Friday, July 29, 2016

Will Mazda Produce Its Own Pickup-based SUV?


Mazda has already announced that its next-generation pickup truck will be produced with Isuzu. With a collaborative partnership that spans more than a decade (Isuzu produces trucks for Mazda’s domestic market requirements), this agreement is seen as a logical extension. Of course, given Isuzu produces a pickup-based SUV on its pickup truck, the mu-X, will Mazda get something similar?

In an interview, Mr. Hiroshi Inoue, Executive Officer for Emerging Markets Business for Mazda has given a straightforward answer, “no”. But that’s not to say they considered making one.

In 2010, when Ford and Mazda collaborated with the Ranger/BT-50, Mr. Inoue said that Mazda seriously thought of developing its own SUV based on the Everest. However, Mazda executives said that the appeal of such a vehicle is limited. With sales mainly for emerging markets and the driving dynamics still nowhere near Mazda standards, the company concluded that it wasn’t wise to use their limited resources/manufacturing footprint to develop this sort of vehicle.

Moving forward, Mr. Inoue believes that going with a globally competitive product such as the CX-5 will help Mazda in this segment. He says it will continue to serve as an alternative to pickup-based SUVs. This is in line with the company’s strategy to offer a premium line-up for customers.

Meanwhile, when quizzed more about this next-generation pickup collaboration, Mr. Inoue said that the Mazda and Isuzu pickup will be different the same way the Ford and Mazda pickups are. Mazda’s next-generation BT-50 will retain the brand’s unique key points and won’t simply be a badge job. It will be built by Isuzu at its Samrong Plant in Thailand though.

And as for their partnership with Ford? With Mazda and Ford jointly owning the Auto Alliance Thailand (AAT) manufacturing plant (50/50 share), Mazda will continue to utilize the assembly plant to produce its passenger cars and CX-series models side-by-side with Ford’s pickup and SUV line.

52 comments:

  1. Isuzu + Mazda = IS-DA

    ReplyDelete
  2. Brace yourselves. Autoactiv's stupid remarks are coming.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I want to see the reactions of those Mazda fanboys that are also Isuzu haters hehe. A test of brand loyalty.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Same here. Already have popcorn ready.

      Delete
  4. Isn't Isuzu's based on the Chevrolet platform? So the Mazda is actually based on the Colorado/Trailblazer

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I was thought of the same.. but for the next generation, Isuzu will no longer use the Colorado Platform. GM and Isuzu have scrapped ther pick-up collaboration.

      http://fortune.com/2016/07/22/general-motors-isuzu-trucks/

      Delete
  5. Guys, the photo is for illustrative purposes only. This isn't the Mazda SUV. In fact, read the story. There wl be no Mazda pickup SUV.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Mazda won't build a third world vehicle. The CX-9 would suffice for a big suv.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Wala na ba iba article kundi mazda? Balato naman sa talent fee boss!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We came from their annual ASEAN press forum so apologies if we have a lot of news about Mazda.

      If you browse through the website, you'll find a lot of other stories also.

      Delete
  8. There is nothing to fear in the Isuzu and Mazda collaboration. Isuzu has the most primitive diesel engine while Mazda's broom broom girlish design never appealed to many buyers.

    From the time of its introduction, the Chevy Colorado is the most powerful pickup truck out there. Not even the 5-Cylinder Ford Ranger Wildtrak could match its tremendous power and torque.

    Unless the other truck manufacturers comes up with bigger and more efficient engines, the Chevy Colorado will reign supreme. It is the most formidable pickup truck of today and destined to rule the flat highways and rugged roads in the many years ahead !

    *Driven 2.8 Duramax Colorado from Manila to Mt. Pulag via Baguio. Then proceeding to the dangerous Kabayan-Tinoc-Asipulo trails to reach Kiangan in Ifugao province and back to origin*

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. For fu** sakes ! No one cares about the Craporodo. Because of you, I've started to hate these cars ! The Ranger even has more equipment than the Craporodo. You're so retarded that there's nothing else to say ! And, guys buy Mazda too ! So stop being so rude and retarded and get back to the showroom so more retards could buy your crappy pickup mr Chevy sales agent

      Delete
  9. The Trailblazer's 200Hp x 500Nm Duramax engine versus CX5 2.2 D Sky Active? With CX5's low output 173Hp x 420Nm of power & torque and priced at Php 1.985m? is pure BS from Mazda !!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Trailblazer is very heavy and the CX-5 is rated at Euro 6, and the SkyActiv D is one of the best diesel engines around. The CX-5 has better power to weight ratio, and has a far better fuel efficiency and driving dynamics. I also stay away from Ford and Chevrolet and stick to the Japs for reliability. Our neighbor's 2 year old Chevy Cruze was towed to the Casa 6 times annually. You won't get in that situation with a Toyota, Honda, or a Skyactiv generation Mazda.

      Delete
    2. With my 1.985m money, i would buy on that price range Toyota's FJ Cruiser or the 86. Mazda is fooling who?

      Delete
    3. The FJ cruiser sucks at all aspects, interior space, fuel economy, comfort, maneuverability. Most FJ cruiser owners use their car in the city, lol. Try driving an FJ cruiser as a daily driven car and you'll see that its a burden to be with. Good luck parking that in Metro Manila and weaving through traffic. Case is different if you live in the province though. But its not very comfy if you'll ask me.

      Delete
    4. If it's not your money then why complain about the price. People buy those cars because they can afford it ! No one cares if you can afford it or not

      Delete
  10. Also, not everybody needs a 7 seater PPV. Some of us would choose a more refined 1st world country Compact SUV over a 3rd world country Midsize SUV. I find driving and parking those behemoths to be cumbersome in Metro Manila.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ^Pinoys dont know or dont care if those being offered locally are 3rd world SUVs. What they see are "affordable" and "versatile" vehicles. True that the engine emissions of these SUVs wont pass the strict envi laws of the 1st world, pinoy authorities are busy with miners and coal plants.

      Delete
    2. That shows that we lag behind 1st world countries' mindset. Their mindset is different than ours, thats why we are still a 3rd world country. We can't even get past decades old trikes and jeepneys. Many Filipinos resist change, a factor why we are lagging behind our neighbors and the rest of the world. You'll see that with the current sales of the Adventure and Crosswind.

      Delete
  11. I agree power to weight ratio should be considered, yes! But it is only significant when it comes to comparing four wheel cars againts six or more wheel vehicles like delivery trucks or trailers.

    In the four wheel world of everyday driving, power to weight ratio effect could not be felt. Real situations show that the tested spec power and torque of the engine is the driving force that pushes the vehicle ahead which then dictates who is the leader in the class!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Could not be felt? Try driving a MX-5 and a Traiblazer, you'll really feel the weight. Or even a car with just you driving and a car full of passengers.Torque is only useful at acceleration, during floods and when you carry cargo around. In normal city conditions, its not necessary to have an overpowered car which would consume unnecessary fuel. Even though the engine is the heart of a car, raw engine power alone wouldn't dictate the leader in the class. You might want to know how enthusiasts chose the weaker MX-5 to the more powerful 86. Power is not everything, it is how power is delivered and consider the weight of the car.

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    3. I passed a lot of CX5's racing with Subarus on Sctex & Tplex. I know my Duramax engine's output by heart and also know both cars power and torque from the specs. After reaching 180kph both the CX5 and Forester let me go. So the numbers prove me right! lol

      Delete
    4. Based on that real life normal daily driving, where is then the significance of the power to weight ratio?

      Delete
    5. You get better driving dynamics and better fuel economy due to the the right amount of power for the weight. I won't argue with you in racing matters. Don't race on expressways, race on a race track. Anyway, I have my own opinion, and you have yours.

      Delete
    6. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    7. Maybe that is because the bulk of CX-5's sales is the much slower gas versions (specifically the lethargic 2.0L which is sold in 3rd world countries like ours.) If you drove that you will be sorely disappointed at the power deficiency. Although it handles nice in the twisting mountain roads, power is what most is needed especially in the highway. Same with the 1.5L Mazda3. If both were manual maybe it can mask its power deficit...

      Delete
    8. Drive safely guys.

      Delete
    9. Maybe because the CX5's and Subaru's decided to be safe and smart and leave racing and speeding on the track retard ! You're retarded in comments and you're sharing your retarded driving on the internet. I'd doubt that you've even seen this. You're just trying to sell your crappy pickup. I bet that you're one of the people that cut in line at the overpasses.

      Delete
    10. Lol mazda fanboys always making excusee even if truth stares them in the face that most cx5 and 3s are underpowered ricers. Looks fast but real slow. Sana they will stick a 0.8l on a cx5 to make it more safer

      Delete
    11. Reason why i give comments?
      Its because like everyone here, im a car enthusiast.It's fun to drive because there's always competition out there!

      Delete
    12. Total BS. Car people respect other car people's cars. Competition? You're comparing a crappy pickup to Cars like Foresters

      Delete
    13. Forester 2.0 is way underpowered trailblazer is cheaper and way more powerful

      Delete
    14. Have you driven the 2.0 ?

      Delete
  12. The CX-5 2.0 and the 3 1.5 may be underpowered, but the 2.5 CX-5 and the 2.0 3 as well as the other models are not. Underpowered ricers? I haven't seen a single Mazda that has been riced in the Philippines unlike your precious car brand.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Madalang lang yung 2.0 na 3 at 2.5 na cx5 halos lahat 1.5 tsaka 2.0 tanungin mo pa sa mazda dahil overpriced. Perfect combi naman ang isuzu at mazda pareho mabagal yung mga binebenta

      Delete
    2. Mazda is overpriced? Will you look at the competitors of the Mazda 3 and the CX-5. The Mazda 3 2.0 is priced similarly to the Altis, Elantra, Forte, Cruze, etc. Heck, the new Civic is the one clearly overpriced. And the AWD CX-5 is just priced at 1.7m, while the Rav4 and tucson go over the 2m mark. The diesel variants of the CX-5 and the 6 are priced competitively. There are no other Japanese midsize or Compact SUV that has a modern diesel engine. If you read the first drive reviews on topgear and here on carguide, they say that its one of the best diesel engines around. Also, the Mazda 3 2.0, Mazda 2 1.5, the CX-5 2.5 and the mazda 6 are no slouch.

      Delete
    3. Smart words to the last guy who commented. Much smarter than AutoRetard

      Delete
    4. tama kayo gawin natin priority ang hp sa pag buy Ng car. Since walang traffic dito pinas.

      Delete
    5. Eh di mag crosswind at adventure na lng tayo nyan kung ganon pagbasehan natin mad mura pa

      Delete
  13. The 1.5l 3 is nearly 1m. At that price you can buy a 1.8l cruze, 2.0 elantra, or add a 100k for a 1.8l civic or focus ecoboost, all of which are way more powerful and has more space inside than the 3. 1.2m for the 2.0 3? You can get cars for real men like the colorado or the trailblazer!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You forgot the top of the line Sylphy

      Delete
    2. The Cruze, Forte and elantra are crap. The only real competitors are the Mazda 3, Ford Focus the Honda Civic. The Altis and Sylphy are boring as hell. That is the point, if you are willing to spend 1.088m for the entry level civic and focus, you will undoubtedly spend more for the TOTL Mazda 3. The TOTL Civic is too expensive, while the TOTL Ford Focus is good, I would still choose the Mazda 3 TOTL vs the Focus. The Focus is fast but has poor fuel economy and reliability. I would only choose between the Mazda 3 and the Civic

      Delete
    3. The 3 is good if you are a slow driver and have no plans of going faster than 60. If you take it to the hiway the vios will probably smoke it

      Delete
    4. The Mazda 3 is the crappy car since at the same price you can get much more powerful cars with larger interior space at basically the same price. But if you're small with shorter legs that will be fine

      Delete
    5. As Ive said, the 1.5 Mazda 3 is underpowered but a lame vios couldnt outrun a mazda 3. The main reason why mazda's feel slow at first because of their linear acceleration as opposed to other cars who fake a sense of power with a sensitive throttle. People keep complaining about mazda's lack of interior space as if they are 6 footers. I'm 5'9" and the backseat is perfectly fine to me. There are other cars more spacious than mazda's but the mazda 3 has features and looks that its competitors do not have. The mateials used in the interior are more upmarket and have better quality than most of its competitors maybe except the new civic and the golf. If mazda is a crappy car then why did it won international accolades and awards? It was also top3 car of the world in 2014. Also more power doesnt mean that its a better car. Ask why carguide, autoindustriya and topgeae chose the weaker mx-5 as opposed to the more powerful 86

      Delete
    6. The 2.0 version is good but the 1.5 is anemic. Maybe it is meant for the city but the linear acceleration is a disadvantage in the stop and go traffic of the city. I'm about the same size as you (5-10) but I find the interior claustrophobic than other compact cars that it goes up against. The car that won plaudits is the 2.0 and not the anemic 1.5 which makes the bulk of 3's sales in the Philippines. I'm pretty sure that they would not choose the 1.5 version over the larger engine but similarly priced competitors of the 3. Maybe some people are more attracted to fancy interior, electronics and other fluff but I look for power and acceleration in a car.

      Delete
    7. I agree that the 1.5 lacks sufficient power and I think that customers bought it mainly for its looks, Made in Japan CBU, Yojin 3, and the sense of having an uncommon car in the road. Still, the 1.5 is good for city driving if you're not an aggressive driver. But the top pick is still the 2.0 in which most people would just buy CUV's or add a little more for entry level midsize SUV's or compact SUV's. The Focus and the Civic are the top choices when it comes to acceleration, but the Focus is not fuel efficient while the Civic RS is just too expensive for a Japanese compact sedan.

      Delete
    8. You guys are arguing how fast that car when it's not even meant to be fast. SMH

      Get a REAL fast fast car not some 4cyl piece of craps

      Delete