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
On another note - anyone seen the Euro version's OEM Nav system? Me want!! Check this video:
http://www.katter.nu/ulf/mazda/m6-nearest-busstation.wmv
I'm with Maltb on a base car being enough fun.
At first, I was for the Premium Package to get the alloys, I've never had them on a car. Now, a month later, the standard wheel covers look good to me. Every car on the road has 5-spoke alloys. Mazda6's wheel covers are the best I have seen and resemble 7-spoke alloys on luxury cars.
The longer you shop the closer you get to what is right for you...the difference between need and want.
fowler3
Whether they look good or not, when you drive in a pothole infested area, those covers just disappear.
Thanks!
PS I can't believe you guys like a 4 cylinder engine that is not turbocharged.
Why? Part of driving fun is not always brute power (although that's satisfying too!), but rather great cornering, stability, road feel and braking...
BTW: How's your A4 holding up? Any issues with it so far?
Dinu
neutral steering: when you go off the road and into the bushes sideways
oversteer: when you go off the road and into the bushes tail first
6i
manual: 3042 lbs
automatic: 3091 lbs
6s
manual: 3243 lbs
automatic: 3311 lbs
The weight difference isn't enough to cause a significant difference in 0-60 times.
Remember though, that magazine tests are done with pro drivers on test tracks (except CR) and you are not likely to match the 0-60 times they get with the MT. On the other hand, with the AT you can just stand on the brakes, hit the gas, release the brakes, and you could probably match their AT times without too much trouble.
Well I went to Performance Mazda tonight and they had 5 6's on the lot. I didnt have time to drive one but I'm impressed with the way it looks- inside and out.
And maybe I'm more boy racer than most of the posters here but I actually liked the GFX package (Spoiler, side skirts, etc).
I hope to drive one soon.
Thanks for the responses. My boyfriend explained to me that the 6 cylinder engine weighs more and that causes the vehicle to not handle as well...... Ok I get it. But, I am used to a 4 cylinder turbocharged engine in my A4. I love the A4, but have had several small problems - ignition coil, gauges breaking, windshield washer pump, etc. It was also misfiring on all 4 cylinders. When I brought it to the dealer, they said it was MY FAULT. I apparently let the fuel level get too low and air got sucked into the fuel injector. Whatever. I'm done with that car. So much for the brilliant German engineering!!!I expect a new, $27,000 vehicle to work right for at least a couple of years. Also, the ONLY dealership in orlando sucks!
I am just worried about a new car's reliability. So, that's why I'm reading this forum.
Thanks for the help!
1) the power loss on the AT is around 5% higher than MT.
2) the 2 consecutive gears are sparser on the AT than on the MT
3) the AT shift about 500 rpm earlier than the optimum rpm.
Including these 3 factors, my calculation come up with a time pretty close to what magazines have tested: 8.34 vs 9.45s 0-60mph for respectively MT and AT.
Bruno
Is the percentage of power loss (efficiency) in the AT constant? It probably would be in the MT, but in the AT you're dealing with hydraulic pressures that probably vary with speed.
What is the difference in the efficiency between the AT and the MT for those last 500 RPMs as opposed to the first 5800 RPMs? Probably not the same as the difference at say, 3000 RPMs.
In other words, it's not linear, so you couldn't model it with a simple algebra equation. That said, it's probably easier than mathematically modeling something like understeer. Or how about modeling the difference between disc brakes and drum brakes.
Well, obviously, I'm not a mother -- SO -- I must be a designer, which I am. And they look better than the wheel covers on the Protegé by far. One thing I have always liked in a wheel (cover or alloy wheel) is that the center be convex or crowned, as opposed to concave, as most alloys are. In other words, looks like a dome. The Mazda6 wheel covers have this shape.
The thing I have never liked about alloys is they let rusty discs show; most have skinny spokes; and they are too hard to take care of. Mags use to crack, I assume alloys are stronger?
Wheel covers do for disc brakes what the wheel dust covers do without blocking airflow and they come standard.
If trim pieces around the headlights and taillights rusted would you accept this as normal? It is on brakes.
fowler3
fowler3
Very much so, especially in this car.
I-auto 59%
I-stick 6%
S-auto 29%
S-stick 6%
abs/tcs (i model) 20%
SAB/SAC (s-model) 14%
moonroof 29%
leather 35%
sport pkg 24%
audio pkg 30%
Saw a Lapis Blue AT. I think it was the base model - grey cloth, nice dash, beautiful shade of blue!
The dealer was closed so I couldn't sit in it (: They only had one 6 outside and maybe one inside (not sure - the lights were off).
I like it in that it's smaller than an Accord/Altima, but larger than the PRO - pefectly-sized IMO.
Dinu
950 miles
First tank:
10.2 gallons
320 miles
Second tank:
15 gallons
520 miles
90% D.C. Beltway area / heavy city taffic
6i MT
If it wasn't my car, I wouldn't believe it.
Values are approximated; I don't have the book in front of me.
I just test drove a 6S manual. We're replacing my Audi TT b/c I am pregnant--so we're looking for a practical but great handling sports sedan. The S kicked the tires off of anything I have driven recently (aside from my TT!), and that includes a BMW 325xi, Audi A4, Audi A6, Jetta, Accord V6, etc. So I am pretty much ready to add a silver 6 to the family. But what I need from you all (in addition to the lively discussion about drifting, for example) is -- please-- what is your best price? I live in the DC area but will take whatever I can get. I need leverage!
Thanks,
Ladybugnova
Thanks again for all the input. Now all I have to do is find a dealer with a MT 6s. :-)
Mike
I think the problem lies with the hydraulic torque convertor. This is the reason automatics are generally unsatisfying to drive to a person who prefers a manual. You've got this big fluid pump between the engines and the wheels that numbs the car's responsiveness. You can put manual shifters on an automatic, but you've still got the torque convertor.
This doesn't apply to the new SMG boxes on high-end BMWs, Porsches, Ferraris, and the MR2 which have a friction clutch under computer control. I've never driven one, but most folks really like them. The issue with these is cost and complexity.
- Mark
The power losses are much less, and there is no changing gears as such. Somehow, I doubt they are much fun to drive.
johncline--Audi has CVTs that I think are out now, but I'm not sure which models. I haven't driven them, but I've read that in Honda CVTs, you have three settings that adjust the engine revs, so you can use higher-rpm setting to use the engine to slow the car down or get more torque than the normal, fuel-efficient setting. I have an automatic that clunks into 2nd every time, so I'm thinking a CVT is in my future (for whatever car my wife drives--not for me!).
So I figure I may be using more gas, but prolonging brake life. My company pays the gas. I can buy it discount after 3 years.
But there's something I do in my auto 6 that I hardly ever did in my auto Camry - control gear changes with shifter and hold button combos (I guess it's equivalent to a manumatic), just to hear and feel the engine along with the excellent steering/suspension systems. I've gotten carried away with the feeling and mistakenly hit the rev limiter a few times in 1st and 2nd. All of a sudden the car starts bucking when this happens. Luckily I was on straightaways, might be dangerous on a curve.
The Camry has an "overdrive off" button, which is the same as using "S" on your tranny. Toyota actually recommends that you use this to save wear and tear on your brakes- they have a whole section on engine braking in its owner's manual. I'm sure it's the same with other manufacturers.
So, yeah, a normal automatic shifter isn't much different then a manumatic. There are more uses for driving this way than just engine braking, and if you enjoy it, perhaps you'd also enjoy a real manual.
LBnova
Heritage Mazda: www.mileone.com
The latter I bought from after the salesman, Johnny Holiday, made me take the '6 out for a lengthy, unsupervised drive :-) Well, that and he was the only one to find the '6 that I wanted- it came all the way from Philly. Still, had that not happened, I would have gone with Fitzgerald. Their service was impeccable, and it's a shorter drive from DC.
(1) Even though V6 is not the best V6 engine out there it is still more powerful than the 4cyl and anybody who gets behind the wheel will feel it. For example after turning (2nd gear) I was going up the hill. With the 4cyl I pushed the acceleration pedal down to it's limit and didn't get any acceleration until I was on top of the hill - not a very nice experience since the hill was about 25-30 degrees incline. While having the same conditions the V6 was able to accelerate the car pretty well.
(2) Though I didn't toss it very much, I couldn't feel any difference in handling even though the V6 is heavier by 200lbs. And it's not a surprise to me - 200lbs could be the weight of a person sitting next to me with the 4cyl.
(3) This is subjective: I really liked the way the V6 engine sounds on a higher RPMs. Something similar to a jet plane ;-)
So my conclusion from this test drive is that if you can afford (and find ;-) V6 MT then go for it.
However the 4cyl is pretty good too.
BTW, a question to all race-spirited M6 4cyl owners:
Did you consider Mazdaspeed Protege as an alternative? I saw one on the dealer's lot - looks very serious and tempting...
Yes and no. I really liked the Protege, but the Mazdaspeed was a little over-the-top for me. Even the base Protege has fantastic handling, and I'm more concerned over that than the added power of the turbo. Both the Mazda6 and the Protege have, on seperate occasions, been called the best handling front-wheel-drive vehicles in the world.
I love the sound of the V6, although the sound of the 4cyl engine fills out nicely as it ages. The V6 sounded awesome though! I can speak for the 4cyl, but I've heard the same of the V6- the engines don't become alive until after 600 miles. I suspect that's the power issue with the i4 here- my first impression wasn't very inspiring either.
The weight differences between the i4 and V6 are minor. Some of that extra weight comes from the extras such as ABS and a power seat, not from the engine. Also, the 4cyl engine is NOT mounted as far back in the engine bay as it could be (why?!), so the weight distributions are similar. Nonetheless, the weight difference is large enough to create minor understeer, while the 4cyl version sometimes oversteers. If you didn't notice, they it probably doesn't matter.
Either way, I'm glad you liked it!
As I understood from their booklet turbo charger wasn't their main goal. They increased hp to add some dynamics and equalize power over rpm range. The main goal was still handling and that's what they spent most of their energy on...
Whilst the Infiniti was slipping all over the roads while trying to throw it around about, the Mazda6 was stuck to the road.
Well done Mazda, a much cheaper car also!
Very true, you're right. Be aware that the Mazdaspeed will also have a harsher ride. The '6 handles well without any harshness- I don't know if this matters to you or not. It's kind of magic, the '6. I don't know how they did it. In terms of outright performance, I'm sure the 'speed is better, though I've never driven it, so I guess my comments about harshness are simply hearsay anyway. I'd check out the RX-8 if you can afford it.