The Zoom-Zoom campaign was a huge success for Mazda. There's still some positive carryover from it today.

 

I give Mazda a pass cause of personal experiences with it in my family. My sister purchased a brand new 2014 Mazda3 with the new gen 2.0 Skyactiv in 2014, since then has put over 220k miles on it with no issues whatsoever and the interior is still solid with no flimsy panels or anything. Impressive durability and reliability.

And considering they are a very small company currently, I like the stylistic and art direction they are going with their new generation products, like the Mazda3 Hatchback and CX-50. Feels very Japanese in their design and build quality and just attention to detail, even if the CX-50 is designed for the US market.

 

I don't think Mazda gets a pass from anyone, especially here in Car Chat, lol.

I may be looking through rose-coloured glasses, but I'm thoroughly enjoying my 2018 CX-9 Signature. I'm excited to see what the CX-70/-90 brings to the NA market, especially in terms of PHEV offerings. I plan to hold on to the CX-9 for the next 4-5 years and then possibly look into a PHEV replacement.

 

I think Mazda makes more interesting cars than the typical Honda or Toyota. Someone who doesn't want a complete appliance will/should look at Mazda if they want a Japanese brand. Unfortunately, they are going up market a bit so don't know how they will end up. I think they will survive this EV transition as they will further develop ICE powertrains for Toyota while Toyota shares their EV platforms with Mazda.

BTW, the only marketing campaign that actually is memorable from Mazda is zoom zoom. The rest of the marketing is completely forgettable.

 

LOL. If I thought vehicles weren't fun, would I have spent almost 20 years in Car Chat....and have 85K posts?

 

Mazda at least styling wise, gives me European vibes. I can no longer tell the difference between generations and lately, between models. Also, their model designations are confusing as heck. I mean I dont really understand the difference between a CX5 and a CX50 or something like that.

 

Bear in mind that this vehicle will be sold alongside the new CX-50 which is a much more interesting vehicle.

 

I used to love Mazdas.
I owned seven of them from 1976 onwards beginning with the 1973-78 808/Savannah, then 1980-85 323/Familia, then 1982-87 929/Luce 2.0, then 1987-91 929/Luce 3.0 V6 3-Valve SOHC, 1991-95 929/Sentia 3.0 V6 Quad Cam, 1992-96 626/Capella 2.5 V6 Quad Cam, and 2000-05 Mazda 6 2.3.
Back in 1981, I used to love RX-7 rotaries and I thought the last turbocharged RX-7 of the early 1990's photographed above was the prettiest - the advantages/disadvantages of which Mike Marshall described very well above - until one day when I actually drove the rotary and found a lack of bottom end torque, and worse - the rotary was so coarse and crass.
In 1987, Mazda introduced the 3.0 V6 with 3 valves per head, and this was a majestic engine with much stronger bottom end torque than modern 4 valves/head.
The 1992 626 2.5 V6 was powerful, yet silky smooth - but so hard riding, I had to give it to my sister.
In the mid-1990's, Mazda collapsed, and so did Amati 1000 full size luxury, Eunos, Efini and ALL of Mazda's V6's.
The 2000-05 Mazda 6 was back to 4 cylinders at about 2.3 L, but the ride was again so firm and noisy, I did not lease for long.

Benz has a mild hybrid in-line six, but they have essentially caned it for electrification.
Many manufacturers like Benz, Beamer and Subaru etc have electric turbos that spool to tens of thousands of RPM's in just 200 milliseconds - but they have essentially stopped development in favor of electrification.
It's probably too late for Mazda to introduce a mild hybrid in-line six with RWD.
At least Mazda could be a niche maker and target sedans with RWD.
I suspect this RWD-line may become passe just like their V6 Series from the late 80's to the mid-90's.
If you ask EZZ and Lexus2K - nowadays, it's all about electrification - not fossil fuel burning ICEV's.

Looking back, Toyota Motor Corp probably did the right thing by painfully discontinuing development of GS, IS and V8 Twin Turbos in favor of electrification...

 

Now, if, by "Fun", you mean speeding, drifting, drag-racing, and general automotive stupidity, then, yes, I agree with you....I don't.

 

I would say cars are a very serious thing for you. You don't tend to like reviews that are anything but purely factual, fun advertising campaigns, etc.

 

Cars have been a big part of my life since I was a teen-ager. Even as a teen, though, I developed a healthy respect for their serious and sensible use....not things to screw around in. I watched too many young people total cars and get hurt or killed.

Well, anyhow, back to thread-topic Mazda. I was a big fan of them in the 1980s, especially after they dumped the troublesome overly-lean carburetors and went to EFI. Too many of them, however, later became redone Fords.....although to its credit, the 1Gen Ford Escape / Mazda Tribute was a nice small crossover SUV...I had a high opinion of it.

 

Hence:

Things can both be serious, and fun...and fun advertising campaigns are often the most memorable and the most effective.

 

No it can't, stop lying to yourself. A C5 will always be an unreachable dot ahead of you as will so many other cars.

The next step after you turbo and do a full spec build to a Miata is to step up to a S2000.....then realize you wasted time and money vs just getting a corvette.

 

The Kansai Engineering campaign that Mazda used in the 1980s really made sense...its theme was to design vehicles that appealed to both engineering excellence and human feelings. That's why the Mazda of that period were informally (off the cuff) known as "Poor Man's BMWs". They were modestly-priced, varied lower dealer-marks than Honda or Toyota, had a precise feel to the steering/underpinnings, nice interiors, and were, IMO, a pleasure to drive....yes, even for someone who had once driven big Buicks and Chryslers LOL.

I put 100,000 miles on my first Mazda in only four years.....a record that I have not matched since.

 

I think many of us have a soft spot for Mazda because of their 90s heyday and the Miata, but it's the brand online enthusiasts love yet few actually buy. To be fair, the major reason for that is because Mazda's tiny size means their production capacity is minuscule for a supposedly mainstream brand.

I already touched upon this in the CX-60 thread, but the only reason Mazda is going full luxury brand is because their economies of scale require higher profit margins from their vehicles to compensate for their small volume just to be sustainable as a company. Aside from the sharing of a factory, I highly doubt Mazda and Toyota have any concrete plans to join one another, especially as Mazda has nothing to offer to Toyota, and Mazda doesn't seem interested in using any technology from Toyota. Even the PHEV system from the CX-60 is completely different from the RAV4 Prime, independently developed by Mazda.

In many ways, Mazda reminds me of Jaguar. Both were small companies pretty poorly mismanaged under Ford and have spent decades trying to establish a concrete brand image, and are now trying to move upmarket to segments they were never in before in order to make up the profits for their small volumes. If anything, Jaguar demonstrated that merely having RWD high-powered vehicles to go after the Germans doesn't guarantee success, and Mazda pursuing the same strategy without even a cushion like Land Rover sales to Jaguar is a dangerous move. Mazda certainly needs to be under the umbrella of a large corporation like Toyota if they want to survive, especially as they have zero progress and readiness for the upcoming EV wave.