Mazda6 Sedan

13233353738342

Comments

  • vocusvocus Member Posts: 7,777
    There is no way that a 1989 SHO weighed only 2001 lbs. Maybe 3001, but not 2001. The regular Taurus weighed like 2700lbs. from that year, so it would make no sense. The car would also have been faster than 6.5 seconds to 60mph.

    In comparison, my friend just bought an automatic 2000 ECHO sedan that weighs like 2200lbs. His goes from 0-60 in about 9.5 seconds, and that's only with 108hp. Imagine if it had 220 and a stick!
  • chikoochikoo Member Posts: 3,008
    >>>I would also not be surprised to learn that the V6 does not have a torque band as well distributed as the 4L. After all, it is a Ford engine :( <<<

    It is not a Ford Engine. It has highly modified/ different pistons and cams. The only common thingy is the Aluminium block.
  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    The gearing shouldn't be that different and the torque/hp bands should be very similiar considering they have the same HP from the same displacement. I'd bet both cars get to 60 without a shift to 3rd, so the gearing shouldn't be that different. 2001 lbs? No way.
  • ambullambull Member Posts: 255
    Sorry, typo. Should be 2901 lbs. Still seems low, but that's what one review said.
  • tomcat630tomcat630 Member Posts: 854
    "It is not a Ford Engine. It has highly modified/ different pistons and cams."

    It's a new generation of the Ford Duratech and will be shared by Ford and Mazda.
  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    "It's a new generation of the Ford Duratech and will be shared by Ford and Mazda"

    No it won't. The Mazda 6 version of the duratec is only going to be used in the Mazda 6.
  • magnetophonemagnetophone Member Posts: 605
    Wrong!

    The 3.0 Duratec in the Mazda 6 is already used in the Ford Mondeo ST220 in Europe.
  • ickes_mobileickes_mobile Member Posts: 675
    in NA Ford Rangers, albeit without all the fancy stuff...
  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    The *Mazda modified* version of the Duratec is in the Mondeo?
  • ashutoshsmashutoshsm Member Posts: 1,007
    Get a brand new, Mazda designed, totally new (just repeating that, for effect) engine that went directly into the Mazda 6?
  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    We were talking about the 6 cyl. I already know the 4 cyl is going to be shared, but that doesn't mean the 6 cyl will be too. The Taurus, Sable, some Jaguars, Tribute, Escape, Lincoln LS, possibly the next Mustang, all have a version of the Duratec. I know that. What car is going to share the EXACT version of the Duratec that is going to be in the Mazda 6? None that I know of.
  • magnetophonemagnetophone Member Posts: 605
    Well, newcar31, either Mazda and Ford decided to modify the torque and horsepower of the Duratec to be the EXACT SAME horsepower and torque figures as eachother, or they have the same engine. Guess which one makes more sense.
  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    If that's true, I didn't know that. So the new Mondeo uses the Mazda version of the Duratec? That's news to me. Thanks. No need to be a smart [non-permissible content removed] about it though.

    "either Mazda and Ford decided to modify the torque and horsepower of the Duratec to be the EXACT SAME horsepower and torque figures as eachother, or they have the same engine. Guess which one makes more sense."

    Well, in THIS case, it makes more sense that they are the same engine. That's not always the case though. The Mazda 2.0L in the Protege and the Ford 2.0L in the Focus have the EXACT SAME hp and torque. They must be the same engine then right? Nope, they are completely different engines.
  • magnetophonemagnetophone Member Posts: 605
    Yes, but the Ford Focus and Mazda323/Protege came out at different times. And the Zetec 2.0 was in use before these two cars came out.

    It only makes sense that the ST220 has the same engine.. the ST220 was introduced late summer... right in time for the Mazda 6 to be also introduced in Europe.
  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    "Yes, but the Ford Focus and Mazda323/Protege came out at different times. And the Zetec 2.0 was in use before these two cars came out."

    Actually, the Mazda 2.0L was in use way before the zetec 2.0L. I was just trying to point out that just because two engines have the same outputs, doesn't mean they are the same. I believe you that the V6 is the same in the Mondeo and the Mazda 6. It does make sense. You could have just explained it like you did in the post above. Instead, you had to write "WRONG" with exclamation points and be a smart [non-permissible content removed] about it. Lighten up.
  • tomcat630tomcat630 Member Posts: 854
    "How did the Mazda engine end up in the Ranger"?
    Fact: Ford controls Mazda and they are sharing many components. The same four cylinder is planned for the 2005 Focus.
  • magnetophonemagnetophone Member Posts: 605
    Actually the 2.3 is not available in the Mondeo just yet.
  • stretchsjestretchsje Member Posts: 700
    I haven't checked this, but is the 6 more agressively geared than other family sedans? Still thinking about those 0-60 (63) times...

    By the way, the Taurus SHO was an awesome car, but in terms of engines, the Mazda 6 is much more efficient. Look at the mileage they both get. Even with the difference in drag, it's drastic.
  • vcjumpervcjumper Member Posts: 1,110
    Judging by the 0-100km time, the 6 is not geared for brisk acceleration like the Nissan sedans. When the Maxima had the 222hp 3.0L motor, it was a ~7 second 0-60 car.
  • magnetophonemagnetophone Member Posts: 605
    Yes, but the Ford Focus and Mazda323/Protege came out at different times. And the Zetec 2.0 was in use before these two cars came out.

    It only makes sense that the ST220 has the same engine.. the ST220 was introduced late summer... right in time for the Mazda 6 to be also introduced in Europe.
  • kenokakenoka Member Posts: 218
    The ST220 and the Mazda6 Duratec are NOT the same. They do share the same block. Mazda added its own S-VT and other features to the engine to aid NVH issues. I'm sure they had help from Ford engineers to squeeze performance out of the engine but the engine in the ST220 is 100% Ford.
  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    That's all I wanted to know and what I believed to be correct in the first place.
  • magnetophonemagnetophone Member Posts: 605
    So what, it removed the variable valve timing and lift already on the Ford engine and put their own? Highly unlikely.
  • magnetophonemagnetophone Member Posts: 605
    You know there's nothing wrong with a Ford. If you like Mazda, these days, that means you have to like at least part of Ford. Much of what makes the car good is due to Ford, for example, the sharp FWD handling is something Ford has been an expert at for years (Escort Cosworth, Focus, Puma, Mondeo)
  • regfootballregfootball Member Posts: 2,166
    Mazda, Ford, who gives a *.

    Ford should have the Mondeo ST here, to sell along with the 6 MPS and get in a little in house performance wars.

    That Mondeo interior is really well laid out, very Audi like for a pedestrian car...nicer than Passat.
  • rotulerotule Member Posts: 12
    Ok... so I saw the televised review of the V6 tonight. They taped the stability test and it was fun to watch the test driver go left and right at high speed in a deserted parking lot. Here is a summary of the review. I won't go over what I posted earlier.

    - The interior, despite the original center console and air vents is a little boring. It is however very functional. There is a lot of storage space. The center armrest has three separate containers and there is 4 cupholders up front. Also, the seatback of the front seats have storage pockets. I noticed that the hinges on all compartments are "dampened" like in the passat. A nice touch. I also noticed that there were a lot of courtesy lights (lack of lighting is one of my personnal pet peeves with most cars).
    - Trunk space is huge and easy to access.
    - Rear seats are very roomy, even more than in most luxury sedans.
    - Soundproofing is very good. This car is very quiet.
    - Suspension is soft enough to be comfortable yet manages to control body roll.
    - Manual transmission is smooth and moves efortlessly.
    - Steering is predictable and is not affected by acceleration or body roll.
    - Visibility is excellent
    - The exterior is unoriginal and failed to attract the attention of bypassers. (Not my opinion but I guess its fair coming from a guy who regularly tests 50000$+ cars)
    - Despite the 220HP, the V6 is not powerful enough to turn this car into a real sports sedan.
    - Reliability is an unknown for this model.
  • mariobros100mariobros100 Member Posts: 15
    I hate to break to you guys but both engines are already been used in Ford products.

    The 4 cyl has already been in the Ford Ranger/Mazda B2300 Pick-up for about a year . It lacks variable valve timing (S-vt?? or whatever Mazda call it).

    The 6 cylinder is the Duratec, besides the Taurus it has been used in the 2.5 & 3.0 Jaguars (with VVT)which range from 190HP to 230HP.

    Also the Lincoln LS V6 has been using the same engine ( same as Mazda 6 will use ) where it has been putting out 220HP/215 lb-ft "without the vvt gimmick" .
    However the 2003's LS already have vvt (s-vt??) and it makes more power.... 232HP/220lb-ft.

    In other words....nothing out of the ordinary although the LS output now its pretty good for a Ford poweplant ;heck... its almost as competitive with the Accord V6 and the Altima even though is still a 3.0 liter.
  • johnclineiijohnclineii Member Posts: 2,287
    Those are NOT the same engines. Sigh.

    That is like saying that the Mazda6 tires are Cadillac tires because both hold the same amount of air and are the same size. (Never mind that one is Michelin and the other Goodyear...or that there are modifications to one tire and the other is off the shelf...or that they are produced in different countries to totally different specifications).
  • mazdafunmazdafun Member Posts: 2,329
    Sounds like the reviewer liked it.

    As for me, boring yet functional works for the controls. I don't need a work of modern art that takes too much effort to find and work controls (like the little-loved Buick Skylark and Ford Taurus consoles that had controls placed haphazardly in the name of artistic form).

    Looking forward to when these come available for test-driving, though I'm going to wait for the hatch and wagon (I've decided I need more utility than a sedan offers...then again, that RX-8 is awful tempting-looking).
  • tiredofmanualtiredofmanual Member Posts: 338
    Boring is far from a requirement for functional. It just takes a little extra work to get a functional yet aesthetically pleasing interior. Japanese automakers tend to ignore this and I believe this is part of the reason why many people complain that Japanese cars are soulless while European cars have personality.
  • taddisontaddison Member Posts: 99
    FYI, For those in the Dallas area there's a Mazda 6 sedan on display at the Texas State Fair, which runs all this month.

    From what I remember it has the 4-cyl engine, manual trans, cloth seats, no sunroof, low profile tires, Bose sound system, dark gray metallic color.
  • mazdafunmazdafun Member Posts: 2,329
    For instance, I think the dimple texture in my Protege dash makes it much less boring than a fake leather that's commonly used in Toyotas and Hondas, and I like it more than the fake carbon fiber look.

    I would prefer something functional and attractive. However, I don't want form overcoming function.
  • kenokakenoka Member Posts: 218
    The engine used in the Ranger and the B2300 is NOT the same as the MZR 2.3 liter. I quote from the press release from Mazda that talks about them celebrating the start of production of the newly developed MZR engines:


    "With the newly developed MZR engine*, used in the Atenza, Mazda Motor Corporation has commenced production at the company's new engine plant (Minami-ku, Hiroshima City). The newly developed engines are all aluminum, in-line 4-cylinder gasoline engines, with 1.8-liter, 2.0-liter, and 2.3-liter engine displacements.


    A ceremony was held at the plant to celebrate the start of production of the new engine. In his speech, Mazda Representative Director and Executive Vice President Hisakazu Imaki commented, "This newly developed MZR engine was developed with Mazda taking the lead role, being designated as the 'Center of Excellence' in the Ford Group for its highly recognized engineering. This plant that will produce the new engines, by incorporating various ideas of everyone, has realized high quality and high efficiency, and is now the factory attracting the most attention in the Ford group. I would like you to all take pride in this plant, and let's make the next-generation products that these engines will be used in a success."

    The new I4 engines realize superb performance due to improved torque and increased output, have excellent fuel economy and clean emissions, and perform quietly with little vibration. The engines will be used in the Atenza and other following next generation products.


    A trial run of the new engine production was held starting from last October. This plant has introduced the "Cosworth casting process," which is also used for the peak performance F1 auto-racing engine. This casting process technology has been provided by Ford and Cosworth from England, and then matured and innovated by Mazda-specific technology. Through this, the mass production of quality, lightweight, and compact engines has been attained, and an epoch-making production process, producing at a lower cost than cast iron engines, realized.

      

    The new engines, in addition to being used in future Mazda products, will also be used by the Ford Group in approximately 2 million units, of which Mazda will produce around 425,000 units, expected to be produced within the next several years. The production base in the Ford Group consists of a total of four plants: the Mazda plant here in Japan, and Ford plants in the U.S., Mexico, and Spain. Production at the United States and the Mexico plants began from the second half of 2000. Mazda has positioned this engine as the cutting edge, global core engine in the Ford Group, and will continue to foster this technology."

    http://www.mazda.com/mnl/200204/jisedai.html

  • maltbmaltb Member Posts: 3,572
    Production at the United States and the Mexico plants began from the second half of 2000.

    Sounds about like good timing to get it into the B-2300/Ranger for its debut in Feb '01.

    What's your take on that?
  • mazda6smazda6s Member Posts: 1,901
    The 2.3L engine in the Ranger and B2300 is an older design that's been around for years. The 2.3L in the Mazda 6 is a new design. Of course the Honduh and Toyotuh people are going to drag this one out forever ...
  • stickguystickguy Member Posts: 53,545
    I do remember seeing in one of the car rag review sections that the Ranger was getting a new 4 cylinder engine, probably this one, but I don't recall if this was upcoming or may have already occured.

    2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.

  • magnetophonemagnetophone Member Posts: 605
    Who in here's a Honda or Toyota person?
  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    You are confusing the old 2.3L with the new one. The Ranger originally had a 2.3L I4 and later a 2.5L version of that same engine. The new 2.3L is different. Yes, there are two different 2.3L engines and the new one is a Mazda design. Why are we talking about the 4cyl anyways? We want to find out if the 6cyl used in the Mazda 6 is exclusive to the Mazda 6.
  • mazda6smazda6s Member Posts: 1,901
    I read somewhere that the 3.0L Duratec was modified by Mazda engineers for the 6. I don't recall the details of what they did to it.
  • seminole_kevseminole_kev Member Posts: 1,696
    that the Mazda 6 used the Ford Duratec V6 with a different Mazda head on it. It might have even been an Edmunds article. But since I can't remember where it was from, just take that with a grain of salt.
  • mazda6smazda6s Member Posts: 1,901
    magnetophone - Sorry, I got my forums mixed up. Gotta slow down I guess.
    newcar - Yes, I was referring to the "old" 2.3L engine. I don't know nuthin about the newer one.
  • harlequin1971harlequin1971 Member Posts: 278
    all this talk of engines is very interesting, seriously. :)

    What about transmissions? No cute names (duratec, zetec, econotec, etc) but they are perhaps a better translation of the hp figures then the figures themselves. Anyone have any info on the transmissions, and what kind of "at the tire" hp do you think we will see?

    If they benchmarked BMW, I hope they benchmarked the trannies and drivetrains. BMW is one of the best at wrangling the most net HP out of their engines. (ie rated at 200, netting 177 at the wheel, etc)

    A 160 hp engine can be flabby or furious, so can a 260 hp engine. Need proof, drive a G35 then drive the I35.

    I drove an I30 before I finally aquainted myself with BMW up close, and man...the 60 hp deficit of the BMW was a complete mirage in the road performance. The BMW felt faster, more alive, and the I30 felt flabby and less willing to move.

    One of the reasons Honda can still sell 105hp I4 cars is that they make pretty spunky and efficient drivetrains/trannies. My 105hp Civic HX with a CVT could keep up nicely in traffic. I dare say it had nearly as much oomph and more smoothness than the current Hyundai Elantra mushbox. That has been a Mazda fault for me with their V6 626. It had decent enough power ratings, but no reaction at the pedals. You press the gas, and it wouldn't get up and go.

    Let's talk trannies... :0
  • maltbmaltb Member Posts: 3,572
    Ok!

    5 forward gears and a clutch. It's as smooth or nasty as I want it to be.
  • ickes_mobileickes_mobile Member Posts: 675
    plus one reverse gear, please...
  • maltbmaltb Member Posts: 3,572
    reverse? Pulease! next you're gonna say I need brakes too.
  • ambullambull Member Posts: 255
    While we're talking trannies, does anybody know if the 4- and 6-cylinder engines get the same manual transmission or not. A few posts above, we saw that the manual for the 4-cylinder was all-new and improved, but what about the v6's?
  • ickes_mobileickes_mobile Member Posts: 675
    clutch...
  • kenokakenoka Member Posts: 218
    No, the manual trannies are different for the 4 cyl. and 6 cyl.

    From the CarsEverything article:

    &#149; The Mazda G5M five-speed is designed to give the four-cylinder engine line-up crisp, short-throw shifting feel and low shifting effort in true sports car style. It features new dual synchronization - a high power synchronization feature for responsively quick shifting, easier shift effort and precision engagement - for the first and second gears.


    &#149; The A5M transmission is used for leveraging the higher-torque engines, including the V-6 gasoline engine and the diesel variants. This five-speed manual transmission also features Mazda attention to detail for optimal shift quality.


    http://www.carseverything.com/content/search/results/article/1346/

  • mazda6smazda6s Member Posts: 1,901
    Sounds like what they are saying is that the 4cyl will have a better-shifting tranny, doesn't it?
  • harlequin1971harlequin1971 Member Posts: 278
    also could be read that the V6 manual tranny might be a bit beefier (more durable?)

    I can tell you the surprise I got when my 318ti needed a new clutch (my fault).

    It was an estimated $600 for the clutch with labor, but they weren't sure until they did it if I would need a new flywheel...quoted price for the part: $625.

    Turns out that BMW used a dual-mass flywheel for crisper acceleration on the 4-cyl manual ti. The other 3-series uses a more standard (single mass) flywheel that had a parts cost under $200.

    So, for that crisp tranny on a 4...it could be a slightly more costly tranny to repair, depending on parts used versus the 6...

    just a few cents into the argument.

    I did like the five forward gears quip. :) I guess it shows that while the engine may be the sexy part of the get up and go...transmission of power is truly where it is at for the real deal.

    Personally, I am a fan of the CVT technologies. Except for the new fad of "gearing" the CVTs to perform with powerband revving like a normal slushbox, the CVT is the most intelligent way to strip a driver of gear shifting duties.

    The object point of CVT? To rev the engine to the most powerful point in the RPMs, hold it there while the car is accelerating, then when the driver lets off the gas, reduce the RPMs to the best spot for efficiency. Honda Civic HX models do this quite well.

    Only problem with CVT is that is has issues when dealing with high power output and is a simple theory but complex piece of equipment. Other issue with CVT, it tends to have a starting pause while the belts grab hold of the tranny...take one drive of an Audi A4 CVT and you will see what I mean. (I am not a technical engineer, so some terms may not be correct, but the simple man explanation still stands)
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.