Mazda debuts the electric MX-30 crossover at the Tokyo Motor Show

Humza

TechSpot Staff
Staff member

Thanks to its 'Kodo Design Language,' nearly all modern Mazdas, including the new MX-30, have a sporty and purposeful look to them. While the Japanese carmaker usually reserves the 'CX' moniker for its SUVs, the brand's first production MX-30 EV is doing things differently.

The crossover was recently revealed at the Tokyo Motor Show where, apart from the 143 hp (106 kW) single motor and a 35.5kWh lithium-ion battery, Mazda didn't reveal much else on paper like the car's range or charging times. It did, however, go to great lengths about the MX-30's sporting credentials and environmental friendliness.

For a start, the e-Skyactive powertrain will offer "outstanding response with smooth dynamic behavior to achieve performance that drivers can enjoy naturally," including Mazda's G-Vectoring chassis control system for improved handling. The interior, meanwhile, features door trim made from recycled plastic, and the console tray uses cork from trees that have not been felled.

The "free style" doors, reminiscent of the RX-8, means the absence of a B-pillar to make for easier access into the back where things might get a little tight in terms of headroom, given the swoopy rear-end.

Pre-orders for the MX-30 are currently open in the European market with deliveries starting next year, while a US arrival is expected to follow at some point in the near future.

Permalink to story.

 

Theinsanegamer

TS Evangelist
LOL enviromental freindliness. Only if you measure one specific gas. If you look into the toxic byproducts of battery manufacture, the filthy mining needed for cobalt and nickle, and what ends up happening to many batteries and electronics when they are "recycled", you may as well calla diesel dually belching black smoke "enviromentally friendly".
The lack of stat's alone will make me look elsewhere ......
Well....that battery is the same size as the one in the later focus electrics. And those were only good for 115 miles. Given this is a big, bloated, heavy crossover with a front grille that looks to be as aerodynamic as a barn door with that upper lip and grill, I'll say it's range is gonna SUCK.
 

wiyosaya

TS Evangelist
LOL enviromental freindliness. Only if you measure one specific gas. If you look into the toxic byproducts of battery manufacture, the filthy mining needed for cobalt and nickle, and what ends up happening to many batteries and electronics when they are "recycled", you may as well calla diesel dually belching black smoke "enviromentally friendly".
Let's not forget that in each step of fossil fuel refinement, from drilling/mining and transportation to market to combustion in an engine, all produce their own wastes. As I see it, eventually a battery will come along that is far cleaner than the current technology.
 

Theinsanegamer

TS Evangelist
Let's not forget that in each step of fossil fuel refinement, from drilling/mining and transportation to market to combustion in an engine, all produce their own wastes. As I see it, eventually a battery will come along that is far cleaner than the current technology.
Dont forget that every step of generating electricity, from mining fuel to building solar panels and wind turbines to nuclear plants, create their own toxic wastes and emissions, and that generation is going to have to be significantly increased for a large influx of electric vehicles.

I have bets on hydrogen or LNG being the fuels of the future, not electricity. LNG can be created with electricity and CO2, and work on getting hydrogen from water has been proceeding smoothly for several years now. Batteries will likely only inhabit short rancge city cars.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IAMTHESTIG

IAMTHESTIG

TS Evangelist
This isn't going to sell well in the US... probably about the same as the BMW i3. Most people don't want quirky, sporty EV's here in the US. They want SUV size vehicle with decent range and normal doors.

The new Audi E-Tron is about what most US buyers want, but they don't want to pay $80K for it.

The first to make a SUV sized EV with normal functionality and appearance that doesn't draw attention to itself (eww look at me I drive a fugly Leaf but I'm saving the world and sniff my own farts) and has at least 150-200 miles of range, and is less than $35K will sell a boat load.

It would also be nice to see a 250,000 mile, 20 year power train warranty on these things because everyone is scared of having to replace the battery pack. There is a lot of tech that is going to be required to make this happen, but it can.
 

complexxL9

TS Booster
LOL enviromental freindliness. Only if you measure one specific gas. If you look into the toxic byproducts of battery manufacture, the filthy mining needed for cobalt and nickle, and what ends up happening to many batteries and electronics when they are "recycled", you may as well calla diesel dually belching black smoke "enviromentally friendly".
good job on helping to spread oil companies propaganda.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wiyosaya

wiyosaya

TS Evangelist
Dont forget that every step of generating electricity, from mining fuel to building solar panels and wind turbines to nuclear plants, create their own toxic wastes and emissions, and that generation is going to have to be significantly increased for a large influx of electric vehicles.

I have bets on hydrogen or LNG being the fuels of the future, not electricity. LNG can be created with electricity and CO2, and work on getting hydrogen from water has been proceeding smoothly for several years now. Batteries will likely only inhabit short rancge city cars.
There are plenty of reports out there done by reputable entities, not paid shills, that clearly indicate that overall, even with the environmental concerns you bring up with respect to the current state of EV technology, EVs produce in the range of 50% of the environmental impact of transportation based on fossil fuels.

For instance:
When taking well-to-wheel emissions into account, all-electric vehicles emit an average of around 4,450 pounds of CO2 equivalent each year. By comparison, conventional gasoline cars will emit over twice as much annually.
And
Natural gas provides the majority of electricity in the United States, followed closely by coal. It is often considered to be the “cleanest” fossil fuel, because it emits 50 to 60 percent less carbon dioxide than coal. Coal is responsible for around 65 percent of carbon dioxide emissions by the electric power sector in the U.S. That being said, even if your electricity is primarily from a coal plant, driving an EV will likely still overall have lower or similar well-to-wheel emissions when compared to a conventional car.
(Emphasis mine)

And then there is this:

And you probably will not like this one if you are right-leaning,

Most of the above is based on the current state of the technology and not on research that has not been commercialized such as the research you mention for hydrogen production. I've seen that research, and while it looks very promising, it has yet to enter the commercial marketplace.

Right now, most commercial hydrogen is produced from fossil fuels - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_production
And
The environmental and health benefits are also seen at the source of hydrogen production if derived from low- or zero-emission sources, such as solar, wind, and nuclear energy and fossil fuels with advanced emission controls and carbon sequestration.
https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/hydrogen_benefits.html (Emphasis mine) The power industry is throwing a fit about having such technologies installed on their plants; I can only imagine the fit that hydrogen producers will have if they have to install similar technology within their plants.

As for as battery research that has not yet been commercialized, there are at least three instances of increased battery capacity; the first two are four times the energy density in the same space, and there is one that is claiming ten times the energy density. https://phys.org/news/2019-01-tiny-silicon-particles-power-lithium.html
We certainly cannot count on research that has not yet reached the commercial market, however, my bets are with EVs.

Time will tell which of our crystal balls are correct.
 

IAMTHESTIG

TS Evangelist
Bwaaa hahaha... Yes it is true, in general, EV's are better for the environement but it is NOT as good as you greenies lead us to believe. And people keep throwing around terms like "renewables" which isn't entirely true either. NOTHING is free, there is always an (environmental) cost to EVERYTHING we create. There are plenty of other variables involved that aren't often accounted for in why this tech isn't as green as we are told to believe.

Don't get me wrong I'm all for reducing and eliminating pollution, becoming more and more self sufficient and not creating waste but we still have a long way to go in EV's, whether battery powered, hydrogen, super capacitors, or some combination there-in before they will be a "clear winner" - at which point everyone will want to buy them. Efficiencies in so many different areas of "green" or "renewable" energy need to increase and to be perfectly honest in *some* combinations and situations, they are worse for the environment.

There is just waaay too much politics surrounding the topic and it is used to get votes for office, so mis-information has become the norm... along with people and companies getting paid to shush, and that is on both sides of the political storm.

As a result, it's both an exciting and a sad time to be alive right now...
 

wiyosaya

TS Evangelist
Bwaaa hahaha... Yes it is true, in general, EV's are better for the environement but it is NOT as good as you greenies lead us to believe. And people keep throwing around terms like "renewables" which isn't entirely true either. NOTHING is free, there is always an (environmental) cost to EVERYTHING we create. There are plenty of other variables involved that aren't often accounted for in why this tech isn't as green as we are told to believe.

Don't get me wrong I'm all for reducing and eliminating pollution, becoming more and more self sufficient and not creating waste but we still have a long way to go in EV's, whether battery powered, hydrogen, super capacitors, or some combination there-in before they will be a "clear winner" - at which point everyone will want to buy them. Efficiencies in so many different areas of "green" or "renewable" energy need to increase and to be perfectly honest in *some* combinations and situations, they are worse for the environment.

There is just waaay too much politics surrounding the topic and it is used to get votes for office, so mis-information has become the norm... along with people and companies getting paid to shush, and that is on both sides of the political storm.

As a result, it's both an exciting and a sad time to be alive right now...
Right. And without links or any credible sources to back up your information, you expect people just to take your word for it?
 

IAMTHESTIG

TS Evangelist
Right. And without links or any credible sources to back up your information, you expect people just to take your word for it?
It's the internet, nothing is credible. Data is cherry picked and manipulated. There are certainly elements of truth in some of it but simple logic will tell you that nothing is free in terms of environmental impact. Solar panels, wind mills, batteries, hydrogen, etc. all these things that are supposedly renewable are most certainly not. They can provide clean energy for some time but they most likely were not 100% clean energy manufactured, nor will they last forever and will have to be repaired or replaced at some point. So it is not renewable energy. The tech offers clean usage for many years but no one really knows the real numbers behind how long they take to offset the pollution created from manufacturing, transport, installation, repair, then uninstallation, transport, and recycling... No one wants to think about that when it comes to green technology. You can post all the sources you want, universities, government entities, scientific "evidence", none of it should be trusted 100%. That's not to say some or most of the information isn't correct, but I'd bet that none of them are 100% accurate. That is what I'm trying to get at...