one of the best parts about the Mazda layout is the retention of a volume control knob right at your fingertips. Getting rid of volume knobs is one of the worst design-implements that modern cars have flocked to.

 

[Grum.Man]

Have to agree with @JGoodish on this one. There are some things that are fine/quicker to use on the touchscreen, mostly if it's a one-touch item from the home screen. If I'm having to drill down through menus and scroll through lists, the buttons/scroll wheel are a MUCH better solution. Each has its place, but one of the best parts about the Mazda layout is the retention of a volume control knob right at your fingertips. Getting rid of volume knobs is one of the worst design-implements that modern cars have flocked to.

Scrolling sure, honestly all my inputs are single touches mostly and you just can't be a touch screen for that. Luckily my car has both options.

 

[David Megginson]

I have a manual shift Mazda3 hatchback. I never really gave the black interior a thought. I thought that the fit and finish was well above average. With 70k miles, I really like the car. Handles very well for an economy car. Actually fun to drive yet still gets 38 mpg. Perhaps look at another model. The CX3 is pretty tiny inside.

I've had two Mazda 3 Sports with stick shift. Great cars (everything you wrote and a 4' x 5' cargo area), but I've found with both that the stick sometimes doesn't want to go into one of the slots. Rare occurrence, but annoying when it happens.

 

[SoonerAviator]

@JGoodish Lookie what just popped up (dunno if it's cookie related or not, lol). Mazda 6 going to a RWD platform with an inline-6 to go after markets like the BMW and Mercedes entry level sedans. I hope it's true.

https://www.motortrend.com/news/2023-mazda-6-future-cars/

 

[JGoodish]

Have to agree with @JGoodish on this one. There are some things that are fine/quicker to use on the touchscreen, mostly if it's a one-touch item from the home screen. If I'm having to drill down through menus and scroll through lists, the buttons/scroll wheel are a MUCH better solution. Each has its place, but one of the best parts about the Mazda layout is the retention of a volume control knob right at your fingertips. Getting rid of volume knobs is one of the worst design-implements that modern cars have flocked to.

Even for single-touch items, having to reach for the screen (and different parts of the screen) is itself a distraction when driving. This is better on some vehicles which place the screen more within the driver's reach, but then it's further from the field of view while driving, requiring the driver to look down at it for changing media or navigation. Another issue I've noticed with some touchscreens (certainly the SYNC 3 system in the F-150) is that the screen won't always respond to a touch, requiring me to poke at it to get it to register. I'm willing to respect the preferences of others here, but from a human factors standpoint the touchscreen-while-driving experience is inferior to a cursor-based system, which appears to be Mazda's rationale for eliminating it.

Some other things I like about the Mazda, which may also apply to other vehicles:

No auto stop/start. I was pretty open-minded about auto stop/start when I bought the F-150, but after 2 years of ownership and 32k miles, I'm convinced it's a giant waste (as is Ford's "Eco" driving mode). Ford provides a button which lets you disable it (per start cycle), but I've heard that GM and possibly others force it on drivers without an option to disable it at all. This is also a personal preference thing, but I don't see how it could improve efficiency unless you spend a significant amount of time sitting and not moving.

The 6-speed transmission. Sure, the car may get better fuel economy with an 8-speed but I think beyond that transmissions spend too much time hunting and it's hard to respond well through that many gears. The F-150's 10-speed is notoriously terrible (and it is terrible... didn't I mention it's terrible?) and is probably hands-down the worst part of the vehicle.

 

[JGoodish]

@JGoodish Lookie what just popped up (dunno if it's cookie related or not, lol). Mazda 6 going to a RWD platform with an inline-6 to go after markets like the BMW and Mercedes entry level sedans. I hope it's true.

https://www.motortrend.com/news/2023-mazda-6-future-cars/

RWD and inline 6, that should make for a very nice car.

 

[Jumpmaster]

I am on my last Mazda. I had a 2006 Mazda 3 that I got 253K on it and my nephew and niece pushed it to over 300K before donating it. Other than eating tires, it was a great car. My 2016 CX5 on the other hand is not so swell. Just slightly over 116K miles, it is now using a quart of synthetic about every 2500 miles. The black leather interior is not holding up nearly as well as the 2006 (both are Grand Touring models). Doubt I will get much more than 200K miles on this one. From what I’ve seen, the 2021 models are not better built. So, I will look for something else - probably a hybrid of some sort.

 

[Seanaldinho]

I am on my last Mazda. I had a 2006 Mazda 3 that I got 253K on it and my nephew and niece pushed it to over 300K before donating it. Other than eating tires, it was a great car. My 2016 CX5 on the other hand is not so swell. Just slightly over 116K miles, it is now using a quart of synthetic about every 2500 miles. The black leather interior is not holding up nearly as well as the 2006 (both are Grand Touring models). Doubt I will get much more than 200K miles on this one. From what I’ve seen, the 2021 models are not better built. So, I will look for something else - probably a hybrid of some sort.

Oil eating has become more common as manufacturers move to lower weight oils to reduce friction and improve fuel economy. I had a 2017 Subaru Impreza running 0W-20 that would need a quart roughly as often as your CX5.

Paging @Ted to confirm or refute the science loosely conveyed above...

 

[asicer]

But...can anyone tell me why ALL the cars have black interior? Even the white exteriors!

The short answer is not ALL the cars have black interior. However, it may be a reflection of what's popular in your area as the dealer probably won't order that which does not sell well.

Here's what a CX-30 with white leather interior looks like:

 

[ebetancourt]

There is a reason BaskinRobins makes so many flavors. My wife had a Jeep Grand Cherokee that we wanted to replace. (It was either her third or fourth). 2021s not available, so we looked around a little and settled on a Mazda CX-9. As soon as we identify a suitable SUV that compares to the Grand Cherokee we'll dump the CX-9 and take the loss. First it's "AWD" supposedly, and probably is in a real traction situation, but it's basically a FWD car with loads of torque steer. Drive feel is somewhat akin to a fork in a bowl of spaghetti. The entertainment system is actually pretty good, designed by SXM apparently, but integration with the car is horrendous and you spend a lot time squinting at the center display looking for things that should be displayed on the big screen. If you want remote start you get the app, and it's free for three years. Apparently they are going to sell "features as a service (FaaS)" to keep generating revenue from the car.

HUD is good, cameras are great, engine is adequate, I like the radar cruise and the fact that you can override it with the throttle without turning it off. And the Red is a really pretty color.

I had a good attitude toward Mazda based on owning second and third generation RX-7s a long time ago, but this is the last one.

 

[SoonerAviator]

One of the things I forgot to mention on radar cruise controls that can be problematic. I've had a few as rentals where a sensor went out or if rain/snow/dirt/etc. obscures the sensors, cruise control will not work at all. Not just limits the radar distancing feature, but disables cruise control altogether. Made me mad on a couple of 2-hr long drives in PA, and one 4hr drive to DFW.

 

[Ted]

Oil eating has become more common as manufacturers move to lower weight oils to reduce friction and improve fuel economy. I had a 2017 Subaru Impreza running 0W-20 that would need a quart roughly as often as your CX5.

Paging @Ted to confirm or refute the science loosely conveyed above...

I’m not sure if I would say “more common”, so much as there have always been engine designs inherently consume some oil because they either get something “wrong” in the design or its the compromise they had to live with. Truthfully I haven’t tracked what new engines do since I don’t own new cars. In the old days, it was common for many engines to burn a quart every 1k miles or so, although it’s unclear to me how much of that was from day 1 or just that the engines wore faster due to inferior designs and inferior oils.

As people have become worse about regular maintenance and oil change intervals have continued to increase, I’d tend to think that commonplace oil consumption has overall decreased, but again, I’ve not tracked it much.

 

[DaleB]

I haven’t owned a car that used any oil between oil changes since well before we stopped buying junkers for the kids to drive in high school. Even the last few of those didn’t burn oil.

 

[Clip4]

Because on of the cost cutting methods the Japanese used to compete internationally was to delete interior color selections. The rest of the industry followed.

 

[asicer]

Because on of the cost cutting methods the Japanese used to compete internationally was to delete interior color selections. The rest of the industry followed.

They did not. Proof by counterexample: See post #60.

 

[MauleSkinner]

Years ago I laughingly rejected the model with a backup camera, "I can back up without a camera!" That's true, but after driving rental cars with backup cameras, I can see how they would be useful.

They’re useful,because they started making cars with really crappy visibility. My 2004 doesn’t need a backup camera. My wife’s 2016 does (same model).

Whadda ya mean by "...ALL the cars have black interior...?" That's all they make? Or all the dealer has on the lot for sale? If the latter, maybe it's because no wants to buy them and it's all they got left.

“You can get any color you want, as long as it’s black.”

 

[luvflyin]

They’re useful,because they started making cars with really crappy visibility. My 2004 doesn’t need a backup camera. My wife’s 2016 does (same model).

“You can get any color you want, as long as it’s black.”

Henry? Is that you?

 

[JGoodish]

There is a reason BaskinRobins makes so many flavors. My wife had a Jeep Grand Cherokee that we wanted to replace. (It was either her third or fourth). 2021s not available, so we looked around a little and settled on a Mazda CX-9. As soon as we identify a suitable SUV that compares to the Grand Cherokee we'll dump the CX-9 and take the loss. First it's "AWD" supposedly, and probably is in a real traction situation, but it's basically a FWD car with loads of torque steer. Drive feel is somewhat akin to a fork in a bowl of spaghetti. The entertainment system is actually pretty good, designed by SXM apparently, but integration with the car is horrendous and you spend a lot time squinting at the center display looking for things that should be displayed on the big screen. If you want remote start you get the app, and it's free for three years. Apparently they are going to sell "features as a service (FaaS)" to keep generating revenue from the car.

The 2021 CX-9 has noticeably less torque steer than the previous model years that we test drove. In fact, it is difficult to detect during normal driving, and it was something that we were watching for during the test drives. The CX-9 is a crossover and not a SUV, and like almost every other crossover (including luxury brands) it uses a car-based FWD platform. For this reason, I would never recommend a crossover from any brand to someone looking for the capability or performance of a Grand Cherokee.

The 2021 CX-9 infotainment is a redesign from previous model years, and I believe is using software from Panasonic. Information in the 7” center cluster display is similar to just about every other car I’ve driven, so I’m not sure what’s there that should instead be on the infotainment screen. Vehicles which integrate everything into the infotainment screen are almost always a usability nightmare and end up covering important information when device-projection (CarPlay/Android Auto) is active. In all the cars I’ve driven, I have yet to see any manufacturer get the systems and screens right, and there are many who do worse at design and integration than what I’ve experienced with Mazda’s system.

If I were looking for a Grand Cherokee substitute, I think I’d take a look at the 4Runner. I’m not a fan of the exterior design, but it’s probably more capable off road than an Explorer (which is now a RWD platform) though likely doesn’t have the same fuel economy. We drove the new Explorers, but the fit and finish was horrendous to the point where I was suspicious that it was intentional to avoid competing with the Lincoln model. We didn’t plan to tow with the vehicle nor take it off road, so we prioritized handling and fuel economy over performance in those areas. We drove a rental Audi Q7 (also a FWD-based platform, I believe) for about 2k miles before buying the CX-9, and of all the competition in the non-luxury segment, the CX-9 was the closest in performance and handling. I didn’t notice torque steer from the Q7 either despite the higher-output engine, though Audi’s AWD system is likely superior to the one used by Mazda.

 

[ebetancourt]

To each his own; both my wife and I find the torque steering objectionable. I don't think putting the OAT in a corner of the display for example would be asking too much, and I really do feel that the drive feel is awful. It was our mistake, I'm sure others like the car, but as soon as we can get a new Grand Cherokee it's gone.

 

[Southpaw]

Best interior color I ever had was Blue in a 1990 Horizon. Loved that car. was great in mud and snow.
Black interiors are terrible . You need a flash light to find any thing.
White exteriors are the easiest to keep "looking clean"
Second worst interior color is grey or gray .
Thinking of keeping my 1990 Isuzu Trooper for ever, along with my 1995 Jeep Wrangler .
At my age that may not be long.

 

[JGoodish]

To each his own; both my wife and I find the torque steering objectionable. I don't think putting the OAT in a corner of the display for example would be asking too much, and I really do feel that the drive feel is awful. It was our mistake, I'm sure others like the car, but as soon as we can get a new Grand Cherokee it's gone.

You bought the wrong car for you—nothing wrong with admitting that, as it’s hard to know what it’s like to live with a vehicle until you own it. I’m not sure why you’re feeling significant torque steer when my wife and I are not, but most FWD-based vehicles will have some torque steer. There is no question the car would be better with a RWD platform (and a 6 cylinder engine). The handling characteristics of the Mazda’s are very German-like, and not everyone likes them; certainly much different than a Grand Cherokee. I used to have a Grand Cherokee and liked the vehicle but didn’t like the long-term reliability issues which came with it.

Regarding the temperature display, the fact that OAT *is not* displayed on the infotainment screen is a huge plus, because that’s where it’s shown on my F-150 and as soon as I plug in my phone, CarPlay takes over and it’s gone. This is a problem which seems to affect most systems where that type of information is displayed on the infotainment screen. Seems more convenient to have it on the gauge cluster all the time than have to dig for it if using CarPlay for navigation or entertainment.