juehoe

Looks like some Phuket condo developers have discovered a new scam.

On 25. August 2016 at 10:42 AM, DavisH said:

The cx-3 here is 2wd. cx-5 is larger and can come with 4wd. You could get a newish cx-5 4wd with their good diesel engine for about 1.2M. It's larger than the cx-3, which i think is too small especially for a family of 4. 

The 4WD Diesel CX-5 cost just under 1.7 million baht. There is a version with 2.0 L gasoline engine for about 1.2 million baht. But this variant doesn't include all the safety features. It is also underpowered with this engine.

Second hand vehicles of the 1st generation CX-5 with AWD and the Diesel engine cost about 850,000 baht.

On 24. August 2016 at 9:28 PM, Johnniey said:

Thanks a lot juehoe for your experience!

 

Can you get two adults in the back seat? I think all versions are 4 wheel drive which I don't really need(maybe once a year) but still love the look.

2 adults can sit quite comfortable in the back seats - at least for shorter trips. I also have a child seat in my CX-3 and my son love it. The former Mazda 3 is wider, but the passengers sit quite low.

Our family is not very tall, indeed. I am 1.7 m and the rest are shorter Thais. So we 3 adults and 1 child fit good. For longer trips, we use the CX-5, of course. 

Hyundai is a good choice (we had the H-1 van). The problem is that there dealership is quite limited. We had always to drive to Bangkok from Hua Hin...

The Mazda 2 is a good vehicle, too. The Diesel is surprising powerful. It's torque characteristic make the quite low power forgotten.

The Sedan seems to be more roomy, when you travel a lot of with passengers back. The hatchback has more cargo space. The sedan also looks quite good. The small sedans from other brands often look like a hatchback with rucksack.

Your analysis is correct. The CX-3 is more fan to drive but the HR-V has more space.

We drive Mazdas in Thailand since 2008 (3 Mazda 3, 2 CX-5, 1 BT-50 and also a CX-3). Mazda's technology is really surprising. The new CX-3 and the Mazda 3 have more power then the old version with Ford technology and uses much less fuel. Our old Mazda 3 used about 9 l per 100 km. New Mazda 3 and the CX-3 only about 6.7 l (Gasohol 95).

The Mazda's are more firm than the Honda's but I have a more secure feeling. Styling is a matter of personal taste. Personally I very like their styling. The interior styling is quite minimalistic.

The Mazda MZD infotainment system is a little bit different than usual. But I like, that I can operate it without touching the screen.

The sitting space is good, also for the second row. The trunk is quite small, indeed.

Mazda has still a lower resale value than Honda, but has improved.

The CX-3 is the better choice, when you like a good driving experience and can live with the small trunk space. The HR-V is more comfortable and has more usability.

I assume, that your marriage is registered in Thailand? Then you are protected by the Thai law. To my knowledge, there is no reason why you should go to the municipality.

My spouse bought a townhouse on her name in Hua Hin. I only signed as a witness.

Sometimes, there a local rules, which are different from other provinces. It may be worth to consult a lawyer.

It is perhaps always good to include a lawyer for important things to cross check the documents. I had to lean that even officials makes errors and things can be get complicated in the future.

Is there a stainless steel metalworker nearby? These guys often have good skills and can made it for you at your specifications.

Skyactiv refers to the Engine Technology..

Kodo Design refers to the body..

Ignoring the other electronics and stuff that makes the car work..

The chassis are still shared between Ford, Mazda and some models from Kia as well..

If Mazda really decides to based the next BT-50 off the Revo.. that will be very bad news for BT-50 fans indeed.

Skyactiv is not only a motor technology. It is the name for a whole set of technology - from the engine to the transmission, suspension and also chassis.

The new Mazda models no more share any (ancient) Ford technology. They are 100% Mazda. They share of course parts which every car maker uses (ABS, airbags etc.). The only remaining vehicle is the BT-50.

Ford and Mazda still share a factory in Thailand (as far as I know).

Why should be a Revo based BT-50 be a shock for Mazda fans (as I am, as you may have remarked...)?

Mazda is a small company and the development of a all new pickup may be too expensive. A new BT-50 may share parts from another company, but key features like engine, transmission and of course styling will come from Mazda.

My Mazda dealer assume, that a new Skyactiv BT-50 will appear in about 2 years.

some said the CX3 is based on the Mazda 2 chassis but with a new engine configuration.

I also learn above concepts - Mazda 3 is more smooth due to the 165hp engine, yet the CX3 is more responsive with shorter wheel base.

yes. The CX3 is based off the same platform as the Mazda 2. Same with the Ford Ecosport..

When buying a mazda, always try to see if the Diesel option is available.. Their Petrol engine still drinks loads of fuel.

Wrong.

The current Mazda 2 or CX3 have nothing to do with the Ford Ecosport or any other Ford.

Sent from my R2D2 using my C3P0 manservant

Actually....

Ford and Mazda have a lot in common..

They are using the same platform.. in this case the B3 platform for the mazda 2.. Which incidentally is also used by Ford for the Ecosport and Fiesta..

Take a second to understand that Mazda and Ford relationship runs deep.. Plus, it is very common for car companies to develop a platform together so that they can save cost.. 2 companies co-investing on a platform makes more sense for a mass market car..

The Mazda BT-50 also shares the same platform as....

The Ford Ranger.. What a surprise right.. heck, they are even made in the same factory, AutoAlliance Thailand!

Ford and Mazda had a lot in common. But this is the past.

The only remaining common vehicle is the BT-50. All others models with Skyactiv technology and Kodo design are from Mazda.

Mazda is now independent. They have a collaboration with Toyota where Toyota will use Mazda's Skyactiv technology for their cars.

Rumours say, that the next BT-50 may be based on the Toyota Pick-up.

The riding position for the passengers is better (higher). My little son never liked the Mazda 3 because he couldn't look outside. I prefer the higher seating position of the CX-3 and the smaller dimensions - and of course the better ground clearance. The ride is softer than the Mazda 3.

yeah, both Mazda 3 and the CX3 the interior are nice ( for SP version ).

thanks for the user insight. the ground clearance and softer ride are important considerations for driving on Thai roads, that rough speed bumpers and broken surface and floods. higher seating position, for driver seat only, or it also applies to the rear passenger seat ? I am not that young, getting out from a taxi rear passenger seat, what an embarrassing moment.

cheers

The passengers are sit higher and have a better view. But the space is narrower and there is no middle armrest.

You have to try both cars, first.

We have drive Mazda's since 2008 and also owned the former, Ford-based models.

The Mazda 3 is very fun to drive. The interior is very nice and «up class». The cream interior looks very nice, but is a little bit prone to get dirty. The car's ground clearance is not big and you have to be carefully when parking or on steep ramps. The front spoiler likes to hit obstacles.

So I have changed to the CX-3 (2l Benzine). It has less interior space and no middle armrests. It is as fun to drive as the Mazda 3 and cannot feel a big difference in performance compared to the Mazda 3.. The interior is also very nice.

The riding position for the passengers is better (higher). My little son never liked the Mazda 3 because he couldn't look outside. I prefer the higher seating position of the CX-3 and the smaller dimensions - and of course the better ground clearance. The ride is softer than the Mazda 3.

I never regret my decision. We also own a CX-5 and so space is not the problem.

Fuel economy is similar between 3 and CX-3. My average is around 6.5 l/100 km (Gasohol 95). The old Mazda 3 consumed more than 9 l/100 km for the same traffic conditions.

The Diesel version of the CX-3 makes only sense for long distance driving.

We buy our Mazda's (#6 now...) from Mazda Petchburi. It is one of the biggest dealers in Thailand and highly recommended.

It seems that bigger dealers are more competitive and have better staff. We bought one of our cars at Mazda Hua Hin, because it is much closer to our home. But we changed back to Mazda Petchburi.

The new Mazda 3 is quite a powerful model and fun to drive. The disadvantage is the low seating position and small ground clearance. That is the reason why I have changed to the new CX-3. It has less space, but is as fun to drive.

There will be an updated version of the Mazda 3, soon.

As mention by others - the personal driving style and the traffic situation have a high influence on the fuel consumption. Modern vehicles consumes generally less fuel (at the same power).

SUVs and pick-ups tend to be fuel guzzlers above a speed of 110 km/h.

Our average fuel consumption with the first gen Mazda CX-5 2.2 L Diesel was at 6.7 litres per 100 km (3 years, 55,000 kilometres). Wie uses the CX-5 around Hua Hin, with some trips to Bangkok or to our families in the north-east. My Thai wife and I try to drive smooth and seldom over 130 km/h.

We changed to the new face-lifted Mazda CX-5. It has no a fuel monitor, which helps to see the fuel consumption in different situations. On a smooth country-side drive (85 km/h, no high acceleration) I could achieve value just a little bit above 5 l/100 km. Highway trips with around 110/120 km/h are around 6.5 l/100km. City trips with a lot of stop-and-go can be up to 8.5 l/100 km.

We have decided, that my Thai wife keeps her Thai name. This helps to avoid «Farang prices». Many things are easier, too. There is another thing, when you plan to live in your country of origin. When living in Thailand, keeping the Thai name is the better option.

You have only to change ID card and passport, if your spouse officially took your family name. I know many couples, where the Thai spouse has 2 passports or ID cards (one for the country of the husband and keep the original name and documents in Thailand).

Publics schools are not very good in Thailand, indeed.

But privat schools are also not (very) expensive. Some public schools have special «English programs» with native-speaker teachers. The cost are around THB 150,000 per year.

The Diesel engine makes the difference - not the power, but the torque. The CX-5 Diesel has about the power of a Toyota Fortuner, but is about half a (metric) ton lighter. You should really try it...!

The CX-5 is underpowered with the 2 litre gasoline engine. Similar as the CR-V or X-Trail with this engine size and power.

.5b difference with 95 per km but with 91/e20 it will be different

remember that e85 gives you a power boost as well

Myself as long as e85 is 30% cheaper, its better than 91 as the car uses about 23-25% more fuel.

E20 has also 95 octane. Gasolhol 91 only 91, as shown in the name.

The alcohol in the E85 has a lower energy content than petrol. That is the reason for the lower fuel efficiency compared to Gasohol 95. But I don't found any power difference between Gasohol 95, E20 and E85 on my Mazda 3 and CX-3.

Over 10 years ago published studies have shown that airbags cause death in low speed crashes.

http://phys.org/news/2005-06-airbags-probability-death-accidents.html

the last line - “The evidence shows that airbags do more harm than good.”

Over 10 years ago - not now... Technology has improved quite a bit since 2005.

Wow... Thank you so much for the figures. It seems like not much cost savings using E85.

I also noticed you are big fan to Mazda ... Haha

E85 should make sense on long trips, but I newer test this.

Yes we become Mazda fans... With the new CX-5 we got the 7th Mazda (6 from the same dealer. I came to Mazda because 2008 the Mazda 3 was the only VW Golf style hatchback, which was available/affordable in Thailand.

I also like smaller brands. Meanwhile Mazda made a big jump in case of style/design, quality and technology.

My experience in driving a 2.0 petrol version CX5 on 95 is about 400km for each full tank. Not sure about 91 and E85.

What kind of petrol is recommended? Because back in my home country, I only have 95 or 97 to choose from. Not so much choices as compared to Thailand.

I made some intensive comparisons with fuel in my Mazda 3. E85 is cheaper, but the fuel consumption is much higher than with Gasohol 95, especially in urban/sub-urban use. My Mazda dealer recommends E85 on for long trips on the motorway.

My figures:

Gasohol 95: 7.0 l/100 km - (24.2 Bath/l) - 1.7 Baht/km

E 85: 8.75 l/100 km - (18.8 Baht/l) - 1.65 Baht/km

So I returned to Gasohol 95.

Thanks for the info. Given the size of CX-5, I think the fuel consumption is quite good... The newly facelifted CX-5 offers quite some interior upgrades and making it even nicer.

Update from a drive from Hua Hin via Bangkok to Isaan: 622 kilometres, 31.4 l of fuel —> 5 l/100 km, 20 km/l

Note that that is diesel consumption. It won't be as good for the 2.0 petrol. The diesel costs 1.53-1.69M and petrol is 1.22 -1.33M. How much would one need to drive to make up the difference in price between the diesel and petrol?

The CX-5 with 2.0 l petrol engine is also a little bit underpowered, in my option. You unfortunately get the full safety feature only in the top model (AWD Diesel).

Hi... Can i ask how's the fuel consumption for your CX-5 ? Roughly how many KM per full tank ?

The average diesel consumption after 50,000 kilometres is 6.7 l/100 km (14.9 km/l). The tank volume is 58 l, so about 850 kilometres. We newer drive at the end, normally fill-up after about 650 kilometres. The longest trip was 740 kilometres and we had still enough fuel. The fuel gage and the trip computer are quite accurate and you can trust the range values.

The fuel consumption depends on traffic situations and your driving style. We drive the CX-5 around Hua Hin, about 50-100 kilometres a day. About every month there is a trip to Bangkok and 4 times per year a trip to Roi-Et province.

We try to drive «moderate» and «smooth» (fuel economical) and seldom with speeds of more than 120 km/h on the highway. Every SUV or pick-up tends to be a fuel guzzler above 110/120 km/h. The CX-5's engine is very powerful and «seduces» to use its capabilities.

We just got the new CX-5 where you have more detailed information on fuel consumption. I could reach values just above 5 l/100 lm on smooth rides on the main road at a speed of around 85 km/h.

Some weeks ago, I was passenger and driver in the new Mazda 3 Sedan (Diesel, top model) on a drive from Roi-Et province back to Bangkok (about 550 kilometres). We were 4 people (3 Thai and me) and I was impressed about the space and comfort in the back seats (I am 1.71 metres tall). I was also impressed about the power of the small Diesel engine.

Do you mean Mazda 2?

Yes, it was a Mazda 2 - sorry. (It is hot and too many numbers...)

Your list of extras seems ok and is standard.

We use the brand Lamina for the window films and they seem to ok. We don't have a long-term experience, because we replace the car after about 3 years.

We have Mazda's since I am living in Thailand (2008) und just bought or 7th car from them. We are very satisfied with our dealer. But not all are the same. Mazda Petchburi is our dealer. It is the biggest in Thailand and has a low fluctuation in staff. So we have the same person of contact since years.

Mazda Hua Hin (where we live) has a bad reputation. We bought our 3rd car from them, but then change back to Mazda Petchburi for maintenance and buying new cars.

We currently own a CX-3, the new CX-5 and a BT-50. Our former cars were 3 Mazda 3 Hatchback (all Models) and the first generation CX-5.

Some weeks ago, I was passenger and driver in the new Mazda 3 Sedan (Diesel, top model) on a drive from Roi-Et province back to Bangkok (about 550 kilometres). We were 4 people (3 Thai and me) and I was impressed about the space and comfort in the back seats (I am 1.71 metres tall). I was also impressed about the power of the small Diesel engine.

IMHO, Mazda currently sells the technological most advance and nicest car, you can afford in Thailand. The interior and exterior design is a matter of personal taste, of course. I am very impressed of their engines and transmissions. It is quite a big step forward from the Ford technology they use in their former models.