Mazda6 Sedan

12122242627342

Comments

  • adu1adu1 Member Posts: 47
    A good analysis (although I differ in one detail re Lincoln -- they are *trying* to be somewhat sporty with the LS and its forthcoming performance version). If the plan for Mazda is NOT as you described, then it SHOULD BE. And I agree that there's an underserved niche of buyers who want drivers' cars that don't carry premium/luxury price tags (or premium parts costs down the road). Oh, and who want cars that look sharp, too!

    Almost everything I've been reading about the 6 makes it pretty apparent that Mazda HAS the engineering talent necessary to turn out great drivers' cars. And the RX-8 looks like another very promising sign for Mazda's future. So I guess it'll come down to one thing: Consistency. That is, turning out vehicles that are consistently more sporty and interesting (both in styling and driving) than Hondas, Toyotas, etc. And also building them to consistently high standards, although Mazda's track record on this seems to have been pretty good overall (Ford-sourced 626 auto. trans. and rebadged trucks excepted, of course)...
  • rsparrowrsparrow Member Posts: 60
    Aside from the taillights being changed, anyone notice that the those little turn-indicator lights that are near the door (on most European and Japanese domestic cars) have been removed on the grey 6? Instead they have the standard orange lights near the headlights. Ah well....very minor point I know, but I like the cleaner look of those yellow Mazda 6 HBs.
  • edmund2460edmund2460 Member Posts: 293
    (BTW, I'm holding off on a car purchase till the 6 comes out). If it's the performance niche why didn't Mazda boost the HP some more. Also, it's often been said that this is going to be their 'bread and butter'. Do you get your bread buttered in a niche market? I wonder if someone has any insight on VW's resurgence. After all before the Golf came out VW America was on the brink of bankruptcy. What is it that they have done that turned them around?
  • maltbmaltb Member Posts: 3,572
    Performance is not all about HP. The majority of cars have more horsepower than they will ever need or be able to handle.
  • kenokakenoka Member Posts: 218
    is different than the American norm, which in a nutshell is: horsepower=performance. While horsepower is an important factor in overall performance it is not the only one, or even the most important. I think this was shown clearly by the ponycar wars, which produced some impressively powerful vehicles who couldn't turn to save their life, or more to the point, YOUR life. Mazda's design philosophy is to improve the overall driving experience rather than worrying about paper spec battles. Their Miata is a clear example of this philosophy. 140 hp of pure driving pleasure. (God I sound like a commercial. If I say zoom zoom, please somebody shoot me in the head). But hey don't get me wrong, I like a little power too. That's why I'm waiting for the MazdaSpeed version.
    My wish though is that they continue development of the Miller cycle engine from the Millenia. 210 hp and 210 lb ft of torque from a 2.3 liter V-6, all while maintaining 20/28 mileage with an automatic on a heavier car than the 6. Wow! Does anyone know why that engine or a version of it isn't out? I suspect it must have something to do with emissions. If anyone has more information on that I'd sure like to hear it.
  • carspy01carspy01 Member Posts: 137
    Issue No. 26 of the German Auto Bild, dtd. June 28, 2002, had a comparison test between following current sedans:
    Mazda 6, 1.8l, 88 kW, 4-cyl.
    Renault Laguna, 1.8l, 88 kW, 4-cyl.
    Opel Vectra, 1.8l, 90 kW, 4-cyl.
    Nissan Primera, 1.8l, 85 kW, 4-cyl.
    The test was interesting and comparable because of the smaller European engines. The current Opel Vectra shares the platform of the upcoming Saab 9-3 as well as the 2004 Malibu, Grand Am etc., while the current Nissan Primera is the new generation of what we know in the US as Infiniti G20, but closer to the new Altima. OK. So far so good. Cabin noise was a question earlier:
    Mazda: at 50km=58dB, at 100km=68dB, at 130km=70dB
    Nissan: at 50km=59dB, at 100km=70dB, at 130km=73dB
    Renault: 50km=57dB, at 100km=66dB, at 130km=68dB
    Opel: 50km=56dB, at 100km=65dB, at 130km=69dB
    The testers noted that Opel and Renault are the "whisperers" in the test, while the Nissan is the "shouter", i.e. at higher speeds the interior noise seems to be double (!!!) as loud as in the Opel or Renault.
    Another comment: somebody mentioned the missing rear adjustable headrests in the US-version of the Mazda6. I think that is really unbelieveable. I thought the PRO5 was the right step in the right direction, but no. Just break your neck in the backseat if you're over 5'5" when a dodo hits you... this is, unfortunately, typical for a lot of US-offered products. But get a grip: even the Hyundai Sonata and the Kia Optima have them!!! Hello, Mazda USA??????
  • carspy01carspy01 Member Posts: 137
    Yeah, the final results of the comparison... sorry:
    Mazda6 = 102 % (1st place)
    Opel Vectra = 100 %
    Renault Laguna = 96 %
    Nissan Primera = 94 %
  • tomcat630tomcat630 Member Posts: 854
    In Japan, where they are picky about quality, orders for the new 6 were ahead of predictions by a ton.
  • wolverine_xwolverine_x Member Posts: 54
    someone mentioned that Mazda suffered trying to compete with Honda and Toyota, so they went back to their roots and built sporty cars. Now this is my question. Car makers are there primarily for profit, Right? Why would Mazda go to being sporty when it will not be as profitable as say than going mainstream? It is niche market and it will not make that much money. This was exactly what happened before and then thank God for Ford who saved them. Now they are trekking that direction again.

    If Mazda were truly a great car maker with the likes of Toyota or Honda, Why then can't they compete for bigger bucks along with Honda and Toyota?

    Honda doesnt mind being labeled bland but it is laughing its way to the bank and same way with Toyota. Now can Mazda say the same thing.I do not think so.

    So far, my own assessment of how Mazda's market strategy is that to distance far and away as possible from the mainstream because they know they couldn't touch the two biggest japanese carmaker. I could almost hear mazda saying, "Well we have tried but we miserably failed and because of that we almost died. But not this time, we have learned our lesson, make our own little niche market and earn a fraction of what Accords are enjoying rather than get booted out completely from the entire car industry"

    I say that is the wisest move Mazda made. They may be better now but they do not have the stability of the other two japanese carmakers. Not yet anyway.
  • johnclineiijohnclineii Member Posts: 2,287
    What is missing here is the fact that in trying to be something else (Honda, Accord), Mazda lost its sporty buyers.

    Perhaps it would help to look at the GM/Oldsmobile story.

    One reason Olds quit selling is they entered the market for younger people...and failed. (And at the same time GM was launching Saturn, never did figure out that one!) While OLDS was doing that, they ran off their traditional market, who always had bought their cars. "This is not my father's oldsmobile." (Dad, to himself, "Dang right, gotta buy a Mercury...") Now, with few sales to younger people, and the older people insulted and not buying, Olds was selling virtually nothing to nobody. Good cars that had always sold, the 88 and 98, were gone.

    Olds had such an identity crisis, the new Aurora came out without the word OLDS on it anywhere. The older market quit buying. Young people still snapped up Chevies, Toyotas, Hondas, yes, even Mazdas.

    Olds, which had always been a respectable and practical car for older customers, had now succeeded in being nothing to nobody. Soon, the whole division closed.

    Same story, different twist with Mazda, only it didn't get as far. Traditionally, Mazda's buyers were people who wanted sporty cars that were a bit different. This apparently wasn't enough for Mazda...Mazda wanted Honda and Toyota's market. Mazda then started building what it hoped were Honda and Toyota clones. For the most part, the people who wanted Hondas and Toyotas were never interested in Mazda in the first place and didn't even look at them. Meanwhile, traditional Mazda buyers scratched their heads, said BORING AND BLAND, and bought something else in many cases. Mazda had run off its traditional market in order to be something else: bland and boring but dependable. It didn't succeed in getting Honda and Toyota's market. Meanwhile, its usual buyers were abandoning it.

    The moral of this story is to dance with the one that brung you. Don't try to be something else, or if you do, change slowly over time. Oldsmobile didn't do that. It's dead.

    The flip side of the coin is that SOME change is necessary. Your traditional buyers eventually quit buying from you, in many cases because they have moved to Forest Lawn (a cemetery, for you non-US readers). This is where Mercury is right now, and what induced Olds to start its effort to go young.

    It is a delicate balance. Mazda has tried to undo the damage it did by trying to be something it wasn't. Whether or not it can win back its prior loyal market remains to be seen. I, for one, am VERY interested in the Mazda6. We will just have to see if ZOOM, ZOOM is real, or just hollow marketing words. Soon, we will each get our own opportunity to see for ourselves. I wish we could see in a 5 door hatch! Now, that, my friends IS unique in the USA (yes, I know FORD offers the Focus that way--sister company, doesn't unprove my point)

    john cline ii, who hopes that helps
  • alternatoralternator Member Posts: 629
    Wow, that Mazda6 preview page


    http://www.mazdausa.com/mazda6/mz6_main_flash.asp


    was sure a disappointment! I'm glad Mazda designs their cars better than they do their web site!

  • carspy01carspy01 Member Posts: 137
    Excellent comments, John!
    The problem with the Mazda US-lineup so far was the "bland mainstream clone 626" in my opinion as well as the relatively bland Protege until recently. In Europe they always had a 626 5-door hatch and wagon, as well as several versions of the 323 (Protege). Mazda was very successful in a "mainstream" market a few model generations ago with a little sportier image. Even though the specifications did not always reflect this. However, I guess we all agree that image is everything in a competitive market like those segments. I think the new 6 is still very much mainstream, however, with a twist: it looks "cooler", more modern but not "in your face", and seems to have the appeal at least to be sportier, and, sorry to say, it is in a lot of ways very Euro-toned. Which is an excellent compliment for all of the 6 model-versions. I am convinced that Mazda hit the nail with this one, and will make us forget the 626 pretty soon. And, they will get a little more of the mainstream cake, as the "mainstream"-generation gets younger.
    I would even go that far and assume that Ford will look into their own versions of the 6 to cover part of the clients which will not make the switch to the upcoming 500 as a Taurus-departure, instead of federalizing the next version of the European Mondeo.
  • ickes_mobileickes_mobile Member Posts: 675
    will be built from the same platform. That is why there is all this talk of the Mazda6 being the last "Mazda". Another Ford brand will most likely get a version, especially if they keep Mercury around that long. It will also end up being shared with a Volvo.
  • audia8qaudia8q Member Posts: 3,138
    kenoka

    one big reason the Miller cycle engine is not being considered for anything in its current form is due to emission laws/regulations....the miller cycle is a rather dirty running engine and will not meet the new emission regulations without a huge overahaul.
  • vcjumpervcjumper Member Posts: 1,110
    Here's hoping the sport package on the I will be available without the rear spoiler.. That thing is way too high/tall.
  • kenokakenoka Member Posts: 218
    That's pretty much what I thought. What a shame. It's a beautiful design. Let's hope they're working on that overhaul as we speak.
    John-thanks for responding to Wolverine so eloquently; you reinforced my point perfectly. I loved the Oldsmobile example. I think Mazda's attempt at the mainstream is actually worse in a way because Oldsmobile tried to capture a younger demographic based on already declining sales (it sucks when all your loyal customers start dropping like flies) whereas Mazda tried to jump into the mainstream with fairly strong sales in its niche wanting a bigger slice of the pie - and almost ended up with no pie at all.
    I do want to be clear that when I'm talking about Mazda's "niche" I'm not equating that to anything exotic (ie Lamborghini, Lotus, etc.) but rather a smaller portion of the mainstream. If you imagine a bell curve distribution of mainstream car buyers, you can imagine one end where the people want more fun factor than the rest. The fat part of the bell curve is more concerned with brand image, comfort, and resale value than with sporty handling or power. But in my opinion the sporty end of the bell curve is getting more crowded as the X and Y generations start getting some wealth. We grew up with mom driving the dull station wagon or the minivan, and we think cars should be both fun and practical. There seems to be a distinct movement back toward sportiness in the auto industry as a whole, and thank god for that, because the last 10 years have seemed like a wasteland to me.
  • mwittmermwittmer Member Posts: 2
    I work at a large Mazda dealership in Atlanta. One reason (IMHO) they are not going with the Miller Cycle engine is that there is not much interest in it. Most of the Millenias we sold are P, not S. We have only 3 Millenia S on the lot and all of them demos. Plus, the maintenance cost on the Miller Cycle is very high. 60k service on the engine is a 3 day job. By the way, Mazda6 is replacing both the 626 and the Millenia. There will be no 2003 Millenia.
  • kenokakenoka Member Posts: 218
    Thanks for the info. Don't you think a lot of the lack of interest in the Miller cycle engine has to do with lack of knowledge about it? I had never heard of it until I started researching the 6 and then Mazda. I had barely heard of the Millenia at all. I don't think Mazda has done a good job of marketing in the last few years until the new zoom zoom campaign.
    3 days to service? What do you have to do? Is that every 60K miles?
  • dbamacdbamac Member Posts: 6
    Maybe the problem with the Miller Cycle engines is dealerships trying to make them seem overly complicated by taking three days to do the 60K service. I had the 60K service done on my S about three weeks ago and it took one day.

    Come on folks, there is not a great deal of difference between a miller cycle and an otto cycle (run of the mill IC engine) engine. People act like the MC engine is some kind of exotic, when the truth of the matter is the maintenance headaches are more due to packaging (hard to get to things) then complexity.

    ...and in case you're wondering, I live in Birmingham, AL. and i do business with Med Center.
  • maltbmaltb Member Posts: 3,572
    I'm not so sure that it runs dirty as you put it Rich, but the biggest problem with that motor is the expense. The motor has a great power band, but compared to what else is available it's not really worth it.

    The only reason it may be called dirty would be due to eccentric shaft seals having a little leakage problem. S owners are mostly familiar with a little puff of smoke on acceleration. Not a big deal IMO.
  • jjpeterjjpeter Member Posts: 230
    This article points out some sobering facts for Mazda. 1-the segment is crowded with excellent offerings; Accord, Camry, Altima. 2-the 6 will launch just about the time the new Accord hits the dealers. But the one model of the 6 that will truly set it apart, the 5 door hatch, won't be here till - what? summer 03. The 6 sedan will likely just get lost in the noise.

    "Perhaps the biggest advantage the Mazda6 brings to market is the body-style variants it offers. In addition to a sedan, the Mazda6 line will offer a wagon and five-door hatchback."

    I'll still be at the local dealers come December!
  • maltbmaltb Member Posts: 3,572
    Automotive News had the same write up today. Jim Hall will trash any Mazda, but to hear doubts come out of Eric Noble's Carl Lab is not good.
  • edmund2460edmund2460 Member Posts: 293
    I've enjoyed readng the comments here about the marketing direction of the 6. What I feared is expressed by the AutoWeek article. Point: Mazda did declare that they were aiming at the Toyota/Honda crowd. This doesn't seem plausible given that this competition is already established itself for the bland comfort features that most people want and are adding HP to the mix. Why would Honda and Toyota follow Nissan if they didn't recognize it as a factor in thier losing sales? Autoweek says that handling alone won't cut it. I have to agree. It all depends on sales goals, if they are trying to survive with a certain niche market (maybe the former yuppies who cant afford BMW's due to the economic conditions) then they will meet that goal. But I hope it is not to woo away the mainstream, because I don't think that will happen. You have to do something striking to stand out. Nissan did it with HP and VW did it with content
  • aftyafty Member Posts: 499
    But isn't VW's pitch of German engineering and luxury interior just as subtle a pitch as Mazda's pitch of overall performance? Passat succeeded, so why can't the 6?

    On the other hand, when Passat came out the competition wasn't as strong. And Mazda's sales goals may be overly optimistic. VW is on pace to sell only ~80k Passats this year.
  • ickes_mobileickes_mobile Member Posts: 675
    cast by BMW and Mercedes, which is something more exclusive than a Japanese car...
  • slickdogslickdog Member Posts: 225
    I submit that the problem is not necessarily with Mazda, but rather with the American carbuyer. The average American doesn't know horsepower from torque, or what they really have to do with a car's performance. That combined with the same old tired attitude in this country that has been around for longer than any of us: MORE IS BETTER!

    Why is it that SUV's and minivans are a dime a dozen? Because they cost more, they have more powerful engines, they're bigger!

    Why is it that Nissan can convince folks who've never even been offroading (and never will) to buy their lumpy, bumpy, overpriced, ridiculous looking Xterra with a built-in first aid kit and a foghorn? Because it's got more!

    Why is it that Ford was able to break sales records year after year in the 90's with the Taurus, one of the worst FWD midsize sedans ever sold in this country? Because everyone else was buying them, they must be better, and they're selling more, more, MORE!

    Seriously, don't you think much of Mazda's problem is at least partially caused by the average American buyer's tendency to fall prey to the numbers game that many auto manufacturers play?

    This phenomenon isn't unique to the auto market, either. I've been working in the computer industry for some time now, and things are just as bad there. Computer manufacturers can just as easily dupe consumers into thinking that their machine is better, because it has MORE MHz, MORE RAM, MORE MB. Does the average consumer even know what MHz, RAM and MB are, much less how they play into the machine's overall performance? Hell no, but that dumbass teenager on the Dell commercial sure makes it sound like we need more of all three in our machines!

    Let me also add that I believe the Internet is making matters worse. Now you don't have to remember that Toyota's commercial told you that the Camry has more standard HP than the competition. You can go to one of those nifty car buying sites and put it's numbers right next to all the others on a chart, and convince yourself that it's better, just because it has more! Too much information, most of which is meaningless to the average American. That spells disaster for a manufacturer like Mazda, who isn't going to play that game. Most people don't necessarily bother to learn whether or not the car they want is actually better, as long as it looks better on paper (or their computer monitor).

    Well, I hope Mazda makes a decent run of it (the 6), and hopefully Ford (more is better might as well be the name of their company) doesn't muck it up for them somewhere along the way. All the enthusiasm on this board is very encouraging. I applaud those of you who essentially cry "less can be more". You have the power to see straight through the facade that most automakers put in front of your face.

    That's my rant for today...
  • ambullambull Member Posts: 255
    I found another review which I don't think has been posted here:

    http://autozine.kyul.net/html/Mazda1.htm#6

    One odd thing about it is that it says the 6-cylinder engine will only be available with the automatic transmission, which I'm sure is incorrect.
  • magnetophonemagnetophone Member Posts: 605
    slickdog, exactly.

    Just like the computer industry...People buy Pentium 4's thinking that 2.0 Ghz actually matters. Nevermind that many Pentium III's, AMD Athlons, and Apple PowerPC G4's are significantly faster in most operations. People think that 2.0 Ghz is "faster" than a 1.0 Ghz Apple, when in fact it's not true at all.
  • ickes_mobileickes_mobile Member Posts: 675
    I'd accept your position on all except mini-vans. They are about the most efficent vehicles all things considered (size/price/economy). The hold back on minivans or small MPVs such as the Honda Stream is image. At least Mazda is addressing the inefficencies of the sedan with a wagon and hatchback version of the Mazda6.
  • kenokakenoka Member Posts: 218
    Slickdog, I would submit that the main reason the SUV industry got so big was because of CAFE regulations. To bolster your original point, Americans have always loved big cars. When CAFE put the crimp on gas guzzling big sedans, the manufacturers provided what the market wanted - a big honking vehicle. Obviously the majority of these will never be taken off road; they merely satisfy our love of big vehicles, with the added machismo of the off road image.
    It's truly sad that most consumers can't be bothered to educate themselves even the slightest bit, and can be swayed by the most blatant of marketing ploys. Obviously the browsers of this place are not of that ilk. ;)
    ickes_mobile brings up another point I've been pondering: why do hatchbacks have such a poor image here in the US? They are so obviously more practical and flexible than a sedan, and yet most of them fail because of poor sales. Honda offers a 5 door version of the Accord in Europe but not here. Mazda was initially very hesitant (and still wishy washy) about bringing the hatch to the US. Frankly I don't even see why most sedans haven't been replaced by hatchbacks. IMHO I think they're a fundamentally better design.
  • carspy01carspy01 Member Posts: 137
    Slickdog and all: thanks a lot for some critical points & great postings. Ickes, no, no, no... Europe is not turning their backs on hatches! You have to make a destinction between the models European makers offer here and what's really going on over there with all the brands & suppliers most of the people over here do not even know... if you count the classical hatches, as well as all the wagons and micro-minivans, hatches are 2/3 of the European market - not including SUV's. Why did the introduction (or "testing of the consumer taste") of the MAZDA with the Premacy fail so miserably here at Detroit? It's a mini-minivan on the 626 platform but only slightly larger than the Protege? No company in the US touches this market area, not even talking about the market below that! But, let's be serious: if you have to pay around $4 and more for a gallon of gas in most of the European countries you think twice if you buy a "rep mobile" or a hatch-type vehicle...
  • magnetophonemagnetophone Member Posts: 605
    ickes_mobile, I disagree - if anything, it's just the opposite. The hatchback is becoming more premium. For example, the A3 is a Golf-based Audi hatchback that can run up to $30,000. BMW has the 3-series compact, as well as the Mini. Mercedes has the A-class, which is a hatchback, and has the C-coupe, which is also a hatchback. They are also considering a larger hatchback/fastback kind of car.

    Other "premimum" hatches to come up recently are the Audi A2, the Alfa Romeo 147, and the upcoming 9-3x.
  • wgrwgr Member Posts: 127
    Wow ! An absolutely glowing report. My only real concern is what the '03 prices will be compared to the '02.
  • ickes_mobileickes_mobile Member Posts: 675
    with comments that mirror others we have seen. However, I think the comment of the current reports is that most of these impressions were garnered from the Manufacture's preview drives and not a "road test" such as Car and Driver would run independently from the PR event.
  • mdaffronmdaffron Member Posts: 4,421
    But at least it's a "drive" and not an "impression" from a car show ...

    Interesting to note how the 2.0-liter seemed more than adequate for our British friends ... makes me consider the 2.3 even more, especially since I refuse to put an automatic transmission in my cars ...

    However, I wouldn't be surprised if Mazda USA decides to put the 4-cylinder in the "DX" and "LX" versions and make the "ES" available only with the Duratec V6. Dammit.

    Meade
  • ickes_mobileickes_mobile Member Posts: 675
    No one has driven the 3.0 V-6 yet, so its hard to predict the difference. Their is quite a bit of difference in the current 4 cylinder vs 6 cylinder Accord. The 4 cylinder feels lighter on its tires and has "quicker" handling, whereas the 6 cylnder has a more settled ride and greater off-line and passing responses. I've found our 4-cylinder/5spd. quite enjoyable. I plan on driving both versions of the Mazda6...
  • the_big_hthe_big_h Member Posts: 1,583
    there will only be 2 trim levels for the Mazda6. The Mazda6i will have the 2.3 I4, while the Mazda6s will have the 3.0 V6.

    and both motors will have MANUAL transmission available :)
  • ickes_mobileickes_mobile Member Posts: 675
    Where'd you find this out?
  • ickes_mobileickes_mobile Member Posts: 675
    I noticed that the rear seat has "integrated" headrests, unlike the JDM/European car. Otherwise all of the goods seem to be there. Now if we only knew how much...
  • mdaffronmdaffron Member Posts: 4,421
    Mazda HAS created two trim levels based on engine. It's impossible, without paying through the nose (and actually not possible in some areas), to outfit a Mazda6i (4-cylinder) as well as a Mazda6s (6-cylinder). After studying Mazda NA's spec sheet whose link was posted by bpi, I have noted the following items that come STANDARD on the s but are OPTIONS on the i:

    ABS
    Traction-control system
    Alloy wheels (steel wheels standard on the i)
    8-way power driver's seat with lumbar adjustment
    Automatic HVAC controls (i's are manual and not upgradeable)
    Anti-theft/perimeter alarm
    110-amp alternator (i's is 90 amps)

    It is NICE to see, however, that both models come standard with 4-wheel disk brakes.

    And since I love manual transmissions, it's nice to see that the i gets 25/32 mpg compared to the s's 20/27. And did you guys notice the HUGE HONKIN' gas tank this car has? 18 GALLONS! Using that highway mileage estimate for the i 5-speed, that means I could go 576 miles on a tankful! WOW!

    Gonna be a hard decision in a couple years -- go with Mazda quality and fewer options, or get the top model but worry about its Ford engine? Two years ago I got out of a Mazda-built-by-Ford B2300 pickup truck that had engine problem after engine problem, and I swore up and down that I would NEVER buy another vehicle with a Ford engine in it again.

    What to do, what to do ... dammit Mazda, why couldn't you keep building your own engines for your cars?!

    Meade
  • manavimanavi Member Posts: 150
    I would call an 18 gallon tank in a mid-size car average, definitely not HUGE HONKIN'!

    If you want a mid-size car with good range you should check out the new Altima, which has a 20 gallon tank.
  • dudleyrdudleyr Member Posts: 3,469
    The Altima needs the extra 2 gallons because in its most frugal form 5-speed 4-cyl it only gets 29 mpg on the highway. Or 1 mpg less than a 240 hp V-6 Accord (2003)with an automatic ; ^ )
  • ashutoshsmashutoshsm Member Posts: 1,007
    What's this I hear - you're 'glad' it has 4-wheel discs? I thought you were the one who insisted (repeatedly and vehemently) that rear drums are just a good and effective ;)

    I think I like the way the options hav been distributed - I'd probably get the ABS and/or traction control, don't care for power seats and automatic HVAC, would spring for the alarm too or install a cheaper and better after-market alarm, and the alternator isn't that big a deal (right?).

    576 mile range - woweeee! Nowadays I fill up at around 200 miles, not because the mileage is low, but because the gauge is sluggish and makes it appear I only have 1/6th tank left (although I rarely get over 7.5 gallons in there!)
  • kenokakenoka Member Posts: 218
    Let's keep the "Fordness" (I think I'll trademark that!) of the V-6 in perspective. The block itself is direct from Ford, but Mazda has done a lot to address NVH on this engine and although they don't talk about it I'm sure they've also addressed reliability issues. After all it wouldn't do to diss the parent company. ;) Obviously time will tell but I'm pretty confident that the new V-6 will work out fine. I still wish they'd continued with the Miller cycle though. *sighs*
  • vocusvocus Member Posts: 7,777
    So does anyone think the 6 will be riddled with recalls like the last 2 cars that FoMoCo introduced (the Focus and Tribscape)? I don't think it will, simply because it's a Mazda only venture (as far as the model, I mean) and Ford isn't really associated in that part of it. I could be wrong though.
  • adu1adu1 Member Posts: 47
    Meade, I'd had some concerns about the Ford-derived V-6, too. However, more than one person has posted previously indicating that the Duratec V-6 is actually a very GOOD engine (and the posters seemed to have some reasonable basis for their claim, as I recall). I guess this means that not ALL Ford engines are lousy. Plus I'm sure that Mazda's extensive modifications to the Duratec are only likely to make it even better...
  • sd1228sd1228 Member Posts: 46
    Mazda MPV is using the Duratec for last 3+ years.
    As far as I remember, there are no major issues.
    You can check "Mazda MPV 2000+" and "Mazda MPV problems" formus.
    Also Jaguar X type uses the duratec and Jatco combo
Sign In or Register to comment.

Your Privacy

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.