Why "People Movers" should be built on the Mazda5 platform

[Guest Sixcav]

Why oh why are the Toyota Camry models getting bigger every generation? They're getting to where they're near Ford 500 or even Chrysler 300 sized.

 

LOL, You guys wonder why I hammer you for being so one sided. The above statement is 100% bullshit.

 

Heres the dimensions for the Camry, generation 1997 - 2003

 

Specification 2-door convertible 2-door coupe 4-door sedan

Wheelbase, in. 105.1 105.2 105.2

Overall Length, in. 190.0 190.0 188.5

Overall Width, in. 71.1 71.1 70.1

 

 

Now the current model

 

Overall width 71.7 71.7 71.7 71.7 71.7

Overall length 189.2 189.2 189.2 189.2 189.2

Wheelbase 109.3 109.3 109.3 109.3 109.3

 

So they moved the wheels closer to the corners, obviously to improve handling but the overall length of car has actually shortend a bit and it's a staggering .6 inches wider, not even noticeable. So to sum it up, the Camry is actually no bigger than it has been the past 10 years.

 

And now, just to be fair the dimension on the 500

 

A. Wheelbase (in.) 112.9

B. Length (in.) 200.7

C. Height – at Curb 60.4

D. Width (in.) 74.5

Edited October 8, 2006 by Sixcav

[Edstock]

I stand corrected, thank-you.

 

Indeed, the Fusion/Camry/Altima/Accord at the large end, and Corolla/Civic/Matrix/Sentra/Focus at the small end, are the largest market segment.

 

It will be a long time til Ford has sales anywhere close to Toyota in this spectrum. The difference, say, between the "optimists" and the "pessimists", is that the optimists are of the opinion that this will come to pass, while the pessimists think it'll never happen.

 

Eventually, we will see.

[waymondospiff]

1) Why oh why are the Toyota Camry the #1 and Corolla/Matrix the #2 selling cars in America? They're not anywhere near Ford 500 or even Chrysler 300 sized, they are relatively diminuitive, hence mid-sized car and SMALL car.

Why oh why are the Toyota Camry models getting bigger every generation? They're getting to where they're near Ford 500 or even Chrysler 300 sized.

LOL, You guys wonder why I hammer you for being so one sided.

 

I'm not picking on you or hammering you Sixcav, instead it always just shocks me when I look at the stats on how much our cars have grown in recent years.

 

(2006 unless otherwise noted)

Car..............wheelbase.....width.....height.....length

Fusion...........107.4"..........72.2".....57.2"......190.2"

Camry..........109.3"..........71.7".....57.9"......189.2"

500...............112.9"..........74.5".....61.5"......200.7"

300...............120.0"..........74.1".....58.4"......196.8"

Avalon...........111.0"..........72.8".....58.5"......197.2"

1990 Camry...102.4"..........67.4".....54.1"......182.1"

1990 Taurus...106.0"..........70.8".....54.3"......188.4"

Focus.............102.9"..........66.7".....56.8"......175.2"

Corolla...........102.4"..........66.9".....58.5"......178.3"

 

I don't really see what this has to do with the topic at hand, that people movers should be built on the Mazda5 platform, but I've always thought the growth in our cars is quite interesting.

 

As far as sales go, it is hard to just compare Fusion & Camry. You really need to look at the whole "family car" category (as the "midsize" and "fullsize" category have begun to really blend together) and then compare all of Ford against Toyota. For example:

 

Fusion/Five Hundred/Montego/Milan

vs.

Camry/Avalon

 

I believe Toyota still leads, but I think this is the correct way to compare the two makers. It will be years until we, if ever, see another mainstream Ford sedan selling 300-350,000 vehicles/year.

 

Scott

[Guest Sixcav]

I'm not picking on you or hammering you Sixcav, instead it always just shocks me when I look at the stats on how much our cars have grown in recent years.

 

Wyman, picture in your mind if you will the average size sedan on the road in the 70's. Were talking an era when a Thunderbird could comfortably carry six people in two seats and they weren't piled up right next to each other. My father had a 71 Impala that a grown man could litterally lay down in the back seat and catch a nap. Even on into the 1980's the Caprice Classic and LTD were big cars. Don't you remember the Countr Esquire? lol Those things were land yatchs. So if anything our cars have only gotten smaller. That the current generation of "small cars" is increasing slightly in size is possilby only a correction of the fact that they got too small and now they are tweaking them a little. Now don't get me wrong, I don't want to go back to the 1970's size cars, I like the size they are now.

[g48150]

My absolute last points on this topic are:

 

1) Ford SHOULD invest in F Series AND the huge Super Chief

2) Ford SHOULD invest in maximizing the kinds of cars that come off the Reflex platform

 

I'd love to see a Diesel-Hybrid Mazda5-type wearing a Ford badge, if not just a tad shorter in the wheelbase

 

I know it looks like a contradiction in terms, invest in the HUGE TRUCK and tiny car segments of the market, but technically, the Taurus was a contradiction in terms of being a WORLD car...

[waymondospiff]

Wyman, picture in your mind if you will the average size sedan on the road in the 70's. Were talking an era when a Thunderbird could comfortably carry six people in two seats and they weren't piled up right next to each other. My father had a 71 Impala that a grown man could litterally lay down in the back seat and catch a nap. Even on into the 1980's the Caprice Classic and LTD were big cars. Don't you remember the Countr Esquire? lol Those things were land yatchs. So if anything our cars have only gotten smaller. That the current generation of "small cars" is increasing slightly in size is possilby only a correction of the fact that they got too small and now they are tweaking them a little. Now don't get me wrong, I don't want to go back to the 1970's size cars, I like the size they are now.

 

I was born after the gas crunch, but of course I do remember the tail end of the big car era. "We was po'" however, so the cars I remember growing up were Horizons and K-Car derivatives, so I never grew up with big cars, but friends had Caprices & LTDs & Gran Furys. I don't know if it was growing up with relatively small cars or what, but I've never really figured out people trying to get bigger & bigger cars today. I chose my Mazda5 over a Freestyle due to size; the Freestyle is huge. I agree with you, I like the size of cars today, I hope to see more choices on the small-side of the scale. Smarts, S-Maxes, Cubes, iCars, etc.

 

What is the most interesting thing about our current car market is the fragmentation of the marketplace - in the 1980s, Ford sold 500K Tempos & Topazes/year for several years. Today, the Camry sells roughly 400K/year and it is far-and-away the best-selling car in the US. So many cars, so many choices - it's tougher for than manufacturers as they have to make more cars with lower volumes, but it is great for consumers.

 

1) Ford SHOULD invest in F Series AND the huge Super Chief

2) Ford SHOULD invest in maximizing the kinds of cars that come off the Reflex platform

Sure it is a bit of contradiction in ideas, but I think you're very correct. Ford needs to put money into their strong markets (trucks) and into new opportunities/growing markets (small cars.) I can't remember exactly, I bet RJ does, but Ford is developing 2 or 3 new vehicles off of the new B-Car chassis. And expect to see at least 2, maybe 3 or 4 variations on the new C2 chassis early next decade.

 

I'd love to see a Diesel-Hybrid Mazda5-type wearing a Ford badge, if not just a tad shorter in the wheelbase

Coming soon, a dual-fuel Gasoline-Hydrogen Rotary-powered Mazda5. And the recent reports of Mazda developing their own hybrid system (not sharing/stealing Ford's system) have hinted for an application in the Mazda5. The small size, low weight, & high utility of the Mazda5 make it an ideal platform for new technologies.

 

Scott

[6-cylinder]

My wife and I would love to test drive a Mazda5. We think it would be a perfect step up from her Focus wagon. However, there is no Mazda dealer within 50 miles of us. I'm a bit hesitant to be at least 50 miles from the closest dealer who can perform warranty work/service the car.

 

Put one on the Ford lot, and we'll drive 12 miles tomorrow to see it.

 

We'll probably end up in a Freestyle, assuming it lives.

[OrlandoGuy80]

Y'mean like the Nissan Pulsar NX?

Oooooo .... now there's a sexy blast from the past! :D

[charly]

Being the owner of a Mazda5 I can say that it gives me 95% of what I need in a vehicle. My family drives too many miles to give the $$$'s away in gas, would rather spend it on us...The family was a bit like why would you buy something like that? After a drive in it they understood. I was going to buy an Edge, but factoring initial cost, MPG, no towing, and interior space it was an easy decision. I love the vehicle more every day especially the 2.3L and its driving characteristics.

 

If the vehicle was really marketed like it should it could be a decent seller. However, when I bought mine there was no incentives. Most people ask what the hell it is? Plus it's pretty easy to find it in a parking lot. I would kill for an S-Max diesel...

 

SparcEE

 

 

Yeah, but its fugly.

[one2gamble]

there used to be a pulsar down the street from me, odd looking car....thats probably why it didnt sell well.

[Biker16]

I'm sure there's limitations as to how big this platform can be taken, so for bigger size duties, I think the C1 would be quite limited.

 

My bestfriend has a Mazda5 and it's great for the most part, other than her complaint (and mine) is passing power. Hopefully they'll be some sort of engine upgrade in the future, other than when the 2.3L grows to 2.5L I-4.

 

BTW the mazda 5 has a longer wheel base than the Fusion.

[ANTAUS]

I'm talking about stretching it to over 120In. wheelbase, something along what a minivan would require.

[macattak1]

It would be too easy to rant and rave, but I'll list my top 5 reasons.

 

1) Gas mileage

2) Seriously, Gas mileage

3) Those Sliding Doors are sweet, not too high, not too low

4) Low maintenance cost for Under Body (i.e. the platform is already mature enough to have parts and suppliers)

5) It wouldn't be out of the question to "stretch" this Upper Body out, giving it a 6 cylinder hybrid option, more (not too much) cargo room, and possibly a "sport" package (ala CX-7)

 

So the first two reasons are the same, but I make up for it on reason 5 (get it?)

 

IMO, the Edge is "pushin it" in terms of size, cost, weight, gas mileage, "overkill" cargo space, etc. The "Fairlane" logically would take all these terms and make them larger, possibly up to 2x the Edge. So used to paying for MORE that we don't use, people don't see the beauty of a "people mover" on a B or B/C platform.

 

Look how ingeniously the Honda Fit stores cargo, and the Nissan Versa is absolutely HUGE on the inside for the driver AND passengers. These cars *start* WAY under $20,000.

 

If we want better MPG make it diesel.

If we want it more green make it diesel.

Hybrids are over sold failures.

If they made a Ford that got 65 mpg like the VW diesel I would buy that in a heart beat.

By the time Ford does this so will every other mfg. If they brought it over here a year or two ago for both the 1/2 tons and smaller D's for smaller vechiles they would have, for once in a long time, had a few year jump on the competition.

 

Peace and Blessings

[waymondospiff]

If we want better MPG make it diesel.

If we want it more green make it diesel.

Hybrids are over sold failures.

If they made a Ford that got 65 mpg like the VW diesel I would buy that in a heart beat.

By the time Ford does this so will every other mfg. If they brought it over here a year or two ago for both the 1/2 tons and smaller D's for smaller vechiles they would have, for once in a long time, had a few year jump on the competition.

 

Well, that VW would be the Polo. And here is the most efficient model:

 

Engine cubic capacity 1400cc

Fuel Consumption

Urban 47.9mpg - 5.9l/100km

Extra-urban 68.9mpg - 4.1l/100km

Combined 60.1mpg - 4.7l/100km

Engine emissions 127g/km

Engine maximum Speed** 102mph - 164km/h

Engine acceleration 0-62mph 14.6secs

Maximum output PS 70 at RPM 4000

Maximum torque 114 lbs.ft at RPM 1600

 

Hmm...70 horsepower and 0-62 in 14.6 sec. I just don't know why they don't sell it in the US!

 

Seriously, the VW diesels sold in the US achieve similar fuel economy numbers as the Prius. Given the additional cost of producing diesels vs. gasoline engines AND the development costs in trying to eliminate particulates & NOx emissions, it may very well be that gasoline-hybrids are cheaper & easier to build than new diesels.

 

And frankly, while I like the idea of diesels, I've also seen the awful toll that emissions have taken in the old cities of Europe - while I like fuel economy, I also enjoy breathable air. It's a trade-off. But much like there isn't a magic elixir for GM or Ford, diesels aren't a magic elixir for the US's fuel dependency.

 

Scott

[g48150]

LINK to KIA's Mazda 5

 

Why does it hurt to be so right??? Somebody tell me???

 

 

:happy feet: :happy feet: :happy feet:

[old_fairmont_wagon]

The Rondo appears to have even tighter third row accomodations than the Mazda5. It also doesn't have the convenient sliding doors of the 5 as well. I suspect that its fuel economy numbers might be a bit lower to boot. That being said, it will probably beat the Mazda5 on price, especially price / content.

 

As for building the people movers on the Mazda5 platform. All I can say is NO! The Mazda5 / C1 platform is just too small for a product of that size. Start with the D3 platform and run with it. Just, please, either use double half doors or a slider for the 2nd and third rows. Sliding doors are too convenient for ingress/egress and crowded parking lots. Any people mover will be an urban use vehicle, and that's where the sliding doors is at its best.

[old_fairmont_wagon]

I wonder what sort of hybrid an atkinson cycle Renesis Rotary combined with a CVT and electric motor would be? The engine is compact and light. The rotary always lacked in torque, but, the electric motor can help there. The atkinson cycle might actually make the rotary fuel efficent for once. It would just be interesting to see a Mazda5 go flying by with a rotary under the hood singing along at 8000 rpm.

[g48150]

I love dredging up old ideas. Here's why the S-max PLATFORM would work here. Build it on the Mazda5 platform.

[Ovaltine]

The Rondo appears to have even tighter third row accomodations than the Mazda5. It also doesn't have the convenient sliding doors of the 5 as well. I suspect that its fuel economy numbers might be a bit lower to boot. That being said, it will probably beat the Mazda5 on price, especially price / content.

 

Looks like the Rondo's got it over the 5 in most of the interior categories. Here's a post on Edmunds where someone does the complete comparo:

 

 

http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/direct/view/.f1013b6/61

 

"In general, the Rondo is slightly shorter, slightly wider, and slightly higher than the Mazda5. The Rondo has 2" less headroom in the 3rd row, but slightly more in the 2nd row. Legroom for rows 2&3 in the Rondo is better by almost 4" if you add up the differences for both rows and since you can slide the 2nd rows, thats a good way to calculate. So you slide the 2nd row you get about 33" of legroom on average for both the 2nd and 3rd row on the Mazda5, and with the Rondo you'd get about 34.5" of legroom in both 2nd and 3rd rows by sliding the 2nd row forward. I think in the Ronda they raised up the 3rd row for more legroom at the expense of headroom, so I'd have to sit in both to see how it really works."

 

RONDO

Headroom (front/middle/rear) 41.6 in./40.2 in./35.1 in.

Legroom (front/middle/rear) 41.3 in./38.2 in./31.3 in.

Hip room (front/middle/rear) 54.6 in./53.9 in./40.3 in.

Cargo behind 3rd Row 6.5CuFt

 

MAZDA5

Headroom (front/middle/rear) 40.7 in./39.4 in./37.1 in.

Legroom (front/middle/rear) 40.7 in./35.2 in./30.7 in.

Hip room (front/middle/rear) 52.9 in./58.3 in./40.9 in.

Cargo behind 3rd Row 4CuFt

 

What I (the poster on Edmunds) like on the Rondo as compared to the Mazda5:

- 2nd row bench

- Armrest storage for the 3rd row

- All the standard safety features including ESC

- 10 yr warranty

- Option choices

- 4cyl MPG

Edited January 28, 2007 by Ovaltine

[Ovaltine]

I swear, if KIA was a woman, it would have a restraining order against Ovaltine.

 

 

Stop it Pioneer, stop it! Yer KILLIN' me!

 

-Ovaltine