Mazda adding 'premium' touches to all models
Since the Mazda3 hit the streets in 2004, it's proven to be a very strong contender in the small car segment. The compact sedan and hatch has been winning customers over with great styling, athletic ride characteristics, and equipment that typically isn't found in small cars. Its rich mix of standard features and options has helped keep transaction prices high, which will be very important as the self-proclaimed Zoom-Zoom automaker looks to downsize its lineup and make as much money as possible from every sale.
Mazda will now execute the Mazda3 strategy across its entire line to boost profits while giving customers the standard features they crave. For example, the all-new 2009 Mazda6 will be equipped with disc brakes at all four corners in every trim level while some of the competition continues to use rear drum brakes on their base models. Mazda has already proven that adding standard content can raise transaction prices while at the same time increasing sales, now the Ford-controlled automaker needs to prove that it can accomplish the same feat across its lineup. If Mazda makes all of its vehicles as competent as the Mazda3, that shouldn't be a problem.
[Source: Automotive News - sub. req'd]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
Dazza 9:12AM (8/12/2008)
"The compact sedan and hatch has been winning customers over with great styling, athletic ride characteristics, and equipment that typically isn't found in small cars." - Autoblog
This statement is true for North America, where small cars have traditionally been little more than four wheels and a seat ... however the statement doesn't apply anywhere else. The 3 is a great car, but it certainly doesn't stand out in the C-segment crowd in many markets.
Reply
Adam Carolla 9:27AM (8/12/2008)
For a minute there, I thought you were going to point out the run-on sentence construction.
Seoultrain 10:12AM (8/12/2008)
I would've gone for the singular "isn't" instead of plural.
zjmuse 9:16AM (8/12/2008)
the mazda 6 before 2009 already has disc brakes in all 4 corners, even on the base model.
Reply
Craig 10:29AM (8/12/2008)
What cars that compete with the Mazda6 have drum brakes?
I cannot think of any at all (Australian market).
why not the LS2LS7? 12:53PM (8/12/2008)
I can't think of any in the US market. The base Camry used to have them, but I think that was changed in the last spin (4 years ago).
Papi L-Gee 4:16PM (8/12/2008)
@ LS2/LS7:
Avenger and Sebring (absolute base models).
Whether or not you feel that they compete with the Mazda6 is up to you, however.
Dausman 9:23AM (8/12/2008)
Mazda's probably doing the right thing now until waiting until the magic year of 2010, when it seems, we will see revolutionary changes, models and technology introduced to the auto industry.
Manufacturers will need to do whatever they can to keep their heads above the ever growing sea of competition.
Reply
n8new 9:46AM (8/12/2008)
Does it really matter to the average consumer whether a car has disc or drum brakes? Or is this just the concern of gear-heads? I currently couldn't tell you which type of brakes my car has, but I know it stops when I apply the brakes. And I wouldn't be able to tell you whether that would be due to whatever kind is better or if they improved the kind that wasn't as good before. The point is -- I can't see the brake components. I just trust them to work.
What other content is added that the average consumer can discern by just looking at the car and, thereby, justifying the higher price?
Reply
JD 9:53AM (8/12/2008)
Well, you can see the brakes on the new 6- it isn't even come with steel wheels and wheel covers(if I'm not mistaken)- so it can matter, if seeing the hardware is your thing. And disc brakes are way better than drum brakes in terms of fade and ease of servicing (among many other things), and think about it- if they point out this safety feature, and then point out that the competitors don't have discs, that's another feature the 6 has over competition. Also, this eliminates the need for drums from the production line, and having only one type of brake available reduces cost. It's a win-win.
Sean 9:58AM (8/12/2008)
n8new:
You must not be the average consumer. The average consumer is aware that disc brakes perform better which is a matter of SAFETY, not just a performance stat. Are you just going to hope multiple air bags deploy in an accident? Or do you assume that when a car says it has airbags, that you have multiple kinds for more than just frontal crashes? Are you ignorant of what ABS is? Or do you just assume that's another way to cause price increases as well?
I compare braking/stability/safety systems in cars I am interested in not because I brag to friends that I can stop the fastest and have the greatest features, but because I care about reaching my destination with my passengers safely.
wagonphile 10:21AM (8/12/2008)
I don't care if I can see the discs or not, knowing they are mechanically superior to drums for matters of safety and performance is enough for me. I consider myself an average consumer, and I'm more interested in the unseen components that make the car go and stop-- not the "jewelry" installed on the dashboard. Go ahead and pay more for the useless stuff you see, but I'll be under the hood ensuring my bucks are buying something substantial.
Benfolio 11:10AM (8/12/2008)
@JD
The 6i comes standard with 16in STEEL wheels with covers.
If Mazda is going to do this across the line they should add an AUX input on ALL cars, have standard rear disc on Tribute and B-series (doubt it, can you even GET a Ranger with rear discs?) since they are the only cars without them standard, and fix thier muddy crap radios on anything that doesn't have Bose.
Surely having all that standard will limit options and therefore make the cars cheaper, right?
nardvark 11:26AM (8/12/2008)
It's marketing, and "style." Rear brakes do almost no work on a FWD, front-heavy car. People cite the fact that rear drums will fade faster than discs, which is true, but a complete non-issue for a street car. If you're causing your brakes to fade on your daily commute, you're driving like an idiot.
"Ease of service" is a non-concern, because drums usually last over 100k miles without service. Discs, not so much (my last Toyota's rear calipers crapped out at 70k).
Putting rear discs on instead of drums does not reduce complexity, it actually adds to it, because cars with rear discs need a second mechanism for the parking brake, while drums can do double-duty.
The only real argument for discs on the rear is that they are shinier, and if you're paying extra for alloy wheels, you don't want to see a black cylinder back there, you want to see rotors. It has nothing to do with safety or performance.
why not the LS2LS7? 1:00PM (8/12/2008)
naardvark:
You've hit it spot on, however, I would say that on larger cars rear discs are a necessity. As the weight goes up, the rear brakes do more.
On a car like the Mazda 3 or similar sized (Civic, Cobalt, etc.), rear drums work fine for street use.
Chase 1:06PM (8/12/2008)
"Rear brakes do almost no work on a FWD, front-heavy car."
Quite the exaggeration there, nardvark. Sure, the rear brakes don't work as hard as the fronts, but they still do plenty of work. The bias in the most extreme examples is about 70/30 front/rear. However, any car which actually has a suspension will net 60/40.
Also, if you start adding any steering input (to say, dodge something), the two outer tires suddenly get the majority of the traction. In this instance, if you're on the brakes but the rear brakes don't stop with similar force to the front, it will increase the effects of trail-brake oversteer, which will lead to loss of control for a normal driver.
Dude 1:53PM (8/12/2008)
naardvark:
The 6 also has EBD which should under most circumstances shifts some of the braking duties to the rears... Hence, a benefit in discs also.
why not the LS2LS7? 2:16PM (8/12/2008)
Chase:
Less braking in the rear means more understeer, not oversteer.
The apportioning may be 70/30 statically, but the rears still see relatively light duty. Under light heavy braking, the drums can handle the load very well, and under heavy braking the weight shift forward is so extreme that the rears don't increase nearly as much in effort expended as the fronts do.
Dude:
The reason the rears do less isn't because someone set the distribution wrong, it's because the rear end of the car is already light in a FWD car and lightens up further under braking.
And where is the idea that drums can't actually apply braking force coming from? They do fine in the rears on light cars, just are more susceptible to fade under heavy braking.
MikeW 2:33PM (8/12/2008)
Yes it absolutely matter that new cars have rear discs. [or it will by the time ESP is mandated]
I don't want to have my ESP to operate with drum brakes.
I don't want to have EBD with drum brakes.
[check out the new Honda fit]
If you have a 60/40 car with a normal ride height, you probably are at 80/20 at 1g deceleration (if you can hit that with your tires)
But in a sportier front wheel drive, still 60/40, and you decelerate at 1g, you can improve weight distribution from 80/20 to 75/25.
I am not saying that vented rear rotors are necessary for a pedestrian front wheel drive car [Ford did that with the Contour V6, many years ago-in the pre EBD days], because if/when the rear brakes fade, you have more stability (see LS2-7 above)
Greg 9:52AM (8/12/2008)
Mazda needs to do something about the mileage on the new Mazda6 V6. That will add mroe value than a standard iPod jack.
Reply