I traded my 2023 CX-5 Signature for a CX-70 Turbo S Premium after test driving it. I too was thinking this thing was just too big and wished for something CX-60 size. The way the CX-70 handles changed my mind. While it has more heft, 1000lbs more, I got used to it very quickly. Despite the heft I think it sticks in turns better than the CX-5. The seats have better bolstering and are much more comfortable. The lane centering feature reduces fatigue while driving on the super slab. And, there's a bonus I was not expecting. It gets better MPG that our CX-5 Signature did. Around 10% to 15% better. Driving to and returning from a visit with relatives I was cruising at 80mph most of the time while going against the wind and dealing with heavy crosswinds. MPG? 27+. The best the CX-5 would do in the same situation was 24 to 25 mpg. My wife and I now have an abundance of cargo space, small storage space, and bigger gas tank that gives us significantly more range. We've put over 800 miles on it in just a week and are loving it. It is worth checking out. The CX-70 is a keeper.
Three things I wish were different: 1) the oversized center console restricting driver leg room is not good, 2) Wish the length was shortened to differentiate with the 3 row class (200 inches is pretty long!), and 3) wish ventilated front seats were standard. It falls short of being a PERFECT competitor against the VW Atlas Cross Sport and even possibly taking some sales from X5 and other potential luxury customers who are on a budget. This thing could have been a unicorn.
The Atlas would be good with a different engine. The 2.0 TSI have too many problems. I have a VW EOS with same engine and it is giving me a hard time this days. I do not think the Atlas is in the same category. If possible lease it, you will sleep better.
Just bought one - it may be small but there's a market for these. I had absolutely no interest in a CX90...too much of a mom car and I would never ever use the third row. I'm a single male in my 30's. Needed something with more cargo space than my Alfa Romeo Stelvio but still handled well. Test drove an X5 and MDX but couldn't justify the 10-20K price difference for comparable equipment. So far I like it a lot - I do wish it was about 5" shorter. I chose black over red - the design is amazing except for the rear quarter. In black it slims it down and makes it look less bulbous.
I have a 22 CX9 that we have a year left on the lease. I do like the colors available in the CX70. I’ll probably get the phev for the gas savings in about a year.
Just a note here because it was mentioned. The CX-60 is actually about the same size as the CX-50. I think it is 2" longer, but narrower. The CX-80 with the US powertrains is really more the middle ground between the CX-50 and CX-70/90.
@@Realistick The CX-80 is a slight modification of that platform in the sizing, but we are still talking about a 194" vehicle, and none of the engines in it are approved in the US except I think the PHEV is the same. Not 100% sure on that. I even wrote Mazdausa and asked if they had plans to replace the CX-70 that exists now with a CX-80 with US engines in a year or two.
4:27 Thank for for mentioning it earlier, and here it is visible - why is the center console so ridiculously wide? It is an old gripe of mine. I used to drive smaller cars and had no problem with my right knee (am 6'3" also, and long legs). Now the driving position is compromised for taller drivers despite the vehicles being bigger, all for the sake of questionable styling. I wish Japanese companies would start hiring designers above 5'7" (that's 170 cm for you, Japan).
Was super interested in the 70, drove two of them, one had a bad wheel and a sagging headliner. As soon as you spec them up they are in Lexus RX territory which is what I wound up buying.
Spot on review. I was one of the people waiting on the promise of the CX-70 but disappointed that it was just a CX-90 with two rows. It is nice but I wanted something sporty and shorter to fill the gap between the 50 and 90 with the motor, trim and finish of the 90. It would have been a banger and unlocked an entirely different market for them. If I wanted this I could have just bought the CX-90 and kept the third row permanently folded down.
The CX-90 currently has aggressive offers from Mazda. I don’t need three rows but got 1.9% APR for 72 months. I just keep the third row down all the time and I’m all set.
I only did the 0-60 test with the standard model because it was a service loaner if i remember correctly. The others were new inventory so I was trying to avoid doing a launch!
What he said about the PHEV being a “low” monthly with the $7500 is not entirely true. IF you wanted the same features as the Turbo S premium you would need to get the highest Premium Plus PHEV trim which is almost 59K. When you subtract the 7.5k from that you come to roughly the same as the Inline 6 Turbos S Premium. And trust me you want the power of the inline 6, being someone who’s driven both I can say that there is a huge difference.
It’s not the same price in a lease, nowhere close! A lease payment is based on the difference between MSRP and the residual value after the term. Most of the time, this means financing 20 or 25 grand for 3 years. 7500 makes a much much bigger difference there than when you’re financing normally. I might make a video about it soon because it’s a neat loophole!
A lot of comments about why the centre console is so wide, with so little storage. That’s the sacrifice Mazda’s chassis engineers made to create such great balance. The engine is essentially behind the front wheels, so the transmission had to be right under the console. Nothing in its class handles like the CX70 or CX90. If your priorities are lots of storage and a soft cushy ride, look elsewhere. If you like to drive and value precise and predictive handling then Mazda is a great choice.
Yeah, burned SOOO many of us who were wanting a slightly bigger cx-60 This is just way too large, and I come from the land of Excursions & F250 (Texas lol)
I have a cx90, when I fold the third row it becomes a cx70, when I need to carry 7 people, it can do what the cx70 can't do. I don't understand what the cx70 is for? Mazda needs to bring the more attractive and sporty cx60 to North America, if they are worried about it being too small, they can just lengthen the body to the size of a BMW X5, it will definitely be more popular than the 5-seater cx90.
The CX-60 is not substantially larger than the CX-5. This is why they didn't bring it over. Mazdas have typically been criticized for being "cramped" compared to their rivals. In the large/midsized two row category, the CX-70 takes care of that, while having best in class build quality, size, and overall presentation. And the inline 6...
It’s still six inches longer, I believe I said “larger or more substantial” and the CX-60 does have the right platform/powertrain for that! They could have brought over the CX-80 too, which is far larger. So now there’s a pre-existing car with a new nameplate that addresses a small niche without filling the big hole in the lineup.
Well no, my biggest complaint is that it leaves a hole in the lineup, and that you lose a row without gaining much of sny cargo. I just think ~most~ would be better off buying the CX-90, folding the third row and saving a little cash! It’s a good car, but very niche when the CX-90 exists!
@@Realistick I do agree that the large gap in their line-up is frustrating, but I don't think you save any cash. Trim for trim they are the exact same price. If you never have a need for a third row (which many people do not) the 70 would still be the better purchase. Especially if you don't like bright chrome which I don't care for. I also personally like the wheels on the 70 better than the 90.
@@hskrgrad There’s incentives on the CX-90 that make the price lower and some of the nuanced differences in the trims means that you have more features trim-for-trim with the 90 (with the exception of adaptive cruise). The style is subjective, I do dig the red interior and I could see people going for the CX-70 because of that if they don’t need the extra row but that’s a small niche. Which is why I think this deserved a more quiet launch without an entirely new nameplate!
@@janoycresnova9156there's reportedly no plans to bring the CX-60 to the US. And if they were to import CX-60, there's no reason to expect any dimensional changes.
Don't try to nag another Mazda design , i know it is not your Subbie despite all the cheese of the world . If CX70 sells at good price it will be a great option to CX90 as not all need 7 or 8 seats
I think you missed the point of the video and I like mazda more than Subaru🥸My biggest issues derive from the hole mazda left in the lineup and the fact that if you fold the seats of a cx-90, it’s cheaper and essentially just as practical (minus a cubby😂)
@@Realistick If you do like the Mazda act in less nagging way and titles on your vids. We all see that CX70 is very very similar to CX90 , as I said if Mazda prices it right with incentives and lease specials and make it more affordable that CX90 in real life than CX70 will make sense . Even if it will cost 30 to 50usd less than CX90 on a monthly lease in comparison to same price/trim CX90. Does not matter that MSRP is the same as CX90 , real life deal and incentives will be the most important factor if CX70 will be making sense .
8:10 "less seats" - Fewer seats. I noticed that trend on RUclips. Is Google telling content creators to dumb down the language to that degree? It's jarring.
they wasted the name (cx-70). I was looking for something the size of cx-50 but with the RWD-based 3.3L powertrain 🙃
Guess we can hope Mazda will do that with a CX-60.
I traded my 2023 CX-5 Signature for a CX-70 Turbo S Premium after test driving it. I too was thinking this thing was just too big and wished for something CX-60 size. The way the CX-70 handles changed my mind. While it has more heft, 1000lbs more, I got used to it very quickly. Despite the heft I think it sticks in turns better than the CX-5. The seats have better bolstering and are much more comfortable. The lane centering feature reduces fatigue while driving on the super slab. And, there's a bonus I was not expecting. It gets better MPG that our CX-5 Signature did. Around 10% to 15% better. Driving to and returning from a visit with relatives I was cruising at 80mph most of the time while going against the wind and dealing with heavy crosswinds. MPG? 27+. The best the CX-5 would do in the same situation was 24 to 25 mpg. My wife and I now have an abundance of cargo space, small storage space, and bigger gas tank that gives us significantly more range. We've put over 800 miles on it in just a week and are loving it. It is worth checking out. The CX-70 is a keeper.
@@DrT1250 👏🏽👏🏽 thanks for that info man!
Ty for this video.👍
We bought the inline 6 3 wks ago. Love it so far. Good size for us without the 3rd row we didn't need.
Congrats! Thanks for watching.
Three things I wish were different: 1) the oversized center console restricting driver leg room is not good, 2) Wish the length was shortened to differentiate with the 3 row class (200 inches is pretty long!), and 3) wish ventilated front seats were standard. It falls short of being a PERFECT competitor against the VW Atlas Cross Sport and even possibly taking some sales from X5 and other potential luxury customers who are on a budget. This thing could have been a unicorn.
The Atlas would be good with a different engine. The 2.0 TSI have too many problems. I have a VW EOS with same engine and it is giving me a hard time this days. I do not think the Atlas is in the same category. If possible lease it, you will sleep better.
They should have just given us European cx80 without a 3rd row
Just bought one - it may be small but there's a market for these. I had absolutely no interest in a CX90...too much of a mom car and I would never ever use the third row. I'm a single male in my 30's. Needed something with more cargo space than my Alfa Romeo Stelvio but still handled well. Test drove an X5 and MDX but couldn't justify the 10-20K price difference for comparable equipment.
So far I like it a lot - I do wish it was about 5" shorter. I chose black over red - the design is amazing except for the rear quarter. In black it slims it down and makes it look less bulbous.
You have the BEST HAIR of any online reviewer!!! 🤩
What a lazy attempt by Mazda. They didnt even bother removing 3rd row cupholders.
😂
Take another look, they’re not cup holders.
I have a 22 CX9 that we have a year left on the lease. I do like the colors available in the CX70. I’ll probably get the phev for the gas savings in about a year.
Just a note here because it was mentioned. The CX-60 is actually about the same size as the CX-50. I think it is 2" longer, but narrower. The CX-80 with the US powertrains is really more the middle ground between the CX-50 and CX-70/90.
Good point! I think the bigger appeal to it for me is the powertrain and platform.
@@Realistick The CX-80 is a slight modification of that platform in the sizing, but we are still talking about a 194" vehicle, and none of the engines in it are approved in the US except I think the PHEV is the same. Not 100% sure on that. I even wrote Mazdausa and asked if they had plans to replace the CX-70 that exists now with a CX-80 with US engines in a year or two.
There is no CX-60 in North America. It's pointless comparing euro cars to what we have here. It won't be the same vehicle by the time it comes over.
@@Realistickbut I do think you are right. The redesigned Mazda CX5 with its popularity in the US, will better fill that size gap.
@@sass1420agreed. Mazda should have made the CX-70 a two-row CX-80.
4:27 Thank for for mentioning it earlier, and here it is visible - why is the center console so ridiculously wide? It is an old gripe of mine. I used to drive smaller cars and had no problem with my right knee (am 6'3" also, and long legs). Now the driving position is compromised for taller drivers despite the vehicles being bigger, all for the sake of questionable styling. I wish Japanese companies would start hiring designers above 5'7" (that's 170 cm for you, Japan).
0-60 in 6.9 seconds? The other PTA moms better get the hell outta the way. 🤯
And that’s the slowest one🥸
@@Realistick Zoom, zoom-“STEVEN, leave your brother alone!”
@@JohnNathanShopper 6.9 seconds for the base engine is perfectly fine for its class. That's faster than most.
Was super interested in the 70, drove two of them, one had a bad wheel and a sagging headliner. As soon as you spec them up they are in Lexus RX territory which is what I wound up buying.
Spot on review. I was one of the people waiting on the promise of the CX-70 but disappointed that it was just a CX-90 with two rows. It is nice but I wanted something sporty and shorter to fill the gap between the 50 and 90 with the motor, trim and finish of the 90. It would have been a banger and unlocked an entirely different market for them. If I wanted this I could have just bought the CX-90 and kept the third row permanently folded down.
Makes sense!
Hahahaha love the title of your post!
What month are the cheaper trims coming out?
Beautiful car inside out
I was hoping the CX70 would have been closer to the size of a CX60. I didn't want a CX90 so we ordered an X5 40i M Sport.
The CX-90 currently has aggressive offers from Mazda. I don’t need three rows but got 1.9% APR for 72 months. I just keep the third row down all the time and I’m all set.
Not sure what the purpose of this car.
To make Mazda more money.
And it’s honestly amazing.
Not for everyone
Some good points. But why no 0 to 60 times for all the engines? Only one was given.
I only did the 0-60 test with the standard model because it was a service loaner if i remember correctly. The others were new inventory so I was trying to avoid doing a launch!
Mazda really removed the rear seats and changed the badge, then called it a day lmao.
What he said about the PHEV being a “low” monthly with the $7500 is not entirely true. IF you wanted the same features as the Turbo S premium you would need to get the highest Premium Plus PHEV trim which is almost 59K. When you subtract the 7.5k from that you come to roughly the same as the Inline 6 Turbos S Premium. And trust me you want the power of the inline 6, being someone who’s driven both I can say that there is a huge difference.
It’s not the same price in a lease, nowhere close! A lease payment is based on the difference between MSRP and the residual value after the term. Most of the time, this means financing 20 or 25 grand for 3 years. 7500 makes a much much bigger difference there than when you’re financing normally. I might make a video about it soon because it’s a neat loophole!
A lot of comments about why the centre console is so wide, with so little storage. That’s the sacrifice Mazda’s chassis engineers made to create such great balance. The engine is essentially behind the front wheels, so the transmission had to be right under the console. Nothing in its class handles like the CX70 or CX90. If your priorities are lots of storage and a soft cushy ride, look elsewhere. If you like to drive and value precise and predictive handling then Mazda is a great choice.
Can the rear seats be taken out of the CX-90?
No, not per user manual. And it’s not just taking out the seats but keeping a flat load floor
How's the transmission lag?
Better! Still not as responsive as I’d like but an improvement over my first impressions with the cx-90 upon release
Yeah, burned SOOO many of us who were wanting a slightly bigger cx-60
This is just way too large, and I come from the land of Excursions & F250 (Texas lol)
The middle console is too wide making the seats too narrow in comparison to Highlander or Pilot.
I have a cx90, when I fold the third row it becomes a cx70, when I need to carry 7 people, it can do what the cx70 can't do. I don't understand what the cx70 is for? Mazda needs to bring the more attractive and sporty cx60 to North America, if they are worried about it being too small, they can just lengthen the body to the size of a BMW X5, it will definitely be more popular than the 5-seater cx90.
This thing should be at least a coupé or boxy SUV
The only car Mazda still makes that's worth a damn is the Miata. Otherwise, the rest of the lineup has much better competition.
The CX-60 is not substantially larger than the CX-5. This is why they didn't bring it over. Mazdas have typically been criticized for being "cramped" compared to their rivals. In the large/midsized two row category, the CX-70 takes care of that, while having best in class build quality, size, and overall presentation. And the inline 6...
It’s still six inches longer, I believe I said “larger or more substantial” and the CX-60 does have the right platform/powertrain for that! They could have brought over the CX-80 too, which is far larger. So now there’s a pre-existing car with a new nameplate that addresses a small niche without filling the big hole in the lineup.
When the only complaint you have left about a car is its name, I think Mazda nailed the rest pretty good😂
Well no, my biggest complaint is that it leaves a hole in the lineup, and that you lose a row without gaining much of sny cargo. I just think ~most~ would be better off buying the CX-90, folding the third row and saving a little cash! It’s a good car, but very niche when the CX-90 exists!
@@Realistick I do agree that the large gap in their line-up is frustrating, but I don't think you save any cash. Trim for trim they are the exact same price. If you never have a need for a third row (which many people do not) the 70 would still be the better purchase. Especially if you don't like bright chrome which I don't care for. I also personally like the wheels on the 70 better than the 90.
@@hskrgrad There’s incentives on the CX-90 that make the price lower and some of the nuanced differences in the trims means that you have more features trim-for-trim with the 90 (with the exception of adaptive cruise). The style is subjective, I do dig the red interior and I could see people going for the CX-70 because of that if they don’t need the extra row but that’s a small niche. Which is why I think this deserved a more quiet launch without an entirely new nameplate!
It's like a bigger cheaper X5. Problem is X5 is pretty nice. It should have been a cheaper X3. Fail.
Don’t understand why manufacturers are making the engine bays so damn ugly
The exterior design isn’t working at all.
🚗 💛
This is what you call laziness
The CX-60 is too small. It literally is slightly smaller inside than the CX-50
There is no CX-60 in NA yet. We have no clue what the dimensions will be. It likely will be different from the euro version.
@@janoycresnova9156 If it's a CX-60, it will be the same as the global version
@@janoycresnova9156there's reportedly no plans to bring the CX-60 to the US. And if they were to import CX-60, there's no reason to expect any dimensional changes.
Don't try to nag another Mazda design , i know it is not your Subbie despite all the cheese of the world .
If CX70 sells at good price it will be a great option to CX90 as not all need 7 or 8 seats
I think you missed the point of the video and I like mazda more than Subaru🥸My biggest issues derive from the hole mazda left in the lineup and the fact that if you fold the seats of a cx-90, it’s cheaper and essentially just as practical (minus a cubby😂)
@@Realistick If you do like the Mazda act in less nagging way and titles on your vids.
We all see that CX70 is very very similar to CX90 , as I said if Mazda prices it right with incentives and lease specials and make it more affordable that CX90 in real life than CX70 will make sense .
Even if it will cost 30 to 50usd less than CX90 on a monthly lease in comparison to same price/trim CX90. Does not matter that MSRP is the same as CX90 , real life deal and incentives will be the most important factor if CX70 will be making sense .
8:10 "less seats" - Fewer seats. I noticed that trend on RUclips. Is Google telling content creators to dumb down the language to that degree? It's jarring.
Let me guess, CX-80 is the one with half the third row seats folded down.
Mazda isn’t affordable and value driven brand anymore . The whole line up is a little high unless you buy the basic car