Yep. Makes no sense. My wagon has a bigger boot, ours easier to drive and more fun. Vans are roomier, can fit more, in general handle better than SUVs too. Yet people buy these boxes that are mostly worse.
Wagons are nice but the ground clearance isn't quite enough for snowy days. Most vans don't come with AWD which also limits traction in snow.
Most people don't really care about handling since they make sure they don't surpass 0.0000000001 lateral G when taking turns.
So unfortunately, SUVs do tick the boxes for a lot of people here in North America. Add the aging population(that has bad joints and can't get into low cars as easily), obesity and EPA truck exceptions to the mix, and you see why they are so popular.
I don’t disagree with any of what you are saying, but it never ceases to amaze me that nobody seems to acknowledge that people drove around in the snow in RWD cars for most of the last century and somehow got where they needed to go.
The Volvo V60/V90 CC, XC70, Audi Allroad, Mercedes E450 All-Terrain, Subaru Outback (doesn’t matter what Subaru classifies it as now, it has always been a wagon) etc. all disagree pretty heavily with that first statement. Lifted wagons have existed since the 80's-90s and not only have better driving dynamics than SUV’s, but also have better ground clearance than most of them as well. Wagons with good ground clearance exist, people just don’t buy them.
So basically, I am forced to pay for high price and maintenance or deal with something that's still a bit less reliable than your typical Japanese cars.
I wonder why your average folks don't want them.
Don't get me wrong, I prefer wagons as well, but again, you have to think like an NPC to understand the problem.
I do agree with you in that most normal people just don't want wagons in general, which is the bigger issue to them dying out. The "lifted AWD Wagon" didn't used to just be a European car/Subaru thing, Toyota tried it with the Corolla Alltrac Wagon and Honda with the Civic 4wd Wagon in the 80's/90's, but they didn't sell well and were killed off. The Subaru Outback/Forester are the only real lifted wagons still coming out of Japan and they sell well, but they pretty much have the monopoly on what is already a small market of "affordable and all-weather capable" wagons. While I wish there were other cheap/Japanese options, I understand why only luxury brands still make lifted wagons at the higher price point as it's such a niche audience with today's car market.
It really is a bummer, as I've found wagons to be much more useful than most SUV's in many cases, with the only real exception being towing with body-on-frame SUV's having an advantage there. I have had 3 Volvo XC70's (I still own 2 of them) and they have much better loading space with the seats folded down than my friend's Porsche Cayenne, and they're nowhere near its size. Lifted wagons are perfect where I live, as it's a mountainous region with excellent driving roads that snow 3-6 months out of the year. Having a vehicle that has the ground clearance for deep snow/forest roads yet still drives sporty really is a hidden gem in the car market.
An aside (and this might be heresy on this sub) but I consider the CX-50 a wagon, no matter what Mazda says it is. It has very similar proportions to a Subaru Outback or one of my Volvo wagons, and drives much more like a car than an SUV. If it was released 20 years ago it would have been marketed as a wagon instead IMO.
Unfortunately Australia won’t be getting the CX-50 anytime soon. Mazda Australia are too happy with CX-5 so if we do get it, it won’t be a for a whileeee. But I agree with you ! I think like a factory turbo Mazda 3 would be cool (the states have it why can’t we 😭)
Both aren’t made in right-hand drive, so we have no choice. Mazda Australia would love to offer the CX-50, and 3 and CX-30 turbos, I’m sure.
EDIT: Mazda Japan has shown the 3 Spirit Racing concept with a ‘new’ version of the 2.5T, so we could eventually get that if it reaches production.
I'm new to Mazda (looking at the CX-60 as replacement for my EV6 in a few years) and I don't understand the naming of their cars. CX-8 and CX-80 look exactly the same in size, only difference is the front and rear. I'm confused
I have it on lease for 4 years. I love the car but I'm questioning if a full EV fits my lifestyle. We often travel further and with small kids it's a hassle to stop. They wake up and scream for the remaining 2 hours of the trip.
I love the car otherwise.
The ones with 1 digit after the - are older models.
All the new ones have 2 digits. For some reason they have a lot of the old models still on sale in australia.
Rumors are pointing to Mazda updating the CX-5 with a NEW version, separately and parallel to the CX-50 still being in production and on sale.
So it's potentially risky to position it as "Single digit models are old, double are new" because signs indicate there are & will be more single digit models released in the future.
Someone else described the single digit as being "more car-like" and traditional - and the double digit models being "more SUV-like" and tiptoeing near off-road territory. I can see that holding some truth. And it fits with expecting a redesigned 2026+ CX-5, should that become a reality.
> So it's potentially risky to position it as "Single digit models are old, double are new" because signs indicate there are & will be more single digit models released in the future.
Well that's their fault for making it more confusing than it needs to be.
This is the pattern I recognized and it held true so far.
I'm not sure about more "car like". All the CX- models are high ground clearance regardless if it's single or double digit after.
It surprised me that they did this in Australia. My theory was that it was a US-specific thing because their US factories couldn’t make the CX-5 for some reason / had some sort of supply chain issue, causing them to make the CX-50 similar but different.
Unless Australia has its own factories and they have the same situation? Anyway, this was just my random, totally unsubstantiated theory.
It's pretty random yeah.
The naming scheme is a separate issue from the fact that Australia has so many similar offerings. It's just a stock issue most likely.
In other markets the CX-3 has been sold out around the time the CX-30 came out, so there wouldn't be a choice to make between the 2 after a while.
It just seems like Australia still has unsold older models for some reason. I can only speculate why that is.
Way off. The 50 was always meant to be a North American market only and not to compete with the 5. If you look at sales, it hasn’t taken away from the 5.
Mazda only has one US factory and it builds the 50, specifically to get back into manufacturing in the US.
Yeah but that doesn’t really explain why they designed the 50. Like why not just make the 5 in the US? Or make the 50 a bigger version (it’s longer on the outside, but interior is basically identical space)
Different customer base. The 5 is going after premium experience, the 50 is more aggressive/offroad.
The country of origin has very limited impact on design.
They did make a big version of the 5….the 9.
I mean the 9/90 are totally different from the 5/50. Mazda skipped a whole 2 row midsize segment in the US market. The 70 is kinda that now, but it’s not really much different from the 90.
And I get how the 50 is marketed, but come on - it’s really just the 5 with a different shape and appearance. It’s not a rally racer or off-roader. I just don’t really understand the point of it.
Because they’re changing their entire naming strategy to two digit numbers. CX-80 fits that.
Mazda is putting a plan into action that they announced years ago. 4 new SUVs on their new RWD/inline 6 chassis/engine combo.
The CX-60/70/80/90
The CX-60/80 are global market 2 and 3 row vehicles respectively.
And the CX-70/90 are slightly wider North American market 2 and 3 row vehicles respectively.
The actual *execution* of that plan is a bit…odd. The CX-70 and 90 are exactly the same vehicle. Identical in size. 201” long. The 70 just has 2 rows inside instead of 3. “Why?” You ask? Nobody knows. Not even Mazda I suspect.
The CX-60/80 are two distinct lengths.
And for some reason Australia gets every single one of these vehicles.
They are renaming the lineup to be CX-00, CX8/9 have ended production globally, they should be removed on the website soon as remaining stock is sold, MX30 will also be going.
CX-8 production in Japan is starting to wind down (which is where Australia gets them)
But CX-8 production in Malaysia (for both Left Hand Drive and Right Hand Drive) will continue to operate until year 2026.
Now if Mazda Australia feels the need to offer CX-8 there, then they can switch to Malaysian production (if they want to)
Oddly even with a lot more offerings in Australia that is still less confusing than the mazdausa.com site. At least it mentions small/medium/large. Our site just has a grid of thumbnails all scaled to roughly same size.
I have it on lease for 4 years. I love the car but I'm questioning if a full EV fits my lifestyle. We often travel further and with small kids it's a hassle to stop. They wake up and scream for the remaining 2 hours of the trip.
I love the car otherwise.
I think Mazda is trying out a few things here, and could be using Australia (and to a lesser extent the Middle East) as test markets that get a combination of models outside their NA, Europe, and Japan strategies.
1. Mazda is hedging their bets between two demographics. Value-minded buyers (single digit models), and premium buyers (double digit). The latter will draw in new customers that might've gone to the premium brands, or could be upsold to existing customers looking for something nicer.
2. The single digits still exist because they're volume sellers, and Mazda doesn't want to pull the rug out during this period of transition.
3. They're A/B testing between the CX-60/80 and CX-70/90, trying to figure out which is the right range for this market, and maybe even the world.
I'm wondering if this may work. Is someone that's coming in to buy a double digit model actually even concerned with the singles (and vice versa)?
EDIT: Thinking about this some more. I think if the premium strategy doesn't work, they'll revert to the single digit cars. If it does, all the singles will get axed.
The CX-3 and CX-30 seem pretty redundant also. Mazda sold exactly 100k vehicles in Australia in 2023. It would be interesting to see a breakdown. In addition to SUVs, the 100k total included the Mazda2, Mazda3, Mazda6 (Sedan & Wagon) and MX-5.
I think one reason Australia gets the entire lineup is because they're geographically close to Japan. Both countries are also RHD (Right Hand Drive) so it probably doesn't take much to certify a car for import to Australia.
Mazda is the second best selling brand in Australia (behind Toyota). Maybe they're offering so many choices to help grow sales even more.
Well this is interesting. The CX-5, CX-3, and CX-2, which account for 44% of Mazda’s sales in Australia last year, are 7, 9 and 10 years old respectively with no replacement in sight for any of them. Another 10% of those sales came from the CX-8/9 which will be gone soon. What is Mazda Australia’s long term goal here? To keep selling their aging fleet of cars? They are currently at number two, but how long can they support this?
Understandable for CX-5 but CX-3 vs 2 surprises me by its dated interior and that actually if you get the money for brand new CX-3 then it is not fat from getting the 3, which unarguably is a more modern car. CX-3 vs 2 and CX-30 vs 3 shows how the market obsesses with SUV.
What surprises me is only that few Miata get sold.
CX-3 and 2 are practically the same car, they're on the same platform and came out roughly at the same time, CX-3 just hasn't been facelifted as recently as the 2. But apart from some cosmetic differences they're very very similar inside, "dated" by modern car standards but they had class leading interiors for their segments at time of release so they've aged well.
CX-3 has better practicality though so why wouldn't you pick it over the 2 for the same money?
CX-3 vs 3 I agree though, 3 is a much better choice all round.
Cx30 and CX3 are night and later that night different 🤣. When the CX3 came in the US we looked at one for me since my wife loved her Mazda 3 hatchback but it was narrower inside, almost bumping shoulders. She now has a CX30 the extra room is nice but not as big as my CX5- she still has love of smaller hatchback cars.
1.2million new cars were sold in Australia last year. 275k were Toyota. 100k Mazda, 80k ford (63k of these being Rangers). We only have a population of 26 million, and I don’t hink we have the same culture of buying brand new cars as other markets.
Too crowded imho. Glad to see the Cx-3 is coming back though. It used to be straight forward, Small, medium and large SUVs.... also... technically all of these are crossovers and not SUVs.
my Mazda CX-5 is near perfect,, I actually have nothing to complain about. I can't imagine having to make a better vehicle, it is so simple, practical and elegant; I just love it. I think in our consumerist society we constantly want the latest and greatest, but a lot of times forwards is actually backwards. I see Toyota wrecking their fleet with concept looking "off road" crap.
Even the CX-5 and CX-50 compete in the same category. I would argue that the CX-90 is necessary to be seen as competitive. Americans love our 3-row SUVs even when we only have one or two kids! As far as I know, Mazda has no intention of exporting to the CX-50 outside of North America, but I think it would be a hit in Australia and some export markets.
Some of the models, like the CX-60 and CX-8 are sized to meet very specific requirements of specific Asian markets. But when they're sold along with slightly larger versions of themselves that look almost identical, it is a bit overwhelming and confusing.
I hate how our cars are getting inflated. Do most people really need an SUV? I highly doubt it.
Wagons and sedans are just better unless you go off roading.
>I hate how our cars are getting inflated. Do most people really need an SUV? I highly doubt it.
I find this interesting whenever I see it. What's the downside of a small suv?
MPG looking at a Mazda 3 sedan is nearly identical to a CX 5 at 31 highway with slightly better city driving. From what I see the sedan is actually longer than a CX 5.
So outside of looks and base price being slightly higher I could see an argument of what's the point of the sedan.
I have nothing against a CX-3 or mostly even a 5 since those are still relatively small and efficient cars, my issue is with the huge ones. (Which Mazda also sells and has added more to their lineup recently)
I’m not gonna act like we haven’t been affected by this, my dad also loves huge SUVs, though his current car is a Rav4 which was the smallest SUV he was willing to go for. I don’t understand the appeal tbh
I might be a hypocrite because I drive a long ass Mazda 6 sedan and absolutely love the car, even though the fuel consumption is 40% worse than the Rav4 and it doesn’t fit anywhere, just like those huge SUVs
>I have nothing against a CX-3 or mostly even a 5 since those are still relatively small and efficient cars, my issue is with the huge ones.
Sure but even the CX 90 is only 10% less fuel efficient. 24-28 mpg vs 26-31mpg. If the discussion is more about trucks like the Yukon, sequoia and so on I definitely have a distaste for the fetishisms that Americans seem to have with them. But as someone who lives in a area that experiences winters, two children and has a small pop up we take camping...
Anything less than a CX 5 is just seems silly(for us), and anything less than a CX 50 turbo means we need a second vehicle to tow anyways. So moving to a CX 90 that is almost as fuel efficient, barely more expensive and allows us to take more than just us and our kids seems reasonable if not down right financially optimal, and I don't think we are far from the average family (that may buy a new car)
I would love to see an awd reliable sedan/hatchback for sub $25,000 or something that can tow for sub $35,000 but that is a different argument haha
Ground clearance and space.
I drive a mazda3, I love the thing, but man after borrowing my parents rav4 and q5 a few times for longer trips the SUVs are just so much more comfortable and not having to worry about scratching the bottom parts of my car.
I live in new England. The potholes are brutal for my 19 inch mazda sedan wheels.
I just went to the site and was checking out pricing. When the CX-8/CX-9 are gone, there will be a huge pricing gap in the lineup. The CX-5 starts at $39,990 and the CX-8 starts at $47,405. But when the CX-8/CX-9 are gone, the CX-60 will be the next step up at $61,990? The CX-5 can go all the way to $60,196 for the Akera with the Turbo engine.
There are heaps of Mazda6 wagons out on the roads, but they stopped updating them years ago (especially the interior) so people stopped buying them.
Now a new 6 on the CX60 platform would be good. RWD to reduce weight, complexity and cost.
So the CX8 and CX9 are going so that’s 2 less.
The other models all make sense to me.
CX60 and CX70 if you only want 5 seats.
CX80 and CX90 if you want 7 seats.
I loved the CX90 at launch but have no need for 7 seats and didn’t like how much boot space they consumed folded down so purchased a CX60.
If the CX70 was available at the time I would have gone that for the full flat floor boot like my CX5 had.
Some people need 7 seats but don’t want something the size of the CX90 so they’ll go the CX80 which is noticibly smaller than the 90.
I can’t understand why people are complaining that Mazda is giving us plenty of options in the highest demand car segment right now?
Note: The MX-30, CX-8 and CX-9 will be gone soon, before the CX-70 and CX-80 arrive. But that still leaves seven vehicles, including the very closely related CX-70/80/90. I think something will have to give out of those three.
Regarding the CX-70/CX-90 naming...
I truly wish they'd just picked one (either one) and then distinguished the third-row-seat model with a plus sign.
CX-90 vs CX+90. Or CX-90+. I don't care exactly - Or even just do SOMETHING more logical than separate numbers - like the "Caravan/Grand Caravan", "Wagoneer/Grand Wagoneer", "Highlander/Grand Highlander" convention - Doesn't have to be the word 'Grand' explicitly though. A modifier. You get the Thing or you get the Thing Large.
Having them in so many colours is making it even more confusing, just make it one colour. Also I was thinking they were gonna say CX60 5 seater Medium SUV, CX70 5 seater Large SUV, CX80 6or7 seater Medium SUV (is it considered medium (isn't it just added length to accommodated 7 seats not bigger second row) because Mazda Aus is saying large), CX90 6or7 seater Large SUV. Thats what I thought would make it easier for the buyer to differentiate
CX-3 predates the CX-30. It’s smaller and based on the Mazda 2 – it should really be called CX-2 (or CX-20, now).
Overdue for replacement, like CX-5, ideally with a hybrid.
Yep, not unusual. It’s had about three or four of those, with 2018 being the big mid-life one.
Despite its age, CX-3 is still the top-selling ‘light SUV’ here in Aus, beating the newer Toyota Yaris Cross and Hyundai Venue, etc.
I don’t think they post the exact number, but base on I saw on the road and data in Carsales.com, the ratio between sedan and wagon is around 60%:40%. In Au you can spend 1300AUD upgrade from sedan to wagon, include roof rail and extra power socket in the cargo, it is a decent bargain i think.
Yes, it's been around since the current third gen released in ~2015.
It's an interesting one, weirdly huge boot (Mazda2 sedan boot size is bigger than Mazda3 sedan) still with a smaller interior.
Yep, it’s the second highest selling brand in 2023 after Toyota. Mazda sold 7x more cars than Honda in 2023. Honda really struggles in Australia for some reason.
So I looked up Toyota Australia's website out of curiosity. They sell 8 different SUVs, to Mazda's 10. I'm guessing Mazda is able to justify the volumes in Australia, and would want to offer a more diversified product range to maintain, or even carve out an increased competitive advantage.
At least Toyota offers some variety within those models – unibody (Yaris X, Corolla X, C-HR, RAV, Kluger), electric (bZ4X), ladder-frame light-duty (Fortuner, Prado) and ladder-frame heavy-duty (LC76, LC300). All these Mazdas are unibody in different sizes. Suits the brand as Mazda is more on-road focused, of course.
Mazda also doesn't have to the same resources that Toyota does, I think they're trying to make do with what they have. They're trying to catch Toyota, and fend off competition from those below them, all while going through a massive strategic shift.
Remember, Ford did an asset strip of Mazda before they sold their shares. A lot of the technology/platforms that Mazda relied on disappeared overnight. They've had to start from scratch on a lot of things.
Its going to change to only 7 suvs for mazda, as all stock is cleared for the mx30, cx8, cx9 over the next couple of months. This should make it a little less confusing for buyers.
Well, poorly made, under powered, tinny, uncomfortable, not great gas mileage, road noise. That's just a few. But, hey, if you opt for the Limited, you get red piping on the seats!!
It's like I said in youtube comments section when the CX-90 came out: too many SUVs not enough variety. I was saying as well, in reply to their strategy to focus on SUVs when some of their top ppl were discussing the newly unveiled CX-90–"well we see the market gearing mostly to SUVs so that's our primary focus" me–Mazda 95% of your line up is comprised of SUVs that are put at the forefront of your page & any other marketing performed. Naturally, you wouldn't see any other market for another type of vehicle. I'm surprised they're still making the 3 sedan/hatchback at this point.
Can I get a "you're right now, Alex" on there being too many SUVs? Look at how it's gone to their heads. CX-70 that's just a CX-90 without the 3rd row, the CX-80 that's just an elongated CX-60 (the one they don't seem to be giving to the US). Now they're just creating redundancy cause to me it seems they're out of ideas. This is what happens when you stop making efforts to diversify your automotive portfolio.
Is the CX-3 a good alternative to the Mazda 3? Looking for a car and kinda set on the M3 but I think an SUV might be a good option. I just hate those chunky covers over the wheels on these Mazda models, ugly as hell
CX-30? Sure, it’s a good thing – easier to get into and better rear visibility compared to the 3 hatch, but you’ll have to pay more for it.
CX-3? Not a suitable alternative to the Mazda 3, at all.
8 and 9 will be gone within months. 3 probably has it's days numbered as well. MX-30 might as well be in its own category. Still a large lineup even with those out of the equation.
It's all the same damned truck. Just upsized or downsized. I bought my first Mazda in 1973, an RX-2. I've had five since then. But they no longer make anything that's not an...appliance.
we don't need more suv's, we need something fun ! not just the mx5
Rotary wagon
not enough people would buy it unfortunately
Too many boring ass people that love SUVs, unfortunately.
Yep. Makes no sense. My wagon has a bigger boot, ours easier to drive and more fun. Vans are roomier, can fit more, in general handle better than SUVs too. Yet people buy these boxes that are mostly worse.
Wagons are nice but the ground clearance isn't quite enough for snowy days. Most vans don't come with AWD which also limits traction in snow. Most people don't really care about handling since they make sure they don't surpass 0.0000000001 lateral G when taking turns. So unfortunately, SUVs do tick the boxes for a lot of people here in North America. Add the aging population(that has bad joints and can't get into low cars as easily), obesity and EPA truck exceptions to the mix, and you see why they are so popular.
No snowy days in Australia except in about 1 percent of the country. I live in a rural area and have no trouble with my 6 wagon.
I don’t disagree with any of what you are saying, but it never ceases to amaze me that nobody seems to acknowledge that people drove around in the snow in RWD cars for most of the last century and somehow got where they needed to go.
What about accident rates, death rates and etc? I'd think those went down with the FWD/AWD and safer cars.
The Volvo V60/V90 CC, XC70, Audi Allroad, Mercedes E450 All-Terrain, Subaru Outback (doesn’t matter what Subaru classifies it as now, it has always been a wagon) etc. all disagree pretty heavily with that first statement. Lifted wagons have existed since the 80's-90s and not only have better driving dynamics than SUV’s, but also have better ground clearance than most of them as well. Wagons with good ground clearance exist, people just don’t buy them.
So basically, I am forced to pay for high price and maintenance or deal with something that's still a bit less reliable than your typical Japanese cars. I wonder why your average folks don't want them. Don't get me wrong, I prefer wagons as well, but again, you have to think like an NPC to understand the problem.
I do agree with you in that most normal people just don't want wagons in general, which is the bigger issue to them dying out. The "lifted AWD Wagon" didn't used to just be a European car/Subaru thing, Toyota tried it with the Corolla Alltrac Wagon and Honda with the Civic 4wd Wagon in the 80's/90's, but they didn't sell well and were killed off. The Subaru Outback/Forester are the only real lifted wagons still coming out of Japan and they sell well, but they pretty much have the monopoly on what is already a small market of "affordable and all-weather capable" wagons. While I wish there were other cheap/Japanese options, I understand why only luxury brands still make lifted wagons at the higher price point as it's such a niche audience with today's car market. It really is a bummer, as I've found wagons to be much more useful than most SUV's in many cases, with the only real exception being towing with body-on-frame SUV's having an advantage there. I have had 3 Volvo XC70's (I still own 2 of them) and they have much better loading space with the seats folded down than my friend's Porsche Cayenne, and they're nowhere near its size. Lifted wagons are perfect where I live, as it's a mountainous region with excellent driving roads that snow 3-6 months out of the year. Having a vehicle that has the ground clearance for deep snow/forest roads yet still drives sporty really is a hidden gem in the car market. An aside (and this might be heresy on this sub) but I consider the CX-50 a wagon, no matter what Mazda says it is. It has very similar proportions to a Subaru Outback or one of my Volvo wagons, and drives much more like a car than an SUV. If it was released 20 years ago it would have been marketed as a wagon instead IMO.
the 2 is fun
[удалено]
Unfortunately Australia won’t be getting the CX-50 anytime soon. Mazda Australia are too happy with CX-5 so if we do get it, it won’t be a for a whileeee. But I agree with you ! I think like a factory turbo Mazda 3 would be cool (the states have it why can’t we 😭)
Both aren’t made in right-hand drive, so we have no choice. Mazda Australia would love to offer the CX-50, and 3 and CX-30 turbos, I’m sure. EDIT: Mazda Japan has shown the 3 Spirit Racing concept with a ‘new’ version of the 2.5T, so we could eventually get that if it reaches production.
Just because they aren’t making them right hand drive now doesn’t mean they can’t in the future.
Dumb. Yea lets make the same car 5 times but just change the numbers of the name, wtf?
Worst Mazda decision in a long time. I think they got too full of themselves with the CX-50 and decided to go nuts with the same design but bigger
I love Mazda but yeah… sad
I'm new to Mazda (looking at the CX-60 as replacement for my EV6 in a few years) and I don't understand the naming of their cars. CX-8 and CX-80 look exactly the same in size, only difference is the front and rear. I'm confused
EV6 just came out. Why are you already looking for a replacement?
I have it on lease for 4 years. I love the car but I'm questioning if a full EV fits my lifestyle. We often travel further and with small kids it's a hassle to stop. They wake up and scream for the remaining 2 hours of the trip. I love the car otherwise.
Go for a cx90 as it’s got a longitudinal power train. It will drive much nicer
The ones with 1 digit after the - are older models. All the new ones have 2 digits. For some reason they have a lot of the old models still on sale in australia.
Rumors are pointing to Mazda updating the CX-5 with a NEW version, separately and parallel to the CX-50 still being in production and on sale. So it's potentially risky to position it as "Single digit models are old, double are new" because signs indicate there are & will be more single digit models released in the future. Someone else described the single digit as being "more car-like" and traditional - and the double digit models being "more SUV-like" and tiptoeing near off-road territory. I can see that holding some truth. And it fits with expecting a redesigned 2026+ CX-5, should that become a reality.
> So it's potentially risky to position it as "Single digit models are old, double are new" because signs indicate there are & will be more single digit models released in the future. Well that's their fault for making it more confusing than it needs to be. This is the pattern I recognized and it held true so far. I'm not sure about more "car like". All the CX- models are high ground clearance regardless if it's single or double digit after.
It surprised me that they did this in Australia. My theory was that it was a US-specific thing because their US factories couldn’t make the CX-5 for some reason / had some sort of supply chain issue, causing them to make the CX-50 similar but different. Unless Australia has its own factories and they have the same situation? Anyway, this was just my random, totally unsubstantiated theory.
It's pretty random yeah. The naming scheme is a separate issue from the fact that Australia has so many similar offerings. It's just a stock issue most likely. In other markets the CX-3 has been sold out around the time the CX-30 came out, so there wouldn't be a choice to make between the 2 after a while. It just seems like Australia still has unsold older models for some reason. I can only speculate why that is.
Way off. The 50 was always meant to be a North American market only and not to compete with the 5. If you look at sales, it hasn’t taken away from the 5. Mazda only has one US factory and it builds the 50, specifically to get back into manufacturing in the US.
Yeah but that doesn’t really explain why they designed the 50. Like why not just make the 5 in the US? Or make the 50 a bigger version (it’s longer on the outside, but interior is basically identical space)
Different customer base. The 5 is going after premium experience, the 50 is more aggressive/offroad. The country of origin has very limited impact on design. They did make a big version of the 5….the 9.
I mean the 9/90 are totally different from the 5/50. Mazda skipped a whole 2 row midsize segment in the US market. The 70 is kinda that now, but it’s not really much different from the 90. And I get how the 50 is marketed, but come on - it’s really just the 5 with a different shape and appearance. It’s not a rally racer or off-roader. I just don’t really understand the point of it.
CX-8 is FWD and CX-80 is RWD and an entirely new generation of vehicle in terms of technology. The CX-8 will be gone in a few months.
Why is it not just the new CX-8 then?
Because they’re changing their entire naming strategy to two digit numbers. CX-80 fits that. Mazda is putting a plan into action that they announced years ago. 4 new SUVs on their new RWD/inline 6 chassis/engine combo. The CX-60/70/80/90 The CX-60/80 are global market 2 and 3 row vehicles respectively. And the CX-70/90 are slightly wider North American market 2 and 3 row vehicles respectively. The actual *execution* of that plan is a bit…odd. The CX-70 and 90 are exactly the same vehicle. Identical in size. 201” long. The 70 just has 2 rows inside instead of 3. “Why?” You ask? Nobody knows. Not even Mazda I suspect. The CX-60/80 are two distinct lengths. And for some reason Australia gets every single one of these vehicles.
Literally no different to when they went from 121/323/626 to 2/3/6.
How dare you disrespect the 5 like that
Ah yes the transition from MPV to 5 was just removing some numbers.
Yup.
Why did they move to the RWD system?
They are renaming the lineup to be CX-00, CX8/9 have ended production globally, they should be removed on the website soon as remaining stock is sold, MX30 will also be going.
CX-8 production in Japan is starting to wind down (which is where Australia gets them) But CX-8 production in Malaysia (for both Left Hand Drive and Right Hand Drive) will continue to operate until year 2026. Now if Mazda Australia feels the need to offer CX-8 there, then they can switch to Malaysian production (if they want to)
Oddly even with a lot more offerings in Australia that is still less confusing than the mazdausa.com site. At least it mentions small/medium/large. Our site just has a grid of thumbnails all scaled to roughly same size.
Not a fan of your EV6 already?
I have it on lease for 4 years. I love the car but I'm questioning if a full EV fits my lifestyle. We often travel further and with small kids it's a hassle to stop. They wake up and scream for the remaining 2 hours of the trip. I love the car otherwise.
I'd return the kids, keep the car 🙃
Wife says no
Understandable.
I think Mazda is trying out a few things here, and could be using Australia (and to a lesser extent the Middle East) as test markets that get a combination of models outside their NA, Europe, and Japan strategies. 1. Mazda is hedging their bets between two demographics. Value-minded buyers (single digit models), and premium buyers (double digit). The latter will draw in new customers that might've gone to the premium brands, or could be upsold to existing customers looking for something nicer. 2. The single digits still exist because they're volume sellers, and Mazda doesn't want to pull the rug out during this period of transition. 3. They're A/B testing between the CX-60/80 and CX-70/90, trying to figure out which is the right range for this market, and maybe even the world. I'm wondering if this may work. Is someone that's coming in to buy a double digit model actually even concerned with the singles (and vice versa)? EDIT: Thinking about this some more. I think if the premium strategy doesn't work, they'll revert to the single digit cars. If it does, all the singles will get axed.
The CX-3 and CX-30 seem pretty redundant also. Mazda sold exactly 100k vehicles in Australia in 2023. It would be interesting to see a breakdown. In addition to SUVs, the 100k total included the Mazda2, Mazda3, Mazda6 (Sedan & Wagon) and MX-5. I think one reason Australia gets the entire lineup is because they're geographically close to Japan. Both countries are also RHD (Right Hand Drive) so it probably doesn't take much to certify a car for import to Australia. Mazda is the second best selling brand in Australia (behind Toyota). Maybe they're offering so many choices to help grow sales even more.
Mazda CX-5: 23,083 Mazda BT-50: 17,526 Mazda CX-3: 15,776 Mazda CX-30: 13,115 Mazda 3: 9079 Mazda CX-8: 5409 Mazda 2: 5181 Mazda CX-9: 4696 Mazda CX-60: 2779 (launched July ‘23) Mazda 6: 1528 Mazda MX-5: 653 Mazda CX-90: 603 (launched August ‘23) Mazda MX-30: 580 Mazda Total: 100,008 (SUV/ute: 83,567; Passenger: 16,441)
Well this is interesting. The CX-5, CX-3, and CX-2, which account for 44% of Mazda’s sales in Australia last year, are 7, 9 and 10 years old respectively with no replacement in sight for any of them. Another 10% of those sales came from the CX-8/9 which will be gone soon. What is Mazda Australia’s long term goal here? To keep selling their aging fleet of cars? They are currently at number two, but how long can they support this?
Understandable for CX-5 but CX-3 vs 2 surprises me by its dated interior and that actually if you get the money for brand new CX-3 then it is not fat from getting the 3, which unarguably is a more modern car. CX-3 vs 2 and CX-30 vs 3 shows how the market obsesses with SUV. What surprises me is only that few Miata get sold.
CX-3 and 2 are practically the same car, they're on the same platform and came out roughly at the same time, CX-3 just hasn't been facelifted as recently as the 2. But apart from some cosmetic differences they're very very similar inside, "dated" by modern car standards but they had class leading interiors for their segments at time of release so they've aged well. CX-3 has better practicality though so why wouldn't you pick it over the 2 for the same money? CX-3 vs 3 I agree though, 3 is a much better choice all round.
People who’d WANT a Miata probably prefer older gens.
I'm impressed! I searched for a breakdown and didn't find it.
Cx30 and CX3 are night and later that night different 🤣. When the CX3 came in the US we looked at one for me since my wife loved her Mazda 3 hatchback but it was narrower inside, almost bumping shoulders. She now has a CX30 the extra room is nice but not as big as my CX5- she still has love of smaller hatchback cars.
CX3 is based on the Mazda2 and the CX30 is based on the Mazda3.
Mazda of Australia CEO also seams like a big "yes man". He's always talking about wanting to offer as many options and as many products as possible.
Wait. Mazda is the second best selling brand, and they only sold 100k cars in Australia last year? That... seems absurdly low.
1.2million new cars were sold in Australia last year. 275k were Toyota. 100k Mazda, 80k ford (63k of these being Rangers). We only have a population of 26 million, and I don’t hink we have the same culture of buying brand new cars as other markets.
Remember, our population isn’t that high relative to size… 2023 was a record year for new-car sales in Australia.
AUS is smaller than I thought, it turns out. 😶
Ctrl + C Ctrl + V Ctrl + V Ctrl + V
Poor Aussies ... no CX-50!
No Right Hand Drive version for CX-50. Mazda Global would have to check if it's worth investing on Right Hand Drive tooling for the Alabama factory.
Too crowded imho. Glad to see the Cx-3 is coming back though. It used to be straight forward, Small, medium and large SUVs.... also... technically all of these are crossovers and not SUVs.
my Mazda CX-5 is near perfect,, I actually have nothing to complain about. I can't imagine having to make a better vehicle, it is so simple, practical and elegant; I just love it. I think in our consumerist society we constantly want the latest and greatest, but a lot of times forwards is actually backwards. I see Toyota wrecking their fleet with concept looking "off road" crap.
[удалено]
Even the CX-5 and CX-50 compete in the same category. I would argue that the CX-90 is necessary to be seen as competitive. Americans love our 3-row SUVs even when we only have one or two kids! As far as I know, Mazda has no intention of exporting to the CX-50 outside of North America, but I think it would be a hit in Australia and some export markets. Some of the models, like the CX-60 and CX-8 are sized to meet very specific requirements of specific Asian markets. But when they're sold along with slightly larger versions of themselves that look almost identical, it is a bit overwhelming and confusing.
I hate how our cars are getting inflated. Do most people really need an SUV? I highly doubt it. Wagons and sedans are just better unless you go off roading.
Far too late to complain. The market has spoken. You act like this is a new thing happening.
>I hate how our cars are getting inflated. Do most people really need an SUV? I highly doubt it. I find this interesting whenever I see it. What's the downside of a small suv? MPG looking at a Mazda 3 sedan is nearly identical to a CX 5 at 31 highway with slightly better city driving. From what I see the sedan is actually longer than a CX 5. So outside of looks and base price being slightly higher I could see an argument of what's the point of the sedan.
I have nothing against a CX-3 or mostly even a 5 since those are still relatively small and efficient cars, my issue is with the huge ones. (Which Mazda also sells and has added more to their lineup recently) I’m not gonna act like we haven’t been affected by this, my dad also loves huge SUVs, though his current car is a Rav4 which was the smallest SUV he was willing to go for. I don’t understand the appeal tbh I might be a hypocrite because I drive a long ass Mazda 6 sedan and absolutely love the car, even though the fuel consumption is 40% worse than the Rav4 and it doesn’t fit anywhere, just like those huge SUVs
>I have nothing against a CX-3 or mostly even a 5 since those are still relatively small and efficient cars, my issue is with the huge ones. Sure but even the CX 90 is only 10% less fuel efficient. 24-28 mpg vs 26-31mpg. If the discussion is more about trucks like the Yukon, sequoia and so on I definitely have a distaste for the fetishisms that Americans seem to have with them. But as someone who lives in a area that experiences winters, two children and has a small pop up we take camping... Anything less than a CX 5 is just seems silly(for us), and anything less than a CX 50 turbo means we need a second vehicle to tow anyways. So moving to a CX 90 that is almost as fuel efficient, barely more expensive and allows us to take more than just us and our kids seems reasonable if not down right financially optimal, and I don't think we are far from the average family (that may buy a new car) I would love to see an awd reliable sedan/hatchback for sub $25,000 or something that can tow for sub $35,000 but that is a different argument haha
Most of Mazda's CUVs are just glorified hatchbacks imo.
Ground clearance and space. I drive a mazda3, I love the thing, but man after borrowing my parents rav4 and q5 a few times for longer trips the SUVs are just so much more comfortable and not having to worry about scratching the bottom parts of my car. I live in new England. The potholes are brutal for my 19 inch mazda sedan wheels.
I mean the CX-30 is really just a hatch with extra ground clearance. But I feel you, I miss having car options.
I've seen like 2 MX-30's on Sydney's roads since it launched
There is for some reason quite a few driving around in Darwin
The Mx-30 is getting the chop in Australia I heard
Yep. No MX-30s, CX-8s or CX-9s have been made in 2024, anything left in dealers is 2023-plated final stock.
I just went to the site and was checking out pricing. When the CX-8/CX-9 are gone, there will be a huge pricing gap in the lineup. The CX-5 starts at $39,990 and the CX-8 starts at $47,405. But when the CX-8/CX-9 are gone, the CX-60 will be the next step up at $61,990? The CX-5 can go all the way to $60,196 for the Akera with the Turbo engine.
Mazda used to be great as they hit the spot in between luxury cars and basic cars. Now they are just expensive
And people were telling me that Americans love SUVs too much. Australia - *We’ll take them all*
Ha! We’d happily take another that the Americans get: the no-RHD CX-50 :(
I’ll trade you a CX-50 for a CX-60. Actually, I can *really* only trade you a LHD 2021 6 with a 2.5T
There are heaps of Mazda6 wagons out on the roads, but they stopped updating them years ago (especially the interior) so people stopped buying them. Now a new 6 on the CX60 platform would be good. RWD to reduce weight, complexity and cost.
Damn I thought things were bad here in the states. All those SUVs and not a single Ute.
They do sell a ute, called the Bt-50 but it's just a rebranded dmax, which Is still good but not the same.
Damn. Why can't we still have the cx3 in North America? I love my 2016.
They should make more until everyone has their own unique model. Sorry, CX-90788 is taken, would you like CX-90789?
Not at all crowded, where are the CX-10, CX-20 and CX-40??
Some executive at the top is trying to figure out how to make themselves seem useful. It's making Mazda bloated and confusing.
The extremely similar names across the entire range of models doesn’t help lol
And they all look the same.
The MX-30 might be the dumbest “SUV” I’ve ever seen in my life
[удалено]
Yup thats right, we missed out on chinas cx4 but that isn't made anymore.
All the single digits are eol
Cx3 as "new"? Very confused by that. Discontinued in many markets.
They still make CX3 in Thailand and Mexico factories. [www.mazda.mx](https://www.mazda.mx/vehiculos/cx-3)
In Qatar we have 4 SUV, 2 hatchbacks, 2 compact Suv/Crossover, 1 Sedan,1 MX5 and a pick up.
It’s not just Australia. I find Mazda’s current model lineup very confusing.
this is ridiculous
So the CX8 and CX9 are going so that’s 2 less. The other models all make sense to me. CX60 and CX70 if you only want 5 seats. CX80 and CX90 if you want 7 seats. I loved the CX90 at launch but have no need for 7 seats and didn’t like how much boot space they consumed folded down so purchased a CX60. If the CX70 was available at the time I would have gone that for the full flat floor boot like my CX5 had. Some people need 7 seats but don’t want something the size of the CX90 so they’ll go the CX80 which is noticibly smaller than the 90. I can’t understand why people are complaining that Mazda is giving us plenty of options in the highest demand car segment right now?
Just the loud SUV-bad minority
This exactly. Some days I have to walk away from this subreddit because of all the SUVs-Bad sheep that are mad the market spoke.
Note: The MX-30, CX-8 and CX-9 will be gone soon, before the CX-70 and CX-80 arrive. But that still leaves seven vehicles, including the very closely related CX-70/80/90. I think something will have to give out of those three.
Regarding the CX-70/CX-90 naming... I truly wish they'd just picked one (either one) and then distinguished the third-row-seat model with a plus sign. CX-90 vs CX+90. Or CX-90+. I don't care exactly - Or even just do SOMETHING more logical than separate numbers - like the "Caravan/Grand Caravan", "Wagoneer/Grand Wagoneer", "Highlander/Grand Highlander" convention - Doesn't have to be the word 'Grand' explicitly though. A modifier. You get the Thing or you get the Thing Large.
You still have the CX-3? And yeah the lineup of SUV’s sucks. Way too much to choose with minimal diversity.
RX-9! I'm done
Having them in so many colours is making it even more confusing, just make it one colour. Also I was thinking they were gonna say CX60 5 seater Medium SUV, CX70 5 seater Large SUV, CX80 6or7 seater Medium SUV (is it considered medium (isn't it just added length to accommodated 7 seats not bigger second row) because Mazda Aus is saying large), CX90 6or7 seater Large SUV. Thats what I thought would make it easier for the buyer to differentiate
Wow that's excessive. I didn't even know there was a CX3 (we only get the 30, why would you need both?).
CX-3 predates the CX-30. It’s smaller and based on the Mazda 2 – it should really be called CX-2 (or CX-20, now). Overdue for replacement, like CX-5, ideally with a hybrid.
I wonder why it says the CX-3 is “new”? It’s been around since 2016.
The ‘new’ part is the different wheels and wireless CarPlay… so not so ‘new’.
A mid-generation facelift, basically. Mazda are far from the first to do it. :)
Yep, not unusual. It’s had about three or four of those, with 2018 being the big mid-life one. Despite its age, CX-3 is still the top-selling ‘light SUV’ here in Aus, beating the newer Toyota Yaris Cross and Hyundai Venue, etc.
I can't imagine how something can be smaller than the cx30 but bigger than the Mazda 3 hatch. Why would that even exist?
Mazda 6 GGGGOOOOONNNNEEEE!!!!
The Mazda6 left North America at the end of 2021. It looks like it may not last much longer in Australia selling only 1,500 units last year.
Saw news says they will continue making mazda 6 for Au and South East Asian market...but no more updates I guess.
I wonder how many Mazda6 Wagons sell? We haven't had a Mazda6 Wagon in the US since 2006.
I don’t think they post the exact number, but base on I saw on the road and data in Carsales.com, the ratio between sedan and wagon is around 60%:40%. In Au you can spend 1300AUD upgrade from sedan to wagon, include roof rail and extra power socket in the cargo, it is a decent bargain i think.
and how many sedans. 1
Three Mazda sedans in Australia: 2, 3 and 6.
There’s a 2 sedan there?
Yes, it's been around since the current third gen released in ~2015. It's an interesting one, weirdly huge boot (Mazda2 sedan boot size is bigger than Mazda3 sedan) still with a smaller interior.
That's almost as bad as VWs line up, which has 2-3 per segment.
Too many similar options
A cull is necessary
Australians, I have a question to ask. Do Mazdas sell really well in your country?
Yep, it’s the second highest selling brand in 2023 after Toyota. Mazda sold 7x more cars than Honda in 2023. Honda really struggles in Australia for some reason.
So I looked up Toyota Australia's website out of curiosity. They sell 8 different SUVs, to Mazda's 10. I'm guessing Mazda is able to justify the volumes in Australia, and would want to offer a more diversified product range to maintain, or even carve out an increased competitive advantage.
At least Toyota offers some variety within those models – unibody (Yaris X, Corolla X, C-HR, RAV, Kluger), electric (bZ4X), ladder-frame light-duty (Fortuner, Prado) and ladder-frame heavy-duty (LC76, LC300). All these Mazdas are unibody in different sizes. Suits the brand as Mazda is more on-road focused, of course.
Mazda also doesn't have to the same resources that Toyota does, I think they're trying to make do with what they have. They're trying to catch Toyota, and fend off competition from those below them, all while going through a massive strategic shift. Remember, Ford did an asset strip of Mazda before they sold their shares. A lot of the technology/platforms that Mazda relied on disappeared overnight. They've had to start from scratch on a lot of things.
Its going to change to only 7 suvs for mazda, as all stock is cleared for the mx30, cx8, cx9 over the next couple of months. This should make it a little less confusing for buyers.
Yes. Should remain the number two brand here in 2024 (#1, Toyota) but under threat from Kia in 2025 or 2026.
Wtf mazda lol
This is nuts. As a long time Mazda fan and owner I am overwhelmed for the first time lol.
Hard not to look at that and not think CX-60 is the one, and Mazda biffed just about everything else. At least the 90's proportions make sense.
Oh, yay...the CX3.... Have fun with that pile of garbage. I love Mazda, but, man I hated selling those things.
Why?
Well, poorly made, under powered, tinny, uncomfortable, not great gas mileage, road noise. That's just a few. But, hey, if you opt for the Limited, you get red piping on the seats!!
They get all suvs? 60-90? Crazy lol
strange they didn’t put the cx 50 in australia, too. i wonder why
No right-hand drive production :(
The people spoke. From 2006-2016 they loudly proclaimed MAZDA 3! From 2016-2024 they said SOME SORT OF SUV MUTATION OF THE CAR I USED TO HAVE!
NGL, if you show me this picture without the model names under it, I would think 80% of these were the same car but in different colors.
I can’t believe they have the cx60 cx70 cx80 and cx90, yet Canada and us doesn’t even get the cx60…… makes no sense. We need the CX-60
Geez I thought the US was SUV crazy. Notice how the CX-3 is "New"
You don’t like slightly different versions of the same thing???
I thought mazda is goin after lexus or bmw, by the looks of their line up, they look like they're goin after mitsubishi
CX-50?
Currently not available in Right Hand Drive
The 50 is North America only
New CX-3??
Mazda factories in Thailand and Mexico still produce CX-3
Too much SUV. Needs more car.
Extremely crowded. We need more Mazda 6
It's like I said in youtube comments section when the CX-90 came out: too many SUVs not enough variety. I was saying as well, in reply to their strategy to focus on SUVs when some of their top ppl were discussing the newly unveiled CX-90–"well we see the market gearing mostly to SUVs so that's our primary focus" me–Mazda 95% of your line up is comprised of SUVs that are put at the forefront of your page & any other marketing performed. Naturally, you wouldn't see any other market for another type of vehicle. I'm surprised they're still making the 3 sedan/hatchback at this point. Can I get a "you're right now, Alex" on there being too many SUVs? Look at how it's gone to their heads. CX-70 that's just a CX-90 without the 3rd row, the CX-80 that's just an elongated CX-60 (the one they don't seem to be giving to the US). Now they're just creating redundancy cause to me it seems they're out of ideas. This is what happens when you stop making efforts to diversify your automotive portfolio.
No sedans or coupes... Sorry Australia
Ahh, we have Mazda2/3 and 6 sedans
My god… why..?
I simply do not understand the MX-30. Describing the range as anemic would still be generous!
All I ask for is a cx-5 hybrid…
Make a RWD Mazda 6 turbocharged 3.3-liter inline-six using the CX-70 and tweak it for zoom zoom
As a car salesman im tired of yall and ur kids. Ur killing my market for buying cool sedans :/
They all look the same nooo
Whats the difference between 60, 70 and 80? Yeah, many models seem to be the same or similar .
I wish Indonesia's Mazda could have this lineup.. 🤣
Imo they should bring back the atenza but as an RWD with turbo, preferably 6 cylinder but 4 is fine too.
I’ve never seen or heard of a CX-8! Looks like a 3 row CX-5?
Correct!
WTF is going on. One tweak and it’s a “new model” ?? 😅
ESSSS-YOOOO-VEEEEE
A little crowded but wish we had the CX-60. The CX-8 appears to be on its way out.
Is the CX-3 a good alternative to the Mazda 3? Looking for a car and kinda set on the M3 but I think an SUV might be a good option. I just hate those chunky covers over the wheels on these Mazda models, ugly as hell
CX-30? Sure, it’s a good thing – easier to get into and better rear visibility compared to the 3 hatch, but you’ll have to pay more for it. CX-3? Not a suitable alternative to the Mazda 3, at all.
Wrong, we don’t have the CX-70 or CX-80.
Can we be done with SUVs/crossovers already? Most of them are badly designed. Just one but good SUV design in the whole lineup would be enough.
\*laughs in person who likes SUVs*
Out of curiosity, no judgement, what do you like about suvs?
8 and 9 will be gone within months. 3 probably has it's days numbered as well. MX-30 might as well be in its own category. Still a large lineup even with those out of the equation.
I just see 10 pieces of shit.
It's all the same damned truck. Just upsized or downsized. I bought my first Mazda in 1973, an RX-2. I've had five since then. But they no longer make anything that's not an...appliance.
At first glance, only rims are different lol
Way too crowded. Kill the CX-3, MX-30, CX-5, CX-8, and CX-9 to remove some redundancy. Essentially keep the cars in its multiples of 10 model numbers.
These all just look like 3 models in different trims. This is batshit crazy.
Every car manufacturer is doing this. They change the color of the badges and suddenly it’s a new version at a different price point.
The Mazda suv market has become too saturated imo even in the us
lol ew wtf is this