1980 Mazda Rx-7 1st Gen Rotary Engine 5 Speed Rx7 No Reserve! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Mazda CX-30 Luggage Test | How much cargo space?

The Mazda CX-30 is pretty much a lifted Mazda3 hatchback. Same platform, awfully similar dimensions, and the interior's a spitting image (if not identical). Ditto cargo capacity. On paper, the two have virtually the same amount of space behind their raised back seats, with the CX-30 at 20.2 cubic-feet and the 3 with just a teensy less at 20.1.  Now, before I go any further, let's see how much that 20.1 cubic-feet relates to in the Mazda3. I wasn't yet doing this test format back then, hence the video.  For reference, both tests used my standard luggage selection of two midsize roller suitcases that would need to be checked in at the airport (26 inches long, 16 wide, 11 deep), two roll-aboard suitcases that just barely fit in the overhead (24L x 15W x 10D), and one smaller roll-aboard that fits easily (23L x 15W x 10D). The bag of baseballs shown in the video is slightly smaller than my new small-bag go-to, my wife's fancy blue overnight bag (21L x 12W x 12D). So, the mark to beat is therefore all the bags minus the smallest roller.  Here is what 20.2 cubic feet looks like in the CX-30. To move beyond the Mazda3 comparison, that figure is in keeping with the CX-30's niche placement between subcompact (the teens) and compact SUVs (upper 20s to upper 30s). The Mazda CX-5 has 30.9 cubic-feet.  Now, typically, I start off by seeing how much I can fit inside with the cargo cover in place. Sadly, this particular CX-30's cargo cover is missing. We'll just have to hope it doesn't rob the CX-30 of as much space as the CX-5's does.  First off, it's immediately noticed that the CX-30's cargo area is not as long as the 3 hatchback's. The largest bag just barely squeezed inside, whereas there was some room to spare in the 3. Now, let's keep loading.  Whattya know? All of the roller bags fit inside. That includes the smallest one, which didn't fit in the 3, fitting atop the stack with perhaps 30% of it over the back seat line. Now, I could've done the same Tetris stack in the 3, but I'm virtually certain the hatch wouldn't have closed. Advantage, then, to the CX-30 and its extra height.  And surprise, the fancy bag also fits. Technically. It robs rear visibility, is pretty far above the seat line and it just barely fits under the back light. If it was filled, I have my doubts about its inclusion. Nevertheless, with or without it, there's still a bit more space on the right side for that bag of baseballs.  Now let's discuss the power liftgate.

Mazda RX-3 restomod makes Leno scream, us cheer

The Mazda RX-3 Savanna was the rotary-engined version of the Mazda 808 Grand Familia. Sold in the US from 1971 to 1978, the little Japanese fastback earned a reputation as an excellent racecar, winning events all over the world. A racing connection is how a fantastic 1973 restomod example owned by Savant Young made its way to Jay Leno's Garage. Young said that when he was a boy his uncle used to street race an RX-3, and Young liked how the RX-3 sounded and the fact that a tiny import could go up against and beat big V8s of the time. Leno admitted that he has no connection to the RX-3, saying it's not the kind of car he typically likes. But he liked Young's custom update so much that when he saw the coupe sitting outside the Petersen Museum in Los Angeles, he waited for the owner to show up. Young's changes over the 15 years he's owned the car include dropping in the rotary engine and running gear from the second-generation Mazda RX-7, bridge-ported and methane injected. At 15 pounds of boost he says it's putting out about 400 horsepower. The rear end comes from a Toyota Hilux half-ton pickup, to help put all that power down in a car that weighs maybe 2,100 pounds. The color is taken from the Lamborghini palette. Disc brakes all around, 14-inchers up front, control the velocity. Nothing controls the gas mileage, said to be "maybe 12 mpg." And nothing could stop Leno from whooping it up during the driver. Check out the fun in the video above.

IIHS Top Safety Pick and Top Safety Pick+ awards get tougher: Here are the latest winners

Automakers love to trumpet the accolades from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, but the agency keeps making its best grades harder to achieve. For 2020, it is raising the bar again, requiring a better score in the passenger-side small-overlap crash test, wider availability of top-performing headlights, and automatic emergency braking systems that effectively avoid collisions with pedestrians, in addition to its previous benchmarks. Why the 2020 criteria is harder: To be named either a Top Safety Pick or Top Safety Pick+, the required performance in the passenger-side small-overlap crash test has been raised from Acceptable to Good, meaning that the model must achieve Good ratings in all crash tests. The Nissan Rogue, for example, scored an Acceptable in the passenger-side small overlap crash, and so it loses its Top Safety Pick rating for 2020. To achieve either of the top ratings, a vehicle's automatic emergency braking system must effectively avoid hitting pedestrians as well as other vehicles. (The automatic emergency braking system can be optional, but then the award applies to the model only when so equipped.) Any vehicle whose automatic emergency braking system does not include pedestrian detection would lose its TSP or TSP+ rating for 2020, the Ram 1500 being one example. To be named a Top Safety Pick+, the model can have no variant with headlights that achieve less than an Acceptable rating (most new cars have different headlights — often LEDs — that are exclusive to upper trim levels).