Lol...deep breath...I agree, but one year we have only one small SUV, what do we do? another year we have 3 that's much better and it goes on and on for all categories.
This. MR2Pritch, I don't mean anything but respect in what I say here, please know that. I'm critical of AJAC's awards because inherently, you test only "new" vehicles. As a casual consumer, I don't necessarily care what vehicle is "newest" (and in some cases, I'm weary of new models because of teething concerns). What I care about is what vehicle will provide me with the best value for my dollar, within my budget.
Just because the Santa Fe Sport was redesigned last year doesn't make it less important for me when comparing to the Forester, Cherokee, Rav4, CRV, CX-5, Tiguan, etc. I recognize that there are many, many vehicles to test, and to re-test them all would be a near impossibility.
But therein lies the problem. I take issue with AJAC using terms like "
BEST NEW Family car". Calling it "car of the year" or "SUV of the year" is almost fine by me - I'd just add in "redesigned" or "new model" - do whatever tests you want and hand out whatever bazillion awards you want - just don't mislead the public by calling it the "best new" when it hasn't been compared to all its competitors. A previously unowned Focus, for example, redesigned in 2012, is still "new". To make a contention that one vehicle is the "best new family car" of 2013 indicates that it has been selected over all its competition - not just newly redesigned models that have paid the entrance fee. Amend the title, and we'd disagree less.
I'm also not fond of the laissez-faire 'categories'. I love the idea that AJAC says "here's the best of what you can get, of the newly redesigned models, for under $50k..." but then other categories such as "Best New Family Car" suggests that AJAC knows what is best for a family. And to crown the Soul?! It's a wonderful car, it really is - but for a family?! You've got to be kidding. No family would consider it. It's short, has a shallow trunk, comes only in FWD (not winter-friendly, or so it's perceived by the lay audience), and would be very, very snug with 1 or 2 car seats installed. These are all important attributes for a family - not to mention being limited to only 5 seats means that even a single car seat installed makes it immediately a 4-seater (including the child). Carpool duty is out of the question. And if you consider older families, it doesn't have the interior volume to do a weekend roadtrip with all seats occupied. Like I said, I am very fond of the Soul and don't mean to single it out.
This is all to say that the categories are decided by AJAC and are subjective. It's just a way for journalists to have a fun time testing vehicles and throwing out awards that sway markets. With such power should come greater responsibility, and therein is my position.
I don't mean to offend any in making the above statements.
What are they doing wrong?
From my experiences with family/friends looking for vehicles, the common reasons I hear for not choosing a Mazda 3 are as follows (note that I don't know anyone who cares about any other model offered, save for the CX-5, which is purchased fairly routinely):
1) Too narrow - front passengers' elbows bump
2) on the same lines, many feel that there's limited interior space
3) Corolla/Civic are cheaper/offer more value
4) Perceived reliability of Corolla/Civic is better than Mazda (not necessarily poor from Mazda, but better for the others)
5) Hard/uncomfortable seats (big bolsters work well for holding an engaged driver, but they are difficult to get over when entering the car for elderly people with arthritis or other ailments)
6) Poor rear outward visibility on the hatch
The only quibbles I hear about the CX-5 are a heavy tailgate that only self-closes when 80% shut (our Forester will close by gravity when about 50%) and that for such a small CUV, it drives HUGE (mostly because of the poor rear outward visibility).
