2003 Mazda Miata Base Convertible 2-door 1.8l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2016 Mazda CX-9 First Drive

Automotive enthusiasts tend to obsess over spec sheets. How else could we know which cars and trucks are the quickest in a straight line, hold the road with the greatest tenacity, or tow the biggest trailers? More succinctly, what ammunition would we have in the seemingly endless back-and-forth of Internet forums if it weren't for specifications? Mazda's engineers think they've found a better way. The 2016 CX-9 has less horsepower than its primary competitors. The only engine available is a turbocharged four-cylinder, hooked to a six-speed automatic. Drivers won't miss the 23 horsepower (or more, as we'll soon explain) lost in the changeover from 2015 to 2016, because Mazda applied its holistic Skyactiv approach to the largest vehicle it offers. That means less weight and, ultimately, more fun. Or so they say. Are they right? Yes. And no. Most of the time, in normal on-road driving conditions, the 2016 CX-9 is the most fun you can have with three rows. But the real-world tradeoff didn't go off completely without a hitch. Reasoning that real-world performance is more important than ultimate horsepower, Mazda specified a four-cylinder for its big, three-row SUV instead of a more traditional V6. Let's get those all-important specifications out of the way: All 2016 Mazda CX-9s are fitted with a 2.5-liter turbocharged four-cylinder with 250 horsepower and, impressively, 310 pound-feet of torque at just 2,000 rpm. Unless you decide to use 87 octane, in which case you'll be limited to 227 horsepower. Mazda doesn't think owners will actually notice the difference in power levels, so there's no Premium Fuel Recommended sticker on the back of the fuel door. Mazda utilized some clever turbo trickery to deliver a diesel-like torque curve from its gasoline-fueled engine, which makes the small-displacement powerplant feel lively at low engine speeds. The flipside is that the CX-9 runs out of breath as the needle swings across the upper reaches of the tach. While that simply wouldn't do for a sportscar like the MX-5, in the CX-9 it's not necessarily a deal breaker. One benefit to the downsized engine is that it doesn't guzzle fuel. The EPA rates the CX-9 at 22 miles per gallon in the city and 28 on the highway. Drop one mpg all around for the all-wheel-drive model. Those figures beat out all the CX-9's most natural competitors, including the Honda Pilot and Toyota Highlander. The turbo-four Ford Explorer matches the 28-mpg highway figure, but loses by three in the city.

This map reveals the cleanest vehicles based on location

Naysayers love to point out how dirty the electricity grid mix is when it comes to charging electric vehicles. Curmudgeons are eager to jump into any conversation about EVs to enlighten the lucky listeners about how plug-in cars contribute to pollution, sometimes even throwing in a dash of climate-change denial for good measure. (Thanks, buddy. Pray, tell me more about the plight of oppressed SUV owners.) Unless someone buys an EV just because they think they're cool (which, yeah, they often are), they probably have at least a passable understanding of their environmental pros and cons. As many EV owners are already aware, location has a lot to do with any particular plug-in car's carbon footprint. Still, there's always more to know, and knowledge is not a bad thing, especially if one uses it to do the right thing. That's why this handy-dandy map from Carnegie Mellon University is so interesting. CMU researchers have compiled information about the lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions of various EVs based on where they're charged, as compared to gasoline-powered vehicles. The researchers looked at the Nissan Leaf, Chevrolet Volt, and Prius Plug-In Hybrid versus the gasoline-dependent Toyota Prius hybrid and the stop-start-equipped Mazda3 with i-ELOOP and compared grams of CO2 emitted per mile. CMU takes into account the grid mix, ambient temperature, and driving patterns. CMU takes into account the grid mix based on county, as well as ambient temperature and driving patterns in terms of miles traveled on the highway or in the city. For instance, if you drive a Nissan Leaf in urban areas of California, Texas, or Florida, your carbon footprint is lower than it would be if you were driving a standard Toyota Prius. However, if you charge your Leaf in the Midwest or the South, for the most part, you've got a larger carbon footprint than the Prius. If you live in the rural Midwest, you'd probably even be better off driving a Mazda3. Throughout the country, the Chevrolet Volt has a larger carbon footprint than the Toyota Prius, but a smaller one than the Mazda3 in a lot of urban counties in the US. The Prius and Prius Plug-In are relatively equal across the US. Having trouble keeping it straight? That's not surprising. The comparisons between plug-in and gasoline vehicles are much more nuanced than the loudest voices usually let on.

Japanese automakers welcome North American trade deal, fear what's next

TOKYO — Toyota, Nissan and Mazda welcomed on Tuesday the revised North America trade deal that left Japanese automakers unscathed, but they may face a bumpy ride when Washington and Tokyo hold new talks on over $40 billion of annual U.S. auto imports from Japan. The United States and Canada reached an agreement on Sunday to update the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement after Washington had forged a separate trade deal with Mexico in August. The updated deal effectively maintains the auto industry's current footprint in North America, and spares Canada and Mexico from the prospect of U.S. national security tariffs on their vehicles. Mazda, which ships cars to the United States from Mexico and Japan, called the deal a "big step forward". Nissan, which makes the cars it sells in the United States locally as well as in Mexico, Japan and other countries, said it was "encouraged" by the agreement. Toyota, Japan's biggest automaker, said it was "pleased" that a basic deal was reached. Other automakers were not immediately available for comment. While the deal has removed the risk that the disintegration of the pact would have posed to automakers, bigger risks loom large for Japanese firms as a chunk of the roughly 7 million cars they sold in the U.S. last year were shipped from Japan, and a trade deal between Washington and Tokyo has yet to be agreed. The United States and Japan last week agreed to begin fresh trade talks, with U.S. President Donald Trump seeking to address Japan's $69 billion trade surplus, of which nearly two-thirds comes from auto exports. Washington is also investigating the possibility of slapping 25 percent tariffs on auto imports on national security grounds, although it has agreed with Japan to put any new tariffs on hold during the talks. Analysts say the United States may take a tougher stance on auto imports from Japan than from its neighbors. "If Japan requests an exemption from the 25 percent tariffs under consideration, Washington could propose a more strict cap on imports than it agreed to with Mexico and Canada," said Koji Endo, senior analyst at SBI Securities. "That would be a risk." This could be a big blow to Japan, as the United States is a key source of revenue for Japanese automakers including Toyota, Nissan and Honda. The U.S. market accounts for a quarter or more of their annual global vehicle sales, and of their total U.S.