Mazda2 Coming To The U.S. Fall 2010

[twintornados]

Mazda2

[MKII]

from article" The source said the Mazda2's interior will be upgraded from the European edition, which has been criticized for its look and feel."

 

Thats a good thing because the inside has that low rent effect.

[ausrutherford]

That explains why the Fiesta plant was increased to a production max of 500k.

[Sixt9coug]

 

[rmc523]

 

 

Not too bad looking......I didn't like it when we first saw it, but it's not bad now.

[Hugh]

Personally, I wasn't surprised at the announcement. I am surprised it took so long to make it.

[ANTAUS]

The rear end is a bit blah, looks like its giving me a bad look...Good to know they are improving the interior, I believe American consumers are becoming pickier in relation to interiors. And again, I'm sure the seats will be replaced with ones that can heavy fat asses...

[twintornados]

Why so sad little Mazda2?? All your bigger brothers have such a happy face...yet you are frowning.....

Edited September 18, 2009 by twintornados

[waymondospiff]

It's about time. It would have been better had this call been made in 2007, but better late than never. In 2010, the Mazda2 will nearly be through with it's lifecycle - I assume we get the current car for two years and then it will be replaced by an all-new model to keep up with the global Mazda2. (???)

 

It may be another b-car, but with Mazda's success with the Mazda3 and history of suspension tuning for zoom-zoom, this may leap to head-of-the-class with the Fiesta & Fit.

 

A belated but interesting move from Mazda.

[jpvbs]

Maybe I'm biased, but to me, the Fiesta looks like a much more expensive car than the 2. For me, the 2 looks rather boring in a Toyota kind of way. It seems to be another bland small car that has given small cars a bad reputation in the US in the past.

In writeups I've read from parts of the world where they already get both the 2 and the Fiesta, the Fiesta almost universally is considerd to be the better of the two. The Fiesta is always complimented for being very athletic feeling, while the 2 is less so.

[Harley Lover]

Given Mazda's recent claims that, going forward, they will only share V6's with Ford (and not 4's), I'm curious to see what drivetrain will be in the M2. I hope that at some point Ford will offer an Ecoboost engine with the dual clutch tranny in the Fiesta, but I imagine it would have to be in a top of the line model, as those features would presumably push the Fiesta to a much higher price point.

[Deanh]

 

I think the Fiesta takes first prize in the styling dept.........

[PREMiERdrum]

I think the Fiesta takes first prize in the styling dept.........

 

Yes, but the 2 is still a much more handsome car than the Yaris, Aveo, Viva (?), Versa, Fit, etc..

[Catalepsy]

I have a feeling they're gonna slap on that silly smile on the 2 for the US version. I really dislike the front of the current Mazdas.

 

 

Yes, but the 2 is still a much more handsome car than the Yaris, Aveo, Viva (?), Versa, Fit, etc..

[ausrutherford]

Anybody have confirmation that it is at the Fiesta plant as i think it is.

[rkisler]

Anybody have confirmation that it is at the Fiesta plant as i think it is.

 

It seems to me it's coming from Ujina (Hiroshima), but I haven't read any confirmation.

 

My guess is that given Mazda's low volumes, it would not have been worth it to develop a second set of stamping dies and ship or tool unique interior and other components to enable production in Cuatitlan when they already are in relatively high production in Japan. I would hope that Mazda and Ford worked jointly on the U.S. emissions and safety solutions, but I was told by a Ford person that there were a lot of doors that slammed shut the day the equity reduction was announced.

Edited September 18, 2009 by Austin

[ausrutherford]

It seems to me it's coming from Ujina (Hiroshima), but I haven't read any confirmation.

 

My guess is that given Mazda's low volumes, it would not have been worth it to develop a second set of stamping dies and ship or tool unique interior and other components to enable production in Cuatitlan when they already are in relatively high production in Japan. I would hope that Mazda and Ford worked jointly on the U.S. emissions and safety solutions, but I was told by a Ford person that there were a lot of doors that slammed shut the day the equity reduction was announced.

 

Seems like its going to be unprofitable then.

[akirby]

Seems like its going to be unprofitable then.

 

Why? The competition is imported from Japan (Fit, Yaris, Versa, etc.)

[ausrutherford]

Why? The competition is imported from Japan (Fit, Yaris, Versa, etc.)

 

Yes, theyre shipped from there...doesnt mean they have a profit doing it.

[danup]

I prefer the look of the 2, honestly—it's a lot cleaner.

[akirby]

Yes, theyre shipped from there...doesnt mean they have a profit doing it.

 

It must be profitable somehow - why else would they import them?

[rkisler]

It must be profitable somehow - why else would they import them?

 

I would have to say "it depends". All of the b-cars are presently imported. The basic reason is the high-volume base and economies of scale in the country of origin, combined with relatively high-volume export markets as well. Manufacturing in North America hasn't taken off (yet) because the volume base is small.

 

In the case of Toyota/Honda, the volume base is large in Japan, and the sales in the U.S. aren't shabby for the Fit and Yaris. I'm guessing they make a small bit, it helps full the plant, and it's very helpful to the dealer body as it provides an entry-level model. Mazda's volume base in Japan is, I believe well over 100k UPA. The volume projections for the the U.S. cannot be expected to be very large due to a relatively small dealer body (look at entries such as the Mazda 5 for example). So you're making an investment in changes requred to enter a relatively low-priced and low-volume market coming from a high-cost manufacturing base. I think that's why Mazda waffled for so long on bringing it in and I suspect the Mazda 2 represents a very difficult business case. But...we still do not know where the Mazda 2 will be coming from. Highly likely Japan, but it's also built (along side the Fiesta) in China and Thailand IIRC.

 

I don't know the facts, but another reason might be that Ford was working to certify the Fiesta for the U.S., so if the engineering work were shared, then that would have helped Mazda develop common solutions for the Mazda 2. This is not trivial, particularly the front end crash with unbelted occupants, and the IIHS side impact test. Probably thousands of hours and lot of supercomputer time.

 

I can tell you with some certainty that importing a b-car (or a sub-b like the Ka) from Europe (even Poland) is very unlikely to ever make business sense.

 

I'm sure Mullaly requires every product to be above water, so I'm going to assume Ford's production of the Fiesta in Mexico will be profitable with the programmed volumes. But part of that profit is likely due to favorable trade with South America. According to reports I have read, VW will be following Ford with production of the Polo in Puebla, Mexico.

 

GM is the only manufacturer I know that will be producing b-cars in the U.S. I can't see any way whatsoever that they can be profitable using this strategy considering high labor rates in the U.S. But they probably had to do it to satisfy their major shareholder.

[ausrutherford]

I would have to say "it depends". All of the b-cars are presently imported. The basic reason is the high-volume base and economies of scale in the country of origin, combined with relatively high-volume export markets as well. Manufacturing in North America hasn't taken off (yet) because the volume base is small.

 

In the case of Toyota/Honda, the volume base is large in Japan, and the sales in the U.S. aren't shabby for the Fit and Yaris. I'm guessing they make a small bit, it helps full the plant, and it's very helpful to the dealer body as it provides an entry-level model. Mazda's volume base in Japan is, I believe well over 100k UPA. The volume projections for the the U.S. cannot be expected to be very large due to a relatively small dealer body (look at entries such as the Mazda 5 for example). So you're making an investment in changes requred to enter a relatively low-priced and low-volume market coming from a high-cost manufacturing base. I think that's why Mazda waffled for so long on bringing it in and I suspect the Mazda 2 represents a very difficult business case. But...we still do not know where the Mazda 2 will be coming from. Highly likely Japan, but it's also built (along side the Fiesta) in China and Thailand IIRC.

 

I don't know the facts, but another reason might be that Ford was working to certify the Fiesta for the U.S., so if the engineering work were shared, then that would have helped Mazda develop common solutions for the Mazda 2. This is not trivial, particularly the front end crash with unbelted occupants, and the IIHS side impact test. Probably thousands of hours and lot of supercomputer time.

 

I can tell you with some certainty that importing a b-car (or a sub-b like the Ka) from Europe (even Poland) is very unlikely to ever make business sense.

 

I'm sure Mullaly requires every product to be above water, so I'm going to assume Ford's production of the Fiesta in Mexico will be profitable with the programmed volumes. But part of that profit is likely due to favorable trade with South America. According to reports I have read, VW will be following Ford with production of the Polo in Puebla, Mexico.

 

GM is the only manufacturer I know that will be producing b-cars in the U.S. I can't see any way whatsoever that they can be profitable using this strategy considering high labor rates in the U.S. But they probably had to do it to satisfy their major shareholder.

 

Actually its even worse for GM, theyre planning oin building the Spark here...which is A-segment.

[Noah Harbinger]

GM is the only manufacturer I know that will be producing b-cars in the U.S. I can't see any way whatsoever that they can be profitable using this strategy considering high labor rates in the U.S. But they probably had to do it to satisfy their major shareholder.

 

They can't really afford a new plant right now, and whatever plant outside the US is free to produce a more expensive car. If you look at the profitability to the company as a whole, it's a wash. It only looks bad if you try to look at individual product lines... and as far as I know, you can't buy stock in a car model.

[RichardJensen]

If you look at the profitability to the company as a whole, it's a wash.

Except that only works with a static or fairly predictable product mix.

 

For instance, what happens if sales of your profitable vehicles collapse and sales of your unprofitable vehicles don't?

 

Mulally's got the right idea, insisting on profits from all vehicle lines.

 

Granted, neither the percentage nor the dollar amount will be the same from the Fiesta up to the Super Duty, but they should all be above the Mendoza line.