A report from Just-Auto suggests that the next Mazda2 will “use [a] downsized CX-5 platform”. While this is technically true, the headline is a bit misleading.

The platform used by the Mazda CX-5 is the same platform that underpins the Mazda6 as well as the upcoming Mazda3. Not only will Mazda be using it to underpin the Mazda2, but it looks like all of their future transverse, front-drive cars will adopt it. This is great news for anyone who likes to drive, as every vehicle so far that uses it is a superb car to drive.

This is also good news for Toyota. The next iteration of their Yaris is supposed to be built by Mazda using the Mazda2 platform at the company’s new Mexican factory. The Yaris is a bit of a dull drive to say the least, but if it really is sharing Mazda’s new scalable architecture, that should change things quite dramatically. The ability to amortize the costs of one architecture across multiple product lines should also be a huge help to Mazda. As Japan’s last “independent” auto maker, keeping its costs under control is crucial in an era of consolidation and shaky economic fundamentals.

Mazda, the favorite car brand of enthusiasts that few seem to actually buy, looks set to become profitable for the first time in five years.

With Mazda so heavily reliant on exporting their Japan made cars, the recent weakening of the yen will no doubt help their financial fortunes. Naturally, Mazda is also playing up the success of their new models which feature the still-bizarre sounding Skyactiv technology.

According to a report in the Wall Street Journal, ork on Skyactiv began in 2006, with Mazda engineers tasked with creating a new platform and powertrain from the ground up. The 2008 financial crisis was a particularly trying time for Mazda executive VP Seita Kanai, who told the Journal

“There were many times when I lost my ability to think” after looking at quarter after quarter of dismal numbers,”

At that point, Mazda executives began to second guess if their bet on gasoline and diesel engines (rather than hybrids and other advanced powertrains) was the right choice. Kanai, however, decided to bring Skyactiv to market prematurely, putting the new powertrains (but not the lightweight platforms) in versions of the Mazda2 and Mazda3.

Since we’ve been discussing Mazda the past few days, Timothy Cain, TTAC’s favorite indepndent sales analyst, has taken a look at how well the much-loved Mazda CX-5 is doing. 

From Mazda’s point of view, the CX-5 has likely been a roaring success. But Mazda’s point of view doesn’t require success to be measured against other popular vehicles. Other than the 3, Mazda simply does not sell a high-volume product. Even the 3, which accounted for 45% of Mazda sales in the U.S. in 2012, sells once for every two-and-a-half Civics.

To understand the CX-5′s success, you have to understand that Mazda, as a whole, sold fewer vehicles in 2012 than Honda sold Civics. 40,863 fewer, in fact.

So when we say the CX-5 is a roaring success, that’s because it’s not forgettable like the old Escape’s Tribute twin, poorly marketed like the surprisingly fun 5 mini-minivan, or awkwardly sized and priced like the CX-7. Compared with its classmates – Escape, CR-V, Rogue, Forester, for example – the CX-5 has been mostly ignored since it went on sale last February. The CX-5 outsold the Jeep Compass last year, and the Volkswagen Tiguan, and Mitsubishi’s small crossover duo. But even the GMC Terrain sold more than twice as often as the CX-5.

Measuring success on Mazda’s in-house success-ometer, the CX-5 is popular enough to be considered a vital part of the family. With only ten full months on the market, the CX-5 outsold all Mazdas save for the 3, and did so by a hefty margin, beating the soon-to-be-replaced 6 by 9563 units.

The CX-5 accounted for nearly 16% of Mazda USA volume in 2012. Good, right? Unfortunately, “good” at Mazda equals “alright” everywhere else. The CX-5 was America’s 88th-best-selling nameplate last year, behind the Toyota 4Runner, Subaru Legacy, BMW X5, and Fiat 500, to name a few.

TTAC readers, this is the one you’ve been waiting for; a fun-to-drive, lightweight, stick-shift sports sedan that doesn’t require a home equity loan to purchase. Now, the question is, will anyone buy it?

A year ago, Jack Baruth had the opportunity to take a Mazda CX-5 around Laguna Seca, and was effusive in his praise. “Heresy!”, I thought. “How can a crossover be better than a wagon?” Turns out Jack was right. The higher seating position and raised ground clearance had no negative effects. The CX-5 may have been a bit pokey in a straight line, but it was a joy to drive. It was better than most station wagons. And the good news is that Mazda has repeated the magic yet again.

The Mazda6 you see above shares a platform with the CX-5, as will all front-drive Mazda products larger than the Mazda2. The new platform is all-new, all-Mazda and uses “Skyactiv” technology, which is a way to make cars lighter, and therefore, more efficient and fun-to-drive (if you buy their marketing spin). At 3172 lbs, this car is light – a fully loaded Chevrolet Cruze weighs about 17 lbs less despite being a full size smaller.

The light weight pays dividends as far as efficiency goes – 26/38 mpg city/highway is possible if you drive accordingly. The downside is that the 2.5L 4-cylinder engine is not all that thrilling. With 184 horsepower at a fairly high 5,750 rpm and 185 lb-ft at 3,250 rpm, the Mazda6 is hardly a paragon of speed. There’s lots of noise, but not nearly as much movement, similar to the BP motors in early Miatas. It wouldn’t be fair to call it painfully slow, but given how great the rest of the package is, the underwhelming engine is a sore spot. For those looking for more grunt, there is no V6 and no boosted four-banger like in the Hyundai Sonata or Ford Fusion. Instead, the enthusiast gods have given us a diesel version, but it won’t be available until the summer.

In typical Mazda fashion, the ho-hum motor is redeemed by a superb chassis. Just as the Mazda3 is the class benchmark for a fun-to-drive compact, so is the Mazda6 in the mid-size category. The electric power steering should be a benchmark for all others; it’s crisp, well-weighted and provides excellent feedback. There is very little body roll, and just like in the CX-5, the damping is spot on.  The 6-speed manual gearbox is the same one employed in the Mazda3 and CX-5. The firm, short-throw shifter is still here, though the clutch is a bit light and devoid of feel. In truth, I think the 6-speed automatic, which uses a hybrid torque converter and clutch pack system to mimic a dual-clutch, is actually better matched to the powertrain.

The auto ‘box itself is a work of art, which a barely perceptible 1-2 shift, zero “slop” when putting the power down and never hunts for gears when ascending a grade. While I’d personally pick the manual for personal enjoyment and snob appeal, you miss nothing by opting for the automatic, and don’t let anyone tell you differently. The one question mark here is the brakes. There wasn’t enough of an opportunity to give them a proper workout. Jack found that after a hard session of driving, they were spent, but rain and a general lack of exciting roads conspired to keep me from testing them to the fullest extent of the law. A major sore point with the car was road noise – the levels of wind noise coming through the A-pillar were far below the standard one should expect from a first-tier mid-size sedan, and suggests some corner cutting on the part of Mazda.

The first half of the day was spent in the manual Sport model, which is the bare-bones base trim. Car enthusiast will appreciate the clean, simple interior, devoid of screens of infotainment doo-dads. The materials used aren’t exactly “premium”, but it feels like a solid step up from the previous generation of Mazdas, specifically the Mazda3. It looks durable and well made, if nothing else, but it won’t wow you like an Accord or a Fusion will. If you’ve seen the CX-5 cabin, you know what to expect. Those hankering after a 6MT Sport, be warned, it truly is a no-frills proposition. Bluetooth connectivity, a prerequisite for many people, requires a step up to the Sport automatic model. Presumably, this was done to cut costs on the price leader version, but Bluetooth is much more useful to those who drive manual. Strangely enough, Canadian 6MT Sports will get Bluetooth (and pay a bit more), but that may be due to our take-rate being higher than the 10 percent Mazda expects).

Lacking any of the volume Touring trim levels, the only alternative to the Sport was a loaded Grand Touring, where one could experience the excellent automatic transmission) and the infuriating TomTom-based navigation, which has now stolen the “Worst Infotainment System Foisted Upon Us By Satan” award from the now-improved MyFordTouch. The iPod and music interface is middling at best, with its slow response times and early-90′s Sega Saturn-esque menus. The navigation is so abominable that there is a verse in Leviticus forbidding the public from ordering it. In a $30,290 car, this is unacceptable. Bring your Garmin and a suction cup mount. Do not let any dealer pawn this off on you.

Despite the awful navigation system and the slightly underpowered base engine, it’s hard not to be taken with the Mazda6. Mazda’s final deadly sin – the heinous styling that plagued otherwise great cars like the Mazda3, is gone. The new Mazda6 is a looker, with its dramatic profile and aggressive front end. Better yet, there aren’t even any packaging compromises – Mazda managed to incorporate the Mercedes CLS-esque sloping roofline, but still leave enough headroom for a six-foot adult male. It is without question the driver’s choice in the segment, to the point where it puts on a clinic for the rest of the segment as far as driving dynamics are concerned. Now that the driving experience and the visual impact of the car are finally congruent, Mazda may even be able to lay claim to the title of “Japan’s Alfa Romeo”. Squint really hard and this car could conceivably be the replacement for the Alfa 159, minus the soulful powertrains and legendary Italian reliability.

And yet I’m worried that it’s all going to end in a giant fuck-up. On a macro level, good cars, especially ones beloved by auto journalists, are prone to dying premature deaths, languishing in obscurity. The mid-size segment is the most competitive in America, with three of the top 10 best-selling cars alone. Aside from the Camry, Accord and Altima, there is the Fusion, the Sonata and the Optima, all laudable in their own right and all are more attuned with the kind of boring appliance-like transportation that the average buyer wants.

Furthermore, not only does Mazda not have the marketing budget to get the word out about this car, but the launch has been a bizarre series of mis-steps. First, Mazda put display-only units of the car in their showrooms, ostensibly due to a missed launch date. Punters could look at the cars, but not test drive or buy them. The diesel powertrain and the i-Eloop regenerative braking system aren’t available at launch either, and to top it off, Mazda USA’s website doesn’t even have a configuration tool to help customers spec out a Mazda6.

Although I am normally agnostic with respect to car companies, I really want Mazda to succeed. If Lotus or Morgan or one of the speciality car makers went under, I’d shrug my shoulders and get back to living my life. Mazda would be a real blow. These are cars that put a smile on my face without forcing me to eat beans every night so I can keep up with the payments (or running costs). I have owned two of them and came close to buying a Mazda3 Skyactiv last year. I’m really glad I didn’t, because now I have two other options (the CX-5 and the Mazda6 Sport) to choose from, should I want a new daily driver. I like their relentless quest for innovation despite having limited resources, their willingness to eschew hybrids and other green-flavor-of-the-month technology in favor of old-school weight reduction and their courage in creating the kind of nimble, featherweight and visually exciting cars that exist in our minds, the scrapyards or outside our budgets. The odds are stacked heavily against them. But that won’t stop me from cheering for my favorite team.

Mazda provided the car, insurance, a tank of gas, travel and accomodations. Thanks to commenters redav, mike978 and PCH101 for the insights that helped inform this review

If you were to read certain outlets, you may have the mistaken impression that Mazda is making a move upmarket. More than one industry gadfly took Mazda CEO Takashi Yamanouchi’s assertion that he wants to see Mazda become a “premium” brand as evidence of managerial incompetence. How could the world’s last independent auto maker have the gall to gun for the Germans and upscale Japanese marques when they are currently a bit player in the global auto sector?

The first and most obvious answer is that Yamanouchi’s words were taken out of context. Nowhere did Yamanouchi say anything about a move upmarket. Mazda won’t even be positioning itself as such in their marketing campaigns.

If that isn’t explicit enough, here’s Yamanouchi’s own words on the “premium” shift, while speaking to Automotive News.

“That’s how we aim to be like a premium…Broadly speaking, it is not to rely on discounts but to have consumers appreciate the value of the product.”

What Yamanouchi did state is that he is aiming for sales of 400,000 units by the end of March, 2016 – a 43 percent boost for Mazda in its biggest market. Mazda is looking to do that by going in the direction that every “car guy” would appreciate – making their cars more involving to drive, with better interiors, distinctive styling and eschewing hybrid technology in favor of diesels and efficient gasoline engines.

That may sound elementary for most Monday Morning Auto Execs, but Mazda is in a unique position, as the last independent mainstream auto maker. Their global sales volume rests somewhere around 1.3 million units – Honda, another relatively small player, sold 1.4 million vehicles in the United States alone in 2012. If you believe Sergio Marchionne’s insistence that 6 million units annually is the minimum scale needed to survive in the current marketplace, then Mazda’s prospects look dim.

On the other hand, being small allows Mazda the kind of autonomy that’s not possible within the context of an auto conglomerate; previous Mazda products, as good as they were, were compromised due to having to share a platform with Ford vehicles. This manifested itself less in the overall quality of the car and more in certain engineering and manufacturing decisions, such as the design of the chassis to accommodate powertrains that were employed across the entire Ford Group. Added weight and a more complex and expensive manufacturing process were two negatives that resulted from this arrangement.

The current generation of Mazda shares nothing with any Ford product; the new Mazda6 rides on an all-new scalable platform made for C and D-segment cars as well as SUVs and crossovers in that size class. That means that the CX-5, the Mazda6, next-gen Mazda3 and whatever replaces the Ford-based CX-9 will all ride on the same architecture. And while driving impressions of the Mazda6 are embargoed until Monday, the CX-5′s excellent driving dynamics and up-to-date suite of both passive and active safety features are positive signs for Mazda as far as the viability of their future product is concerned.

In other segments, Mazda has been astute with forging alliances to help ease the burdens that come with being a smaller player; the next MX-5 will be built in association with Fiat, while their B-segment car will be built alongside Toyota at their new Mexican factory. Interestingly, the Toyota vehicle will be derived from the Mazda2, another Mazda vehicle that has garnered significant attention from the enthusiast media but sold poorly. Meanwhile, Toyota’s own Yaris has neither sold well nor been warmly received by the automotive press.

So far, Mazda’s key mis-step has been with the marketing of their Skyactv technologies; at the Mazda6 press briefing, engineers went on a labored and detailed explanation of what Skyactiv really is – a way of engineering cars to be lighter and more efficient without sacrificing driving dynamics. Unfortunately, the message is beyond muddled and the moniker is so dumb that it could have only been cooked up in a boardroom in Japan. If a cadre of die-hard car types needed a lengthy lecture on Skyactiv, one can only imagine how unpleasant it must be to explain to dealers or consumers.

As far as Mazda’s “premium” push is concerned, the CX-5 is a promising start, but the Mazda6, which serves as the brand’s flagship product, will be the real test, competing in what might be the most competitive segment in America’s auto market. But you’ll have to check back Monday for TTAC’s take.

A reader tip pointed us to an issue with Mazda’s recent Skyactiv-D diesel engines in Australia. Apparently, the vehicle’s particulate filter may be the source of some engine oiling issues.

Our reader sent us this note regarding the issue

I’m really looking forward to the new skyactiv D engines coming to North America next year. As I was looking for info about them I came across issues with oil rising over the full mark. Seems to be caused by diesel leaking into the oil sump after being sprayed to burn off contaminates in the particulate filter (apparently this happens in other manufacturers diesels as well.) Most of the problems reported seem to be in Australia but apparently it is happening in Europe too. I know that the CX 5 Diesel is very popular in Japan but I didn’t find anything about the issue in Japan

Mazda sent out this leaflet to diesel owners regarding monitoring the oil, while forums have been alight with this topic. While some would-be owners have canceled their orders for CX-5 and Mazda 6 diesels, it appears that new engine software and a re-designed dipstick (which can give owners a more accurate reading of the oil level) can remedy the problem.

Mazda is remedying the biggest complain regarding its wonderful CX-5 crossover; the lack of power. Starting next year, the 2014 CX-5 can be ordered with the new 2.5L Skyactiv engine offered in the new Mazda6.

While the base 2.0L is still available in Sport trim levels, the 2.5L will be available on Touring and Grand Touring trims, making 184 horsepower and 185 lb-ft of torque. Fuel economy is rated at 25/32 mpg for FWD models and 24/30 for AWD models. The 2.5L will not be available with a stick shift, but Mazda’s automatic in the Skyactiv is about as good as it gets anyways.

The words “Mazda” and “premium” will be forever linked with the stillborn Amati brand in the mind of car enthusiasts. Cancelled at the 11th hour, Amati was supposed to be Mazda’s luxury brand that would go head to head with Infiniti, Lexus and Acura. All we got out of it was the Millenia.

With the launch of the 2014 Mazda6, the last independent Japanese auto maker will be attempting another move towards becoming a “premium” auto maker, though Mazda is not looking to compete with other luxury auto makers. According to Automotive News, company officials call their aspirations “Japan premium” (thankfully, this won’t join Skyactiv as their latest marketing moniker), but the motivation behind it seems simple; build cars more desirable than the other mainstream brands, but stay within that space.

The new Kodo design language, diesel engines, advanced active safety systems and strong build quality (Mazda ranked 4th in the latest Consumer Reports reliability study, behind Toyota, Scion and Lexus) will be the pillars of the new philosophy. The target is 400,000 units annually in the United States by 2016, up from 228,000 through October of this year.

As well regarded as Mazda’s cars may be by enthusiasts, they’ve never caught on with the wider public. The previous crop of cars may have been a joy to drive, but the gaping front ends and substandard interiors doomed them in a field filled with equally competitive Japanese and Korean entries. The CX-5 is a strong indicator that Mazda has figured things out, but the upcoming Mazda6 and Mazda3 have to be even stronger for consumers to even consider them over the usual Camry, Civic or Korean alternative.

Some driving enthusiasts (for reasons that escape me) take their significant other’s tastes into account when buying a car for themselves. Invariably, the s.o. won’t abide a hatchback, but finds crossovers the epitome of automotive style and utility. So our whipped enthusiast wonders which compact crossover they will least regret. Oh, and it can’t cost BMW money. Volksagen, Mazda, and Ford offer the most entertaining hot hatches. What do they offer in something a little taller? Today we examine Europe’s (relatively) affordable offering, the Volkswagen Tiguan.

A facelift for the 2012 model year fails to conceal the Tiguan’s advanced age. A more demure grille and LED headlight accents update the face to the current VW look, but the basic shape remains the same, with a long hood, squared-off upper body, and bobbed tail. Even when this shape was new, four years ago, it wasn’t pretty. It wasn’t meant to be. Many people just want a crossover that appears functional with hints of sport and ruggedness, and the Tiguan’s chunky exterior delivers this.

Interior updates lend the interior a slightly less downscale ambiance, but the cabin’s basic character remains functional rather than stylish. The controls are simple by current standards, and easy to reach and operate. The driving position is more upright, and so less car-like, than more recently designed compact crossovers. Depending on personal tastes, this isn’t necessarily a bad thing. The instrument panel seems a little too tall, perhaps to provide some real truck flavor, but it’s not deep. Raise the seat an inch and forward visibility is good. Rearward visibility not so much, but it’s better than in swoopier competitors. A good thing, as neither a rearview camera nor a blind spot warning system is offered.

With no substantial changes to its body, the Tiguan remains among the more compact of compact crossovers. Its wheelbase and length are three to four inches briefer than those of the entirely new Mazda CX-5 and Ford Escape. Passenger space isn’t much affected, though. According to the official specs, the VW has 4.4 inches less total legroom than the CX-5, a big difference. In person, I had an equally generous amount of rear legroom in both of them. (We’ll discuss the Ford’s rear seat later in this series.) Unlike that in the Mazda, the VW’s comfortably high rear seat slides and reclines.

No such magic was worked with the Tiguan’s cargo area. The VW’s deficit might not be as large as the official specs suggest (56.1 cubic feet vs. 64.8 in the Mazda and 67.8 in the Ford), but there is a deficit. The only folding front passenger seat in the threesome (which goes away with the SEL) compensates.

Ironically, the German-engineered and manufactured Tiguan has the least “European” dynamics of the three. Its steering feels relatively loose on center and considerably lighter in all situations. Its seats and suspension tuning are similarly the softest in this bunch, if still firmer than you’ll find in a Honda or Toyota. The Tiguan’s handling is composed and even confidence-inspiring, but not especially sporty. A GTI with a suspension lift it isn’t; a Rabbit with a suspension lift, perhaps.

The Tiguan has one clear advantage over the CX-5. Both have a single engine option (and thus no options at all), a 2.0-liter four-cylinder. But the VW’s has a turbo, and 200 horsepower compared to the Mazda’s 155. The difference in straight line performance is readily evident even in casual driving. The Mazda engine often sounds and feels like it’s straining, the VW engine rarely if ever does.

According to the EPA ratings, the Tiguan isn’t nearly as fuel-efficient as the Mazda, 21 city / 27 highway vs. 25/31. In all but the most casual driving the real-world difference seemed about half as large (26 vs. 28 in the suburbs, if the trip computers are to be believed). For a crossover with a powerful engine and all-wheel-drive, the VW’s real-world numbers might actually be the more impressive.

Not that all is top notch with the Tiguan’s powertrain. You’ll find no quick-shifting, quick-witted DSG transmission in this VW, at least not on this side of the Atlantic. Instead, a conventional six-speed automatic supplied by Aisin (a Toyota affiliate) too often lurches, lugs the engine, or swaps cogs when no swap seems necessary.

The Tiguan’s handling might not be terribly Teutonic, but its price is. The tested 2012 “SE AWD with Sunroof and Navigation” listed for $33,300. For the 2013, add another $430. Similarly equip a Mazda CX-5 with sunroof and nav, and it lists for $3,315 less. Did we mention that, so configured, the Tiguan has vinyl upholstery, while the CX-5 has red-stitched black leather and a considerably more upscale ambiance? The Mazda’s lower price also includes larger wheels, a premium Bose audio system, power driver seat, proximity key, blind spot warning system, rearview camera, an auto-dimming rearview mirror with Homelink, dual zone automatic climate control, and steering-linked HID headlights. Adjust for this extra stuff (save the wheels and audio) using TrueDelta’s car price comparison tool, and the Mazda emerges with a nearly $6,000 price advantage. You can equip the Tiguan past the CX-5’s level by opting for the SEL, but then the sticker tops $38,000.

Despite (or in cases because of) the noted shortcomings, my wife strongly preferred the Tiguan over the other two, with their more steeply raked windshields, heavier steering, and less compliant suspensions. My wife is not a driving enthusiast. Neither are most buyers in this segment. But even those who prefer how the Tiguan drives won’t prefer how much it costs.

Volkswagen provided an insured vehicle with a tank of gas.

Michael Karesh operates TrueDelta.com, an online source of car reliability and pricing information.

A scheduling conflict led me to be booked into a 2013 Mazda CX-5 SkyACTIV. With Jack and Brendan having already driven the car, I’ll spare you all yet another review discussing Mazda’s latest crossover. But a week in the CX-5 raised an interesting question; when are automatics better than a stick shift, even if it’s a vehicle that (arguably) has some appeal as a driver’s car?

The Mazda3 SkyACTIV, as well as the CX-5, both use Mazda’s newest SkyACTIV powertrain. As my review of the Mazda3 revealed, the SkyACTIV powertrain is better suited to the 6-speed automatic, even though the manual is a great gearbox. Driving the CX-5 confirmed this. The CX-5 seems to want to upshift to the highest gear ASAP, but when commuting, I don’t find it so bothersome. The transmission kicks down when needed, shifts are beautifully smooth, and the manual model enables nearly unfettered use of all six forward gears.

The SkyACTIV isn’t the only instance of a two-pedal gearbox being the one to get. The E60 M5 was famously set up to work best with the SMG gearbox. U.S. gearheads complained until BMW relented and offered a six-speed manual. It turned out that the stick shift was a poor choice for the car, no matter how much enthusiast cred it added. Most of the time, I’ll take a stick shift, even though I engage in a lot of stop-and-go driving. But my memory doesn’t extend far enough to remember the muscle car era, when an automatic was often preferred. Best and brightest, fill in the gaps in my knowledge. When is an automatic the gearbox of choice? Or am I just plain wrong?

The small crossover segment is heating up, with the Honda CR-V, Ford Escape and Mazda CX-5 squaring off as this year’s new entrants in an already crowded field. Starting at $20,695, the CX-5 will get class leading fuel economy numbers of 26/35 mpg thanks to the SKYACTIV 2.0L 4-cylinder engine – and a 6-speed manual gearbox.

A 6-speed automatic and AWD will set you back another $1,400 and $1,250 respectively. The Touring model costs  $23,895 and $25,145 for FWD and AWD respectively while the Grand Touring runs $27,045 and $28,295 for the GT AWD. A Technology package, featuring items like in-dash TomTom navigation, pivoting HID headlights and rain-sensing wipers adds another $1,185 ($1,325 for the GT model, which also adds keyless entry) while a Bose stereo/moonroof package is $1,130. A destination charge of $795 is not included in the price.