Find Reviews by Make:
The long-rumored Mazda2-based Scion is a step closer to reality, with Mazda unveiling the sedan version of the Mazda2.
With the Scion iM serving as the hatchback in Scion’s new lineup, the next Scion will be a traditional sedan. The unnamed Scion will be built at Mazda’s Mexican factory, and is likely to retain the 1.5L Skyactiv engine for superior fuel economy.
107 Comments on “Mazda2 Sedan Gives Hints To Next Scion...”
Read all comments
Look, another progressive, exciting, enthusiast-oriented Mazda no one buys…
I have a feeling Enterprise will try to give me one.
They must have a skeptical mind like me, they look at the Mazda2 and wonder “How could a FWD sedan actually be fun?”.
Either that or they’re too busy fixing up old busted LTDs.
Toyota seems to be following a strategy of killing off Toyota nameplates and then replacing them with Scions. The Matrix was killed off, but now the iM will be brought here instead. It also replaces the xD, which itself replaced the xA, neither of which sold in viable quantities. The Yaris sedan is dead, but now we have this car to take over subcompact sedan duty. Then, of course, there’s the whole question of the FR-S and whether or not it should have been a Celica/MR-2 successor. Neither the iM nor this sedan will be available from dealers that don’t have Scion franchises- meaning that for the foreseeable future, Toyota dealers won’t have a subcompact sedan or a compact hatchback.
Color me crazy, but I suspect this is a case of Toyota trying to force Scion into viability by peeling market segments away from Toyota dealers.
It doesn’t sound too crazy, but the flaw in your plan is that of the 1200 or so Toyota dealerships in the U.S., around 1000 of them also sell Scions.
I think many are over-thinking this. Scion IS Toyota: There is no Scion Corp., no Scion factory, and most Toyota dealers sell Scions; it’s nothing more than a name on a badge. Who cares what they call it (as long as it has little in common with the dreadful old Matrix).
I don’t understand large sedans. But even less I understand small sedans.
Not sure what to thonk of this JV. Will they rust like Mazdas and drive like Toyotas?
Some people just won’t drive hatchbacks.
@Preludacris, unless those hatchbacks get jacked a few inches up in the air and can be had with AWD.
Yes!
You make that sound like it’s somehow an unenlightened choice. There are practical reasons to drive sedans instead of hatchbacks.
If you live in the city, the added security of a closed trunk where you can store valuables precludes getting a rear window smashed in and folks trashing whatever you had beneath the hatch. It’s safer in a crash too, provided the sedan doesn’t have cheap pass-through rear seatbacks, because the trunk helps separate junk projectiles from flying into the passenger compartment.
In short, driving a sedan trades extra package space for secure package space. As a city-bred motorhead who often has to park on the streets, I’ll accept that tradeoff any day of the week.
Easy there jrhmobile, hatchback vs sedan vs crossover is the car forum meme of choice, nothing personal
Yeah, it’s just a meme about how fickle and trendy the buying public is: Lift A Hatchback, Make A Bundle.
Jeepers… I think they’re talking about me!
*Bob Bell’s Bozo laugh*
They’re talking about me too, when I used to drive gas-guzzling, hard handling SUVs I would think to myself, “Why can’t they just jack-up a wagon or hatchback and give it AWD, I would be so happy” They did and I’ve been happy as a pig in poop ever since
>> the added security of a closed trunk where you can store valuables precludes getting a rear window smashed in and folks trashing whatever you had beneath the hatch
Cheap cordless power drills make getting into trunks easy. Parcel shelves, under the floor storage compartments, and/or cargo covers hide the contents of the hatch. Also, if you live in the city you should know not to leave anything of value in your car anyway.
Agreed, the whole “secure trunk” argument seems silly to me, especially if you’re able to fold the rear seats from cabin. Even if not, there’s the ski-pass hatch behind the arm rest in a lot of cars which is not lockable, and trough which you can probably snag the seat release.
However, much as I think hatchbacks make vastly more sense as small cars, I won’t pile on the hate. That I’ll reserve for solo commuters in empty Super Dutys.
Not true, there is a need for secure out-of-sight storage and I respect that. A thief isn’t going to go looking for something he can’t see when it’s easier to see what he wants
Dude made a nice respectful comment and a solid point. I say let him have his squash-boxes.
Make it so, number one.
As long as it’s a jacked-up squash-box and has available AWD
Why the hell not?
Imagine a jacked-up ’78 Caprice with AWD.
Huh? Huh? Ammirite?
I’m OK with that…
http://www.stationwagonforums.com/forums/gallery/files/8/1/caprice4x42.jpg
So much want
Shyeah.. windrows, anyone?
Windrows? We don’t have no steenking windrows where we’re going
@Lie2Me, that’s the point – basically every current hatchback comes standard with a cargo cover that’s pretty much permanently in place.
Adversely, if it’s that much of a security issue, than why do people buy crossovers? I mean, that’s just begging for your stuff to be taken.
Of course, a lot of subcompact sedans do have rather generous trunks, given that pretty much all of them do their best impersonation of a miniature Leyland P76. Although, they almost always look like more of a penalty box than their hatchback counterparts.
It doesn’t matter to me, I drive a crossover with an open back for the whole world to see, but then I don’t carry anything worth stealing. However, to me cargo covers scream, “I’m hiding something of value” and an open invitation for thieves to look. Where as a trunk could be loaded with valuables or it could be empty. If I’m a busy crook I’ll just move on to the next car until my chances of finding something good improve
I have never, ever locked my vehicle since moving out here to Green Acres. I’ve taken big career hits to stay here but it’s worth it.
It’s that Hodag Festival, once you’ve been you stay, dontcha know?
Yah!
*loons* *float plane*
(shadows lengthen)
You bet!
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebensraum
That’s the feeling of driving a big car.
For me it was a awaking experience to daily drive a big car. Especially after at decade of mr2, miata, m3, is300 driving.
I have a friend that drives a Mazda 2 and is disappointed in the car. It’s fun if you are a magazine guy and you have 1 week but in the non-city it is not the best choice.
You equate the feeling of driving a large car to the philosophical expansion of Nazi Germany?
The nazis ruined a lot of perfectly useful and innocent words that had always been in common German parlance before those sh1thead losers were ever born.
But ruin them they did and I don’t see how anyone anywhere on Earth could not realize the slime that coats this one.
In this case I fear your benefit of a doubt is a bridge too far, this has got wacko written all over it
Yeah, no argument.
Oh look a Neon!
I thought it’s a well-known fact that young people want to appear rich and would rather throw $15K to a used performance/luxyry car.
And anyone over 30 unlucky enough to need to buy one of these would have a better piece of mind with the Toyota logo in front.
Do not see this angle at all.
+1
I gladly pay for Toyota quality and Scion likely has same quality. But The Scion brand is targeted towards boy racers even when only old peole buy them. And we know depreciation of boy racers….
And at some point Toyota may come to its senses and kill Scion. We all know orphan brand values.
A Matrix type Toyota would intetest me. A scion not at all. Especially theur designets need to make it look like a highschool boy’s dream.
Please stop making cars, Mazda. Make exquisite espresso machines or kamado cookers instead. Make something useful; we already have too many cars.
Same for you, Koreans.
What’s wrong with Mazdas? They have a decent offering right now, and the only company offering an affordable roadster. If Mazda went under, the automotive world would be a sadder place.
Mazda is like a 5’9″ running back who manages to get into the NFL. They try so hard but they just keep getting hammered. The Miata is Mazda’s equivalent of the guy’s popularity from community outreach activities because nobody else wants to bother with them.
Mazdas are like a Hollywood starlet at the beginning of the high school movie with her hair in a ponytail, glasses, and frumpy clothing. When the handsome, popular jock recognizes her “inner beauty” and she transforms into a Hollywood starlet, all of the morons applaud and act like they’ve witnessed some sort of magic.
Except this is real life, so Mazdas are Hollywood starlets but most people can’t see that because Peyton Manning doesn’t drive one in a commercial and scream stupid things into the dashboard, so most people think Mazdas are ugly nerds.
We are too stupid to live.
OK..OK.. Mazdas are like a beeyootiful butterfly flapping its wings in the virgin rainforest and causing water molecules to invade the explosive powder used in a Mexican airbag factory.
Your turn.
mazda never called
so he ate his cake alone
happy f***ing birthday
Everybody loves the underdog and Mazda is our beloved under(Snoopy-nosed)dog
Poor sap. He should understand he is doomed to failure, like all the other 5′-9″ running backs before him.
Such as:
5′-9″: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emmitt_Smith
5′-8″: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Sanders
5′-8″: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_Rice
5′-7″: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurice_Jones-Drew
5′-6″: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darren_Sproles
OK, got another one:
Mazdas are like the hand-full of counter-examples meant to disprove a rule brought three days late to a discussion that really wasn’t a dispute to begin with.
But as one who celebrates any anomaly in the physical universe, I love the hell out of watching Big Daddy Sproles run. He’s a rock-solid, fearless athlete.
Do Mazdas really deserve all these metaphors? I mean, they’re ok, but they’re not Cadillacs
I’m too old for the workload of coming up with Cadillac similies, let alone metaphors.
I leave that for the young bucks like Corey and bball.
From a recent hit song on the radio…
“She’s got a booty like a Cadillac…”
As far as metaphors go it doesn’t get any better
I wonder if Art & Science had “booty” in mind when developing that design language?
“From a recent hit song on the radio…”
They still have those? I only listen to NPR so’s I know how to get my mind right. Or, actually, Left.
I already know too much, cars and “Top 40” are my R&R
Pete, I think there are many companies that should stop making cars instead of Mazda. Mazda is one of the only car companies that actually gives a damn about making something well-engineered, state of the art and interesting. Also, when “affordable” is factored into the equation we’re pretty much left with them, Ford, GM (at times) along with the Koreans.
If there was a trial, Honda would be probably be the first to be found guilty after making superb, class-leading, and truly groundbreaking cars from 1972-2000 and completely losing the plot afterwards. They know much better than to make cars like the 2012 Civic, ILX and Crosstour, but prefer to be mendacious and lazy as long as money comes in as per the finest 1980’s Detroit tradition.
Toyota doesn’t have their signature quality anymore, so why should they exist?
Nissan provides the worst of European tackiness and slapdash quality expertly blended with Japanese dullness in almost everything not on the FM platform.
Hell, if we all had to contend with one carmaker to exist, my vote would most likely be for Mazda since their only problem is not their cars, but nobody gives them a chance. Next would probably be Ford and a theoretical General Motors with the management fired and replaced by the B&B.
Your comment is lucid and succinct and since my opinion doesn’t matter I agree with you.
Eyeflyistheeye, I disagree. Mazda has a big problem, and that is they have no idea how to sell cars.
Mazda right now is basically what Pontiac pretended to be. Mainstream cars that are sporty to drive. They don’t have the dealer network to be a mainstream brand, but more importantly, when it comes down to it people really don’t want a car that’s sporty to drive. They want something that looks sporty, but that’s about it.
The long term plan for Mazda is not to sell more cars. It’s to slowly move the brand into premium territory while still maintaining their current volume. Right now they sell about as many cars as BMW, and that’s sort of the brand image they’re chasing. It’ll take many years to transform the perception, but even if they could just move the brand into semi-premium territory, like Acura, Buick, or Volvo, and still maintain most of their volume, they could be successful.
The 6 is exquisite. I think it’s one of the most beautiful cars on the market. It’s by far the best implementation of Kodo.
The 3 sedan looks like a slightly smaller 6, and still very tasteful.
This thing… yuck.
yeah its not a great looking sedan but its ok… its heaps better than other small sedans
and the mazda 3 sedan is a great reason to buy a sedan
i dont like the look of the hatch and i have access to other vehicles if i need to move stuff
its a beautiful car
I like it. Hopefully Scion doesn’t end up making it look tacky.
Good luck with that.
It’ll probably look better than Mazdas “kodo” styling.
Kodo worked well on the Mazda 6 sedan, on the rest of their line-up it just looks deformed.
Scion could release a brown diesel wagon with AWD, manual transmission, and 7 interior colors to choose from and TTAC would still piss and moan about it.
“the best implementation of Kodo”
Gotta credit Mazda for giving a meaninglessly vague and trumped-up Japanese shibboleth one more try in the Western market, even featuring the drama-brush kanji for it in many of their ads.
Back in the ’70s & ’80s that kind of silly mystification got a lot of Western kids to buy the nihonjinron falderal but today is merely perceived as just more lame marketing sh1t.
I guess kodo has amounted to nothing more than egregiously curvy fenders in emulation of animal musculature. Big whoop and didn’t Jaguar and others have that pretty well covered back in the 1930s?
“Japanese shibboleth”- lol, you funny guy
Makes you hear one of those emphysema-flutes moaning in the background, doesn’t it?
Yes, peteysan by the light of a Hanukkah Menorah
o_O
Again I say,
o_O
You win.
“Kodo” is on par with “Art & Science,” “Fluidic Sculpture,” etc.
At least they didn’t name their engines “Earthdreams.”
“Art & Science” is about as fluid as ice
But at least “Art & Science” was badass for a while through association with the F-117. And Caddy really *did* explore every way possible to make a car look like an armored, high-tech bug. It was unique and instantly recognizable.
But what has Mazda done that wasn’t already exhausted 70 years earlier by the Brits and Italians? Curvy, curvy, car look like a beeyotch.
I like Art & Science, I just wouldn’t call it “fluid”
‘Bout as fluid as a quartz crystal.
Mazdas are like beeyootiful crystals in the virgin rain forest.
Who cares… I ain’t goin’ in there after ’em.
Who’s calling “Art & Science” fluid?
Not you ;-)
I think I preferred car styling when it had no marketing names, no “design language”, no nothing, it was just something that was done to make a car companies line-up look “unified”.
Kodo, roughly translated, means “We REALLY want to be like BMW!”
After WWII a lot of cars copied the Lockheed P-38 Lightning bomber tail fins. I guess “Bomber Design Language” would have been tacky
Sometimes theme names suggest themselves.
Like for the CX-3 and other new CUVs “Kardashian” just naturally emerges from the subconscious when they’re viewed from behind.
“Lockheed P-38 Lightning bomber”
Someone gonna get all pedantic on you over that. Won’t be me, though. I’ll get moderated.
“The P-38 was used in a number of roles, including dive bombing, level bombing, ground-attack, night fighting, photo reconnaissance missions, and extensively as a long-range escort fighter when equipped with drop tanks under its wings.” – Wikipedia
… but, I’m being pedant
Yeah, but…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Vengeance
Couple of games ago the Packers put Julius Peppers in as a receiver on a goal-line play. But I doubt he’ll be known to history as a pass-catcher (especially since he dropped that one).
@petezeiss
Packers fan I take it?
“Packers fan I take it?”
.
Packers Fan = Pain in the a$$
.
… me included ;-)
28,
Nah, just an innocent bystander in a family full of every-stat-memorized fanatics.
Like breeding, I leave Packer craziness to the driblings.
Stockholder, no doubt… The worse kind
No more tacky than “art and science” or “kodo”, if anything it sounds better.
What would we call 60’s car styling? “Shipping box design language?”
Cons*dering all the good drugs floating around I’d say 60’s styling was tasteful and elegant… Well, there was the Pacer and Gremlin, but everyone knew you weren’t suppose to take the brown acid, guess AMC didn’t get the memo
Can’t say that I’d argue with that, if there were any “peaks” for car styling I’d say the mid-60’s and the mid-late 80’s.
Today we have much more advanced tools for styling, so why modern cars have to “hark back” to the past or look like prehistoric fish I’ll never get. We should be using our tools to make cars that’re spacious yet compact and safe, stuff like the Juke is just going backwards.
Its truly strange how AMC could give us something as tasteful and restrained as the Rambler and Hornet, but then make literal hack jobs like the Gremlin, or just bad designed like the Pacer and its crammed engine bay.
Whats even stranger is that AMC “platform sharing” ideas and their CUV, the Eagle, would become the norm 30+ years later.
The thing is about the 60s stylists had a free hand, no safety issues to contend with and style around, so what you got was pure style. Look at the original Stingray, Riviera and Lincoln Continental. Classics all that still look good today. Not saying safety is a bad thing, just something that designers today have to work around
And although some small car ads paid it lip service, no one really gave a rat’s about fuel economy because the gummint didn’t make them.
So you could have rolling Parthenons without a care about aerodynamics.
“Aerodynamics are for people who can’t build engines.”
-Enzo Ferrari
Thats true, you got small clean styled cars and elegant fancier ones, not like today where you got elegant big cars and smaller counter parts that just look nasty.
60’s Rivieras, Toronados, those cars looked great I agree, I just wish their face-lifts did the originals justice.
We’re just a bunch of grumpy old men.
But are we grumpy enough?
Can’t do worse than have Mazda do up a Scion: someone needs to put out the word to Toyota designers – ‘Stay away from the brown acid’.
By Toyota allowing Mazda to guild their small cars for them in Mexico, they’re sacrificing the bullet proof reliability of the last couple of Japanese built affordable models they had, the Yaris and all the Scion models, for the questionable quality of these new ones, albeit they will be better driving and more stylish than the ones they replace.
Volt, think about it, it shows a couple of things:
1 – Toyota will pick up buck wherever it can;
2 – Even Toyota recognizes its legendary reliability has been reached, if it were not the case it would not associate itself to a lower brand;
3 – No, I don’t believe number 1 overrides number 2
It’s the little dirty secret that has been going on for a while now, others have caught up with Toyonda. Like Volvo who used to sell based on safety, then other caught up and Volvo got into trouble, I think Toyota sees the need to improve in other areas. They are investing in ride, now it seems they are investing in style. Me, being here in Brazil can attest that, this Mazda 2 sedn looks like it is among the top of the worldwide bunch in the explosion of small sedans happening the world over.
I meant BUILD
Is it wrong that I find early 90’s Proteges more attractive than the new 2?
The new 6 is fine, and the 3s not half bad (hatchbacks a bit deformed), the 2 just looks like Mazdas Chevy Sonic, seriously deformed.
All subcompact sedans have a very similar profile. You can see a lot of Fiesta and Accent sedan in this as well. Probably a byproduct of safety regs and trying to maximize interior volume in a small package.
I think its a mix of that and automakers trying to re-purpose big car styling onto little cars, it just doesn’t work right most of the time.
*cough*CLA*cough*
You really think all those swoops and creases look good on the CLA?
Lie2me, no. I’m agreeing that it looks funny when you put 18-feet of styling on a 15-foot car. The CLA has the absolute worst proportions of anything its size. If you said it was a knockoff Mercedes released by Shengfangguongdong Heavy Metal & Industrial Co. LTD, I’d believe it.
“18-feet of styling on a 15-foot car.”
So, how close are you to retiring from the car biz so you can write full-time?
“18-feet of styling on a 15-foot car.”
Is that like saying 18lbs. of crap in a 15lbs. bag?
As soon as I get rid of two fourteen year-old SAABs on the back fence. So, like 2029.
Hope you don’t get any A3s to keep you there longer.
Well, I also have a back line with 3 ’00s Chrysler products. Then again, if you’re a used car lot and DON’T have at least three MOPARs on your back line, you’re doing it wrong…
@Flybrian
Pre or post Cerberus?
Pre-…definitely pre-…
Ouch.