For at least the last half-decade if not longer, Mazdas have usually been reviewed as vehicles on top of their game in looks, build quality, and their fun to drive aspect. Note that possessing powerful engines wasn’t usually an attribute listed there. While fuel efficiency was generally quite good, the performance tradeoffs in most of the lineup often had reviewers withholding that last ratings star. Mazda finally did something about that when they released their SkyActiv-G 2.5liter turbo engine and started making it available in all of their newer models bar the Miata; and every Mazda that they’ve sent our way has had it.
Being a smaller automaker means that the budgets are a little tighter and things need to stretch further, not that you’d know it by driving any single Mazda. In the case of the turbo engine that’s a welcome thing though as while most other makers would develop and use a smaller variant in their smaller offerings, Mazda found it more expedient to simply offer the same relatively large engine in their newest small crossover, the CX-30, which effectively replaces the CX-3.
That CX-3 is actually still available this year, however now only in one solitary trim level; it’s hard to imagine that it will stick around much longer. The new CX-30 really takes up where that one leaves off, refining everything ever so much and making the look as modern as the rest of the lineup while still offering it at a base level price of $23,225 including the destination charge. Even at that level there’s still some pizzazz with the interior having a two-color motif that interestingly does not just use the seats as one of the main points of contrast.
However, a reviewer’s lot in life is never to be able to actually get a base-level vehicle delivered to them and such it was in this case with our CX-30 2.5 Turbo Premium Plus ranking at the top of the seven (!) available trim levels, the top three of them being endowed with this same engine that we’ve become quite familiar with over the last year.
The one bone they did toss out is to not have this car sent in the same Machine Gray Metallic as the earlier CX-5, CX-9, and Mazda3 were, but rather this one came in a hue named Polymetal Gray Metallic, which is another dark gray, however depending on the light it changes color quite a bit from blue to various shades of gray, thus adding more visual interest. It’d be hard though to pass up the Deep Crystal Blue Mica or especially the stunning (a word I do not use lightly or often) Soul Red Crystal Metallic were I to spec one for myself.
Setting the CX-30 apart a bit from the rest of the lineup is the very liberal use of black plastic around the wheel arches and especially the bumpers, more so than in the other models but in line with what the older CX-3 has. Having had a recent experience wherein a minor bumper incident involving a family member cost a shockingly large amount of money to rectify, an (in theory at least) easier to simply replace molded flat black rear bumper instead of multiple painted pieces has all of a sudden become quite attractive.
As the smallest Mazda crossover, it does carry all of the styling cues of its larger siblings. The large, expressive grille is there with its sharp leading edge, a fairly upright front end follows it and leads to a sculpted body that doesn’t have a ton of what people might term weird surface angle changes, and then terminates in a pert rounded rear end.
Lighting is used as jewelry, but of the high quality less is more type rather than jangly costume stuff; the headlights look smaller than what might be expected, the front accent lights below are very minimalistic, and the tail lights are superbly interesting in shape, design, and integration of the various lens colors.
Absolutely delightful are the rear LED turn signals that light amber, but are of some sort of multistage variety wherein the on/off flashing is not of the instantaneous standard LED variety but rather a smoothly staged process where it absolutely mimics an incandescent’s soft fade between illumination and darkness. Even more delightful, this carries over into the interior where the signal’s green indicator does the same exact thing, gently fading between pulses. Someone put a lot of thought into this and it is certainly worthy of recognition.
With the aforementioned large black expanses around the lower perimeter and the dark colored wheels, it carries a bit of the look of an urban hiking shoe, perhaps not an unwelcome parallel for a smaller vehicle that is well suited for tight spaces such as urban cores while carrying a slightly upscale aura.
Quantity of anything, specifically physical size, certainly has absolutely zero to do with the attendant quality of that offering (just as often the inverse is true), but something small and practical along with excellent attention to detail and little delightful aspects provides a certain je ne se quoi that transcends a price point and can make the monetary aspect less relevant. When the item in question then doesn’t actually cost a relatively huge amount, so much the better.
Getting in just reinforces that feeling. While this one was finished in two-toned black and brown leather seats, and had some of the door panel as well as dashboard and other surfaces also finished in the same brown hue, it wasn’t starkly contrasting, serving to accent rather than highlight the difference. The seat covers being perforated makes the color of the brown areas appear different in the photos, rest assured it works in harmony with the rest of it when viewed in person.
Although a small vehicle, the front seats of the cabin were remarkably spacious, my 6 foot 1 inch frame with 32 inch inseam had no issues getting comfortable and there was sufficient headroom below the sunroof frame for that aspect to be a non-issue. Supportive seats (heated) with a memory function and two position lumbar allowed a good position to be dialed in quickly, programmed for future reference and then forgotten about for the next week.
The steering wheel dead ahead (also heated) is of small diameter with a miniscule airbag hub and a lateral row of toggle switches with buttons below embedded in the horizontal spokes rendered in a metal/plastic combination with positive action for all. Gauges in Mazdas have lately been a paragon of simplicity and usability with the speedometer being a digital display that looks exactly like the other actual gauges in the triple-pod arrangement (tach, speedo, temp/fuel) but can be reconfigured to display differently.
While the “fade” aspect of the speedometer numbers segment that some of the other models we’ve seen had isn’t repeated here, the (moving) small red hash mark denoting the current speed limit is again used here along with its pull-a-thread like red indicator clearly showing how far in excess of the limit one is traveling at present, a fantastic touch.
Additionally, the distance to empty display mimics the fuel gauge showing how full the tank is; after all, while handy to know the tank is half full, vastly more handy is knowing what remaining driving distance that level will provide, the DTE display in the form of a gauge and number renders actually looking at the separate fuel gauge irrelevant.
Little things like that are welcome and appreciated every day and serve to remind the driver that the vehicle is an actual partner in the experience (the highest level it can be), not just a tool (conversely, the lowest level).
Wearing out its welcome is the current and latest version of Mazda’s infotainment system, while it’s a larger display (8.8″) with a more interesting shape set in a dash-mounted nacelle of its own (from the driver’s seat looking more integrated than just tacked on) it still operates with a sometimes aggravating cursor knob in the center console. That knob is of the highest quality and the action of it is excellent, that isn’t the issue, what is though is having to sort through multiple menus, click on some, dial on others, and eventually hope to find the desired function. It’s better than it was a generation ago, but as some others are starting to rethink the separate knob aspect and are bringing the screen closer in order to touch it instead, the hope is that this just starts getting phased out.
Of course there are quick-menu buttons around the knob for the commonly used major categories but that just gets one to a starting point or where one left off of each one. With time and continued use undoubtedly it would become second nature, the same as with similar systems in much more expensive brands (and this one isn’t inferior to those, just slightly different again). But without reading and learning the manual there is a learning curve, it is not intuitive and definitely less so than a regular touch screen.
Voice commands work in some instances but for example programming favorite radio stations so they appear in a particular order when others are already programmed in has no readily apparent procedure (Most touch screens for example simply have you press and hold the appropriate digital chiclet while on the desired channel and it overrides whatever was there before). I know it can be done as I managed it on a different Mazda recently but the procedure escaped me this time. Perhaps that’s nitpicky and not something a longer-term user/owner would face but there is an attraction to a vehicle that you can get into and simply use fully in regard to common items such as that.
The screen of course controls the navigation system (excellent), has the camera display (both fore and aft as well as the birds-eye view) with very good resolution, vehicle settings of all sorts, and the 12-speaker BOSE audio system with a myriad of configurations and settings that can be chosen. Suffice to say the audio quality was very good and left little to improve on.
Below the infotainment screen area is the wide horizontal sweep of the dash with really only the dual-zone automatic HVAC controls including the seat and steering wheel heat buttons incorporated into its leading edge. The knobs and buttons of that system are high quality items, extremely similar and perhaps even the same as in Mazda’s more expensive vehicles, certainly not cut-rate whatsoever. The experience in this generally mimics that of the vastly more expensive CX-9 for example.
Below that a solitary USB plug (there are more in the console bin between the seats) and then a decently sized well for a phone or whatever just ahead of the cupholders. Curiously there was no wireless charging mat, a nowadays fairly common accessory, at least on upper level trims.
Having transitioned to the horizontal plane of the console and moving aft there is the gearshifter, a traditional sort with a left-hand gate for manual shifting (as well as the option to use the shift paddles behind the steering wheel). To the left of it is a small toggle to engage Sport Mode, and behind that is the electric parking brake actuator and the cursor knob.
And finally the bin which is under an elbow pad that moves fore and aft but won’t tilt open unless pushed all the way rearward first. It won’t fit a gallon of milk or anything like that but is easily sufficient for smaller items such as sunglasses, wallets, and the daily bric-a-brac that tends to accumulate in spaces such as these.
Please select page 2 below to continue…
Pages: 1 2
You would love the look of our driveway – a CX9 in deep crystal blue mica, and a CX5 in soul red!
Great review, as always.
That Soul Red Crystal Metallic or whatever is a fantastic colour.
A friend had a current-shape MX5 in Soul Red. It looked absolutely stunning when the sun was bright, really highlighting the shape. Amazing paint.
Now if Mazda could only employ that same paint technology in some greens, a gold, a purple…..
Amen, oyez, PREACH IT!
The thing I hate most about the CUV craze is the black plastic wheel arches, and these are the biggest I’ve seen. Ruins an otherwise nice looking car, once you get used to the bobbed tail.
I can’t figure out why all these black interiors sell. It must remind people of the womb, but all I can think of is ovens.
The black wheel arches are there so nobody will mistake a CUV for a minivan, because nobody wants to look like a soccer mom – especially if they are one.
As far as the interior, I think it is well done and tasteful, far more appealing than the garish plastic fantastic interiors competitors like Toyota is putting out.
Will people look back on this automotive era the same way people today look back at the malaise era, with the tacky interiors and overdone exterior styling? Kind of a neo-Brougham?
Ive been making that comparison since the tacky look became dominant about a decade ago. This era is just lasting a lot longer.
People have voted with their wallets and want this to last forever.
What I find hilarious is that minivans became popular partly because they didn’t look like the station wagon’s minivan shoppers parents drove. Now it’s one more generation on and people don’t want to drive what look like minivans so they end up driving what are essentially tall all-wheel-drive station wagon’s!
The CX-5 plastic arches are way less cumbersome looking, I’m not sure why they supersized them for the 50 because I’m with you, they look really bad. I’m not a fan of them in general but back in my day plastic arches used to double as fender flares, these however are just as flat as the bodysides, it’s a very strange look. This black texture ages badly too, it’ll be dulled from black to an uneven grayish in no time, just like it did on the cars it was last popular on.
I think the idea is to visually de-emphasize the height of the body and the amount of bodywork around the wheels. I think the eye tends to read the black as wheel/tyre rather than body, and see the body as being lighter/smaller as a result. I know that’s how my eyes perceive my wife’s Mitsi ASX.
I’d want to see this in a lighter colour (or maybe I wouldn’t?), but I’m inclined to agree they’ve gone overboard here. It doesn’t look so bad against the dark body, but there must be, what, five inches of the stuff around the wheels? That’s excessive, the mark of a stylistic Band-Aid rather than good design. Five centimetres would be about right.
It is with some chagrin that I see the re-emergence of oodles of black/gray plastic trim along the lower surfaces of cars. I did not like the look the last time it was in and still do not, but it looks like I am going to have to deal with it for awhile. And the snarky part of me says that at least it will cover up the rust for a few years. 🙂
Actually, Mazdas seem to have been (finally) improving on this front, though the numbers of 10-ish year old Mazdas on the road seems fairly low in my area, so it is hard to guage. But those that I do see don’t stick out the way they did some years back.
Your impressions of modern Mazdas make sure that one is on my list for checking out when the time comes to replace something in my fleet.
I’m going to guess that you’re not a fan of my glamorous plastic-clad Scenic RX4 then?
Hmm, photo got stripped. Trying again…
Interesting vehicle. The top half says first gen BMW X5. The bottom half says first year Pontiac Aztek.
250 hp and 320 lb.ft. of torque….My parent’s 1978 Buick Estate Wagon with the Olds 403, 6.6 liter produced 185 hp and the same amount of torque…Amazing what electronics and turbocharging has done
Lately I’ve been re-reading magazines from thirty years ago, and that was one of the first things I noticed. Even without turbocharging, specific outputs seem to have hiked to an amazing degree.
Just make the whole thing unpainted black plastic and stop teasing us.
That said, Mazdas do have something of a pretty face, so that’s something. Not enough of these to balance all the Toyota UglyNauts trampling around though.
I checked these out at the dealership several months ago and didn’t get past briefly poking my head in the interior. The CX-30 is tiny inside with a fairly poor use of space (very common of the segment).
I don’t understand why you’d buy this over the CX-5 unless you REALLY need the slightly smaller footprint and slightly lower price. But I’d say that about any of the sub compact SUVS.
Speaking for myself, having driven the CX-5 and CX-30, I’d say the CX-30 controls body roll a little bit more than the CX-5 owing, I presume to a slightly longer/lower footprint.
As a side-note, the CX-3 could have been a fun pocket rocket with some sound deadening and the 2.5 Turbo. 👹😸
Interesting vehicle and difficult to pigeonhole, like most current Mazdas. A unique blend of premium and economy. Modest underpinnings, but a very nice interior, standout powertrain, adept handling, and sophisticated exterior styling details.
However, the overall shape of this particular Mazda doesn’t do it for me. The first profile pic–with the staircase in the background–shows every gripe I have. Gunslit greenhouse atop a cliff of sheetmetal, an overly aggressive hatchback rake, all seemingly teetering atop the most disproportionately large wheel set I’ve seen outside my 8-year old’s Hotwheels collection. It’s simply ridiculous in concept and only through the decades-long creep of shrinking glass space and oversized wheels is this remotely acceptable.
Compared to the amazing interior packaging of a first-gen xB or Honda Fit, this is a failure of engineering in my view. I know people insist on AWD, a bit more clearance, and something a bit more stylish than the Scion box, but it seems to me a middle ground should be possible.
Interesting timing. Just as you were posting this, I was drafting a comment about comparing it with my xB, which is 20″ shorter but has an absolutely massive back seat and huge leg room, as well as superb visibility.
I may have to buy another xB or two and store them so I have a lifetime supply.
Reading about your Nevada adventure certainly brought your xB to the front of my mind. It’s a brilliant little car and I think it’s a shame that the market didn’t take to it more, and that Toyota botched the second gen and sealed its fate.
Snap those low-mile xBs up before they become a thing. Honda Elements are trading for big money on the auction sites, and woulda thought that back in ’03?
Hi Paul.
I still recommend the 2000-2004 Avalon.
It’s overbuilt, supremely comfortable and has power and efficiency. With a tall seating position and no…damn, I forget the term… side windows upright with no tip in at the top… oh well, brain-fart.. butter-smooth steering, huge back seat.
No van-style room in the back, though, but a functionally huge trunk.
Makes your back feel good and you won’t feel any potholes.
Just a suggestion. Get one before they age out of commonality.
“Tumblehome”.
Thanks, Daniel.
Of course I remembered it just as the edit deadline passed.😀
I guess the Kia Soul and Seltos represent the “middle ground” you speak of with good but not the same level of finish inside or power from the engine. The base CX-30 might be a bit of a closer comparison to those pricewise. Mazda has chosen not to go down that path (building a box) though once two generations of the Mazda5 didn’t seem to light the sales charts on fire and instead seems to want to compete with the Toyota C-HR (which it’s outselling), the Honda HR-V and on the other end take the fight to the Audi Q3 and BMW X1 and perhaps even the MB GLA which it seems to be doing quite well. Note that neither the Fit nor the xB are sold here anymore and neither have a direct successor in those form factors at least, probably everyone who needs a more practical car already has a full size truck or two in the driveway. I will say that the cargo area is vastly larger than it appears in the profile pic, the high windowline deceptively minimizes the space available below it and the slanting hatch (but it isn’t a huge vehicle altogether.)
Mazda seems like another one of those Maxwell Smart auto manufacturers in that they “missed it by that much”. They build competent vehicles that almost always finish near (if not at) the top of any comparison tests, it doesn’t seem like their sales figures are ever that great.
A big part of that may be a definite reluctance to offer big incentives or rebates; Mazda just doesn’t do it, so the price will invariably be higher than similarly equipped vehicles from the competition. The problem is that while that kind of premium might be perceived as worth it for a Toyota or Honda, it’s tougher to justify with a Mazda.
Interesting to read that. In Australia Mazda’s near the top of the charts, and the 3 used to outsell the Corolla. But then in your country Honda’s huge, while here they’re more of an also-ran. C’est la vie, I guess.
If you hadn’t mentioned that, I would’ve! 🤓 Nifty, isn’t it? It’s all the turn signals, front-side-rear. They flash on instantly like any other LED, but fade to off like an incandescent bulb. There’s nothing at all the matter with this; it’s the instantaneous onset that increases the performance (speed and accuracy of message acquisition) of LED turn signals versus incandescents. In fact, there might be a safety advantage to this setup, because it increases the likelihood of an observer seeing some amount of light from the turn signal in any momentary glance.
I don’t know why Mazda have done this only on the CX-30, but that’s the only one so far.
The urgent, instant-on nature of LEDs is leading our society’s visual landscape in an unfortunate direction. Take the communication tower that site squarely below my mountain view. A few years ago they replaced the old red aviation lights with new LEDs. Now, at night, the tower blinks on suddenly, drawing your eyes and sending a tiny jolt of adrenalin saying, “Watch out!” That may suit the purposes of an aviation warning light, but it ignores aesthetics. There’s a major bridge beside an East Coast beach we visit every summer. The paired support towers sport six white lights that blink in the distance on every northbound beach walk. The lights crackle like firecrackers, in random rhythms because they’re not synchronized. They’re another eyesore, even from miles away.
Has anybody ever considered the psychological effect of modern police car lights, which put on a hysterical light show of blinking, random and chaotic? How many suspects, and cops for that matter, have had their thinking and behavior impaired by this panic-inducing spectacle?
The old red lights had a calm and a dignity, dimming and brightening on a human time scale. These new lights seem to anticipate a nighttime barrage of ever-increasing visual distractions, and they may be right. The proper balance between protection and distraction hasn’t been achieved. Good to know that Mazda engineers are at least thinking about this.
You’re assuming facts not in evidence, good sir; it is very unlikely Mazda did this fade-to-off thing on the CX-30’s turn signals for any reason other than eye candy. That’s what’s driving all of this turn signal frippery: fade-to-off, sequential-on, sequential-off, etc.
Lately there’s been new interest in what is called “human-centric lighting”. at the moment it’s primarily focused on spectral factors and circadian rhythms, but with growing focus on the potential for excessive blue light to cause problems and injuries. It seems likely there will eventually be some attention paid to flash and blink characteristics, but…well…æsthetics are not on the list of criteria for aviation lights. They are there for collision avoidance, full stop. Maximum performance of that job is overwhelmingly the most important consideration. After that comes power consumption, durability, dependability, time between failures, etc. The feelings of those of us down on the ground who happen to see them and happen to prefer the old incandescents? Not on the list.
Emergency-vehicle lights: mix of agreement and disagreement. The old incandescent rotating beacons consumed inordinate amounts of power, weighed a lot, burned out and broke down all the time, and were grossly unaerodynamic. However, the strobes that replaced them were a curse in any kind of bad weather. Unlike the rotating beacons, which created beams of light that could be visually followed back to the source, the strobes lit up the whole visual field for a very brief instant; it was very difficult to get a fix on where the vehicle was, and I suspect this contributed to crashes. LEDs are markedly better than strobes; their dwell time is much longer and their light distribution is more directionally deliberate. Some of them even rotate like the old beacons! But yes, there is still a “Super Size it!” tendency in America, and many of them are much more intense than they need to (or should) be.
I noticed the instant-on but fading LED turn signals (all synchronized) on the CX-30, and my first thought was one of amazement: that a struggling small OEM splurged on this (relatively) costly design. It adds cost to implement this sort of design (in a way it’s probably no less complex than a fancy sequential turn signal found on Audis or Lexi, since I assume a small microcontroller is required to do the fading), on the most affordable SUV offered by the carmaker.
I’m not in the market for this car but I give kudos to Mazda. Somebody (a designer I assume) surely had to fight big battles to get this design feature approved.
This what they did adds no cost. Turn signals are controlled by the BCM on pretty much all vehicles now, which means flash rates and fade-offs like this are a matter of no more than a line or two of code. Sequential turn signals require quite a bit more hardware (linear array of LEDs) but again, not more than a few lines of code to control.
No CD player…..fiddle with screen controls ’til ya’ die. Nope – This overly-fangled stuff can just strangle itself in complexity. I’m done.
Yeah, I’m still at the CD stage myself. But that’s not the problem for me. I can live without audible music. What bugs me is the lack of commonality across the automotive landscape these days when it comes to some of these (admittedly minor) controls. At least they haven’t tried reinventing the accelerator…. Or the brake.
When my wife got her Mini Cooper six years ago, the sales guy sat down and spent an hour explaining how to work this and how to access that. He admitted as how he’d like to have had longer, but she had over an hour to drive to get home – and peak hour freeway traffic is not when you want to be experimenting with controls in an unfamiliar brand-new car.
We were still discovering the odd adjustable parameter three years later – well, I was – most of which Jane greeted with “But why would you want to do that?”.
It’s nice to have all this adjustability, I’m not dissing that; if only there was across-the-board consistency in how to get there. Must be hell being a road tester…..
My wife says she plans to drive her 2012 Outback 3.6 indefinitely, but occasionally thinks about replacing it while it still has solid resale value. I’d encourage her to look at both the CX-30 and CX-5, but I think both are considerably smaller inside than the Outback. With one kid heading off to college this fall and the other in three years, back seat room — of which the Outback has plenty — is not as critical. But cargo space for all the crap we take on a road trip will still be important, and that’s another plus for the Outback.
She also talks periodically about buying a boat (since I have three cars, I have no grounds to object), and the Outback can tow the kinds of boats she’s looking at. Not sure about the towing capacity of either Mazda, if any.
I love the way Mazdas drive, and my 2018 6 Turbo feels so much more lively and fun compared to the Subaru. It might be a little quieter on the highway and rides just as well in most cases. The Outback is perfectly competent, comfortable and capable, but I would be bored out of my mind driving it all the time.
I have pretentious friends. I admit it. They ask me what they should buy and I say.. GO get a Mazda. It’s better than the Audi, the Volvo, the BMW and some even get as far as test driving and agreeing, it’s GREAT, but then they go lease an XC60 or Q5. It’s a drag. In some ways, the Mazda brand is equal to what Volvo was in the 60s and 70s. The smart choice. Not a BMW, not a Mercedes, not a Borgward, but smarter, more coy, better yet less prestigious. They’re SUCH appealing cars. Just get one.