Average new car payment $554

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by MCompact
I abhor FWD in anything much bigger than a Mini. The E84 has a default 40/60 front/rear torque split so it performs like a RWD car in most situations. In a perfect world, everything in my garage would be RWD except for the Wrangler- but my wife wanted AWD. I decided to keep the Clubman since it is a perfectly fine car for my daily commute.

I hate FWD, and refuse to ever own another one (owned an Infiniti G20 years ago). I used to LOVE RWD cars. Had 2 Trans Ams (LT1, LS1), a modded 5.0 GT (Fox), a C6 Z06, and 370Z, and then I got a Jeep Grand Cherokee w/HEMI and QD2, and realized just how much I'd been missing. Two CX5's later, I doubt I ever own another RWD vehicle again unless it's a Viper (the one sports car that I would pave my driveway for). AWD is just...better, and whether it's transverse, or longitudinal, doesn't matter a hill of beans to me as long as it's 50/50 torque dist or better. I drive my CX5 just like my 370Z (similar weight distribution), and it behaves the same on/off throttle in corners, etc. When I floor it in the rain, it just squats and GOES. All 310# of torque at 2000rpm doesn't bother it a bit.

LOL, so you bought a car that runs 100% on FWD unless front wheels slip, runs on FWD platform, but you hate FWD? I apologize, this is actually sad, not funny.

FWD only is far from reactive AWD. I have no wheel spin, when I accelerate out of corners it powers the rears, etc. Absolutely different from not having awd.
 
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by 2015_PSD
You are saying that in similarly equipped cars, the Mazda is better in every way? Based upon what I see under my AMG, if the GLC is similar (and I have to assume they are) there is no way the Mazda is the equivalent, much less better. Not sure what is happening with your neighbor's AMG, but there is nothing the Mazda can do to best my AMG--except in price, I will give that to Mazda. It is solid, rattle free, well designed and engineered, nothing Mazda has comes close. Also, if the Mazda outperforms the GLC (what year cars are we talking about anyway?), it definitely will not in 2020 given that MB just announced a 416HP 2.0L engine to replace all existing 2.0L engines. I question it outperforming the existing 2.0L engines in Sport+ mode. My wife's C300 and the GLC300 I recently had as a loaner car hauls the mail in Sport+.

In the end, if Mazda is your car, by all means carry on, but to suggest that Mazda tops Mercedes is a serious stretch...

The 416hp motor is AMG only.
We are talking 2019, current.
I have not looked under my Mazda or a GLC300.

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a27255337/2019-mazda-cx-5-reliability-maintenance/

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a15101871/2016-mercedes-benz-glc300-glc300-4matic-test-review/

This is the very best data I could find for the GLC300. It appears it is 0.3 faster to 60, and then the advantage fades and by the quarter mile the Mazda has pulled away, as well as beating it 30-50 and 50-70, regardless of using a 6 speed to its cog shuffling 9 speed. Motortrend got it at half a second slower to 60. Brakes and handling appear very similar, as well. Mpg is better on the cx5. It can also take 87 octane.

Here is motortrends test of the two:
https://www.motortrend.com/cars/mer...es-benz-glc300-review-long-term-arrival/
https://www.motortrend.com/cars/mazda/cx-5/2019/2019-mazda-cx-5-turbo-first-test-review/


The transmission and 3.0TT in your AMG are awesome, but the cx5 has a more refined ride (quieter, less structure flex) and stiffer body structure, although if they cost the same, etc. Id go with the AMG for that sweet motor and transmission. It really is a joy how it cracks off those shifts.

A. Mercedes has smaller engine.
B. Mazda 2.5T weight: 3,791lbs (weight distribution 59/41%. "Joys" of FWD platform). Even Audi and VW are not that heavy in front.
Mercedes GLC300 weight: BAse model +250lbs over Mazda.
So, it has smaller engine, more weight, and Mazda is ONLY 0.3sec faster. That is where MB transmission comes to play.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by MCompact
I abhor FWD in anything much bigger than a Mini. The E84 has a default 40/60 front/rear torque split so it performs like a RWD car in most situations. In a perfect world, everything in my garage would be RWD except for the Wrangler- but my wife wanted AWD. I decided to keep the Clubman since it is a perfectly fine car for my daily commute.

I hate FWD, and refuse to ever own another one (owned an Infiniti G20 years ago). I used to LOVE RWD cars. Had 2 Trans Ams (LT1, LS1), a modded 5.0 GT (Fox), a C6 Z06, and 370Z, and then I got a Jeep Grand Cherokee w/HEMI and QD2, and realized just how much I'd been missing. Two CX5's later, I doubt I ever own another RWD vehicle again unless it's a Viper (the one sports car that I would pave my driveway for). AWD is just...better, and whether it's transverse, or longitudinal, doesn't matter a hill of beans to me as long as it's 50/50 torque dist or better. I drive my CX5 just like my 370Z (similar weight distribution), and it behaves the same on/off throttle in corners, etc. When I floor it in the rain, it just squats and GOES. All 310# of torque at 2000rpm doesn't bother it a bit.

LOL, so you bought a car that runs 100% on FWD unless front wheels slip, runs on FWD platform, but you hate FWD? I apologize, this is actually sad, not funny.

FWD only is far from reactive AWD. I have no wheel spin, when I accelerate out of corners it powers the rears, etc. Absolutely different from not having awd.

LOL, no it is not absolutely different than having FWD. Your vehicle is FWD platform. Your engine is hanging in front of axle although it has transfer case (in Audi for example it has Torsen which is limiting factor in pushing engine back).Only thing you have here is well behaved FWD system that probably does not have torque steer tendencies, but considering system and weight distribution has a lot of understeer.
My VW does not spin too (Toyota actually does, but that AWD is absolute POS), but in the end it is FWD system on FWD platform! Period! You cannot make pie out of s...!
 
Last edited:
[Linked Image]
 
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by 2015_PSD
You are saying that in similarly equipped cars, the Mazda is better in every way? Based upon what I see under my AMG, if the GLC is similar (and I have to assume they are) there is no way the Mazda is the equivalent, much less better. Not sure what is happening with your neighbor's AMG, but there is nothing the Mazda can do to best my AMG--except in price, I will give that to Mazda. It is solid, rattle free, well designed and engineered, nothing Mazda has comes close. Also, if the Mazda outperforms the GLC (what year cars are we talking about anyway?), it definitely will not in 2020 given that MB just announced a 416HP 2.0L engine to replace all existing 2.0L engines. I question it outperforming the existing 2.0L engines in Sport+ mode. My wife's C300 and the GLC300 I recently had as a loaner car hauls the mail in Sport+.

In the end, if Mazda is your car, by all means carry on, but to suggest that Mazda tops Mercedes is a serious stretch...

The 416hp motor is AMG only.
We are talking 2019, current.
I have not looked under my Mazda or a GLC300.

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a27255337/2019-mazda-cx-5-reliability-maintenance/

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a15101871/2016-mercedes-benz-glc300-glc300-4matic-test-review/

This is the very best data I could find for the GLC300. It appears it is 0.3 faster to 60, and then the advantage fades and by the quarter mile the Mazda has pulled away, as well as beating it 30-50 and 50-70, regardless of using a 6 speed to its cog shuffling 9 speed. Motortrend got it at half a second slower to 60. Brakes and handling appear very similar, as well. Mpg is better on the cx5. It can also take 87 octane.

Here is motortrends test of the two:
https://www.motortrend.com/cars/mer...es-benz-glc300-review-long-term-arrival/
https://www.motortrend.com/cars/mazda/cx-5/2019/2019-mazda-cx-5-turbo-first-test-review/


The transmission and 3.0TT in your AMG are awesome, but the cx5 has a more refined ride (quieter, less structure flex) and stiffer body structure, although if they cost the same, etc. Id go with the AMG for that sweet motor and transmission. It really is a joy how it cracks off those shifts.

A. Mercedes has smaller engine.
B. Mazda 2.5T weight: 3,791lbs (weight distribution 59/41%. "Joys" of FWD platform). Even Audi and VW are not that heavy in front.
Mercedes GLC300 weight: BAse model +250lbs over Mazda.
So, it has smaller engine, more weight, and Mazda is ONLY 0.3sec faster. That is where MB transmission comes to play.

The F/R dist on the cx5 is certainly sub optimal, but in practice it doesnt seem to harm performance really.
Keep in mind the cx5 is also more efficient on fuel as well as faster. Not bad for 6 gears and a bigger motor eh?
 
Originally Posted by Ws6

The F/R dist on the cx5 is certainly sub optimal, but in practice it doesnt seem to harm performance really.
Keep in mind the cx5 is also more efficient on fuel as well as faster. Not bad for 6 gears and a bigger motor eh?


If the benchmark is CR-V or Rav4, sure.
 
Originally Posted by edyvw

LOL, no it is not absolutely different than having FWD. Your vehicle is FWD platform. Your engine is hanging in front of axle although it has transfer case (in Audi for example it has Torsen which is limiting factor in pushing engine back).Only thing you have here is well behaved FWD system that probably does not have torque steer tendencies, but considering system and weight distribution has a lot of understeer.
My VW does not spin too (Toyota actually does, but that AWD is absolute POS), but in the end it is FWD system on FWD platform! Period! You cannot make pie out of s...!


Vs


If only the static numbers translated into actual performance, eh? Looks like the GLC cant hang with the cx5 when pushed hard.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by bbhero
Hey... You were a proud driver/owner of a Yugo... So, you know a thing or two about performance
lol.gif


Lol, who in here owned a Yugo? Those were before my time, I believe?
 
Originally Posted by 02SE
Stand back...I am pumping iron while reading this thread...


It does make for great amusement between sets.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top