Impossible, they are not in the country at dealers yet. Our order is not coming until late March, early April. I have checked our order status from Mazda in Japan, and non of the CX-7's that have been ordered for my first allocation even have VIN"s yet! I bet you got an auto-response email from the dealer telling you to come in.
just spoke with dealer and he said there automated system sent out letters showing they were in stock. I did reserve one though through mazda website. Nice that it shows which models and what options are being shipped where.
The $800 difference between the "Touring" model and "Grand Touring" looks like a steal. You get: 1.Auto Xenon HID Headlamps 2.Fog Lamps 3. Auto Climate Control 4. Electroluminescent gauges 5.Heated/Body color/Folding side mirrors 6.Outside temp gauge 7.Special GT leather, 8.Custom steering wheel, 9.Bright door handles. I was looking over Mazda's website, obviously, and noticed an error: Heated mirrors are listed as std. and only available on the Grand Touring model under "Features and Specs" but when you try to "build" one, they're listed as std. on the Touring model. But any way you cut it, this is a $800 option that's worth the money. If it looks half as good in pictures as it does in person, the CX-7 is the best looking CUV/SUV since the Infiniti FX35/45. I love it!
the cx7 has arrived !!!!!!!! 3 in stock and ready for test drives
I think you may have been mislead by a dealership, just like someone in an earlier post. The CX-7 has not been distributed to dealers yet. They will not appear in showrooms in the U.S. until late March, early April.
Second year is always a good idea. Here's a little trick I try to force myself to do -- look at LAST year's and other recent introductions, read the hype and get excited about THEM. Then they are in their second year or later, reliability has improved and prices are down.
It's HARD to do though!
SO, by that strategy I should be getting excited about a Honda Odyssey, the Honda Ridgeline, and the Subaru Tribeca, Mini Cooper and ignoring the Acura RDX, Mazda CX-7, Audi A3, Passat and vaporware CR-V 2007!
If you are REALLY hard core you can wait for the mid model change before you get excited -- ie Mazda 6, Honda Pilot, Murano, Element, Accord. Then the bugs are worked out and you have something that looks freshened.
Again - its hard advice to follow and I can't always do it, but I try!
Firstly, it looks like Mazda is positioning CX-7 as a direct competition to Murano, in my opinion. Size, weight, dimensions, power.... And undercuts the price a little. So, it is going to come down to design in choosing between them. Also I must say, that Murano, on paper at least, is bigger inside (cargo and passenger space), more powerful, gets better city mileage and does not require premium gas. Hm... :confuse: Secondly, I received an e-mail yesterday, from Mazda USA, telling me to reserve my CX-7 at any of the local (NJ) Mazda dealerships, with the possibility to check an inventory(they call it "1st Choice Buyer’s Program"). So I did and got a result of 70 CX-7s within 20 mile radius. Not many, and no VIN numbers, just order numbers, but it is a start...
Mazda seems to have problems with first year models. The recent Mazda 5 problems and the many RX-8 teething problems.
Most every car has a few kinks or so in the first model year. The RX-8 problems, mostly flooding, are due to owners not knowing how to properly operate their vehicle. Either they were not told by the dealer, did not watch the video Mazda gives with the car, or they are just ignorant. When people do not understand technology, and something does not work right, the first thing they do is BLAME the technology, not themselves. The Mazda5 was just an exhaust issue. Someone dealer revved the car up to rev limmiter and the exhaust over heated and they saw smoke. A simple heat shield and exhaust adjustment was the solution. If you look, even Honda's and Toyota's have many recalls! Just because there are recalls, does not mean the car is not reliable.
yeah, i've heard a few people having concerns with the DISI turbo. Mainly the gas millage and fuel grade requirement. Also, on the Toyota, they are advertising a 21/28 MPG on the V6 4WD. Thats a really big fuel consumption widow. I really doubt anyone will get 28. It may be closer to 23-26. And a lot of high performance V6's require 91 octane. I don't know if the RAV4 does or not, I cannot find that info. So, there is a possibility they could be very close. But, we will have to wait and see
According to review @ Edmunds, RAV4 4WD V6 is rated at 20/27 mpg. With I4-23/29mpg. On regular. The numbers are 1mpg higher for 2WD. And Toyota is cheaper, I think. So... Unless you really like the exterior design of CX-7, the smart money are on RAV4.
Wow, with such thinking, the RAV4 should kill the Murano too, since its even more expensive and same FE to CX-7...
Why not the even cheaper CR-V or Tucson?
Not to put too strong a point on it, but I think different people look for different things. The Murano does well versus cheaper cars like the Highlander etc.
Here is my opinion if you can live with the blah styling of the RAV4 and the poor interior then sure go for it. I mean I have seen it and it really is nothing special, and I can't imagine how they actually have a 3rd row the RAV4 is quiet small, seems to be a highlander blue light special.
I think it is a good value if you must have a small SUV with V6 and 3rd row, but it still it is yawn...sorry almost fell asleep talking about it.
Now the CX-7 now that is fresh!...Not to mention the interior is light years nicer then the RAV4's. I just don't see the CX-7 and RAV4 being compared by buyers unless they are comparing everything that is a tall wagon.
Here is what makes sense: Rav4 VS CRV, PILOT, Highlander, Tribute...etc...
CX-7 VS RDX, Edge, MKS.
What is scary is how similiar the Acura RDX and Mazda CX-7 are...it almost seems as tho' these 2 companies are working together or someone has a mole...same 2.3 L turbo engine each tuned slightly different.
i might be alone here, but i'm sorta disappointed with the engine. yeah, it might be great for tuners, but 19/24 mpg with 91 octane gas required. ---------------------------------
No, you're not alone. The turbo fits the zoom zoom image but the mileage and need for premium gas are disappointments. I think the Edge with its 3.5V6 is a better choice.
Mazda is making questionable choices with their engines. First, many think the Mazda5 is underpowered with the 2.3 and now a poor mileage, premium gas CX7.
I like the style of both the Mazda5 and the CX7 but the engine choices are less than ideal.
If you mean that the RAV4 will probably sell more than the CX-7, I'd probably agree with you.
It's a no-brainer to think that the RAV4 will sell more then the CX-7. Toyota is a giant, Mazda is not. Take the Mazda3 Vs. the Corolla. The Mazda3 is so much more of a car in every aspect, but the Corolla kicks its behind in sales. Toyota sells on reputation alone, and if their product is actually more of a car then its competitior's, then thats a bonus. For the most part, Toyota has a very boring product line IMO, but, since reliability is fantastic, people say "well, it's a Toyota, I'm getting value for my money" Right now, Mazda is trying to create a buyer for their vehicles. There are not a lot of repeat Mazda buyers right now. Since the redesign of every vehicle in the product line, and the happieness of the majority of the new Mazda customers, it is safe to say that there most likely will be a lot of repeat buyers in a few years when they decide to get a new car. Toyota has tons of repeat buyers, as well as first time buyers. It will be some time before Mazda has that as well.IMO
Like many of you I am impressed with the fun styling of the new Mazda products but underwhelmed by their engine choices.
The poster child for a silly engine choice is their no torque, unreliable, gas hog, low horsepower, oil consuming rotary engine in the RX8. The RX 8 has a really fun body style and please Mazda how about a nice V6 in the next RX 8? Rotary.......RIP. As I have mentioned before the CX-7 would be more successful if they also offered a V6 and charged another $1500.00 for the same.
Like many of you I am impressed with the fun styling of the new Mazda products but underwhelmed by their engine choices. ----------------------------------
I think the Mazda3 and 6 engines are fine but they dropped the ball with the Mazda5 and the CX7. The 5 and the CX7 should both have a second engine choice.
I hope with the arrival of cleaner diesel fuel, that will become an option in the 5 and the CX7.
Below are the performance and EPA numbers for the Murano, CX7 and RAV4. While the RAV4 has a higher EPA mileage, I think the CX7 provides about the same EPA figures as the Murano and the horsepower and torque curve meaning it will be probably be faster than either the RAV4 or the Murano. In short I think the engine in the CX7 is comparable to what the competition is offering. The upcoming Acura RDX will offer a similar 2.3L 240hp engine.
I apologize for using "smart money" without explanation. I meant that, as a package, RAV4 is a better choice then CX-7. Which vehicle is better driving-an open question. Besides, "better driving" means different things for different people.
Well, I never mentioned a 3rd row seat in my post #242, didn't I? Personally, I coudn't care less for 3rd row seat. As far as boring goes... The beauty is in the eye of the beholder, isn't it? And I am very fond of the industrial design, in any shape or form. By the way, all vehicles you compare CX-7 to: RDX, MKS, Edge, are vaporware for now... Show me the metal!
"I think the CX7 provides about the same EPA figures as the Murano and the horsepower and torque curve meaning it will be probably be faster than either the RAV4 or the Murano" Well, in your performance data you forgot to mention weight! So... RAV4 V6: 3675 lbs, 269hp@6200, 246lb-ft@4700 Murano : 3981 lbs, 245hp@5800, 246lb-ft@4400 CX-7 : 3929 lbs, 244hp@5000, 258lb-ft@2500. And if calculate pounds per 1 horsepower... RAV4 V6: 13.66, Murano : 16.25, CX-7 : 16.10. I would say, Toyota beats both these vehicles. And where did you see the torque curve? I want to see it too!
I saw the cx7 in person at the st.louis auto show and i was not impressed at all with the outside. After seeing it I would not buy it. Everyone i went with to the auto show said it looked like a car/wagon. I was very disappointed because i thought for sure it was the car i was going to buy this spring. It is nothing compared to the Murano or even the RAV4. Just looks like a beefed up car. I am now leaning towards the Rav4 if the V6 ever comes out. I dont see mazda selling alot of these. Maybe the interior is nice but they didnt have it open so i couldnt tell.
“And where did you see the torque curve? I want to see it too!” I have not seen a picture of the torque curve but Mazda states that the “CX-7 is tuned to deliver 258 lb-ft of torque at a low 2,500 rpm, and at least 99-percent of the maximum torque available all the way to the 5,000 rpm horsepower peak.”
The RAV4 and CX-7 are not competitors. The CX-7 competes with the Murano, period. I don't think Nissan cares too much about the RAV4 stealing Murano sales. The CX-7 and Murano are a little more premium than the RAV4. THe CX-7 will perform the best as far as handling and will out gun the Murano. No one is looking at the RAV4 as a performance SUV which is what Mazda is billing the CX-7 as from day one. Remember the whole "soul of a sports car" thing. And I think Mazda may have targeted Acura as well. Suppliers and car makers know what the competition is developing far before the public. The Mazda comes with features such as keyless go, navigation, and special leather seats (also not to be found on a RAV4. Could Mazda be positioning itself as a cheaper Acura?
Sorry I missed you at the auto show! I saw the CX7 as well, and I *think* I took some photos, which I'll post later this afternoon.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name. 2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h) Review your vehicle
I don't get the quantity of RAV4 posts here - other than Toyota sells lots more vehicles than Mazda, probably always well.
Mazda is targeting a different driver with the CX-7 than Toyota is with the RAV4. If Mazda ever offers a CX-9, with third row seating, it still wouldn't be aimed at the RAV4 crowd. Looks are in the eye of the beholder.
It is kind of like comparing the Mazda3 to the Toyota Corolla. Tons more Corollas on the road, and the 3 costs more - but the driving experience can't be compared - IMHO.
The poster child for a silly engine choice is their no torque, unreliable, gas hog, low horsepower, oil consuming rotary engine in the RX8. The RX 8 has a really fun body style and please Mazda how about a nice V6 in the next RX 8? Rotary.......RIP.
Well, I think I will start by saying that your statement is just a little inaccurate. The Mazda 13b MSP rotary IS a reliable engine. Refer to Consumer Reports. Also, the only problem I have seen is engine flooding. That is caused by the owner not knowing how to operate the car. Either they were not properly educated, or they are ignorant. As for fuel consumption, yes, it's not great, but it gets comparable gas mileage to a performance V6. The engine is really bigger then a 1.3L engine. It's more like a 2.6L. Engine displacement is measured by the volume at engine rest. Well, in a rotary, that depends where the rotors rest, and its always different. Oil consumption, is not that much more then a piston engine. Now, if you are racing the engine, or constantly shifting at 9,000 RPM, you will use more oil. The Mazda rotary is a very race proven engine. It is the ONLY Japanese manufactured engine to EVER with at the 24 hr LeMans. Now, if Mazda were to place a V6 in the RX-8, it would not be called an RX-8. It would be called the MX-8. "RX" stands for a Mazda vehicle powered by a rotary engine. "MX" stands for a Mazda sports coupe powered by a piston engine, like the MX-5. Also, Mazda does not have a V6, they borrow Ford's. If you want to lern more about the rotary, I suggest going to the RX-8 forum, or RX-7 forum.
I don't get the quantity of RAV4 posts here - other than Toyota sells lots more vehicles than Mazda, probably always well.
Well, that is because the RAV4 and CX-7 are in the same class, similar performance and size.
Mazda is targeting a different driver with the CX-7 than Toyota is with the RAV4. If Mazda ever offers a CX-9, with third row seating, it still wouldn't be aimed at the RAV4 crowd. Looks are in the eye of the beholder.
Of course! Mazda targets a completely different customer with all of their products, but that does not mean Mazda is not looking to take a Toyota customer and make them a Mazda customer. The CX-9 will be a 7 passenger crossover, like the Ford Freestyle or Chrysler Pacifica. Not RAV4
It is kind of like comparing the Mazda3 to the Toyota Corolla. Tons more Corollas on the road, and the 3 costs more - but the driving experience can't be compared - IMHO.
Yes, I agree that the Mazda3 is much more of a car, and is more exciting to drive, but that does not mean that the Corolla is not a competitor! From what I read, you say that Mazda does not compete with Toyota? I don't understand that comment. :confuse:
Yes, I agree that the Mazda3 is much more of a car, and is more exciting to drive, but that does not mean that the Corolla is not a competitor! From what I read, you say that Mazda does not compete with Toyota? I don't understand that comment.
I'm not sure I said that they don't compete at all. I guess the case can be made that all carmakers are in competition with each other, some more than others.
I'd say that the CX-7 is geared more to drivers who value "fun to drive" than the RAV4. If you go to the Toyota RAV4 site, they hype the new length, mpg, cargo space, car pooling, landscaping, camping, and a few other tings before they mention fun to drive in small type.
If the RAV4 makes someone happy, then by all means, I hope they buy one.
Well, that is because the RAV4 and CX-7 are in the same class, similar performance and size.
Based on what does it make you think they are in the same segment? Question for you, is the Acura which is less powerful than the Rav and CX-7 in the same segment as well? The Rav-4 is about the same size as the current Highlander. The new Highlander won't be out for a little while. Does Toyota have two entry's into the same segment? I think the Rav4 is entry level while the Mazda. Edge, Highlander, Murano, Subaru B9, are more premium.
Based on what does it make you think they are in the same segment?
I said before, similar size, price, and power, function.
Question for you, is the Acura which is less powerful than the Rav and CX-7 in the same segment as well?
Tough to say. With similar size, little less power (not much), function..one could say it's in the same segment. The thing is, Acura is considered a premium vehicle. Price will most likely be more on the Acura RDX. The Mazda would seem more for your dollar.IMO
Does Toyota have two entry's into the same segment?
I have no idea, for I have not seen the new Highlander.
I think the Rav4 is entry level while the Mazda. Edge, Highlander, Murano, Subaru B9, are more premium.
I do think the RAV4, Edge, and Murano can be placed together, however, the B9 Tribeca is much bigger. I would say the B9 is more in the mid sized SUV class, like the Pilot, 4-Runner. I really don't know where the new Highlander will fall. The current one is in the same class as the Escape, Tribute. IMO. But, everyone is entitled to their opinion.
This debate reminds me of a similar one regarding the Acura TSX and Mazda 6. Similar on paper with the Acura costing more but having better resale and interior quality. Both go for the sporting buyer, just at a little different price point.
Comments
I have checked our order status from Mazda in Japan, and non of the CX-7's that have been ordered for my first allocation even have VIN"s yet!
I bet you got an auto-response email from the dealer telling you to come in.
Thats what i figured..
I did reserve one though through mazda website
Everyone can do that now. It's a program that Mazda released for anyone to reserve one before they come in. It's a good idea by Mazda
I think you may have been mislead by a dealership, just like someone in an earlier post. The CX-7 has not been distributed to dealers yet. They will not appear in showrooms in the U.S. until late March, early April.
I am having trouble with the Mazda website.
Length is 184.1", Width is 73.7", Height is 64.8" and the wheelbase is 108.3". Weight is 3710# FWD and 3929# AWD.
How soon before we see one of these on the road.
Mazda seems to have problems with first year models. The recent Mazda 5 problems and the many RX-8 teething problems.
Does anyone know the exterior color options?
If we are interested in buying should we wait to the second year?
It's HARD to do though!
SO, by that strategy I should be getting excited about a Honda Odyssey, the Honda Ridgeline, and the Subaru Tribeca, Mini Cooper and ignoring the Acura RDX, Mazda CX-7, Audi A3, Passat and vaporware CR-V 2007!
If you are REALLY hard core you can wait for the mid model change before you get excited -- ie Mazda 6, Honda Pilot, Murano, Element, Accord. Then the bugs are worked out and you have something that looks freshened.
Again - its hard advice to follow and I can't always do it, but I try!
Secondly, I received an e-mail yesterday, from Mazda USA, telling me to reserve my CX-7 at any of the local (NJ) Mazda dealerships, with the possibility to check an inventory(they call it "1st Choice Buyer’s Program"). So I did and got a result of 70 CX-7s within 20 mile radius. Not many, and no VIN numbers, just order numbers, but it is a start...
Most every car has a few kinks or so in the first model year.
The RX-8 problems, mostly flooding, are due to owners not knowing how to properly operate their vehicle. Either they were not told by the dealer, did not watch the video Mazda gives with the car, or they are just ignorant. When people do not understand technology, and something does not work right, the first thing they do is BLAME the technology, not themselves.
The Mazda5 was just an exhaust issue. Someone dealer revved the car up to rev limmiter and the exhaust over heated and they saw smoke. A simple heat shield and exhaust adjustment was the solution.
If you look, even Honda's and Toyota's have many recalls!
Just because there are recalls, does not mean the car is not reliable.
the v6 in the rav4 is much more appealing. but otherwise, the cx7 is a nice looking suv.
So, there is a possibility they could be very close. But, we will have to wait and see
Why not the even cheaper CR-V or Tucson?
Not to put too strong a point on it, but I think different people look for different things. The Murano does well versus cheaper cars like the Highlander etc.
If you mean that the RAV4 will probably sell more than the CX-7, I'd probably agree with you.
That doesn't mean that the CX-7 won't be the better driving vehicle.
I think it is a good value if you must have a small SUV with V6 and 3rd row, but it still it is yawn...sorry almost fell asleep talking about it.
Now the CX-7 now that is fresh!...Not to mention the interior is light years nicer then the RAV4's. I just don't see the CX-7 and RAV4 being compared by buyers unless they are comparing everything that is a tall wagon.
Here is what makes sense:
Rav4 VS
CRV, PILOT, Highlander, Tribute...etc...
CX-7 VS
RDX, Edge, MKS.
What is scary is how similiar the Acura RDX and Mazda CX-7 are...it almost seems as tho' these 2 companies are working together or someone has a mole...same 2.3 L turbo engine each tuned slightly different.
CX-7: 244HP, 258 LB/FT
RDX: 240HP, 260 LB/FT
Just found that interesting.
B.
---------------------------------
No, you're not alone. The turbo fits the zoom zoom image but the mileage and need for premium gas are disappointments. I think the Edge with its 3.5V6 is a better choice.
Mazda is making questionable choices with their engines. First, many think the Mazda5 is underpowered with the 2.3 and now a poor mileage, premium gas CX7.
I like the style of both the Mazda5 and the CX7 but the engine choices are less than ideal.
It's a no-brainer to think that the RAV4 will sell more then the CX-7. Toyota is a giant, Mazda is not. Take the Mazda3 Vs. the Corolla. The Mazda3 is so much more of a car in every aspect, but the Corolla kicks its behind in sales.
Toyota sells on reputation alone, and if their product is actually more of a car then its competitior's, then thats a bonus.
For the most part, Toyota has a very boring product line IMO, but, since reliability is fantastic, people say "well, it's a Toyota, I'm getting value for my money"
Right now, Mazda is trying to create a buyer for their vehicles. There are not a lot of repeat Mazda buyers right now. Since the redesign of every vehicle in the product line, and the happieness of the majority of the new Mazda customers, it is safe to say that there most likely will be a lot of repeat buyers in a few years when they decide to get a new car.
Toyota has tons of repeat buyers, as well as first time buyers. It will be some time before Mazda has that as well.IMO
The poster child for a silly engine choice is their no torque, unreliable, gas hog, low horsepower, oil consuming rotary engine in the RX8. The RX 8 has a really fun body style and please Mazda how about a nice V6 in the next RX 8? Rotary.......RIP. As I have mentioned before the CX-7 would be more successful if they also offered a V6 and charged another $1500.00 for the same.
---------------------------------------
I've read highway in the mid 20s and also combined in the mid 20s. It's a little early to get reliable information.
I've read the length as 193inches and also 186inches.
----------------------------------
I think the Mazda3 and 6 engines are fine but they dropped the ball with the Mazda5 and the CX7. The 5 and the CX7 should both have a second engine choice.
I hope with the arrival of cleaner diesel fuel, that will become an option in the 5 and the CX7.
Nissan Murano
3.5-liter DOHC 24-valve V6 engine
245 hp @ 5,800 rpm
246 lb-ft of torque @ 4,400 rpm
EPA fuel estimate 19/24 (awd) 20/25 (fwd)
CVT (Continuously Variable Transmission)
Mazda Cx-7
2.3L Direct Inject Spark Ignition turbocharged 16-valve inline engine
244 hp @ 5,000 rpm
258 lb-ft of torque @ 2,500 rpm
EPA fuel estimate 18/24 (awd) 19/24 (fwd)
6-speed electronically controlled automatic transmission
Toyota RAV4
3.5-liter DOHC 24-valve V6 engine
269 hp @ 6,200 rpm
246 lb-ft of torque @ 4,700 rpm
EPA fuel estimate 21/28 (awd) 22/29 (fwd)
5-speed electronically controlled automatic overdrive (ECT)
ACURA RDX
2.3L turbocharged 16-valve inline engine
240 hp
260 lb-ft of torque
EPA fuel estimate: TBD (awd) TBD (fwd)
5-speed sequential SportShift(TM) automatic transmission.
By the way, all vehicles you compare CX-7 to: RDX, MKS, Edge, are vaporware for now... Show me the metal!
Well, in your performance data you forgot to mention weight! So...
RAV4 V6: 3675 lbs, 269hp@6200, 246lb-ft@4700
Murano : 3981 lbs, 245hp@5800, 246lb-ft@4400
CX-7 : 3929 lbs, 244hp@5000, 258lb-ft@2500.
And if calculate pounds per 1 horsepower...
RAV4 V6: 13.66,
Murano : 16.25,
CX-7 : 16.10.
I would say, Toyota beats both these vehicles. And where did you see the torque curve? I want to see it too!
I have not seen a picture of the torque curve but Mazda states that the “CX-7 is tuned to deliver 258 lb-ft of torque at a low 2,500 rpm, and at least 99-percent of the maximum torque available all the way to the 5,000 rpm horsepower peak.”
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
Mazda is targeting a different driver with the CX-7 than Toyota is with the RAV4. If Mazda ever offers a CX-9, with third row seating, it still wouldn't be aimed at the RAV4 crowd. Looks are in the eye of the beholder.
It is kind of like comparing the Mazda3 to the Toyota Corolla. Tons more Corollas on the road, and the 3 costs more - but the driving experience can't be compared - IMHO.
Well, I think I will start by saying that your statement is just a little inaccurate. The Mazda 13b MSP rotary IS a reliable engine. Refer to Consumer Reports. Also, the only problem I have seen is engine flooding. That is caused by the owner not knowing how to operate the car. Either they were not properly educated, or they are ignorant. As for fuel consumption, yes, it's not great, but it gets comparable gas mileage to a performance V6. The engine is really bigger then a 1.3L engine. It's more like a 2.6L. Engine displacement is measured by the volume at engine rest. Well, in a rotary, that depends where the rotors rest, and its always different. Oil consumption, is not that much more then a piston engine. Now, if you are racing the engine, or constantly shifting at 9,000 RPM, you will use more oil. The Mazda rotary is a very race proven engine. It is the ONLY Japanese manufactured engine to EVER with at the 24 hr LeMans.
Now, if Mazda were to place a V6 in the RX-8, it would not be called an RX-8. It would be called the MX-8. "RX" stands for a Mazda vehicle powered by a rotary engine. "MX" stands for a Mazda sports coupe powered by a piston engine, like the MX-5. Also, Mazda does not have a V6, they borrow Ford's.
If you want to lern more about the rotary, I suggest going to the RX-8 forum, or RX-7 forum.
Well, that is because the RAV4 and CX-7 are in the same class, similar performance and size.
Mazda is targeting a different driver with the CX-7 than Toyota is with the RAV4. If Mazda ever offers a CX-9, with third row seating, it still wouldn't be aimed at the RAV4 crowd. Looks are in the eye of the beholder.
Of course! Mazda targets a completely different customer with all of their products, but that does not mean Mazda is not looking to take a Toyota customer and make them a Mazda customer.
The CX-9 will be a 7 passenger crossover, like the Ford Freestyle or Chrysler Pacifica. Not RAV4
It is kind of like comparing the Mazda3 to the Toyota Corolla. Tons more Corollas on the road, and the 3 costs more - but the driving experience can't be compared - IMHO.
Yes, I agree that the Mazda3 is much more of a car, and is more exciting to drive, but that does not mean that the Corolla is not a competitor!
From what I read, you say that Mazda does not compete with Toyota? I don't understand that comment. :confuse:
From what I read, you say that Mazda does not compete with Toyota? I don't understand that comment.
I'm not sure I said that they don't compete at all. I guess the case can be made that all carmakers are in competition with each other, some more than others.
I'd say that the CX-7 is geared more to drivers who value "fun to drive" than the RAV4. If you go to the Toyota RAV4 site, they hype the new length, mpg, cargo space, car pooling, landscaping, camping, and a few other tings before they mention fun to drive in small type.
If the RAV4 makes someone happy, then by all means, I hope they buy one.
Toyota is boring IMO, I think Mazda is pretty exciting, as a company.
Based on what does it make you think they are in the same segment? Question for you, is the Acura which is less powerful than the Rav and CX-7 in the same segment as well? The Rav-4 is about the same size as the current Highlander. The new Highlander won't be out for a little while. Does Toyota have two entry's into the same segment? I think the Rav4 is entry level while the Mazda. Edge, Highlander, Murano, Subaru B9, are more premium.
I said before, similar size, price, and power, function.
Question for you, is the Acura which is less powerful than the Rav and CX-7 in the same segment as well?
Tough to say. With similar size, little less power (not much), function..one could say it's in the same segment. The thing is, Acura is considered a premium vehicle. Price will most likely be more on the Acura RDX. The Mazda would seem more for your dollar.IMO
Does Toyota have two entry's into the same segment?
I have no idea, for I have not seen the new Highlander.
I think the Rav4 is entry level while the Mazda. Edge, Highlander, Murano, Subaru B9, are more premium.
I do think the RAV4, Edge, and Murano can be placed together, however, the B9 Tribeca is much bigger. I would say the B9 is more in the mid sized SUV class, like the Pilot, 4-Runner. I really don't know where the new Highlander will fall. The current one is in the same class as the Escape, Tribute. IMO. But, everyone is entitled to their opinion.
I wouldn't put these two in the same segment unless I see them in person.
The 2006 RAV4 is only 3" smaller in length then the CX-7.
RAV4 is 3 inch shorter with spare tire in length(so the real gap should be larger than 3 inches).
In addition, RAV4 is also 2.2 inches narrower in width and 3.6 inches shorter in wheelbase.
They are still "similar" is size. We are talking about litteraly about "inches" here.
For reference, an Accord is 2.6 inches wider than a Civic, has a 1.6 inch longer wheelbase and is 14.2 inches longer overall.
Still just inches, but not many people think an Accord and Civic are the same size.
The differences here are not that great, but closer to Accord/Civic than Accord/Camry types of differences.
Does anyone know if there is a factory installed roof rack option? It doesn't look like it, which would be a bummer.
P.S., I know I could probably get an aftermarket rack, but I would rather not.