[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by chris719

Is this really an advantage (I mean over the torque converter)? I'm not sure it is on a big SUV. Most of these type of transmissions are clunky and not well behaved at low speeds. Also remember that the torque converter is locked up almost all the time in ZF 8 transmissions, especially in sport modes.

I have no idea, I've never driven an automatic where the torque converter is replaced with a wet clutch, but it sounds cool. Most modern automatics have wet clutch packs inside the "gear box". How the wet clutch works in place of a torque converter is an interesting question. If one assumes the wet clutch is operated via solenoid as in a BMW SMG transmission, I'd say the difference is Mazda's design still uses a traditional wet-clutch automatic rather than an automated-clutch manual transmission (aka SMG), where the wet clutches in the gear set smooth out torque shock. Just a guess.

[chris719]

Originally Posted by Tejas1836

-DCT vs automatic debate, the ZF8s are amazing with 200 ms shift times
-Not sure of the definition of clunky.
-BMW's, Porsche's, Ferrari's DCTs (and I'm sure others) are very well behaved at all speeds.
-ZF8s lock up in 6th gear on up in any mode

This isn’t a DCT, first of all. It’s more like the Mercedes MCT they had for a while. Second, I’ve driven MDCT and PDK and it’s not as smooth at low speeds as a traditional auto.

[DB_Cooper]

Originally Posted by RM7

If the M40i dynos at 382 and the Mazda does 340 at the crank, they are pretty far off.

Not sure how that translates in big SUVs.

Sure a 40hp delta can be a big deal, but 340 vs 380 in a 3 row SUV? Same wheelhouse IMO.

[chris719]

Originally Posted by DB_Cooper

Not sure how that translates in big SUVs.

Sure a 40hp delta can be a big deal, but 340 vs 380 in a 3 row SUV? Same wheelhouse IMO.

I’m pretty sure there’s going to be a massive gap in performance. Mazda gives honest power numbers and not a bit more. B58 is probably going to curb stomp
this engine still. I’ve driven the Skyactiv 2.5 turbo and it wasn’t terrible but didn’t feel as strong as I expected.

[Donatello.]

Originally Posted by ASAP

this is a family SUV and that is far more than any of the competition it sits against... even an X3 M40i makes 382 and costs 15k more

Did you want 500+ lol? Because those are the super SUVs... i.e. X3m Comps, Stelvio QVs, Urus etc... far more than most families would need...

lol don't NEED 340 either. not the point

[Conissah]

For such a small company with low sales numbers (Mazdas entire lineup barely beats out Camry sales in a year), it's awesome how much they seem to care about the driving dynamics. My wife had a 2019 Mazda 3 Hatch, not only is the manual mode for the shifter the correct direction (pull down to shift up, push forward to shift down), but it would also hold the gear you were in and simply bang off limiter instead of auto-shifting to the next gear. People wanted a turbo 3 Hatch, they came out with one.

We had a turbo AWD CX5 and it was awesome, decently quick for an SUV of its size and only cost $33k. 250hp wasn't particularly impressive, but the 310 lb/ft of torque at 2000 rpm was. Nice passing power on the interstate without grabbing gears and pulled a trailer well. I used it to move houses, made 8 trips with it and my 5x8 FULLY loaded, didn't break a sweat. We should've never gotten rid of that thing.

I wonder where they're sourcing the i6 engine? They could've most definitely made it in house, but all they've made for a while has been the 2.5L NA or turbo 4 bangers.

[tranquility]

Originally Posted by chris719

This isn’t a DCT, first of all. It’s more like the Mercedes MCT they had for a while. Second, I’ve driven MDCT and PDK and it’s not as smooth at low speeds as a traditional auto.

Ok, my head is totally spinning now haha. So the vehicle in question is still an AT w/o a tq converter? What qualifies it as still a traditional AT if that is gone? It's not a CVT I assume (I dunno anything about this vehicle)?

I dunno about other DCTs but I've driven lots of ATs and my DCT is smooth as silk. In any event, who cares about absolute smoothness when buying a sporty vehicle? As long as it's not crazy jerky like a single clutch, that's just nitpicking and doubtful it's the same sensation as a guy who just learned how to drive a MT.

[chris719]

Originally Posted by tranquility

Ok, my head is totally spinning now haha. So the vehicle in question is still an AT w/o a tq converter? What qualifies it as still a traditional AT if that is gone? It's not a CVT I assume (I dunno anything about this vehicle)?

I dunno about other DCTs but I've driven lots of ATs and my DCT is smooth as silk. In any event, who cares about absolute smoothness when buying a sporty vehicle? As long as it's not crazy jerky like a single clutch, that's just nitpicking and doubtful it's the same sensation as a guy who just learned how to drive a MT.

It's like this I believe:

https://www.autoevolution.com/news/m...ms-112461.html

Which in reality doesn't work as well as either a real DCT or a ZF8. I assume Mazda is using an Aisin version as they usually do.

I agree with the smoothness with a sporty vehicle, but this is a Mazda SUV, it's not a BMW M, Porsche, or AMG product. M5 owners bitched to BMW about DCT... so this would have to be exceptionally well designed to not get negative comments from the intended buyer.

[Devils41]

Originally Posted by Donatello.

This thing needs to go in the underpowered CX-5. Please do it now in case that is what my lady ends up wanting as her new DD lol

curious, have you tried the CX-5 Turbo? My wife had a 2018 CX-5 and we traded it in and got a 2021 CX-5 Turbo. My biggest complaint was the lack of power on the N/A engine. The turbo fixed that issue and it finally has enough power to make overtaking on the highway a breeze.

Also, went with the carbon edition so it has the red cherry seats too. We cross shopped Infiniti, BMW, Genesis and a few others, but still very impressed with the Mazda. I'll be looking at the CX90 probably when she's ready to upgrade.

[RM7]

Originally Posted by DB_Cooper

Not sure how that translates in big SUVs.

Sure a 40hp delta can be a big deal, but 340 vs 380 in a 3 row SUV? Same wheelhouse IMO.

You are ignorant to what BMW dynos at.

[DB_Cooper]

Originally Posted by RM7

You are ignorant to what BMW dynos at.

You are ignorant to my point, which is that in a car this big and its intended utility, 340 hp (& 370 lb ft of torque) is plenty regardless of what the comparable BMW dynos at.

Same wheelhouse for 3 row SUVs even if the BMW is posting a better 0-60 time. Getting to the next traffic light faster for a family SUV is a pointless metric for buyers shopping for this car…it’ll be fast enough, most likely tens of thousand of dollars cheaper and in a more attractive package.

[RM7]

Originally Posted by DB_Cooper

You are ignorant to my point, which is that in a car this big and its intended utility, 340 hp (& 370 lb ft of torque) is plenty regardless of what the comparable BMW dynos at.

Same wheelhouse for 3 row SUVs even if the BMW is posting a better 0-60 time. Getting to the next traffic light faster for a family SUV is a pointless metric for buyers shopping for this car…it’ll be fast enough, most likely tens of thousand of dollars cheaper and in a more attractive package.

That’s all well and fine, but you acting like its not a significant difference was the problem. Its not a 40hp delta. There is no doubt the current 3.0 turbo bmw is putting out over 400 at the crank. The mazda may be plenty for you, but that wasn’t the original point. I dont especially care for high HP stoplight-hero suvs, but you are on a bmw site. The x “m” variants are exactly that and thats what those owners will be comparing against. For those that care, there will still be a significant performance difference.

[DB_Cooper]

Originally Posted by RM7

That’s all well and fine, but you acting like its not a significant difference was the problem. Its not a 40hp delta. There is no doubt the current 3.0 turbo bmw is putting out over 400 at the crank. The mazda may be plenty for you, but that wasn’t the original point. I dont especially care for high HP stoplight-hero suvs, but you are on a bmw site. The x “m” variants are exactly that and thats what those owners will be compacting against.

I do get your point, but I still stand by the Mazda being plenty powerful for most buyers looking for a 3 row large SUV and the intended utility of such a car.

The buyer that’ll overlook the Mazda for the BMW is prob not concerned about what HP the car is putting out. Instead, they won’t even consider the Mazda bc of badge snobbery. Lots of people still consider Mazda a non luxury automaker, but their higher trim models are def on par w/ most Luxury car makers. They do employ a more minimalist design language which is at polar opposites compared to what MB, Lexus, Audi and def BMW is up to nowadays; that minimalist design prob won’t resonate with a buyer that’s into the newer overstyled BMW design language.

I will point out that this is being posted in the “non-BMW” section of a BMW site so…

[nicholasn]

Originally Posted by Conissah

I wonder where they're sourcing the i6 engine? They could've most definitely made it in house, but all they've made for a while has been the 2.5L NA or turbo 4 bangers.

Engine and transmission are both designed and developed in-house.

This feels like what the Acura MDX should have been all along instead of a glorified Pilot. The RWD-based platform and stunning interior (with actual buttons and knobs) elevate the CX-90 to a level waaaay higher than I think most consumers would expect from what has generally been kind of an alternative mainstream automaker.

Gotta give Mazda a huge amount of respect for the effort it has put into this vehicle, when it could have settled for good enough like almost all its competitors. Remember a few years back when the Telluride/Palisade knocked the segment on its head? This makes those look like modest conservative efforts by much larger automakers afraid to step out of line. I hope sales numbers reflect the gamble that Mazda has taken and enables some fun, lower-volume models in the future such as a new Miata or RX-7, maybe some hotter Mazdaspeed variants of various models (something unexpected like a 400+ horsepower twin-turbo Mazdaspeed CX-90 would be wild and would likely obliterate the MDX Type S and similar).

[tranquility]

Interesting debate, so what exactly are the performance numbers between this and its competitors (I'm kinda chuckling as I personally wouldn't care too much if in the mkt for one unless it had, I dunno, 150hp and did 0-60 in 10s...it's a SUV, right? To me, I think it's silly to place so much emphasis for these kinda vehicles)?

[jmack]

If the price isn't outrageous, this will probably be my wife's next car. X5 with Mazda reliability and price, sounds perfect.

[ASAP]

Originally Posted by tranquility

Interesting debate, so what exactly are the performance numbers between this and its competitors (I'm kinda chuckling as I personally wouldn't care too much if in the mkt for one unless it had, I dunno, 150hp and did 0-60 in 10s...it's a SUV, right? To me, I think it's silly to place so much emphasis for these kinda vehicles)?

in my personal opinion... just STRICTLY based on price and class of vehicle... it would have to at least do 0-60 somehwere in the 6s... but i have a feeling it will be faster

most don't know but a basic audi q5 does 0-60 in 5.9 and can be had below 50k

[ASAP]

Originally Posted by nicholasn

Engine and transmission are both designed and developed in-house.

This feels like what the Acura MDX should have been all along instead of a glorified Pilot. The RWD-based platform and stunning interior (with actual buttons and knobs) elevate the CX-90 to a level waaaay higher than I think most consumers would expect from what has generally been kind of an alternative mainstream automaker.

Gotta give Mazda a huge amount of respect for the effort it has put into this vehicle, when it could have settled for good enough like almost all its competitors. Remember a few years back when the Telluride/Palisade knocked the segment on its head? This makes those look like modest conservative efforts by much larger automakers afraid to step out of line. I hope sales numbers reflect the gamble that Mazda has taken and enables some fun, lower-volume models in the future such as a new Miata or RX-7, maybe some hotter Mazdaspeed variants of various models (something unexpected like a 400+ horsepower twin-turbo Mazdaspeed CX-90 would be wild and would likely obliterate the MDX Type S and similar).

i am actually really surprised how the Hyundai / Kia twins did so well because they fundamentally are a very cheap and old formula

its a fwd biased suv w an NA V6... there is nothing cheaper than that lol

but it appears they knocked the size out right, made the interior a bit more premium and somehow it sold left and right... the driving experience is still 100% hyundai / kia and hyundai's reliability based on everything ive heard is so so

[RM7]

Originally Posted by ASAP

i am actually really surprised how the Hyundai / Kia twins did so well because they fundamentally are a very cheap and old formula

its a fwd biased suv w an NA V6... there is nothing cheaper than that lol

but it appears they knocked the size out right, made the interior a bit more premium and somehow it sold left and right... the driving experience is still 100% hyundai / kia and hyundai's reliability based on everything ive heard is so so

Im renting a santa fe this week. It has the ability to lock the f/r diff. I used that during the the ice here this week.

[OkieSnuffBox]

Big fan of Mazda. I've had many over the years and still have one now.

Compare pricing to the current CX-9 and I suspect with the new engine/transmission, it will be a few thousand more at each trim level.

We may get one of the CX-70s for the fiance in a few years, but she really likes the '18 Mazda 3 we have now. The only two things it's missing for her are a sunroof and the BOSE stereo. Although I think she'd prefer to not have a car payment, since we neither of us put many miles on either of our cars.

[Donatello.]

Originally Posted by nicholasn

Engine and transmission are both designed and developed in-house.

This feels like what the Acura MDX should have been all along instead of a glorified Pilot. The RWD-based platform and stunning interior (with actual buttons and knobs) elevate the CX-90 to a level waaaay higher than I think most consumers would expect from what has generally been kind of an alternative mainstream automaker.

Gotta give Mazda a huge amount of respect for the effort it has put into this vehicle, when it could have settled for good enough like almost all its competitors. Remember a few years back when the Telluride/Palisade knocked the segment on its head? This makes those look like modest conservative efforts by much larger automakers afraid to step out of line. I hope sales numbers reflect the gamble that Mazda has taken and enables some fun, lower-volume models in the future such as a new Miata or RX-7, maybe some hotter Mazdaspeed variants of various models (something unexpected like a 400+ horsepower twin-turbo Mazdaspeed CX-90 would be wild and would likely obliterate the MDX Type S and similar).

Is the MDX Type S as soulless as the TLX Type S? Had a TLX Type S for a day and man that thing was slow as F and zero engagement. Steering was numb as F too

[Donatello.]

Originally Posted by DB_Cooper

You are ignorant to my point, which is that in a car this big and its intended utility, 340 hp (& 370 lb ft of torque) is plenty regardless of what the comparable BMW dynos at.

Same wheelhouse for 3 row SUVs even if the BMW is posting a better 0-60 time. Getting to the next traffic light faster for a family SUV is a pointless metric for buyers shopping for this car…it’ll be fast enough, most likely tens of thousand of dollars cheaper and in a more attractive package.

My lady wants an SUV. If I have anything to say about it, how fast & fun it is will be a factor