Quick Drive: 2018 Mazda6 Signature

[William Maley]

The Mazda6 is a prime example of how making various improvements throughout the lifecycle can make a vehicle. Since the first model I drove back in 2014, Mazda has been messing around with various aspects such as the interior and NVH levels. Last year saw Mazda make some key changes to 6 with the big news being the introduction of a turbocharged 2.5L four-cylinder from the CX-9 crossover. This was to address one of the major shortcomings of the sedan, lackluster performance when it comes to making a pass or merging onto a freeway. There are some other minor changes to go with the updated engine that help make the Mazda6 feel a bit more rounded.

• The turbocharged 2.5L four-cylinder produces 227 horsepower (250 on premium fuel) and 310 pound-feet of torque. This is paired with a six-speed automatic to the front wheels. 
• I praised this engine in the CX-9 I drove back in the summer with a linear flow of power and no hint of turbo lag. Those carry over to the 6, along with the feeling of confidence that you’ll be able to pass or merge onto a freeway without any issue. It was quite startling how quick the 6 accelerated from 45 to 70 on a freeway on-ramp, only taking a few seconds. The six-speed automatic works seamlessly with the turbo engine, providing snappy up and downshifts.
• One other trait of the turbo engine I was impressed with was NVH levels. There was barely any engine noise or the whoosh of the turbo when accelerating.
• Mazda hasn’t messed with the 6’s chassis with the addition of the turbo engine. It still has the planted feeling and minimal body roll that imparts a lot of confidence to a driver. Steering is quick and provides the right balance of weight and feel.
• One surprise is how the 2018 model rides slightly better than the 2017 model as bumps are better isolated. This might be 
• Exterior enhancements are small with a new grille design, LED headlights, and the 19-inch wheels. But they do a surprising job of keeping of the 6’s exterior looking fresh.
• The enhancements for the interior really help Mazda’s ambition to become more premium. The dash has been slightly restyled and now comes with stitched upholstery and natural wood trim. The climate control system has been redesigned that makes it slightly easier to use.
• Mazda has started rolling out Apple CarPlay and Android Auto compatibility on the 6 for 2018 via an update. My test car had had the update, but I was unable to try it out as I could not pick the option in the system. I’m not sure of the issue, but I hope to try it once again in a future Mazda product.
• The turbo engine is only available on the Grand Touring, Grand Touring Reserve, and Signature. My test 6 was the top-line Signature that carries a base price of $34,750. With destination and some options, the as-tested price came to $36,140. If I was to buy one, I would drop down to the Grand Touring Reserve which begins at $31,750. I would lose out on the 360-degree camera system, Nappa leather upholstery, and digital gauge cluster. But I would keep a number of desirable features such as the ventilated front seats, heated steering wheel, heads-up display, and power front seats.
• Every Mazda6 review has seen me come to the same conclusion; the sedan is so close to being considered one of the best, but it is missing a certain thing. But this conclusion is different. Mazda has been able to fix the various issues I have complained about over the past few years and now have a very compelling midsize sedan. It's a shame that the 6 along with other midsize sedans are being overshadowed by the likes of crossovers. But for those who still have their heart set on a sedan, then I have no issue in recommending the 6 as an option worthy of consideration.

Disclaimer: Mazda Provided the 6, Insurance, and One Tank of Gas

2018 Mazda6 Signature Gallery

Year: 2018
Make: Mazda
Model: 6
Trim: Signature
Engine: Turbocharged 2.5L Skyactiv-G Four-Cylinder
Driveline: Six-Speed Automatic, Front-Wheel Drive
Horsepower @ RPM: 227 @ 5,000 (Regular), 250 @ 5,000 (Premium)
Torque @ RPM: 310 @ 2,000 rpm
Fuel Economy: City/Highway/Combined - 23/31/26
Curb Weight: 3,560 lbs
Location of Manufacture: Hofu, Japan
Base Price: $34,750
As Tested Price: $36,140 (Includes $890.00 Destination Charge)

Options:
Machine Gray Paint - $300.00
Scuff Plates - $125.00
Cargo Mat - $75.00

View full article

[G. David Felt]

@William Maley How is the interior space for big people? I grew up with my parents having a 626, my moms car and later my oldest sister got a Mazda 6 in 2007 which if I was in the front no one could sit behind me. 

So how is the interior space and rear headroom with that coupe sedan design?

[William Maley]

2 minutes ago, dfelt said:

@William Maley How is the interior space for big people? I grew up with my parents having a 626, my moms car and later my oldest sister got a Mazda 6 in 2007 which if I was in the front no one could sit behind me. 

So how is the interior space and rear headroom with that coupe sedan design?

@dfelt I happen to be 5'8" or 5'9" and I fit ok behind the front seat with a decent amount of head and legroom. Legroom will become tight if a tall person is up front.

[G. David Felt]

16 minutes ago, William Maley said:

@dfelt I happen to be 5'8" or 5'9" and I fit ok behind the front seat with a decent amount of head and legroom. Legroom will become tight if a tall person is up front.

Awesome, much appreciated, thank you.

[A Horse With No Name]

If Chevrolet put the 2.0 into a lower level of Malibu it would be an obvious choice over this...but given the extra power...I think I would take the Mazda over the Malibu.

Nice looking car and I wish them well with it.

Chris

[Suaviloquent]

DFelt how is this a relevant question for gods sakes you can’t fit yourself either headroom or legroom wise behind the driver seat adjusted for yourself in any midsize sedan currently available for sale.

 

?

 

[G. David Felt]

2 minutes ago, Suaviloquent said:

DFelt how is this a relevant question for gods sakes you can’t fit yourself either headroom or legroom wise behind the driver seat adjusted for yourself in any midsize sedan currently available for sale.

 

?

 

ALWAYS RELEVANT!!!

The biggest missed place in ALL AUTO REVIEWS is to clearly talk about how people sitting in the front will affect those sitting in the back. There is NEVER a perfect front seat sitting and back seat sitting that fits a perfect 4 or 5 adult placement. This is the LIE that the auto industry has not owned up to. You and your coworkers decide to go out to lunch and your the one who offered to drive. You and one coworker are US average size of 5'8" another is 5'6" tall but very large size and the other is 6'2" tall and you drive a Camry. Who sits where and why. 

IMHO, ALL Auto Reviews should cover sizing and how it fits for the AVERAGE American but also if you have Large size people or tall people or even very short. 

Just like many other areas in life that people either try to fit everyone into or ignor it totally, the interior space of sizing for a single person is a lie when you will always have a variety of sized people. They should clearly state a 4 adult person space seating in every car or SUV on how people will fit. Fine if 5'8" tall is the standard they want, but then clearly state how much head room, hip room, leg room, etc. is left or if there is not enough.

We have discussed many times on how tight the compact to mid size 4 door sedan market is and how even when multiple OEMs state the same or near same seat size, one fits more comfy than another.

The reviews are heavily biased on just the driver and not taking into account passengers.

I could go on but I hope you get my point.

[Robert Hall]

Back seats are usually for children or pets.     How many car buyers actually care if large adults fit in the back seat of a car?  It seems like an edge case, not a common use case. The driver space is the most important measurement.    However, I could see back seat space for adult passengers being a concern if you are a taxi, Uber or Lyft driver. 

[ykX]

9 minutes ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

Back seats are usually for children or pets.     How many car buyers actually care if large adults fit in the back seat of a car?  It seems like an edge case, not a common use case. The driver space is the most important measurement.    However, I could see back seat space for adult passengers being a concern if you are a taxi, Uber or Lyft driver. 

Exactly.  These cars are family cars and usually back seat reserved for kids or pets.  Especially, in mid size sedan category.   You want to fit 5 full size adults in a car, you need to buy a full size sedan or CUV.

My dad has 2016 Mazda 6 and one time I was driving  it with three 8 to 11 year old kids in the back, and they fit perfectly fine there,  

Edited October 16, 2018 by ykX

[A Horse With No Name]

2 hours ago, ykX said:

Exactly.  These cars are family cars and usually back seat reserved for kids or pets.  Especially, in mid size sedan category.   You want to fit 5 full size adults in a car, you need to buy a full size sedan or CUV.

My dad has 2016 Mazda 6 and one time I was driving  it with three 8 to 11 year old kids in the back, and they fit perfectly fine there,  

That was the beauty of the Chrysler cab forward cars like the Intrepid and Concorde. They had loads of interior space in the back. We loved the one that we owned. 

[G. David Felt]

5 hours ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

Back seats are usually for children or pets.     How many car buyers actually care if large adults fit in the back seat of a car?  It seems like an edge case, not a common use case. The driver space is the most important measurement.    However, I could see back seat space for adult passengers being a concern if you are a taxi, Uber or Lyft driver. 

Sorry Cubical, I have to down vote this. Even when I was 12 I was already 6' tall and my sisters were almost as tall as I even being older. Many people do not want a minivan  or full size van to carry adults. 

Adult carrying is VERY IMPORTANT and I think many are to focused just on themselves the driver when you also need to think about others you carry. This is not a corner case but a much more common use case. I see it daily coworkers cramming into tiny cars, corpool in cars or SUVs and everyone is cramped it looks like. More common than many realize.

[Drew Dowdell]

2 hours ago, A Horse With No Name said:

That was the beauty of the Chrysler cab forward cars like the Intrepid and Concorde. They had loads of interior space in the back. We loved the one that we owned. 

Those weren't mid-size thought the Intrepid could sell as low as a mid-size in poverty spec.  When those were out, the mid-size at Chrysler/Dodge would have been the Cirrus/Sebring and Stratus/Avenger respectively.   That would have been the equivalent of the Malibu or Contour.

The LH cars overlapped with a bit of Taurus/Sable and Crown Vic, and Lumina/Impala/Grand Prix/Bonneville/Regal/LeSabre/Park Ave/Cutlass Supreme/Intrigue/88/98 

[Robert Hall]

8 minutes ago, dfelt said:

Sorry Cubical, I have to down vote this. Even when I was 12 I was already 6' tall and my sisters were almost as tall as I even being older. Many people do not want a minivan  or full size van to carry adults. 

Adult carrying is VERY IMPORTANT and I think many are to focused just on themselves the driver when you also need to think about others you carry. This is not a corner case but a much more common use case. I see it daily coworkers cramming into tiny cars, corpool in cars or SUVs and everyone is cramped it looks like. More common than many realize.

I'm not an Uber driver and would never carpool, so I really don't care.  I've driven before w/ coworkers going to lunch, etc.  Never had anyone complain about backseat space in my Jeeps.    I do recall cramming a couple tall coworkers in the back of my Mustang years ago, was a bit of chore for them getting in and out of the back.  Likewise when I rode in the back of a '15 Mustang and a '76 Porsche 911--tight.  But for a 10 minute ride to lunch, no big deal.

For people w/ children, that's what minivans and SUVs are for...

[A Horse With No Name]

15 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Those weren't mid-size thought the Intrepid could sell as low as a mid-size in poverty spec.  When those were out, the mid-size at Chrysler/Dodge would have been the Cirrus/Sebring and Stratus/Avenger respectively.   That would have been the equivalent of the Malibu or Contour.

The LH cars overlapped with a bit of Taurus/Sable and Crown Vic, and Lumina/Impala/Grand Prix/Bonneville/Regal/LeSabre/Park Ave/Cutlass Supreme/Intrigue/88/98 

You are very correct in that...but they were not really full sized either.

[Robert Hall]

2 minutes ago, A Horse With No Name said:

You are very correct in that...but they were not really full sized either.

They were as big as the FWD LeSabres, etc of the time IIRC..pretty big.  I liked them, had several '99-04 Intrepid rentals, a couple 300Ms, a Concorde and an LHS as rentals back in the day..really liked the design inside and out, and they drove quite nicely.. 

Edited October 16, 2018 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[A Horse With No Name]

1 minute ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

They were as big as the FWD LeSabres, etc of the time IIRC..

Really...hmmmm.....Never really thought of the Intrepid/Concorde as that much larger than a Mazda 6.

Passat also has decent interior room for a lot terribly large car.

[Robert Hall]

2 minutes ago, A Horse With No Name said:

Really...hmmmm.....Never really thought of the Intrepid/Concorde as that much larger than a Mazda 6. 

Actually longer than the Impala or LeSabre....the LHS was DTS sized.  The 300M was a bit shorter w/ it's cropped rear. 

Edited October 16, 2018 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[Drew Dowdell]

6 minutes ago, A Horse With No Name said:

You are very correct in that...but they were not really full sized either.

Well I disagree on that... particularly the last LHS/Concord.... that thing was a titanic and that's coming from a guy who loves big cars. 

[A Horse With No Name]

2 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Well I disagree on that... particularly the last LHS/Concord.... that thing was a titanic and that's coming from a guy who loves big cars. 

Hmmm....Okay. The last of the Interbreeds and Concordes fell to rust and transmission failure seemingly years ago here in Central Ohio.  My memory (like much of the rest of my so called thinking...) is probably flawed.

Thankfully, youngest kid goes away to college next year...so Beetle can be trade in fodder for a BRZ or Miata.

Back into a fun car....could not convince the wife we needed a V8 Camaro.

[Drew Dowdell]

1 minute ago, A Horse With No Name said:

Hmmm....Okay. The last of the Interbreeds and Concordes fell to rust and transmission failure seemingly years ago here in Central Ohio.  My memory (like much of the rest of my so called thinking...) is probably flawed.

Thankfully, youngest kid goes away to college next year...so Beetle can be trade in fodder for a BRZ or Miata.

Back into a fun car....could not convince the wife we needed a V8 Camaro.

I just had a V6 Camaro Convertible and that thing was way more fun than it should have been in that config.  Felt light-weight, fun to toss around, and the V6 had plenty of scoot without being excessive. 

[A Horse With No Name]

Just now, Drew Dowdell said:

I just had a V6 Camaro Convertible and that thing was way more fun than it should have been in that config.  Felt light-weight, fun to toss around, and the V6 had plenty of scoot without being excessive. 

I am working on that with the wife. I actually really like the 6th gen Camaro, Also  GM has a fantastic Blue BTW. Interior is an upgrade over 5th gen also.

[ykX]

38 minutes ago, dfelt said:

Sorry Cubical, I have to down vote this. Even when I was 12 I was already 6' tall and my sisters were almost as tall as I even being older. Many people do not want a minivan  or full size van to carry adults. 

Adult carrying is VERY IMPORTANT and I think many are to focused just on themselves the driver when you also need to think about others you carry. This is not a corner case but a much more common use case. I see it daily coworkers cramming into tiny cars, corpool in cars or SUVs and everyone is cramped it looks like. More common than many realize.

Sorry, you are not a typical case. According to the latest statistical data average US male is 5 feet 9 inches tall and female is 5 feet 4 inches.  This car can perfectly accommodate two average males according to dimensions and @William Maley .

Edit: two average adults in the back with four average adults total.

Edited October 16, 2018 by ykX

[A Horse With No Name]

1 minute ago, ykX said:

Sorry, you are not a typical case. According to the latest statistical data average US male is 5 feet 9 inches tall and female is 5 feet 4 inches.  This car can perfectly accommodate two average males according to dimensions and @William Maley .

As a sumo wrestler (or at least Sumo/Shrek sized) you would think he would support Japanese products...

[Drew Dowdell]

^ This....

@dfelt is doomed to a life of Suburbans and Escalades. 

[A Horse With No Name]

Probably two guys 6'3 if no one adult is in the back seat behind them.

[Robert Hall]

1 minute ago, Drew Dowdell said:

^ This....

@dfelt is doomed to a life of Suburbans and Escalades. 

Yes, like NBA and NFL players..doomed to having to buy full size SUVs to haul around their posse of hangers-on...

[ykX]

1 minute ago, A Horse With No Name said:

Probably two guys 6'3 if no one adult is in the back seat behind them.

I meant two adults in the back seat which four average adults total.

[A Horse With No Name]

3 minutes ago, ykX said:

I meant two adults in the back seat which four average adults total.

Since I have checked out the Mazda 6 of a regular member here....yes...seems reasonable.

4 minutes ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

Yes, like NBA and NFL players..doomed to having to buy full size SUVs to haul around their posse of hangers-on...

Someone needs to sell bling and 26 inch rims. A market for everything...

[G. David Felt]

2 hours ago, A Horse With No Name said:

You are very correct in that...but they were not really full sized either.

They were Roomy! :D 

[G. David Felt]

@Drew Dowdell @Cubical-aka-Moltar @A Horse With No Name @ykX

So this year, was 50, colonoscopy, total cardio and while I easily passed everything, I have put on weight, 310lbs. 40" waist. So September 1st I went into body builder mode. ?️‍♂️ Low fat, veggie, dairy and protein focused diet. Dropped 15lbs so far, gained an inch in the chest, lost one in the waist. making good weight gains in lifting. Gonna see how close I can get back to my college days of body building, but I admit, it will be hard as I do not see myself giving up wine and chocolate when I watch a movie over the weekend.

Will keep ya guys updated, but no I doubt unless Cadillac brings back the Brougham that I will ever be back in a car as I like my comfort and need to always make sure I have room for myself in the seat behind myself. 

That way, I make sure everyone riding with me is comfortable. After all, Happy wife, Happy Kids, Happy Friends, Happy Life!

Convinced the wife to give Skiing a try this year, so she is also in the gym with me working hard to get into better shape for Ski season! ⛷️ 

Now ya know how I measure rear seat room. Set the front seat for my comfort, get out, get in behind the front seat I just set and see how I fit. 

 

[G. David Felt]

Me in a little car!

Not sure what is worse, big guy in little car or sadly what I see around here all the time. Big short guy on a little bike.

[ccap41]

It makes zero sense for a major auto company to build around the 0.1% of the population. If they did that people 5' and under would struggle, which there are more people I run into that are 5' or less than over 6'6".

[G. David Felt]

10 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

It makes zero sense for a major auto company to build around the 0.1% of the population. If they did that people 5' and under would struggle, which there are more people I run into that are 5' or less than over 6'6".

Missing the Point, easy to build by just having longer auto's. Selling the ATS and CTS L edition from China here in the US as regular auto's would give them room no other luxury automaker has and would make the back room seat debate a moot point. Very simple to do by adding 6 inches of leg room, tall people can slouch then and fit into the coupe roof line on everything that is out there now.

[ccap41]

1 minute ago, dfelt said:

Missing the Point, easy to build by just having longer auto's. Selling the ATS and CTS L edition from China here in the US as regular auto's would give them room no other luxury automaker has and would make the back room seat debate a moot point. Very simple to do by adding 6 inches of leg room, tall people can slouch then and fit into the coupe roof line on everything that is out there now.

Buy said longer autos. They already make them. Why even ask about ones that are classified as "mid size" when you know you need longer autos? 

ATS-L(Chinese ATS) would absolutely not be in a class of "room no other luxury automaker has". 

[G. David Felt]

2 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

Buy said longer autos. They already make them. Why even ask about ones that are classified as "mid size" when you know you need longer autos? 

ATS-L(Chinese ATS) would absolutely not be in a class of "room no other luxury automaker has". 

They do not already make them here, you cannot get the L edition of the cadillacs here and if you could there is nothing the German or Asian brands have that would compete with an ATS that has additional 16 inches of rear leg room.

[frogger]

55 minutes ago, dfelt said:

Me in a little car!

 

 

Some years in the NBA have boosted Marcin's car budget

 

[ccap41]

And I'm not missing the point. I think you are. You ask about size for every vehicle no matter the class and then act surprised or like the automaker is oblivious to different size humans. 

28 minutes ago, dfelt said:

They do not already make them here, you cannot get the L edition of the cadillacs here and if you could there is nothing the German or Asian brands have that would compete with an ATS that has additional 16 inches of rear leg room.

Then go the next size up, CT6. There are vehicles that will fit you and you know from the outside which ones those are. 

ATS vs ATS-L is not an additional 16 inches of rear legroom. It's 3.3 inches. Which is still smaller than a CTS so if you already said the CTS was too small why are you even bringing up the ATS? If you are interested in an ATS-L, buy a CTS.  

[Drew Dowdell]

1 hour ago, dfelt said:

They do not already make them here, you cannot get the L edition of the cadillacs here and if you could there is nothing the German or Asian brands have that would compete with an ATS that has additional 16 inches of rear leg room.

The reason they don't sell those here is that they're not up to the US safety standards for side impact.  Get a CT6. 

[ocnblu]

I don't think I want any more cars in my considerable, serial "collection".  Crossovers, SUVs or pickup trucks are where it's at.

[G. David Felt]

Guess I have still failed as in the past Cadillac always sold tweener cars that were just a bit bigger than the Germans. Then they moved to building cars that compete with the Germans and they have gotten nailed over pretty much the same crap the Germans have in their auto's and on top of this with identical rear car seats we have people complain about Cadillac but it is OK with the Germans.

So my point is use the US safety version but extend it to be equal in length to what is sold over in China and have a bit bigger auto. Take away the stupid talking points.

FYI, I have been in the CT6, very nice car, but the rear I cannot fit in without the front seat pulled up and I slouch. Still not big enough for my body. Yes I am the exception to many here.

[regfootball]

Per Car and Driver

2018 Mazda6 signature

C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 6.4 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 16.0 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 33.3 sec
Rolling start, 5–60 mph: 6.7 sec
Top gear, 30–50 mph: 3.2 sec
Top gear, 50–70 mph: 4.2 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 14.9 sec @ 97 mph
Top speed (drag limited, mfr’s claim): 149 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 184 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.81 g

C/D FUEL ECONOMY:
Observed: 21 mpg
75-mph highway driving: 36 mpg
Highway range: 590 miles

 

 

2018 Buick Regal Sportback FWD (just sayin)  Mazda continues to underwhelm, all the time, time to stop glorifying their run of the mill

C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 5.6 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 13.8 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 28.8 sec
Rolling start, 5–60 mph: 6.1 sec
Top gear, 30–50 mph: 2.9 sec
Top gear, 50–70 mph: 4.0 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 14.2 sec @ 101 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 131 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 162 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.87 g

C/D FUEL ECONOMY:
Observed: 24 mpg
75-mph highway driving: 31 mpg
Highway range: 490 miles

Edited October 16, 2018 by regfootball

[regfootball]

On 10/15/2018 at 2:28 PM, A Horse With No Name said:

If Chevrolet put the 2.0 into a lower level of Malibu it would be an obvious choice over this...but given the extra power...I think I would take the Mazda over the Malibu.

Nice looking car and I wish them well with it.

Chris

bingo.  But now the new LSY in the XT4, i would love to see if it makes it to the Malibu.  Improved NVH, and maybe if they added some tune to it.  NOW you're talkin.

20 hours ago, dfelt said:

ALWAYS RELEVANT!!!

The biggest missed place in ALL AUTO REVIEWS is to clearly talk about how people sitting in the front will affect those sitting in the back. There is NEVER a perfect front seat sitting and back seat sitting that fits a perfect 4 or 5 adult placement. This is the LIE that the auto industry has not owned up to. You and your coworkers decide to go out to lunch and your the one who offered to drive. You and one coworker are US average size of 5'8" another is 5'6" tall but very large size and the other is 6'2" tall and you drive a Camry. Who sits where and why. 

IMHO, ALL Auto Reviews should cover sizing and how it fits for the AVERAGE American but also if you have Large size people or tall people or even very short. 

Just like many other areas in life that people either try to fit everyone into or ignor it totally, the interior space of sizing for a single person is a lie when you will always have a variety of sized people. They should clearly state a 4 adult person space seating in every car or SUV on how people will fit. Fine if 5'8" tall is the standard they want, but then clearly state how much head room, hip room, leg room, etc. is left or if there is not enough.

We have discussed many times on how tight the compact to mid size 4 door sedan market is and how even when multiple OEMs state the same or near same seat size, one fits more comfy than another.

The reviews are heavily biased on just the driver and not taking into account passengers.

I could go on but I hope you get my point.

The Mazda6 is tighter than Malibu, especially in the back.  The front is comparable but the Mazda6 rear seat is the weak spot.  Just enough tighter that adults won't like it IMO.  One of the reasons besides bad NVH (at least back in 2014 or whatever) I crossed off the Mazda6 pretty quickly.

12 hours ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

Back seats are usually for children or pets.     How many car buyers actually care if large adults fit in the back seat of a car?  It seems like an edge case, not a common use case. The driver space is the most important measurement.    However, I could see back seat space for adult passengers being a concern if you are a taxi, Uber or Lyft driver. 

I end up in the back seat often enough that it makes a diff to me.. Especially on long trips.

[Robert Hall]

14 minutes ago, regfootball said:

bingo.  But now the new LSY in the XT4, i would love to see if it makes it to the Malibu.  Improved NVH, and maybe if they added some tune to it.  NOW you're talkin.

The Mazda6 is tighter than Malibu, especially in the back.  The front is comparable but the Mazda6 rear seat is the weak spot.  Just enough tighter that adults won't like it IMO.  One of the reasons besides bad NVH (at least back in 2014 or whatever) I crossed off the Mazda6 pretty quickly.

I end up in the back seat often enough that it makes a diff to me.. Especially on long trips.

Different use cases for different people, understandable.  I've never ridden in the back seat of my own cars.

[regfootball]

3 hours ago, dfelt said:

Missing the Point, easy to build by just having longer auto's. Selling the ATS and CTS L edition from China here in the US as regular auto's would give them room no other luxury automaker has and would make the back room seat debate a moot point. Very simple to do by adding 6 inches of leg room, tall people can slouch then and fit into the coupe roof line on everything that is out there now.

 

16 minutes ago, dfelt said:

Guess I have still failed as in the past Cadillac always sold tweener cars that were just a bit bigger than the Germans. Then they moved to building cars that compete with the Germans and they have gotten nailed over pretty much the same crap the Germans have in their auto's and on top of this with identical rear car seats we have people complain about Cadillac but it is OK with the Germans.

So my point is use the US safety version but extend it to be equal in length to what is sold over in China and have a bit bigger auto. Take away the stupid talking points.

FYI, I have been in the CT6, very nice car, but the rear I cannot fit in without the front seat pulled up and I slouch. Still not big enough for my body. Yes I am the exception to many here.

EVERY YEAR, when at the auto show, and in the Cadillac section, it is brutally clear one huge reason why Cadillac doesn't make sales.  Nearly everyone bitches about the useless back seat of the ATS, and even people comment on the cramp front quarters of the CTS (although that is more sort of due to console design).  Cadillac used to have the original CTS be a tweener above the 3 series.  The ATS fails in back seat room compared to 3 series and Mercedes, just by a noticeable enough amount to make a difference between usable and not usable.  CTS is in a higher price class so it seems woefully small inside in comparison to perceived value vs sticker.

Cadillac's heritage calling card, up until the last 10-15 years or so was spaciousness = luxury.  Until they return to providing space expected in each class they will lose sales once people arrive at the test drive and put the car on for size.

[Robert Hall]

1 minute ago, regfootball said:

 

Cadillac's heritage calling card, up until the last 10-15 years or so was spaciousness = luxury.  Until they return to providing space expected in each class they will lose sales once people arrive at the test drive and put the car on for size.

One thing about that DTS my sister had, it had great rear seat space and legroom.  Her STS is good, a bit less  (FWD vs RWD proportions)...but still quite spacious...

[regfootball]

4 minutes ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

Different use cases for different people, understandable.  I've never ridden in the back seat of my own cars.

mid sized sedans often get tested for fit of kid car seats too.  Surprisingly, many of them are tight for getting car seats behind the fronts and having good access through the door.

One car that is large but deceptively tight in the back, is the Fusion.  Its not wholly uncomfortable, its just not as efficient as one would think considering how large the car is.

Edited October 16, 2018 by regfootball

[Robert Hall]

38 minutes ago, regfootball said:

mid sized sedans often get tested for fit of kid car seats too.  Surprisingly, many of them are tight for getting car seats behind the fronts and having good access through the door.

One car that is large but deceptively tight in the back, is the Fusion.  Its not wholly uncomfortable, its just not as efficient as one would think considering how large the car is.

One thing I've noticed with the Fusion and Malibu and other current midsize sedans is how the roof slopes and the rear door opening slopes..seems like getting in and out of the back seat would be awkward for adults..

[William Maley]

2 hours ago, regfootball said:

Per Car and Driver

2018 Mazda6 signature

C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 6.4 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 16.0 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 33.3 sec
Rolling start, 5–60 mph: 6.7 sec
Top gear, 30–50 mph: 3.2 sec
Top gear, 50–70 mph: 4.2 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 14.9 sec @ 97 mph
Top speed (drag limited, mfr’s claim): 149 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 184 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.81 g

C/D FUEL ECONOMY:
Observed: 21 mpg
75-mph highway driving: 36 mpg
Highway range: 590 miles

 

 

2018 Buick Regal Sportback FWD (just sayin)  Mazda continues to underwhelm, all the time, time to stop glorifying their run of the mill

C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 5.6 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 13.8 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 28.8 sec
Rolling start, 5–60 mph: 6.1 sec
Top gear, 30–50 mph: 2.9 sec
Top gear, 50–70 mph: 4.0 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 14.2 sec @ 101 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 131 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 162 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.87 g

C/D FUEL ECONOMY:
Observed: 24 mpg
75-mph highway driving: 31 mpg
Highway range: 490 miles

Is the review in question? 2018 Buick Regal Sportback FWD

I'm going to burst some bubbles here. I recently just sat in a Regal Sportback over the weekend at a local auto show (more on that in an upcoming Afterthoughts) and I hate to say it, I was disappointed. Many of the plastics used were somewhat middling and didn't feel as nice as the one found in the Mazda, let alone the recent Hyundai Sonata and even the Toyota Camry XSE. For a car that stickered around $38,000, it made me shake my head. The cars just listed - sticker between $2,000 to $6,000 less.

Now I'll give the Regal that it has the easier infotainment system to use. I'm quietly hoping that Mazda gets their act together and introduces something modern in the next year.

Is the Mazda6 the be all, end all midsize sedan? No. There are some areas that would make me hesitate to recommend the 6 like the stiff ride. It does some things quite well that it has earned a place in the sedans I would recommend which includes the Chevrolet Malibu Hybrid and Hyundai Sonata.

I'm withholding comment on the driving dynamics of the Regal till I can get my hands on one. On paper, it may seem like the better car. But I have a sneaking suspicion that I would still pick the 6. 

[A Horse With No Name]

Honest question where does the Camry fall short compared to the 6 the Malibu and the Sonata?

1 hour ago, regfootball said:

mid sized sedans often get tested for fit of kid car seats too.  Surprisingly, many of them are tight for getting car seats behind the fronts and having good access through the door.

One car that is large but deceptively tight in the back, is the Fusion.  Its not wholly uncomfortable, its just not as efficient as one would think considering how large the car is.

I find the Fusion awkward enough that I told the rental car company to stop sending them to me for our school debate trips.

2 hours ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

One thing about that DTS my sister had, it had great rear seat space and legroom.  Her STS is good, a bit less  (FWD vs RWD proportions)...but still quite spacious...

DTS was a nice car. I like them.

[A Horse With No Name]

2 hours ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

Different use cases for different people, understandable.  I've never ridden in the back seat of my own cars.

I ride in the back seats. Part of me would not mind a car with real back seat room.

2 hours ago, ocnblu said:

I don't think I want any more cars in my considerable, serial "collection".  Crossovers, SUVs or pickup trucks are where it's at.

From the standpoint of vintage cars I feel the same way. If I ever get another old car it will be a truck.