Last post on Jan 12, 2007 at 11:04 AM
You are in the Mazda Mazda5
What is this discussion about?
Mazda MAZDA5, Van
#2010 of 2063 Re: Operator Error? [isda65]
Sep 29, 2005 (6:12 pm)
Though, let's not forget about profit (real and projected). Though this $9.6 might ache in the short run, take a look at the big picture here. Let's assume a conservative $800 per car net income for Mazda on the Mazda5 (Ford and GM USA have some of the lowest per car profits of around $500, Toyota USA has a nice $1200 per car profit, and I'm sure Mazda falls somewwhere in between). Mazda has 3400 MZ5 units sold or waiting to be sold in the US. Let's assume they all get sold. 3400 units with an $800 net income comes to $3,200,000. $9,630,000 - $3,200,000 = $6,430,000 in the red. Less, but still somewhat significant. Projected 2006 sales for the Mazda5 were a low 15,000 units. Still, let's assume the MZ5 hits only 12,000 units next year. 12,000 x $800 = 9,600,000. First year losses wiped out. Net of $3,000,000 over a year and a half.
I love my Mazda5 (as does my better half) and we will be singing its praises for a long time. Is Mazda doing some damage control with this recall? I guess so. What manufacturer doesn't? However, the main advertising force for this auto has apparently been the owners, and if they are kept happy they will continue to rave about this car. Word of mouth is the best way to sell anything. Combine that with a big traditional advertising push next year and all these recall costs will be long gone. I would imagine Mazda sees the cost of putting everyone in an MPV as insurance for good sales next year.
A couple other items. Right now, Mazda is offering $4,000 cash back on new MPVs. The $1500 plus $50 per day works out to about $3000 per month. Even if the recall does take 6 weeks, Mazda is still only looking at $3600 per MPV. Mazda corporate still makes out okay. Dealers have what seems to be a few good low-mileage deals on the lot. Puts more MPVs on the road, too!
This car is selling like hotcakes everywhere else in the world. Mazda was taking a risk bringing it here. I (and yes, I am a layman) don't think sales are going to be affected at all because of the recall. I mean, come on, Saab just had to recall 300,000 cars the other day because of a possible ignition overheating and subsequent risk of fire. 300,000!!!!!!! Talk about a financial loss! And do you think people will second guess buying a Saab just becuase of it?
I dunno. I guess to summarize, If there is anything I'm sure of, it's that for whatever reason Mazda is handling things the way they are, more money for Mazda is the only real reason to do it!
Sep 30, 2005 (7:44 am)
I wonder if you can actually get a base MPV for less.
Still, I think I'd rather drive a 5.
Sep 30, 2005 (7:54 am)
"However, the main advertising force for this auto has apparently been the owners, and if they are kept happy they will continue to rave about this car. Word of mouth is the best way to sell anything."
The sales of this car in the USA and Canada are almost entirely based on word-of-mouth. If Mazda doesn't treat us well, that will stop, rest assured... so I'd hope that they continue to keep us sweet.
Like I said, I'll take an extended warranty.
#2013 of 2063 Re: MPV [ateixeira]
Sep 30, 2005 (12:06 pm)
Yes, you can (well, I can anyway) get a MPV LX for under $17k, list over $23k. Which would put the MPV under the price of the 5, until some incentives come (and maybe they will in the aftermath of the recent press on the exhaust issue, if sales sputter because of it).
Oct 01, 2005 (11:16 pm)
I still haven't seen any real 0-60 mph data. Car connection did an informal test result as follows:
"We sampled it with both five-speed manual and optional four-speed automatic transaxles with two normal-sized adults and no cargo on board and found it, well, slow. Informal 0-60 runs with the automatic were 11 seconds plus."
This is similar to my experience driving an MZ5 automatic.
#2015 of 2063 Re: Operator Error? [isda65]
Oct 02, 2005 (3:02 pm)
I agree 100% and posted the same opinion in the 'problems and solutions" discussion. There is no way this about high revs in second gear only. Any car really feels wrong when driving 65 mph in 2nd. No one would do that for long periods of time. And what will programming the auto trans ECU do? Lower the rev limit or require a computer upshift at high RPM? The thing already downsifts in case you forget and stop in 4th so ehy not upshift? and how ugly is the warning sticker going to look and where are they going to put it????? An ugly stick just to try to put a pretty spin on an engineering mistake.
You can drive any auto in second- by accident. Particularly in cars with shifters on the steering wheel. It happens and you can tell because the car drives badly. No other fires I know of from this.
The heat shield is the real fix. That's why they are spending all of the bucks on this. Otherwise they would call and give the cars back. They can schedule the repair when the heat shield and the new stickers come in and save some dollars.
#2016 of 2063 Re: Operator Error? [sandiegoguy]
Oct 02, 2005 (5:43 pm)
Another reason an auto-tranny car could be driven in 2nd on the highway is if there is a failure which causes the tranny to drop into "limp home" mode, which is 2nd gear on the few auto tranny I've owned in recent years. And that isn't under control of the driver. The driver should slow down in that case, but this may be a big reason why Mazda is adding the heat shield.
#2017 of 2063 Re: Operator Error? [rideyourbike]
Oct 04, 2005 (6:49 pm)
rideyourbike wrote: "Saab just had to recall 300,000 cars the other day because of a possible ignition overheating and subsequent risk of fire. 300,000!!!!!!! Talk about a financial loss! And do you think people will second guess buying a Saab just becuase of it?"
Hmm . . . I own two SAAB's and haven't received anything in the mail yet. But, anyone who is a SAAB-o'phile knows where the problem is, and should have been on top of this potential problem for years. Of course, just as in the Mazda5, it's a exhaust heat related issue, but a different problem due to the "unique" (some will say peculiar) nature of SAAB's.
For those who may not know, all SAAB's have had their ignition switches on the center console between the bucket seats. Yep, that's right -- on the floor! Why, you say . . . rather than locking the steering wheel, the Swede's thought it best to lock the transmission gear selector, hence the unique-to-SAAB location of the ignition switch. If it is a manual transmission, it is locked in reverse, as the car must be placed in reverse before removing the key.
Since all of ignition switch wiring, along with wiring for the power windows (also on the center console), run above the center tunnel area which includes the catalytic converter and exhaust system, a long heat shield attaches to the bottom of the center tunnel underneath the chassis. This heat shield rusts out over time, and guess what happens? The iginition wire insulation melts, and bingo . . . you have the beginnings of an electrical fire.
As I said, most SAAB owners know of this problem, and change out the exhaust heat shield when signs of rust out appear. But, some recalls seem to be designed to protect those who seem not to be able to protect themselves - this is one of those.
#2018 of 2063 Recalibration of engine and transmission?
Oct 14, 2005 (11:57 am)
What do they mean by changing the "calibration" of the engine and transmission? Will this effect performance? If the recall was found because of a three engine fires by people driving at highway speed in 2nd gear, and a tag and heat shield will solve the problem - why mess with the engine and transmission? Just wondering!
#2019 of 2063 Re: Recalibration of engine and transmission? [bluegrass_guy]
Oct 14, 2005 (12:05 pm)
Because the whole driving in second gear thing is a "cover" story for the real problem. I suspect simply insufficient shielding. I doubt the engine will be toyed with but the tranny should get an autoshift point for going to a higher gear once a certain RPM is sustained in Manual Mode. It already has it for going to a lower gear.