Gotta say, I was one of the ones who thought there was no chance the CX-70 would just be a two-row -90. Whoops. I still think it's a huge mistake to not have a shorter wheelbase RWD-platform option here.
@@ozzielara2337 CX60 is also narrower and much shorter ,all haters would bash it for no room... CX70 pricing will be the key , if priced from 37K to say 52K than it will make lot more sense, also they should tune the suspension and steering for performance while give it slightly more psi boost for better power than CX90
@@kdomster9141 did you know all the difference in width between 60 and 90 went to the fenders and wheels? The cabin is identical in width. 90 has wider wheels/tires and more pronounced fender flares around the wheel well. That's it.
exactly. i just need a cx-5 that can fit rear facing car seats and enough cargo room for a stroller and a costco run :( i decided last year to go with a crv for that very reason, and had high hopes for the 70. so disappointed
As a Mazda fan, I am very disappointed with this new vehicle. I was hoping to get something with similar dimensions as Europe's CX60. I am sorry but this CX70 is simply way too big. Big miss by Mazda in my opinion. I am considering now a 2024 Honda Passport trailsport....
I hope Mazda is watching the feedback. Many of us don't want a two row CX90. I was expecting something to compete with the X5 or Grand Cherokee to replace our GLE450. Mazda - send us a CX60 and call it the CX70 Sport
@@timw2083 well, CX-60 and CX-90 are the same platform. But I agree, the CX-70 is way too long. Had they shortened the wheelbase a bit, it would have been a far more compelling product for most buyers.
@@FeLiX13sLaVe yeap.. you're right the platform architecture is the same. I was simply disappointed with this choice for the CX70. I'm a Mazda fan and want to see them as a relevant alternative to the luxury brands
I was really excited for the CX-70. I had 2017 GT CX-5 and now have 2021 Signature CX-5. I was really hoping for a model that would of course be a bit larger and more luxurious, as an upgrade from the CX-5 as I get more advanced in age and career. BUT I am pretty disappointed about Mazda’s choice to just do a CX-90 with 2 rows. The CX-90 is way too long for my garage and for everyday use in a crowded suburban area; I was hoping the CX-70 would have been at most 190” long. I am by no means a hater as I also have a 2016 MX-5 and bought my mom a CX-50, so really a Mazda lover. Just no way I could upgrade which had been my plan (was really looking forward to the PHEV) unless I move and get a bigger garage.
Jonathon, I like all your videos but this video seemed a little off to me. 1.) you got six people in your family and your still choosing the CX70 🫤. 2.) you keep mentioning extra cargo space. How is it anymore than the Cx90 with seats down? The storage under the floorboard is okay but those will be for items that you don’t need to use often because in order to get to that area, you have to lift the floor board all the up meaning you gotta shuffle your existing cargo to get to it so this review/video throws me off a little. Sorry man, just keeping it real. Keep up the good work.
I noticed those 2 things too. I get that he’s a salesman and it’s his job, but it seems like he was forcing/faking it. I was looking forward to a smaller cx70 but I guess I’m buying my cx9 lease for now. At least I have the flexibility of folding the rear seats down. I often leave them up solely for easier reaching lesser cargo from the rear, not because anyone’s sitting in them.
I think it will really come down to the price difference between the CX-70 and 90 and how much more cargo space there is in the CX-70 compared to folding down the third row on the 90. Also, I question if people wanting only a 5 passenger vehicle would really want it to be 201" long and so large in general.
I get why Mitchell has to hype up the CX-70, but this is borderline fraud by Mazda. A 3rd row delete, minor cosmetic changes front & rear, and different paint options is NOT a new model; it should at most be a trim level for CX-90. The CX-70 should be a CX-60 with US specs and safety gear. This is actually worse than claiming the CX-50 Meridian is an off-road vehicle. Very disappointed as it looks like my CX-9 will be the last Mazda in my garage for a while.
I get that you're tryping to hype up the CX-70, but I still think its stupid of Mazda to pretend this is a different model. I get that Mazda is a small company and may not have the resources to develop & build another model right now. But they should have reserved the CX-70 name for a future vehicle to fill the size void between the 50 and 90, as the name implies. Thats what so many of us were expecting and have been waiting for. And I suspect it would actually outsell the CX-90.
And hopefully an upgraded all touch screen that is bigger. The current one is too small and a bit too far away for Car Play usage. Its the main reason I have not purchased a Mazda.
Car and Driver is right. Mazda is saving money by not making a new model and this will likely harm the sales of the CX70 making this a gamble that won't pay off. Every comments sections is flooded with disappointment at this missed opportunity to make an exciting new shorter model to fit between cx50 and cx90 length. That would have competed directly with the luxury brand 2 row SUV/CUVs.
HUGE miss, too big for a 2 row.. heard mazda didn't want to be subjected to additional testing and certification so they used the exact same model and changed the name. Should have made it smaller by 8-10", and improved handling and dynamics. They could have made it roomier by better packaging the interior, like other brands with smaller exterior dimensions but roomier interiors than mazdas. I grabbed my cx90 when I heard the cx-70 might be the same size and platform... several friends interested in a smaller cx70 have now passed and went elsewhere.. despite loving my cx90 looks and all.. they all wanted a smaller exterior but everything the same.. so did i... hope it's not a flop
My take…. Mazda got cold feet here and had to pivot…. CX-5 sales are still on fire, regardless of the recent addition of the cx-50. CX-90 is beautiful, but doesn’t have the mass appeal. CX-5: The plans to fade it out became questionable, so internally they debated whether/how they need to keep it rolling as a cash cow. Quickest way to reallocate funds for refresh is to stop work on a US version (cx-60), make an impromptu CX-70 (90 minus 3rd row) for little to no investment. Buys the time and $$ to figure out plan B for what the new cx5 looks like and get that ramped. Or - maybe the US planned cx60 (70) wasn’t quite up to the level (refinement) they needed it to be to put a stamp on the BMW x3? The reality here is that if they do it right, and build a true X3 competitor for $5-10k less, they’ll sell the crap out of them. Maybe taking a little grief over this questionable cx70 weirdness to get it right for what everyone was hoping for (me included), was the better short term path? I don’t like it a bit - disappointed and just doesn’t make sense. Certain they’re taking notes from the reactions from all…. Hopefully there’s more to come…. My wife has a cx50 PM turbo premium, my work car is a 2016 cx5 GT…. We were both hoping for the “right-sized” x3 fighter.
It’s nice looking. It’s just too large for a 2 row SUV. 200 inches long is just too big. But yes it will have a lot of cargo room. If one needs that much. Will be very curious to see how it sells.
Don’t know how anyone can justify this decision. It’s just awful. Why would you ever buy it when you could get the 90 and fold the seats down. You never know when you could use those seats. The price difference will be negligible. Very disappointing. I now have to look at a rav 4 hybrid. Not what I wanted but…
I searched the internet and found similar photos of the CX-70 cargo area and CX-90 cargo area with the third row seat folded down. It was highly disappointing to see that the space is practically identical. Sure, CX-70 has some additional shallow storage under the floor if you want to empty everything out of the cargo area so you can fuss with the cargo floor to access it. Personally, I would just rather have the CX-90 and keep the third row folded down most of the time until an extra seat or two comes in handy. There are occasions where just one additional seat makes the difference between taking one car or two. And the CX-90 also has the flexibility to fold down half of the third row to offer a combination of more cargo space plus that additional seat. I understand that the savings on R&D is substantial by giving us a two-row version of the CX-90. But they could've just added the new paint colors, wheels, and interior color to the 90 and given the North American market the CX-60 instead. That saves a substantial amount of R&D as well, plus gives us a crossover with all of the new large platform mechanical attributes and new interior in a package that fits in my garage.
Just my opinion, but that really sounds like a dumb idea to make indistinguishable models from each other and have different names. The 70 should have been somewhat smaller overall.
Mazda should have delayed the CX-70 until they were ready to put out a model that’s actually different. In the interim, they could have put out a two-row only CX-90, if they felt a need to do so. But to have all this publicity and have people, especially fans of the brand, anticipate a new model only to get another trim of the CX-90 is disingenuous at best.
I get that they didn't have the R&D to create an entirely new vehicle but the lack of differentiation to the cx-90 is head scratching. It's just the same car with cosmetic changes and no third row. And the d pillar is pretty infamous to many so it's surprising they didn't do anything about that. Time will tell whether it was a good move or not. Certainly lost a buyer in me. I'm on 4 Mazdas but something else is next
I’m disappointed in the direction Mazda has taken especially considering they were doing so well years ago. Almost seems like they are not in the right headspace anymore. The 17 cx5 cx9 and the 19 Mazda 3 feel as though it’s the pinnacle of their work. Ever since they started collaborating with other brands and forcefully moving up market thier priorities have changed and it’s watered down the lineup and the cost cutting is clear. I have to disagree with johnathan about the sales of the 70 because I think people would rather have 3 rows and have an extra two seats if need be than lack them for around the same price. Granted I was someone who got a cx9 and used the 3rd row once which was helpful because the cx5 was slightly too small. Then the cx50 came out and I thought it was the one but size wise it was just right, headroom was not there for me and honestly the interior was extremely cheap compared to the 9. Simply didn’t want a Mazda built by Toyota. So I waited for the cx70. And now here I am again dissapointed, I used the 3rd row once in the 9 and I prefer the sporty look of the 70 so will I ultimately consider it yes but I also understand this type of vehicle is a niche market at this point. Even when I looked at the cx90 there wasn’t anything “better” I should say than my cx9. It felt tighter upfront the steering wheel was significantly smaller, all the rows were about the same size and material quality felt worse despite putting all that leather on the dash. I don’t understand the engine lineup either, why put a bigger unrefined inline 6 in just to target the Germans, the performance oriented market, and quite honestly just get to say you have an i6, when it severely impacted the enjoyment of the car. They had a plenty power 4cyl that was reliable for ages, and smooth as butter but they had to overengineer and only put it into the phev which is just as unrefined thanks to the battery electric motor situation. In a household with a Volvo xc90 as well I will say the cx9 was very close to that luxury mark, and the cx90 is missing it when it’s supposed to be a competitor. Mazda needs a new 6 asap with the accord being a snoozefest now and the Camry getting that joke of a redesign , they would be able to capture the remainder of the consumer midsize sedan market if it’s anything like the Mazda 3. I’m sorry about the paragraph I just needed to voice my frustration, I simply want Mazda to do better. I’m extremely disappointed.
I was waiting for the CX-70 for what seemed forever, but alas my '08 Escape Hybrid died in October and I was forced to get the CX-90 instead. I've never had anyone in the 3rd row, but I do love my 90. My daughter continues to drive our 03 Protégé 5 Zoom Zoom.
I never used the 3rd row on my 2016 CX-9 Signature. There's a lot of people out there looking for towing and cargo capacity and never use that 3rd row, so this fits the bill. I do think it's a bit compromised as it uses that same awkward 3rd row window styling and still has the armrests and cupholders of the third row. Plus, without the third row, it would be better to have the spare mounted vertically and have the floor lowered for easier loading and increased cargo room, rather than a bunch of awkward to access underfloor compartments. While many are disappointed that it really isn't a new model, Mazda just got all the media attention a second year in a row for offering a CX-90 with a third row delete, so score one for the marketing department, and expect a CX-75 to come out that's a CX-70 with an ashtray! If they make up for not spending the additional to change what they should do for a unique model, by offering it at a substantial discount, then it gives the consumer a value. All Mazdas are small for their class, and those shopping for a 2 row will finally find a Mazda the largest in class, so I do think it will achieve a niche. No driving reviews are yet published, and if they match the sportier looks with a stiffer suspension and a quicker turning rack, then I think this is a great option. The CX-5 is overdue for a redesign. I wouldn't be surprised to see them offer a wide body cx-60 for North America to replace it. While different from the CX-60s offered elsewhere, it would fit their new nomenclature and CX-5 owners would have an option of migrating to the CX-50 or CX-60, so it may make better sense once the CX-5 is redesigned, and this North American CX-60 may be just exactly what so many were looking for, yet having a CX-70 as a sporty large midsize, rather than a fancy 3rd row CX-90 just strengthens their overall lineup.
You and none of the other reviewers have addressed the space in the seating. My question is since they have removed the third row did they push the second row back a little bit to give more legroom? Did they make the rails any longer on the driver seat to extend back for more legroom? And also I agree with you on the pillar. They should’ve made it a little different back there to make it a little bit better looking without really losing much cargo space.
Base Price of 70 must be at 37K or less , it should get its own suspension tune and engine turbo power tune , steering rack a bit quicker to be more of performance choice over 90 , otherwise and Specially if it does not and is just CX90 with 3rd row delete and same cargo space ... it is a fine line here... Front and rear bumper difference along with some cosmetics is not enough of difference
I feel that if the suspension or engine was tuned differently, Mazda certainly would have said so during the reveal. Unfortunately, I don't think there were any mechanical changes. At least not compared to the forthcoming 2025 CX-90.
If Mazda doesn’t price the CX70 competitively, it will lose the narrative and this SuV will fail. There aren’t enough middle class people and above with an empty nest that can pay for a 50-60k car… just because. If this is priced high, then a large portion of Mazda’s customer base will get the signal that Mazda is chasing other customers and will regrettably move to other brands
Jonathan, explain why Mazda doesn't bring to North America a smaller and potentially sportier version of these vehicles for the people that were expecting the CX70 to be this? In Europe it's called the CX60.
@@judyaustin8527 You said "it's more about drivetrain layout than size". If size doesn't matter, as you've argued, why should Mazda bring the CX-60 to the US? People can just get the CX-70 or CX-90.
This does leave room for the CX 60 to replace the aging 5 although they deny that. The CX60 platform will also make a great sport sedan that might bring back the 6. Especially now the 6 has been discontinued in Australia and Asia giving more production availability.
Dedicating over 12 minutes to discuss a tiny list of changes thay could have been addreessed in under two minutes. This marketing exercise by Mazda is embarrassing.
Great review! Most reviewers have been knocking the 70 for having the same dimensions as the 90, but I agree with you that more cargo space is a plus. I'd like to know how Mazda retunes the inline 6 to create 340 HP vs 280. Would you happen to know how that's done? If so, can you share those details?
I feel like it's a waste of resources for a small brand. I was hoping for a slighty bigger CX-60 or a sexy coupe-like styled CX-90. I'll wait for the next gen CX-5.
Its just too damn long for the interior size that can be provided by existing 2 row midsize crossovers. You cant design out the effect of a 200+ inch crossover. I cant see the 70 being more than 1k less than the 90 like for like. Live by design, die by design. Cx90 being smaller inside than its competitors puts it at a disadvantage even when removing the third row. It doesn't actually get as much an advantage against competition because smaller 3 rows have as much space inside as the 70 in 2 row config.
Ok, Jonathan, thanks for the info. I love the new red interior color, trim materials. I think that red would go very well with Machine Grey Metallic paint, but alas, that won't be available. (Zonk #1) It appears captain's chairs with the deep console storage won't be available (Zonk #2). It better be available in Soul Crystal Red Metallic or (Zonk #3). I like the blackout trim touches on the exterior, but don't care about black wheels. I like polished or chrome wheels anyway (I know, old school). I'm not concerned about the length because my 2018 Murano Platinum is 198" long, so no big deal. I won't do black paint or interior either. Not a fan of the Copper paint. Love the sub-cargo floor storage. I heard from another source the prices will be (on the Turbo S Premium Plus) roughly $4,000 less. I love the idea of Alexa voice recognition. So, if I can't get Machine Grey Metallic and I can't get Soul Crystal Red Metallic, then I'd get a CX-90 with the 6 passenger configuration and just leave the 3rd row down. 🤷♂️
If the price point is better I feel like this is a good luxurious option for our long travels. Would’ve liked a slightly shorter wheel base. But if I can save 3-5k than this is better than the cx90
The current CX70 is just a CX90 rear seat delete. Mazda did not need this CX70, nor the CX50, and instead just bring us the European CX60 that is RWD based with the CX90 powertrains, and a shorter wheelbase.
If they are within the same price range…the CX90 will be a better pick because you get more passenger capability and almost the same cargo capacity if you fold the third row seats.
The strongest feature of the CX-70 is they adopted the CX-90 powertrains... it's a great combo of performance and efficiency. My biggest complaint on the CX-70 is the design, and I think Jonathan nails it with the bubble butt back end. I'm okay with the longer wheelbase because the CX-90 does drive very well... but hell, you have enough cargo length to make it look more like a Porsche SUV than a CX-90 clone. It just reeks of lazy engineering. That being said, I think the CX-70 will be great for empty nesters that like to travel... and for families where you have a couple of teenage kids.
CX-70 has equal cargo capacity as CX-90 with 3rd row folded. Based on initial photos, there is a false floor - potential extension of CX-70 cargo space if you don't care for flat load floor.
I got to hand it to Sewell, he was warning last year the the CX-70 would be a CX-90 with the third row deleted -- not a US-spec CX-60 as Mazda itself led us to believe a few years earlier. A lot of us were skeptical of Sewell's prediction, couldn't believe Mazda would launch a two-row CX-90 under a whole new nameplate, but he was right. That said, the CX-70 we got is not the vehicle I wanted or expected -- much too big, too heavy, too expensive -- and I'm incredibly disappointed that Mazda hasn't addressed the CX-7-sized hole in its lineup. Went to the auto show this month and my wife took one look at the CX-90 before rejecting it out of hand owing to giantism, so -- heartbreaker -- Mazda is off our shopping list and we're instead scoping the Lexus NX, Toyota Crown Signia, new Buick Envision, maybe the reskinned Acura RDX. Sorry, Mazda, we'll be back in six or seven years to see if you've wised up.
Rear cargo capacity more important than taking the whole family? Let me get this straight? You add more luggage in the back and tie two kids to the roof?
Mazda mailed it in on this one. Really disappointed in this product and several of their latest efforts. It feels like Mazda is lost their way with their products… promising for the past two years for a hybrid CX50 (where is it), no design changes for the long-in-the-tooth CX5, a CX50 with abysmal fuel economy (very low 20’s in real-world driving), power trains that are antiquated (a 6 speed in 2024… really?). I have owned Mazdas for the past 30+ years, but I’m sorry to say that my next car apparently will not be a Mazda. The products just seem so uninspiring and behind the curve of other automakers products. (heck, even Jeep changed the wheelbase length on their Grand Cherokee models). Mazda needs to do better than just fancy paint colors and nice interiors…
I would like to believe that Mazda know what they are doing from marketing perspective by selling a a CX90 without the third row, I’m sure there will be people interested but the question is how many. I love the look and the different side that the black accents bring, that is how I would spec my CX90 but sadly is no possible. What really worries me with this Mazda move is the naming convention. It should of be called CX90S or CX90 Sport or maybe CX80. The right move to was a new product to sit between the CX5 and CX90 in size and equipment. I saw that they are working on a CX80 for European market that will be a CX60 with a third row (not sure if the source was trustable) but by using CX70 will now make no sense to have a new model smaller than a CX90 and called CX80, at least not for North America, the 70, 60 and 50 are taken, so what will be new? Only a brand new CX5 but that does not align with the new numbering. Only Mazda will know but this decision of the CX70 is confusing to say the least.
The CX-90 is a good car, and so the CX-70 should be too. And I had forgotten about the original CX-7, thats a good point. Ultimately its popularity will come down to pricing (assuming it's not getting any efficiency benefit with just the weight of the seat difference), but its hard to believe there will be much purchase savings. I think the frustration is that the CX-60 seemed like a sweet spot just above the CX-5/50, with the new CX-90 interior styling and positioned at the RDX. It probably still can be positioned against it, but with the same wheelbase as a larger vehicle it will be harder to argue they drive like on that smaller segment. As a non SUV buyer ultimately it is all moot to me. But i was hoping a CX-60/70 would have formed the basis for a Mazda6 on the platform. Now maybe I should expect a 929 on the 90's wheelbase 😂
That had to be a tough video to make. If you buy a CX70 you are an effect saying that there is no conceivable situation where you would need the third row. Mazda is competing with itself and muddying the waters as to what their flagship is.
My wife and I own a 2021 Acura RDX Advanced we are empty nesters but we have grandchildren who are coming into teen years and growth spurts. I am waiting for the CX-70 to arrive to my dealer. I drove the 90 and was impressed but the third row was still not needed for us. I think the added rear room will be perfect for us.
Man! I don’t know how to feel. At home we have the cx30 which to me is the best mazda suv to drive. It’s quick and so responsive i love that car, then we have the cx90 which we got from trading in our cx9 (my wife misses it) Now i feel Mazda got caught in the middle. The cx90 3rd Row is on the small side not comfortable they could’ve stretched it a few inches more and the cx70 could’ve had the cx9 dimensions for better drivability.
Amazing Mazda is sooo big they can afford to sell the 5/50 twins and the 70/90 twins. Maybe something in-between would be a good idea. Say a CX-60. Oh yeah they have that also but not for the tiny US market. ????
Car salesman in his element here... lol. He says he would pick a cx70 even though he has 6 people in his family. Just fold the 3rd row down in the 90.. just say mazda messed up. Its ok. Sometimes that happens.
I have to say it's kinda funny everyone saying cx70 has more cargo room than the cx90. My cx9 third row has been used maybe 5 times in 250000 miles. I was hoping for a shorter wb lighter and more efficient. I do light the Cx70 front facia. I would like exposed dual exhaust. I also need a vibrant blue like there red. You could get rid of the ugly tan...oh I mean zircon sand.
If the best selling Mazda is the cx5 it makes more sense to say cx70 will outsell the cx90 and also as it seems no decision has yet been made on the cx5 that could partly be why the cx70 is so much like the 90.. anyway for now I’m loving my cx50 zircon terracotta and all. Thanks for keeping us in the loop.im also hoping for a drive event in the cx70 and maybe convince my other half to upgrade
I have a feeling the CX 70 will be Mazda's most American leaning vehicle yet!!! Love my 2024 CX 5 Turbo Premium, but it's a little tight. The CX 50's interior just doesn't work with the cup holder placement, and I don't need 3 rows on the CX 90. Brilliant job, but the US needs the CX 60 as well.
I understand you gotta be a supporter since you sell Mazdas, but to tell it like the CX-70 is all good and trying to make it unique basically sets aside the 95% of the people and Mazda supporters that are completely let down by this lackluster and lazy vehicle.
There is an upside. You get a ton of cargo room, and Mazda can sell it to you for less because they obviously save a ton of cost by not having two actual models. I've seen so many comments saying that they wish this was the size of the X5, Jeep Grand Cherokee, etc. but if you compare the sizes they are really not all that different. It's generally about 6" of length between the in-between 5-seaters and the mid-size 7-seaters. That's 3-4% longer. I was also disappointed that there wasn't something all new and exciting. Actually there was one thing - it appears based on Canadian reviewer vids that Canada will be getting a top-trim CX70 PHEV, whereas they do not make a CX90 PHEV in the top trim. (If they did, I would own one already...)
I personally love it, I can understand some not liking it, but I think people love the drama, I just don't care what the vehicle is called, if it's something I like and it meets my expectations, great. If it doesn't meet your expectations, look for one that does or wait for one and leave the childishness and drama behind and enjoy life.
@@michaelp.3485 Yes, yes it is, just enough to say that when something does not meet your expectations you turn around and choose what is best for you, that seems much more sensible and mature to me than complaining on CZcams.
@@samaguilarestradaThat is no different than you posting on CZcams how much you love it. Different opinions. This will all come out in the wash when sales are published later this year. I suspect with the CX70 priced the same as the 90 Mazda will be in for a rude awakening.
Yeah no thanks! This was a huge disappointment! The car feels like your driving a boat it’s absolutely huge! And that back end is absolutely awful! They need to bring over the cx60. Also no black rim for it … awful
If this car is priced right then the CX 70 is for me! I am an SUV girl. But i don't really have a NEED for a V8 gas guzzling 3 row SUV that i have now. So now that the kids are older and only 1 minor is in the house, this car is perfect. I want an SUV and I'm ready to downgrade from a large one to a midsize one. I need it to have lots of cargo space for luggage and groceries and trips to Home Depot. I love the look of the CX 9 but didn't really need a third row that everyone was saying was virtually unusable anyway. I like the thought of 2nd row captain seats but the seat in the cx 70 will actually work better because I'm able to put a 3rd person in the back seat if needed and it will actually be comfortable for them. The only thing that could stop me from getting this over the 90 is the price. If i can get the top trim for $40 something grand, its sold!
The CX-70 is the perfect vehicle for those who want a CX-90 without a 3rd row. Many that hear the CX-90 has a 3rd row won’t look at it or consider it believing they are paying for something they don’t need. Price point of the CX-70 is key. I believe if it is in the $2,800 less range, it will sell well.
lol, bunch of whiners in this crowd.😂 All 1st world problems, as they say. So, tell me the price and color/trim options … only then will I vote with my wallet! 🥸😺
Mazda blew it, all they had to do is adapt the CX-60 for the North America market and call it a day. What a disappointment.
The CX70 is not distinguishable enough to warrant another new SUV. It's a lazy effort. No thanks.
100% agree!
You said it perfectly
Exactly
I’m all in! More cargo room, big plus for me!
@@markfoster7564 2% max additional.
Gotta say, I was one of the ones who thought there was no chance the CX-70 would just be a two-row -90. Whoops. I still think it's a huge mistake to not have a shorter wheelbase RWD-platform option here.
Absolutely 100% correct. All other commentary is just fluff....
If they made it shorter than people would complain why it is not the biggest cargo in the class , as with all other Mazdas ...
This is such a miss. Why not just give us the CX-60? Also, they could’ve just done a third row delete option for the CX-90.
@@ozzielara2337 CX60 is also narrower and much shorter ,all haters would bash it for no room... CX70 pricing will be the key , if priced from 37K to say 52K than it will make lot more sense, also they should tune the suspension and steering for performance while give it slightly more psi boost for better power than CX90
@@kdomster9141 did you know all the difference in width between 60 and 90 went to the fenders and wheels? The cabin is identical in width. 90 has wider wheels/tires and more pronounced fender flares around the wheel well. That's it.
Such a mistake. I was seriously considering the CX70. Not anymore. I want something bigger than the CX5 and smaller than the CX90. Big miss.
100%!
exactly. i just need a cx-5 that can fit rear facing car seats and enough cargo room for a stroller and a costco run :( i decided last year to go with a crv for that very reason, and had high hopes for the 70. so disappointed
Yup I have a 50 and I hate it now I’m officially moving to another brand
@@RealKevGotEm why do you hate the 50?
@@Genuinelycuri0us the transmission is not smooth and will not downshift when u need to quickly accelerate
Just bring over the CX-60. Mazda would sell a ton.
Jonathan letting his salesman colors shine through on this one. Disappointed overall. This is a miss on Mazda.
As a Mazda fan, I am very disappointed with this new vehicle. I was hoping to get something with similar dimensions as Europe's CX60. I am sorry but this CX70 is simply way too big. Big miss by Mazda in my opinion. I am considering now a 2024 Honda Passport trailsport....
I hope Mazda is watching the feedback. Many of us don't want a two row CX90. I was expecting something to compete with the X5 or Grand Cherokee to replace our GLE450.
Mazda - send us a CX60 and call it the CX70 Sport
Or, uh, send us the CX-60 and call it the CX-60? Idk. Maybe I'm crazy.
@@FeLiX13sLaVe regards of what it's called, Mazda missed the mark in my opinion. The current CX90's platform is not a midsized competitor
@@timw2083 well, CX-60 and CX-90 are the same platform. But I agree, the CX-70 is way too long. Had they shortened the wheelbase a bit, it would have been a far more compelling product for most buyers.
@@FeLiX13sLaVe yeap.. you're right the platform architecture is the same. I was simply disappointed with this choice for the CX70. I'm a Mazda fan and want to see them as a relevant alternative to the luxury brands
@@timw2083 agreed. The CX-70 is 6" to 10" too long compared to its competition. Sad that Mazda will likely never give us a true midsize two-row.
I was really excited for the CX-70. I had 2017 GT CX-5 and now have 2021 Signature CX-5. I was really hoping for a model that would of course be a bit larger and more luxurious, as an upgrade from the CX-5 as I get more advanced in age and career. BUT I am pretty disappointed about Mazda’s choice to just do a CX-90 with 2 rows. The CX-90 is way too long for my garage and for everyday use in a crowded suburban area; I was hoping the CX-70 would have been at most 190” long. I am by no means a hater as I also have a 2016 MX-5 and bought my mom a CX-50, so really a Mazda lover. Just no way I could upgrade which had been my plan (was really looking forward to the PHEV) unless I move and get a bigger garage.
Valid points, I was hoping it would be similar to the CX-60 as it’s a pretty good size not too big or small in my opinion.
Jonathon, I like all your videos but this video seemed a little off to me. 1.) you got six people in your family and your still choosing the CX70 🫤.
2.) you keep mentioning extra cargo space. How is it anymore than the Cx90 with seats down? The storage under the floorboard is okay but those will be for items that you don’t need to use often because in order to get to that area, you have to lift the floor board all the up meaning you gotta shuffle your existing cargo to get to it so this review/video throws me off a little. Sorry man, just keeping it real. Keep up the good work.
I noticed those 2 things too. I get that he’s a salesman and it’s his job, but it seems like he was forcing/faking it. I was looking forward to a smaller cx70 but I guess I’m buying my cx9 lease for now. At least I have the flexibility of folding the rear seats down. I often leave them up solely for easier reaching lesser cargo from the rear, not because anyone’s sitting in them.
I think it will really come down to the price difference between the CX-70 and 90 and how much more cargo space there is in the CX-70 compared to folding down the third row on the 90. Also, I question if people wanting only a 5 passenger vehicle would really want it to be 201" long and so large in general.
Well, the CX-70 pricing is $3k higher than the CX-90, so there's that...
This CX-70 is a complete waste! I was expecting a new vehicle along the lines of the Euro spec CX-60 in dimensions! Dumbest move ever by Mazda!
100%!
Cx70 is such a disappointment, it'll flop.
I get why Mitchell has to hype up the CX-70, but this is borderline fraud by Mazda. A 3rd row delete, minor cosmetic changes front & rear, and different paint options is NOT a new model; it should at most be a trim level for CX-90. The CX-70 should be a CX-60 with US specs and safety gear. This is actually worse than claiming the CX-50 Meridian is an off-road vehicle. Very disappointed as it looks like my CX-9 will be the last Mazda in my garage for a while.
Wow. What a crybaby.
Because a car manufacturer decided to name a variant of a vehicle with a new model name is hardly borderline fraud.
@@jdm1039 No, not fraud, but a big disappointment.
I get that you're tryping to hype up the CX-70, but I still think its stupid of Mazda to pretend this is a different model. I get that Mazda is a small company and may not have the resources to develop & build another model right now. But they should have reserved the CX-70 name for a future vehicle to fill the size void between the 50 and 90, as the name implies. Thats what so many of us were expecting and have been waiting for. And I suspect it would actually outsell the CX-90.
I will wait for the redesign CX5 instead
Me too! Hopefully a hybrid!
Yes, you, me and everyone else.
And hopefully an upgraded all touch screen that is bigger. The current one is too small and a bit too far away for Car Play usage. Its the main reason I have not purchased a Mazda.
Car and Driver is right. Mazda is saving money by not making a new model and this will likely harm the sales of the CX70 making this a gamble that won't pay off. Every comments sections is flooded with disappointment at this missed opportunity to make an exciting new shorter model to fit between cx50 and cx90 length. That would have competed directly with the luxury brand 2 row SUV/CUVs.
HUGE miss, too big for a 2 row.. heard mazda didn't want to be subjected to additional testing and certification so they used the exact same model and changed the name. Should have made it smaller by 8-10", and improved handling and dynamics. They could have made it roomier by better packaging the interior, like other brands with smaller exterior dimensions but roomier interiors than mazdas.
I grabbed my cx90 when I heard the cx-70 might be the same size and platform... several friends interested in a smaller cx70 have now passed and went elsewhere.. despite loving my cx90 looks and all.. they all wanted a smaller exterior but everything the same.. so did i... hope it's not a flop
My take…. Mazda got cold feet here and had to pivot…. CX-5 sales are still on fire, regardless of the recent addition of the cx-50. CX-90 is beautiful, but doesn’t have the mass appeal. CX-5: The plans to fade it out became questionable, so internally they debated whether/how they need to keep it rolling as a cash cow. Quickest way to reallocate funds for refresh is to stop work on a US version (cx-60), make an impromptu CX-70 (90 minus 3rd row) for little to no investment. Buys the time and $$ to figure out plan B for what the new cx5 looks like and get that ramped. Or - maybe the US planned cx60 (70) wasn’t quite up to the level (refinement) they needed it to be to put a stamp on the BMW x3? The reality here is that if they do it right, and build a true X3 competitor for $5-10k less, they’ll sell the crap out of them. Maybe taking a little grief over this questionable cx70 weirdness to get it right for what everyone was hoping for (me included), was the better short term path? I don’t like it a bit - disappointed and just doesn’t make sense. Certain they’re taking notes from the reactions from all…. Hopefully there’s more to come…. My wife has a cx50 PM turbo premium, my work car is a 2016 cx5 GT…. We were both hoping for the “right-sized” x3 fighter.
It’s nice looking. It’s just too large for a 2 row SUV. 200 inches long is just too big. But yes it will have a lot of cargo room. If one needs that much. Will be very curious to see how it sells.
Don’t know how anyone can justify this decision. It’s just awful. Why would you ever buy it when you could get the 90 and fold the seats down. You never know when you could use those seats. The price difference will be negligible. Very disappointing. I now have to look at a rav 4 hybrid. Not what I wanted but…
I searched the internet and found similar photos of the CX-70 cargo area and CX-90 cargo area with the third row seat folded down. It was highly disappointing to see that the space is practically identical. Sure, CX-70 has some additional shallow storage under the floor if you want to empty everything out of the cargo area so you can fuss with the cargo floor to access it. Personally, I would just rather have the CX-90 and keep the third row folded down most of the time until an extra seat or two comes in handy. There are occasions where just one additional seat makes the difference between taking one car or two. And the CX-90 also has the flexibility to fold down half of the third row to offer a combination of more cargo space plus that additional seat. I understand that the savings on R&D is substantial by giving us a two-row version of the CX-90. But they could've just added the new paint colors, wheels, and interior color to the 90 and given the North American market the CX-60 instead. That saves a substantial amount of R&D as well, plus gives us a crossover with all of the new large platform mechanical attributes and new interior in a package that fits in my garage.
Just my opinion, but that really sounds like a dumb idea to make indistinguishable models from each other and have different names. The 70 should have been somewhat smaller overall.
Mazda should have delayed the CX-70 until they were ready to put out a model that’s actually different. In the interim, they could have put out a two-row only CX-90, if they felt a need to do so. But to have all this publicity and have people, especially fans of the brand, anticipate a new model only to get another trim of the CX-90 is disingenuous at best.
I get that they didn't have the R&D to create an entirely new vehicle but the lack of differentiation to the cx-90 is head scratching. It's just the same car with cosmetic changes and no third row. And the d pillar is pretty infamous to many so it's surprising they didn't do anything about that. Time will tell whether it was a good move or not. Certainly lost a buyer in me. I'm on 4 Mazdas but something else is next
I’m disappointed in the direction Mazda has taken especially considering they were doing so well years ago. Almost seems like they are not in the right headspace anymore. The 17 cx5 cx9 and the 19 Mazda 3 feel as though it’s the pinnacle of their work. Ever since they started collaborating with other brands and forcefully moving up market thier priorities have changed and it’s watered down the lineup and the cost cutting is clear. I have to disagree with johnathan about the sales of the 70 because I think people would rather have 3 rows and have an extra two seats if need be than lack them for around the same price. Granted I was someone who got a cx9 and used the 3rd row once which was helpful because the cx5 was slightly too small. Then the cx50 came out and I thought it was the one but size wise it was just right, headroom was not there for me and honestly the interior was extremely cheap compared to the 9. Simply didn’t want a Mazda built by Toyota. So I waited for the cx70. And now here I am again dissapointed, I used the 3rd row once in the 9 and I prefer the sporty look of the 70 so will I ultimately consider it yes but I also understand this type of vehicle is a niche market at this point. Even when I looked at the cx90 there wasn’t anything “better” I should say than my cx9. It felt tighter upfront the steering wheel was significantly smaller, all the rows were about the same size and material quality felt worse despite putting all that leather on the dash. I don’t understand the engine lineup either, why put a bigger unrefined inline 6 in just to target the Germans, the performance oriented market, and quite honestly just get to say you have an i6, when it severely impacted the enjoyment of the car. They had a plenty power 4cyl that was reliable for ages, and smooth as butter but they had to overengineer and only put it into the phev which is just as unrefined thanks to the battery electric motor situation. In a household with a Volvo xc90 as well I will say the cx9 was very close to that luxury mark, and the cx90 is missing it when it’s supposed to be a competitor. Mazda needs a new 6 asap with the accord being a snoozefest now and the Camry getting that joke of a redesign , they would be able to capture the remainder of the consumer midsize sedan market if it’s anything like the Mazda 3. I’m sorry about the paragraph I just needed to voice my frustration, I simply want Mazda to do better. I’m extremely disappointed.
I don't mind at all that the proportions are the same, but I do mind that the looks aren't different enough to distinguish cx70 v. cx90
I was waiting for the CX-70 for what seemed forever, but alas my '08 Escape Hybrid died in October and I was forced to get the CX-90 instead. I've never had anyone in the 3rd row, but I do love my 90. My daughter continues to drive our 03 Protégé 5 Zoom Zoom.
just get a cx-90, fold down the 3rd row. and there you go, you have cx-70. ppl are overthinking this
I never used the 3rd row on my 2016 CX-9 Signature. There's a lot of people out there looking for towing and cargo capacity and never use that 3rd row, so this fits the bill.
I do think it's a bit compromised as it uses that same awkward 3rd row window styling and still has the armrests and cupholders of the third row. Plus, without the third row, it would be better to have the spare mounted vertically and have the floor lowered for easier loading and increased cargo room, rather than a bunch of awkward to access underfloor compartments. While many are disappointed that it really isn't a new model, Mazda just got all the media attention a second year in a row for offering a CX-90 with a third row delete, so score one for the marketing department, and expect a CX-75 to come out that's a CX-70 with an ashtray!
If they make up for not spending the additional to change what they should do for a unique model, by offering it at a substantial discount, then it gives the consumer a value. All Mazdas are small for their class, and those shopping for a 2 row will finally find a Mazda the largest in class, so I do think it will achieve a niche. No driving reviews are yet published, and if they match the sportier looks with a stiffer suspension and a quicker turning rack, then I think this is a great option.
The CX-5 is overdue for a redesign. I wouldn't be surprised to see them offer a wide body cx-60 for North America to replace it. While different from the CX-60s offered elsewhere, it would fit their new nomenclature and CX-5 owners would have an option of migrating to the CX-50 or CX-60, so it may make better sense once the CX-5 is redesigned, and this North American CX-60 may be just exactly what so many were looking for, yet having a CX-70 as a sporty large midsize, rather than a fancy 3rd row CX-90 just strengthens their overall lineup.
You and none of the other reviewers have addressed the space in the seating. My question is since they have removed the third row did they push the second row back a little bit to give more legroom? Did they make the rails any longer on the driver seat to extend back for more legroom? And also I agree with you on the pillar. They should’ve made it a little different back there to make it a little bit better looking without really losing much cargo space.
Base Price of 70 must be at 37K or less , it should get its own suspension tune and engine turbo power tune , steering rack a bit quicker to be more of performance choice over 90 , otherwise and Specially if it does not and is just CX90 with 3rd row delete and same cargo space ... it is a fine line here...
Front and rear bumper difference along with some cosmetics is not enough of difference
I feel that if the suspension or engine was tuned differently, Mazda certainly would have said so during the reveal. Unfortunately, I don't think there were any mechanical changes. At least not compared to the forthcoming 2025 CX-90.
But the pricing on CX-70 has been announced and is $3k higher than the CX-90.
@@rlsedition it is not , look again .
Mazda just lowered prices on CX90 so it is now priced the same as CX70
If Mazda doesn’t price the CX70 competitively, it will lose the narrative and this SuV will fail.
There aren’t enough middle class people and above with an empty nest that can pay for a 50-60k car… just because.
If this is priced high, then a large portion of Mazda’s customer base will get the signal that Mazda is chasing other customers and will regrettably move to other brands
I was gonna get a 70 when it came out next year and get rid of my 50 which I hate. Now I’m officially going else where
Jonathan, explain why Mazda doesn't bring to North America a smaller and potentially sportier version of these vehicles for the people that were expecting the CX70 to be this? In Europe it's called the CX60.
More to do with drivetrain layout than size, what's your point? @@sunlover5150
@@judyaustin8527 CX-90 and CX-60 share platforms and drivetrains. Same engines, same transmissions.
@@FeLiX13sLaVe That's right, and what is your point?
@@judyaustin8527 You said "it's more about drivetrain layout than size". If size doesn't matter, as you've argued, why should Mazda bring the CX-60 to the US? People can just get the CX-70 or CX-90.
@@FeLiX13sLaVe No, it IS about size; this CX-70 is too big.
This does leave room for the CX 60 to replace the aging 5 although they deny that. The CX60 platform will also make a great sport sedan that might bring back the 6. Especially now the 6 has been discontinued in Australia and Asia giving more production availability.
Dedicating over 12 minutes to discuss a tiny list of changes thay could have been addreessed in under two minutes. This marketing exercise by Mazda is embarrassing.
Great review! Most reviewers have been knocking the 70 for having the same dimensions as the 90, but I agree with you that more cargo space is a plus. I'd like to know how Mazda retunes the inline 6 to create 340 HP vs 280. Would you happen to know how that's done? If so, can you share those details?
I feel like it's a waste of resources for a small brand. I was hoping for a slighty bigger CX-60 or a sexy coupe-like styled CX-90. I'll wait for the next gen CX-5.
Should have been 7-8" shorter, this one is cx-88.
Its just too damn long for the interior size that can be provided by existing 2 row midsize crossovers. You cant design out the effect of a 200+ inch crossover.
I cant see the 70 being more than 1k less than the 90 like for like.
Live by design, die by design. Cx90 being smaller inside than its competitors puts it at a disadvantage even when removing the third row. It doesn't actually get as much an advantage against competition because smaller 3 rows have as much space inside as the 70 in 2 row config.
Only price could save cx70 in my opinion.
“A super sized CX-5”. I think perfect for the CX-5 owner who wants more. More power and cargo space. RWD is the icing on the cake!
When are they going to renew and redo the CX5
Zircon Sand or Melting Copper with RED interior!… the configurator lets you do that… for those who want an extra special CX-70
Ok, Jonathan, thanks for the info. I love the new red interior color, trim materials. I think that red would go very well with Machine Grey Metallic paint, but alas, that won't be available. (Zonk #1) It appears captain's chairs with the deep console storage won't be available (Zonk #2). It better be available in Soul Crystal Red Metallic or (Zonk #3). I like the blackout trim touches on the exterior, but don't care about black wheels. I like polished or chrome wheels anyway (I know, old school). I'm not concerned about the length because my 2018 Murano Platinum is 198" long, so no big deal. I won't do black paint or interior either. Not a fan of the Copper paint. Love the sub-cargo floor storage. I heard from another source the prices will be (on the Turbo S Premium Plus) roughly $4,000 less. I love the idea of Alexa voice recognition. So, if I can't get Machine Grey Metallic and I can't get Soul Crystal Red Metallic, then I'd get a CX-90 with the 6 passenger configuration and just leave the 3rd row down. 🤷♂️
If the price point is better I feel like this is a good luxurious option for our long travels. Would’ve liked a slightly shorter wheel base. But if I can save 3-5k than this is better than the cx90
I'd be interested if it was about the same size as a 2 row Jeep Grand Cherokee.
I read about the CX-90 having 5 recalls…some very important to safety! Have these issues been solved in the CX-70?
The current CX70 is just a CX90 rear seat delete. Mazda did not need this CX70, nor the CX50, and instead just bring us the European CX60 that is RWD based with the CX90 powertrains, and a shorter wheelbase.
They should have made it its own identity. Different front and rear end (different head/tail lights). And the interior should have also been changed!
If they are within the same price range…the CX90 will be a better pick because you get more passenger capability and almost the same cargo capacity if you fold the third row seats.
So: no machine gray and no ivory seats? There goes my configurator. 😢
The strongest feature of the CX-70 is they adopted the CX-90 powertrains... it's a great combo of performance and efficiency. My biggest complaint on the CX-70 is the design, and I think Jonathan nails it with the bubble butt back end. I'm okay with the longer wheelbase because the CX-90 does drive very well... but hell, you have enough cargo length to make it look more like a Porsche SUV than a CX-90 clone. It just reeks of lazy engineering. That being said, I think the CX-70 will be great for empty nesters that like to travel... and for families where you have a couple of teenage kids.
CX-70 has equal cargo capacity as CX-90 with 3rd row folded. Based on initial photos, there is a false floor - potential extension of CX-70 cargo space if you don't care for flat load floor.
I got to hand it to Sewell, he was warning last year the the CX-70 would be a CX-90 with the third row deleted -- not a US-spec CX-60 as Mazda itself led us to believe a few years earlier. A lot of us were skeptical of Sewell's prediction, couldn't believe Mazda would launch a two-row CX-90 under a whole new nameplate, but he was right. That said, the CX-70 we got is not the vehicle I wanted or expected -- much too big, too heavy, too expensive -- and I'm incredibly disappointed that Mazda hasn't addressed the CX-7-sized hole in its lineup. Went to the auto show this month and my wife took one look at the CX-90 before rejecting it out of hand owing to giantism, so -- heartbreaker -- Mazda is off our shopping list and we're instead scoping the Lexus NX, Toyota Crown Signia, new Buick Envision, maybe the reskinned Acura RDX. Sorry, Mazda, we'll be back in six or seven years to see if you've wised up.
Rear cargo capacity more important than taking the whole family? Let me get this straight? You add more luggage in the back and tie two kids to the roof?
Hey Jonathan is the mazda cx70 built in Japan? Can you give me the power train and starting price for the us.
What they need is a new CX-30 that is larger and more coupe styled -- like the Buick Envista.
Agreed they went the cheap way out...I guess they consider the size of the CX-60/CX-80 market to be greater?
Good point on the back roof 💯
Mazda mailed it in on this one. Really disappointed in this product and several of their latest efforts. It feels like Mazda is lost their way with their products… promising for the past two years for a hybrid CX50 (where is it), no design changes for the long-in-the-tooth CX5, a CX50 with abysmal fuel economy (very low 20’s in real-world driving), power trains that are antiquated (a 6 speed in 2024… really?). I have owned Mazdas for the past 30+ years, but I’m sorry to say that my next car apparently will not be a Mazda. The products just seem so uninspiring and behind the curve of other automakers products. (heck, even Jeep changed the wheelbase length on their Grand Cherokee models). Mazda needs to do better than just fancy paint colors and nice interiors…
I just wish the 70 had its own look. It's a twin brother...
I would like to believe that Mazda know what they are doing from marketing perspective by selling a a CX90 without the third row, I’m sure there will be people interested but the question is how many. I love the look and the different side that the black accents bring, that is how I would spec my CX90 but sadly is no possible. What really worries me with this Mazda move is the naming convention. It should of be called CX90S or CX90 Sport or maybe CX80. The right move to was a new product to sit between the CX5 and CX90 in size and equipment. I saw that they are working on a CX80 for European market that will be a CX60 with a third row (not sure if the source was trustable) but by using CX70 will now make no sense to have a new model smaller than a CX90 and called CX80, at least not for North America, the 70, 60 and 50 are taken, so what will be new? Only a brand new CX5 but that does not align with the new numbering. Only Mazda will know but this decision of the CX70 is confusing to say the least.
You make the car go.
I'll be the cargo drama!
🚙 Zoom-Zoom 🚙💨
I have a great idea; buy the CX-90 and fold the 3rd row down🤦🏾♂️. Mazda missed extremely with this.😢
The CX-90 is a good car, and so the CX-70 should be too. And I had forgotten about the original CX-7, thats a good point. Ultimately its popularity will come down to pricing (assuming it's not getting any efficiency benefit with just the weight of the seat difference), but its hard to believe there will be much purchase savings.
I think the frustration is that the CX-60 seemed like a sweet spot just above the CX-5/50, with the new CX-90 interior styling and positioned at the RDX. It probably still can be positioned against it, but with the same wheelbase as a larger vehicle it will be harder to argue they drive like on that smaller segment.
As a non SUV buyer ultimately it is all moot to me. But i was hoping a CX-60/70 would have formed the basis for a Mazda6 on the platform. Now maybe I should expect a 929 on the 90's wheelbase 😂
I thought it would be a little more affordable
That had to be a tough video to make. If you buy a CX70 you are an effect saying that there is no conceivable situation where you would need the third row. Mazda is competing with itself and muddying the waters as to what their flagship is.
My wife and I own a 2021 Acura RDX Advanced we are empty nesters but we have grandchildren who are coming into teen years and growth spurts. I am waiting for the CX-70 to arrive to my dealer. I drove the 90 and was impressed but the third row was still not needed for us. I think the added rear room will be perfect for us.
Wish it looked more like the cx60..big miss for mazda
Man! I don’t know how to feel. At home we have the cx30 which to me is the best mazda suv to drive. It’s quick and so responsive i love that car, then we have the cx90 which we got from trading in our cx9 (my wife misses it) Now i feel Mazda got caught in the middle. The cx90 3rd Row is on the small side not comfortable they could’ve stretched it a few inches more and the cx70 could’ve had the cx9 dimensions for better drivability.
Great Report once again, thx
The CX-70 should have been called the CX-90 Carbon Edition.
Amazing Mazda is sooo big they can afford to sell the 5/50 twins and the 70/90 twins. Maybe something in-between would be a good idea. Say a CX-60. Oh yeah they have that also but not for the tiny US market. ????
So much for the pricing check. Same price.
Car salesman in his element here... lol. He says he would pick a cx70 even though he has 6 people in his family. Just fold the 3rd row down in the 90.. just say mazda messed up. Its ok. Sometimes that happens.
I'm very excited about the CX-70. I may purchase one depending on the price and the trims
I've got a question about the need for a turbo isn't that enough power. Not totally sold on turbos and can't see where it's needed case
I have to say it's kinda funny everyone saying cx70 has more cargo room than the cx90. My cx9 third row has been used maybe 5 times in 250000 miles. I was hoping for a shorter wb lighter and more efficient. I do light the Cx70 front facia. I would like exposed dual exhaust. I also need a vibrant blue like there red. You could get rid of the ugly tan...oh I mean zircon sand.
If the best selling Mazda is the cx5 it makes more sense to say cx70 will outsell the cx90 and also as it seems no decision has yet been made on the cx5 that could partly be why the cx70 is so much like the 90.. anyway for now I’m loving my cx50 zircon terracotta and all. Thanks for keeping us in the loop.im also hoping for a drive event in the cx70 and maybe convince my other half to upgrade
it's the weakest effort by Mazda in a very long time. maybe ever.
I have a feeling the CX 70 will be Mazda's most American leaning vehicle yet!!! Love my 2024 CX 5 Turbo Premium, but it's a little tight. The CX 50's interior just doesn't work with the cup holder placement, and I don't need 3 rows on the CX 90. Brilliant job, but the US needs the CX 60 as well.
I understand you gotta be a supporter since you sell Mazdas, but to tell it like the CX-70 is all good and trying to make it unique basically sets aside the 95% of the people and Mazda supporters that are completely let down by this lackluster and lazy vehicle.
Nope too big, might have considered it too.
What everyone wants is a hybrid CX5. I hope Mazda would make that.
There is an upside. You get a ton of cargo room, and Mazda can sell it to you for less because they obviously save a ton of cost by not having two actual models. I've seen so many comments saying that they wish this was the size of the X5, Jeep Grand Cherokee, etc. but if you compare the sizes they are really not all that different. It's generally about 6" of length between the in-between 5-seaters and the mid-size 7-seaters. That's 3-4% longer. I was also disappointed that there wasn't something all new and exciting. Actually there was one thing - it appears based on Canadian reviewer vids that Canada will be getting a top-trim CX70 PHEV, whereas they do not make a CX90 PHEV in the top trim. (If they did, I would own one already...)
So when you go on a trip with the 70, the wife stays home? 😂
No,he ties the kids to the roof.
Mazda should have bought over the CX 60
I personally love it, I can understand some not liking it, but I think people love the drama, I just don't care what the vehicle is called, if it's something I like and it meets my expectations, great. If it doesn't meet your expectations, look for one that does or wait for one and leave the childishness and drama behind and enjoy life.
People voicing their disappointment in the CX70 is not childish and not being dramatic.
@@michaelp.3485 Yes, yes it is, just enough to say that when something does not meet your expectations you turn around and choose what is best for you, that seems much more sensible and mature to me than complaining on CZcams.
@@samaguilarestradaThat is no different than you posting on CZcams how much you love it. Different opinions. This will all come out in the wash when sales are published later this year. I suspect with the CX70 priced the same as the 90 Mazda will be in for a rude awakening.
@@JackSmith-qi7dr To be honest, I don't care. People need to focus more on the positive, have a great day.
So which kid are you booting out of the family?
Very silly and very stupid. It’s the same vehicle
Yeah no thanks! This was a huge disappointment! The car feels like your driving a boat it’s absolutely huge! And that back end is absolutely awful! They need to bring over the cx60. Also no black rim for it … awful
I’ve seen better futuristic designs for the CX, 70 and other Mazda products, and what Mazda comes up with
If this car is priced right then the CX 70 is for me! I am an SUV girl. But i don't really have a NEED for a V8 gas guzzling 3 row SUV that i have now. So now that the kids are older and only 1 minor is in the house, this car is perfect. I want an SUV and I'm ready to downgrade from a large one to a midsize one. I need it to have lots of cargo space for luggage and groceries and trips to Home Depot. I love the look of the CX 9 but didn't really need a third row that everyone was saying was virtually unusable anyway. I like the thought of 2nd row captain seats but the seat in the cx 70 will actually work better because I'm able to put a 3rd person in the back seat if needed and it will actually be comfortable for them. The only thing that could stop me from getting this over the 90 is the price. If i can get the top trim for $40 something grand, its sold!
How does 58k grab you? Huge delta between that and the $40k you were hoping for.
bait and switch by mazda, it's a 90 without the 3rd row. pass
The CX-70 is the perfect vehicle for those who want a CX-90 without a 3rd row. Many that hear the CX-90 has a 3rd row won’t look at it or consider it believing they are paying for something they don’t need. Price point of the CX-70 is key. I believe if it is in the $2,800 less range, it will sell well.
Same price
lol, bunch of whiners in this crowd.😂 All 1st world problems, as they say. So, tell me the price and color/trim options … only then will I vote with my wallet! 🥸😺
We also have first world cost of living to deal with.
Go to the Mazda configurator. It’s all there.