Mazda CX-30: Why Mazda chose that name

Everyone knows Mazda's model nomenclature – a single digit tacked on the end of the 'Mazda' brand to distinguish the different model lines of passenger car, or a single digit tacked on the end of 'CX-' to identify the various SUVs in the range.

The only exception to the rule is the BT-50 one-tonne commercial.

So how does the company explain the name of the new SUV, the Mazda CX-30?

Speaking to carsales through an interpreter at the Geneva motor show last week, Naohito Saga, the Program Manager for the Mazda CX-30, revealed that the name for the new SUV reflects its relative importance in the Mazda model range.

"It is a fact that we run lots of studies in deciding the naming of this vehicle," he said.

"We would like to develop this model to become a new business pillar for Mazda. That's why we didn't want to give the same name [from] this other model. So by calling it the CX-30 we wanted to give emphasis to what we determined for this car."

When asked for further detail concerning the CX-30 as a 'business pillar', Saga-san painted a picture of the new SUV as a vehicle that could expand Mazda's drawing power among younger buyers –which any brand aims to do.

"We want to provide value in Mazda vehicles to as many people as possible," he replied.

"And this time [with CX-30] we are focusing on young customers who are facing changes in their life stages, and we really want to provide driving fun for those people."

The Mazda executive sidestepped the question of buyers being confused by the 'CX-3' and 'CX-30' badges, simply highlighting instead that the new SUV is important to the brand and warrants a different sort of model name.

"Firstly, we believe that by adding this model we are able to offer more choice to customers in the segment," he said.

"But at the same time we have to make sure we communicate the difference of this model from other models we have, so that we can develop this model into a business pillar. That is one of my missions: to raise the awareness of this model."

Asked whether the trailing zero (or any other secondary digit) would appear in the names of future Mazda models, Saga-san clammed up.

"I'm asked the same question by almost everybody, however we have nothing decided for the future product names," he said.

"For the moment I cannot tell you anything. Of course maybe there's a possibility of using the zero [in model names], but I cannot give you any comments on that."

Mazda's Aussie execs were left to explain to local journalists why the CX-30 badge was chosen over 'CX-4', which is an older SUV sold in China.

“Our objective is to offer a broad range of nameplates – and CX-30 will be another one [added] to a comprehensive portfolio of SUVs,” Mazda Australia MD Vinesh Bhindi told carsales during in the aftermath of the SUV's global launch in Geneva this week.

“People were talking about 'CX-4' and other names, but in the end... an additional nameplate, and CX-4 already existed in the portfolio, but not [available to] Mazda Australia.

“It's a China-only model,” Bhindi explained.

When the question of the new naming convention was put to him, Mazda Australia Marketing Director Alastair Doak left the door open.

“It wouldn't be a one-off, in terms of introducing a name like that,” he said.

“If the current demand for SUVs continues, then obviously any car company would be looking at additional opportunity to expand into that space, so if all the numbers are taken where do you go?

“It's not just numbers,” Doak continued.

If Mazda had chosen to name the CX-30 the CX-2 instead, that would have signalled to consumers that the new model is smaller than the CX-3, but if it had been named CX-6, that would be taken to mean it is a larger vehicle than the CX-5.

And Mazda didn't want to go with CX-4, as Bhindi had already explained, since that badge is already applied to the model already sold in China.

The problem is a familiar one to a brand like BMW, which years ago decided to name its small coupe and convertible models 2 Series, even though the two-door cars were built on the same platform as the larger 1 Series and were physically smaller.

If there's a problem for Mazda it's this: consumers may still believe the CX-30 shares more with the CX-3, when it's actually closer in size to the CX-5 – and it's certainly newer than both.

Time will tell whether buyers will accept the name, but it's unlikely to be a major stumbling block in the retail showroom.