1998 Mazda 626 No Reserve 4 Cy 5 Speed Pa Inspected Runs Great Cold Ac Sunroof on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Mazda CX-5 named Japan's Car of The Year, Subaru BR-Z wins "Special Award"

The Mazda CX-5 stamped its Kodo design and SkyActiv technology authority all over the Japan Car of the Year awards, taking the top prize ahead of the Subaru BRZ/Toyota GT 86. It is Mazda's second victory in the last ten years, the 2005 MX-5 claiming the same trophy, and the fourth time the Hiroshima company has won.
The award is decided by 60 local "automotive experts and journalists," and open to any passenger car released in Japan from November 1, 2011 to October 31, 2012 that has sold more than 500 units. Each judge gets 25 votes, his or her top vote getting 10 points, the rest of the points being spread among the judge's choice for the next best four cars.
The second-place getters were the Toyobaru twins with 318 votes, the surprise being they didn't beat or get any closer to the crossover. The Subaru BRZ did claw some mojo back, earning the Special Award given to cars that have made "an exceptional impact." The BMW 3 Series was third overall and won the Import Car of the Year award with plenty of room between it and the second place Range Rover Evoque.

Infiniti QX60 AWD vs. Mazda CX-9 Signature

In certain ZIP codes around Dallas, Chevy's Suburban remains the Official SUV of Texas, but Infiniti's QX60 could be the Official Crossover. The Pathfinder-based three-row is everywhere. And while its popularity is based on transporting kids and their stuff, the QX60 is a more urban Suburban. Mazda's CX-9 is not as ubiquitous as the QX60 in McMansion driveways, but it has been making inroads into the near-luxury segment with its near-luxury spec. The CX-9's second generation has obviously upscale intent, in the sheetmetal and throughout the top-line Signature interior. And the prices of these two cars are surprisingly close. INFINITI QX60 AWD: The sheetmetal differentiating Infiniti's QX60 from its volume-oriented Nissan donor is attractive. The changes are subtle, and in profile the Pathfinder and Infiniti are almost identical, but the eye is drawn to the differences in the grille and D-pillar. The Infiniti has a luxury vibe with a more athletic stance. The QX60's interior surfaces seem upscale, but if you want wood it will cost you. In "building our own" and opting for graphite leather with maple trim, the wood requires another $12,000(!) of mandatory packages, including Infiniti's Premium and Premium Plus packages ($1,800 and $2,900, respectively) and $7,300 of Deluxe Tech. So, wood? We wouldn't. But if you do, know the QX60 won't match the larger QX80 in presence or passion, but it is certainly something beyond a rebadged Pathfinder. For you and your passengers, there is 156 cubic feet of interior room; with the second and third rows folded, you can accommodate 76 cubic feet of cargo. Like in most crossovers, that third row is best used by young kids, but taking six adults to lunch won't require too much gymnastics – or chiropractics. On the road, the QX60 is known more for comfort than composure; this isn't an old Buick, but neither is it a BMW. Nissan's 3.5 liter V6 produces generous power (295 horsepower and 270 pound-feet of torque), but it's transmitted to either the front wheels or all wheels via a CVT (continuously variable transmission). Nissan has tried to mitigate the quirkiness, but it's a CVT all the same. At a well-equipped base of $44,000, we like the QX60. But start adding options, and you can approach $60,000, which is real money even in the better ZIP codes. MAZDA CX-9 SIGNATURE: This, ladies and gentlemen, is dramatic. Mazda has absolutely nailed it. Using Mazda's KODO design language on a large platform could have gone wrong.

2016 Mazda CX-5 [w/video]

It's difficult for me to get excited about crossovers. I try hard not to be the stereotypical car guy: ignoring the fact that the rest of the world loves these tall hatchbacks, while yelling, "station wagons make more sense!" until I've voided my lungs of air. Deep down I am that guy, but I work around it. Historically the Mazda CX-5 is one crossover that has been quasi-immune to my knee-jerking. It doesn't weigh two tons, offers a manual transmission (in poverty spec, but still...), and looks faster than its competitors. Most importantly, the CX-5 can round a corner without wobbling like a Slinky at the top of the stairs. No item on that list of plaudits would likely crack the top ten "desirables" for average small CUV shoppers. So, for the 2016 update, Mazda instead upgraded the in-cabin experience along with the requisite nips and tucks to the exterior. I borrowed a 2016 model CX-5 to see whether or not those concessions to comfort affected the car-nerd stuff. And to see if the Mazda could still be my go-to CUV recommendation. Driving Notes The engine options are unchanged for 2016. You can still have the fine, 2.5-liter four-cylinder engine, with its 184 horsepower and 185 pound-feet of torque, or its wimpier 2.0-liter lil' brother. My fully spec'd Grand Touring came with the bigger engine, which feels adequately powerful for the class, but not quick. In an era where turbocharged engines are everywhere, revving the Skyactiv 2.5-liter up to its torque peak at 3,250 rpm takes some commitment. I'm annoyed that there's no manual offered with the 2.5L (a combo I can have in both the Mazda3 and Mazda6), but I don't hate the automatic transmission. The six-speed unit is unobtrusive 99 percent of the time; something I regretfully can't tell you about certain nine-speed autos. There are no paddles to play with, but you can tap the shift lever up and down if you're struck by a need for total control. With a new center console and dash, and the addition of the Mazda Connect infotainment system, the '16 CX-5 feels like a new vehicle from behind the wheel. An attractive, pliant, leatherish material swaths the neat console and surrounding real estate. And the perforated leather seats feel damn near upscale. I think that Mazda Connect's version of the central control knob (with handy adjacent volume knob) is almost luddite-proof in its simplicity. There's no latency between twisting and reaction on the screen.