The Mazda CX-30 is a new crossover that Mazda introduced back in March at the Geneva auto show. It’s supposed to slot in between the worthlessly tiny CX-3, and the CX-5, but Mazda didn’t want to call it CX-4 because...that would make too much sense.
When I first saw the CX-30, my immediate thought was that Mazda should ditch the cramped, tiny, slow-selling (because of how ridiculously impractical it is) CX-3 in the US and sell the CX-30 as the new CX-3.
My wife drives a CX-5 now, but before this she had a Subaru Impreza hatchback. When we were shopping for that car, I looked at a CX-3. After attempting and failing to get myself in the back seat without smushing the hell out of my knees, and viewing the woefully inadequate trunk, and I was like,
Point being, in a segment that’s supposed to be all about a small car on the outside with a lot of room on the inside, Mazda completely forgot about the second part. Or maybe they tried and just failed. Badly.
Part of the problem is the CX-3 is based on the Mazda 2 (otherwise known in the US as the Scion iA and now the Toyota Yaris) subcompact, and yet when Mazda turned the 2 into a crossover to make the CX-3, they did nothing to maximize the interior space. It’s bad.
The Honda HR-V that the CX-3 supposedly competes against is based on the Fit, and both of those cars are nice and roomy, and the CR-V is a lot roomier inside than the CX-5. The Mazdas are better to drive, but basically Mazda sucks at interior packaging efficiency compared to Honda.
The CX-30 is based on the new Mazda 3, and at least according to the pictures, has a totally fine and decent back seat and trunk.
Well...let’s hope for the CX-30's sake that driver’s seat is slid all the way back and the passenger seat is in a more normal position.
Anyway, without any fanfare, the CX-30 is now on the future vehicles section of the Mazda USA website. So, I guess we’re getting it! Maybe now Mazda will put the CX-3 out of its misery.