By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
Anyway, I called to make an appointment and what does he say? Mazda NA has already called him to alert him to the fact that there is still a problem and they reamed him out for not getting everything checked completely before giving the car back to me. He said they made it clear that not checking the failsafe functions was inexcuseable.
I go back in next Tuesday.
Hopefully it will not come to that though.
Why the hell would you set the cruise control when you're in neutral? If you would just follow the owner's manual procedures for setting and de-activating and it works as described, shouldn't that be good enough? I don't see anywhere in the manual to "set cruise control while in neutral". I don't think it's up to the cruise control to detect what gear you're in, that's the operator's responsibility! Jeez.
Why don't you try this. Set the cruise at let's say 65mph. Then come to a complete stop, put it in first,let out the clutch and then hit "Resume". I bet that would really be neat. LOL
Can it change gears too?
It can..in the automatic transmission
Seriously, if not for my screw up, I would not have known there was a problem. The dealer said the concern was this: the failsafe should have kept the system from recognizing "set" or "resume", but since it did, they said there is no way of knowing if the redline limiter would work. Their concern was the engine might be allowed to go beyond the limiter AND stay there, so the wiring harness warranty work could turn into an engine replacement.
Mistakes can happen...luckily Ron found his problem with no serious consequences.
Actually, it's the other way around. The 1.8L is a de-stroked 2.0L. The 2.0L was around way before the 1.8L.
I remember when the current gen Protege was released in 99' and I asked myself, "Why would Mazda go to the trouble of messing with an existing engine to make it SMALLER and less powerful?" I prefer to have my power where you actually use it.
I'm looking for some replacements...anybody have any recommendations?
And Ron -- I'll say this -- I've had VERY good experience with Mazda North America when I've had problems. Not with any of my four Proteges, mind you, but with my piecacrap 1994 B2300 pickup (built by Ford, of course). It came *THIS CLOSE* to a lemon law matter. However, Mazda NA was there all the way -- I often got calls from THEM asking me if my service manager had done/offered/etc. whatever. Often I would get to the dealership to find that they had already ordered the service manager what to do. I even got to meet personally with a Mazda NA service exec twice about my problem. And to top it all off, these problems (lean air/fuel mixture and engine temp problems) persisted until I got rid of the truck at 114,000 miles -- but since they surfaced while the vehicle was still under warranty, I NEVER PAID ONE CENT for about $5,000 worth of diagnostics, part swapping, engine rebuilding and other things over the course of three years. This included loaner cars, once for two weeks straight. All of this ORDERED by Mazda NA. I never had to fight them for any of it.
Yes, I'll never buy another Ford-built product. But Mazda has my business, my friends.
Meade
I don't even know if we have lemon laws up here in Canada...one would hope so.
A note of caution to all:
There are many instances where, due to some of the more extreme financing arrangements, a person that has a vehicle "bought back" could end up having to pay the manufacturer to take the car from them. Make sure you know where your loan stands in relation to the vehicle value before you scream hell.
I would love to come to MAPP III but I don't think my beater Legend would make it that far and I'm only in Charlotte, NC
Later!
Tom
The bigger question is whehter I would make that claim. I really don't know. I suppose it's a matter of how strongly you believe these problems could be the forebearer of future electrical problems.
Hopefully this all gets resolved next week and I'll have an intersting question that I will never need to know the answer to.
I hope to get this behind me so my biggest problem is deciding when to put the K&N filter in and whether to buy that factory sport exhaust. Maybe when the smoke clears we might be able to discuss some customer good will by way of a lower price on the sport exhaust?
Just think rbrooks, you may be the guy causing Mazda to spend millions of dollars fixing a problem nobody knew they had. Now that's what I call carrying a big stick.
Hmm. Well, the comments about more low end torque and decreased willingness to rev still apply to the engine with the longer stroke, opposite obviously applies to a shorter stroke (de-stroking). While we are on the subject: all other things being equal, longer stroke = more displacement = more air = more fuel = worse fuel economy. So, what sort of fuel economy did the 1.8 get? The 2.0 is fairly mediocre for its size IMO.
For having as many and as bad potholes as they do, many Detroiters drive like crazy. No wonder SUVs and trucks are popular there.
Eek. Good thing I don't live there. Makes the roads here seem like silk in comparison.
Cruise control, which I use rarely, worked very well. Only about 1/2 second delay before kicking in and kept the speed +/- 1mph.
MPG: 34mpg on one fill-up and 38mpg on another fill-up (I think the pump cut-off early on this one...it'll all average out over the year). This is all at Montana-legal speeds. It was hard for me to stay lower since the car is so eager.
This is true, but an engine with more torque should be able to handle taller gears and may in fact get better mileage. I don't know what the 1.8L got, but it is plausible that the 2.0L gets the same or better mileage.
I guess I'd prefer to have either more torque/power get to the ground out of this 2.0, or get better fuel efficiency with the given engine/gearing. It lacks in one or the other, IMO. But then again, I'm a power/torque junkie. Can't have it all at $14,200 I guess.
Where'd you get the vinegar tip from??
and vinegar....that is what windex uses...smart thinking..huh?
That's funny, I am too. I used to have a Mustang LX 5.0L and that thing had torque overload. 300 lbs-ft at 3000 rpms and that was when it was stock. Can you say 2nd gear burnout? (not just a "chirp" a BURNOUT) It's kinda funny when I talk about the Pro as being torquey and then I think back about the Mustang. It's all relative I guess.
In some states the problem must "significantly" alter the value, safety, and driveability of a car.
Rbrooks, do you actually like your particular Mazda? If so, maybe you should give the dealership another chance to fix the problem. Even though the cruise control issue is annoying, it is in the dealership's best interest to correct the problem. Is the car leaving you stranded or do you feel unsafe in it? You may let Mazda NA know that you are willing to let another dealership tackle the problem before you initiate a Lemon Law buy back.
I had a 1996 Nissan truck that I had in the shop for a total of 30 days and 7 visits to correct an emissions problem that consistently left the truck unstartable. It took numerous visits before I cried Lemon Law because I had too much invested in the truck to not give the dealership ample chances to fix it. What broke the camel's back was the greaseballs accusing me of sabotaging the truck to make it not start. I explained to them in no uncertain terms that I wanted an identical truck and had no intentions of taking advantage of the situation. Several months after the dealership bought the truck back, I received a recall notice from Nissan concerning the problem and took it to the dealership with a grin of satisfaction...
Good luck in resolving the issue--it is frustrating to pay several months' salary for a car and not have it work correctly.
The cruise problems you seem to be aware of, so how did you get clutch engagement related to them?He even says when he pressed the clutch and brake it shut off, but he wasn't sure which one did it. Either one could have done it depending on which switch got depressed first.
Maltb, I don't think anything is wrong with his cruise control, but you haven't given us your opinion. Based on what he did, setting or resuming the cruise in neutral and the resulting increase in rpm's, is this abnormal or not?
Ron's problem is that when he is in neutral and the cruise control system is active, if he hits the resume button, it will fly up to redline b/c it thinks it is in a gear.
Not sure how the clutch engagement got involved. Ron's clutch does sound like it shuts off the cruise.
I've never had cruise in a manual car, but it doesn't sound right to me. The car's computer should be able to tell when it's in gear or not...and consequently, not shoot up to redline, causing possible engine damage, if the resume button is accidently hit.
Anyway, my wife's 99 Pro LX is in the shop because she hit something metal on the highway and it gouged out apparently rather a lot of the under side of the car. Hopefully it doesn't need a new tranny, sigh.
Anyway, the shop where the car ended up is also a tire shop (Goodyear), and since the original Poortenzas are still on the car (and have around 48k miles), I might have them replace the tires as well. My wife is more concerned about treadlife and comfort than handling (though wet traction is always a concern here in the summer)--any recommendations? What do people think of the Goodyear Aquatread 3?
If you grew up with Sixties and Seventies Detroit iron, you probably know the difference between "small-block" and "big-block" V8s. Think of the B-series 1.8 as the small-block Mazda four - a variation on it goes into latter-day Miatas, in fact - and the F-series 2.0 as the big-block. (The 2.0 does, in fact, have a taller block deck height.) As with Chevys and Fords of yore, the big-block engine has torque to spare down low but doesn't rev quite as eagerly. (The original F-series 2.0 in the first-generation 626, in fact, was also used in the B2000 truck, an application that tends to call for more torque.)
There was yet a third series of four-cylinder engines from Mazda, the G-series, but they got no car use; these were the 2.6 engines in the early MPV and the B2600 truck. These don't have anything in common with the B or F engines either.
All this sounds like cars of the past that were put on the market and let the buyers find the bugs. Applies to computers, too. I doubt Mazda has done this. They try to make them fool-proof, but no machine is damnedfool-proof.
fowler3
Well, EVERYTHING seemed to be in my way. First a painter's van pulled out in front of me on a 45 mph, two-lane, double-yellow-lined road and insisted on going 30 mph for three miles. Then I got stopped at the longest traffic light in the county. The lightning was getting closer and I was going nowhere fast.
Finally I got onto a four-lane road! I quickly got around a slow-moving Escort, dropped it into third and boogied! Speed limit only 35. Hell! Oh well, we're gonna break that! I just let 'er rip. By the time I got around this bend and arrived first at a traffic light, I felt pretty good. ZOOM ZOOM ZOOM!
Then I looked in my rear-view mirror. A nice, shiny gray Crown Vic with blue lights flashing in the grille.
"#%$@*^%(&^%@#*^#&#!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
Radar. 67 in a 35. Oooops.
To be continued ....
Meade the Illegal
More touring than sporting type. Probably a softer ride than the Portenzas and much better wet traction.
I was considering it, but in the end wanted something that handled better in the twisties.