Why did Mazda axe the MPV with this in the wings?
Despite the protestation of General Motors and Ford, we believed the Chrysler Group's take on the minivan market's current state given at the Detroit Auto Show. According to the boys and girls from Auburn Hills, the market for Soccer Mom-mobiles will likely hold steady, and they hope to enjoy an even larger piece of the pie with their new Dodge Grand Caravan and Chrysler Town and Country. But many automakers are picking up their ball and leaving the minivan market, and this interview with Robert Davis, Mazda North America's senior VP lays out the reasons why most automakers aren't willing to fight Chrysler in the segment.
Davis cites the fact that domestic automakers market minivans in such a way that it puts downward pressure on prices, which in turn hurts resale value and decreases the amount of money they can make for a company. CUVs like the CX-9, however, can command premium prices, retain their resale value better and are able to be sold with fewer incentives. Despite the fact that a new Mazda MPV was being developed for the Japanese domestic market (see the new model above, which happens to look great), Mazda officials decided against engineering a version for the U.S. market in favor of the CX-9, which is largely built using components shared with the Ford Edge CUV. The fact that Davis reveals the Edge and CX-9 have so much in common yet look nothing alike gives us hope that Ford can indeed produce two cars using the same mechanicals that aren't badge-engineered versions of each other.
[Source: AutoWeek]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Clipper 7:01PM (2/05/2007)
Minivans and wagans are Dead on arrival in the US. I think car companys should breed more Suv/car thingys!!
Reply
PJ 7:00PM (2/05/2007)
I don't know about the wisdom of keeping this new MPV off U.S. shores in favor of the CX-9.
I haven't driven the CX-9, but it's no substitute for a van in the people-hauling department. The third-row seat is too low and horribly cramped for adults. The second row is better, but still tighter than a van.
Moreover, people typically buy SUVs instead of vans because they're more stylish. But, IMO, the van pictured above is more distinctive than the CX-9.
Reply
Duh 6:52PM (2/05/2007)
They axed cause it look liked an Nissan model.
Reply
NihonCar 6:58PM (2/05/2007)
This Japanese MPV is a GREAT car (family) and I was very surprised when testing it, this is a good news for you in the US (IMHO) to get this new MPV...
Here you can check out what we think about it during our test drive
http://www.nihoncarandbike.com/news-326-X.html
Reply
Jeff Banks 7:01PM (2/05/2007)
I think its good that Mazda axed their mini-van. Their cars are more performanced oriented and although it wouldn't hurt their image any, it just seems better. I really dig the mazda 6, 3, Miata, RX-8 car linup. "Crossovers" are basically edgy looking minivans anyway.
Reply
Mike 7:15PM (2/05/2007)
1 simple reason: Break size.
Anyone that owned an MPV can attest to this.
Great stock stereo (one of the best I've ever heard), but the brakes needed replaced after 6-7 months of easy driving in PA (and I don't drive cars rough).
Reply
Howard Kerr 7:53PM (2/05/2007)
I know this will anger many folks but the new CX series of CUVs from Mazda look somewhat alike. I had to re-read the article and look twice at the picture to see the door rail for the sliding door before I realized this was the MPV. Mazda has always had trouble selling decent numbers of it's previous MPVs because they were somewhat ill-conceived for the American market. The 1st gen. was RWD/AWD, not a bad idea, too bad it was underpowered after the first year or two. The 2nd gen got off to a bad start with it's small 2.5 liter V6 and horribly mis-matched automatic transmission. FINALLY, Mazda has conceded it can't afford to profitably adapt the MPV to North American tastes.
Reply
Accordsforall 7:52PM (2/05/2007)
Hmmmm
While I find it fantastic.. that Ford can actually take the Edge and make it look like the CX-9. I dont get why the CX-7 and 9 are both needed. Same vehicle.. same use. Who the heck needs.. a 7 or 9 passenger vehicle?
As for wagons.. Im tired of these GOD DAMNED SUVS driving around driven by people who think they are jsut sedans. Im tired of the average Expedition and Tahoe being driven to work.
Wagons and or Minivans suceed when they are designed properly. Ex.. Gm and Ford are out.. while Honda and Toyota deliver some of the best Minivans on the market.. but with none of the depreciation of the Chrysler crap. Those damn things sell for bargain basement garbage. Cheap to build, cheap to make, and cheap to sell.
But its DAMN funny who GM and Ford are out of the minivan business.. while Kia and Hyundai are putting their best foot forward (even tho they took the best parts of a Honda and or Toyota.. and sell them as cheap as Chrysler's garbage.)
As for wagons and or Minivans being on the way out.. I got news for ya.. THE US MARKET is the only MARKET that gets the garbage. Every other market, Europe, China, Austrailia, Japan, Russia, Brazil and or India GET FAR BETTER CARS!!!
Heck.. Id love a good powerful wagon. Screw the soccer mom drivers with the fake wood trm and give me the SHOOTING BRAKE FROM AUDI AND OR HONDA!!!
As for the stuff from Mazda.. I think its fantastic that they managed to remake their models with stuff from Ford.
Now they need to sell their stuff TO A MARKET THAT ISNT MADE UP OF W O M E N !!!! IM A GUY.. I DRIVE HARD, TAKE TURNS AT HIGH SPEED.. AND I DONT NEED A ALHPABET SAFETY system in my car to help me drive!
Reply
Shawn704 8:27PM (2/05/2007)
#7 In reality, the CX-7 and CX-9 is basically Mazda developed or co-developed. CX-9 and the Edge is based off the CD3 platform which Mazda developed for the Mazda 6 back in 2003. CX-7 is a modified C1 based platform. The JDM MPV is a CD3 based platform and it is still smaller than any minivans in the US market.
Reply
aliasfox 8:30PM (2/05/2007)
So... the Mazda5, the CX7, and the CX9 put together don't adequately replace a small van for a smaller car company? I guess they've decided that cannibalization is a bad idea (unlike Ford with its dozen SUVs, CUVs, Vans, etc).
Reply
tikirob 8:31PM (2/05/2007)
Well they have the Mazda5 to fill in the sporty minivan (sorta) and the SUV's pull in more money. I never really considered Mazda to be the cars I would buy if I had a big family.
Rob
http://www.autoshortlist.com
Reply
Mark 9:53PM (2/05/2007)
What hope that Ford can do more than rebadge cars does this give? For how many years now has Ford said "we are going to stop rebadging". And they don't! It has been at least a decade..."next time we will diferentiate them more..." blah blah. Now look at Ford. Five years ago, would anyone have ever though that Chrysler would be outselling Ford in the US? Toyota, maybe, but Chrysler?
Reply
4schizle 10:00PM (2/05/2007)
#7, "Accordsforall" or "RETARD", I thought we told you to go away? Your posts are brainless garbage.
For starters, "CX-7" and "CX-9" do not mean 7 and 9 passanger seating, the CX-7 seats 5 and the CX-9 seats 7, dummy. Nine passangers, think about it, does that make sense? Oh, I forgot, you don't think. You must be confusing it with the Yellow "CX-10" Ten passenger short bus that picks you up for "special school" every morning.
"Cheap to build, cheap to make, and cheap to sell" - What? American cars cost just as much or more to make due to the high costs of labor - hiring dumb asses like yourself and protecting you with unions -
"DONT NEED A ALHPABET SAFETY system in my car to help me drive!" - thank God for that -it's called the survival of the fittest - Please keep driving without your seat belt, we need to keep the forward progression of man fully intact - Thanks. . .
Reply
RamSport47 10:10PM (2/05/2007)
I wonder what Chrysler did to accordsareboring to make him hate them soooooo much. I'm not a big hondota fan, but I don't HATE them. This guy must be like 10 years old and think he's all growed up now
Reply
david 10:20PM (2/05/2007)
accordsarejunk, i think you either need a good stiff drink or a visit to dr. phil. you talk nothing but nonsense. course if i were you, stuck in an accord all day, i'd probably be whacky as well. if you think all the other country's get all the better cars, well then go there. we won't miss you or your idiotic posts.
Reply
NoNameDenton 10:33PM (2/05/2007)
The CX-7 and CX-9 are not the same, for anyone who thinks so, the CX-9 seats more the the 7, and it is good Ford and GM ditched mini-vans, they lost way too much money on them, CUVs are better and Ford will have that Fairlane concept vehicle out soon, and Lincoln will get one with different sheetmetal to compete with the Enclave
Reply
CaliberSRT4 11:12PM (2/05/2007)
"CUVs like the CX-9, however, can command premium prices..." The keywords is "premium prices," that is the problem with selling any car now days...sell for less more will buy...depending on what they are in the market for of course!
Reply
Jiminy Cricket 7:47AM (2/06/2007)
Mazda marketing used to say that the MPV had the "soul of a sports car." That poor sports car was saying "kill me". I don't know what kind of sports car you drive, but mine doesn't share any components with a minivan for sure especially its soul.
Minivan market is still somewhat alive and well. Honda Odyssey seems to be doing quite well. I think the previous MPV was just too small for alot of minivan buyers and was a nice but outdated design. I laughed at the Dallas Auto Show when they had the poor MPV pushed off to one side like an orphan.
Reply
starlightmica 10:40AM (2/06/2007)
Just when Mazda's MPV is leaving, Kia shows up with their short-wheelbase Sedona, for just over $20k.
Thanks to its twin-turbo direct injection powertrain and assembly in Japan, I don't think the gen III MPV could have competed pricewise with the low end, nor sizewise with the 16-footers that now dominate the minivan market.
Reply
CM 2:58PM (2/06/2007)
Bottom line is if you need a minivan, SUVs don't work.
Minivans have sliding doors, perfect if you have kids.
Minivans have lower floor, easier ingress/egress, perfect of you have kids.
Some minivans like Sienna and Odyssey have 40 cubic feet of cargo space behind 3rd row (that's more than most SUVs have behind their second row) perfect if you have kids
Minivans are loaded with safety equipment including headrests for all seating positions (most SUVs don't) perfect if yyou have kids
Minivans get better fuel economy -- perfect of you have kids
Enough said...
Reply