Mazda Problems

Such is its broad appeal that it's hard to peg down the Mazda CX-7, but that's the nature of the new-age so-called 'Crossover' vehicle. For some it would be a stylish family wagon, for others it might be a sporty all-rounder perfect for a weekend on the run. The reality is that it could satisfy many and varied uses for all manner of people. Mazda itself tried to define by saying it was a "sportscar on steroids" when launching it, claiming it would appeal to young parents in the 35-45 age group 'who wanted a car with style, performance and driving fun'.MODEL WATCHAlthough the CX-7 looked much like a traditional four-wheel drive wagon, and boasted all-wheel drive, it was not really likely to be used for anything more than light off-road driving. With limited ground clearance and the massive 18-inch alloys filling its wheel arches the CX-7 it was clearly aimed at city dwellers. But with accommodation for five it wasn't for the large family either, it was clear it wasn't trying to compete with the likes of the Ford Territory, the Holden Captiva or the Toyota Prado, which all offered seating for seven. No, the CX-7 was best suited for smaller families, or those with no kids at all.The engine was a 2.3-litre turbocharged four-cylinder unit, the same engine that powered the sporty Mazda6 and Mazda3 MPS models, but it was detuned for the CX-7 and put out 175 kW at 5000 revs and 350 Nm at 2500 revs. In the CX-7 it had to lug around a rather large lump of a car weighing almost 1800 kg and that put something of a dampener on the CX-7's performance and fuel economy. A six-speed automatic transmission was standard, and Mazda didn't offer a manual alternative.Final drive was through all four wheels and split between the front and rear as its active AWD system determined was for safe traction. Mazda offered two models, the base CX-7, replaced by the Classic in 2007, and the Luxury, the latter with a host more standard equipment. All had air-conditioning, cruise control, power windows and mirrors, remote central locking, a trip computer and an MP3-compatible sound system. In addition the Luxury had automatic climate control air, six-stack CD player, and leather trim instead of the cloth of the base model.IN THE SHOPIt's early days on the life of the CX-7, but so far owners are giving the big Mazda a clan bill, of health in terms of reliability. Carsguide has received very few complaints from owners, those that have been received are of a minor nature and mostly concerned with higher than expected fuel consumption. Despite the good field report make the usual checks to confirm regular servicing and look for signs of offroad use. Few are likely to have been driven offroad, other than down a gravel road, but it's worth making sure.IN A CRASHANCAP awarded the CX-7 its highest rating of five stars, which was not surprising given it had front, side and curtain airbags, antilock brakes, electronic brakeforce distribution, emergency brake assistance, traction control and electronic stability control.AT THE PUMPThe weight of the CX-7 makes it difficult to get decent fuel economy out of it, and not surprising that's the most common complaint of owners. Mazda claimed an average of 11.5 L/100 km, but the real life reality is 14-15 L/100 km. Adding to the cost brought on by the high consumption is the requirement to use Premium unleaded fuel.OWNERS SAYTony Gigliotti bought a CX-7 Classic in 2007 and has done 28,000kms in it since. He says the styling is well ahead of anything else of its type, and rates the ride and handling as excellent. He also likes the visibility afforded by the high ride height, the split rear seats, cup holders and the privacy blind over the cargo area, and reckons the retained value is high compared to others in the class. He's not so enamored with its fuel consumption, the 'cheap' plastics inside, the lack of rear cooling vents, and the blind spots in the rear quarter.The Gianakopoulos family uses its 2008 CX-7 Luxury mainly as family transport for two young children as well as the usual shopping trips. They have racked up 15,000 km in the time that they have owned the car and report that they have not had a problem with it. It seems well built, it's comfortable to ride in, and is a pleasure to drive, and they are happy with it overall. Their only complaint is its fuel use, which has been 16.7 L/100 km on average.David Devlin's CX-7 has done 30,000 km and the 66-year-old says it's a great car, one of the best he's owned in the last 45 years. He likes the power seats, rear camera and large storage areas, but dislikes the high fuel consumption.LOOK FORSporty looksRoom for five plus luggageGood ride and handlingSlurps fuelWell built.THE BOTTOM LINE: Looks good, drives well, but has a thirst for fuel.RATING: 75/100

The traditional prestige players are priced beyond the means of most of us -- but the qualitative difference separating the business class and the topline versions of the rest has diminished to the point of non-existence. All right, you'll look better in the car park comparison stakes if you drive the exxier choices listed here, but you're by no means always driving the better car.WAGONSOne's a classy Volkswagen Group sport wagon with a direct injection turbo petrol engine with the option of a cutting-edge transmission. And so's the Audi.The Czech-made Skoda is essentially a bigger in the body, more discreet, better riding and cheaper VW Golf GTI, the car that more than any other blurs the distinction between the prestige pack and the rest.The handling-enhancing electronic diff of the new GTI is on its way to the RS, so while the twin clutch DSG adds $2300, the generous standard kit (including tasty 18s) and skinny options list means there's not a lot more to spend. Rare is the Audi of which that can be said.The output of the front-wheel-drive Avant's turbo four is similar (132kW/320Nm plays Skoda's 147kW/280Nm), limited for its continuously variable transmission. Quattro and the full-fat engine sets you back another $13,000 -- and the premium is already just a bit silly.SEDANSOne's a perfectly balanced, rear-wheel-drive, inline petrol six with great steering and a six-speed ZF automatic. And so's the BMW.All right, we're comparing a big tarted-up Aussie taxi with a thoroughbred mid-size Bavarian sport sedan here, but what of it? Priced $33K south, this Falcon is probably the best-value car in the country on a metal for money basis and that price difference buys a lot of basic unleaded petrol for that 4.0-litre atmo six with its whacking 195kW/391Nm. If there's a quickish car that rides as well as the Falcon, it's known not unto us.As to the Bimmer, well, you'd go there if you could, even if the peerless handling comes at the price of run-flat tyres and an options list to make your eyes bleed.DIESELSOne's a European-built front-wheel-drive with a sophisticated turbodiesel engine and bank-vault build quality. And so's the Volvo. Now the first prestige Euro to be owned by a Chinese company, Volvo did rather well out of its association with Ford (certainly better than Saab did out of GM). But the years of proximity invite comparison.Long the choice of UK sales reps and families, the Mondeo's marriage of the diesel with an auto and capable dynamics give it a comfortable niche position at this level of the market. The Titanium edition gives the long Ford the trim and kit to compare with the premium brigade.Despite its more potent five-cylinder engine and Swedish aura of invulnerability, we just can't see the extra spend in the stolid Volvo.SUVSOne's the best-driving compact SUV and... uh, that's the BMW, actually. We've often said that if BMW made front-wheel-drive family cars they'd handle like Mazdas, so the two brands' respective four-wheel-drives should logically be even closer.Not quite, but not to the extent that the X3 is nigh-on $20K better. The X3's only real advantage in Australia's restricted conditions is its standard six-speed auto. Stop us if you're tired of hearing this, Mazda doesn't yet have a slusher for its diesel.While the Mazda's engine is slightly bigger and more potent than the BMW diesel, it has to haul a nearly two-tonne kerb weight. The X3 is 250kg lighter but, within, it's also the most dated Bimmer.How much is that badge worth, again?