I think you are a bit behind in your reading. The Mazda 3.7 had gotten nothing but rave reviews for over a year now, since its introduction in the CX-9.
"- if engine efficiency is a combination of delivered fuel economy AS WELL AS HP per unit engine volume then the Nissan (and Toyota engines FTM) deliver 77 HP per liter while the Ford/Mazda engine checks in at 73 and further the Ford engine is also about 10% behind in FE (17/25 compared to 19/27) - this all makes the brand new 3.7 about 15%in total LESS EFFICIENT than the much 'older' Nissan VQ or the not quite as old Toyota 2GR "
The big question is "if". Really, what is the big deal if the engine is bigger, more powerful and yet has very very similar FE to the smaller engines. I have yet to see your point, You are also taking into account the Nissan V6 with a manual transmission compared to the Mazda automatic. It does not work that way. The Nissan V6 CVT is 19/26. The CVT is supposed to offer superior FE over a geared automatic. The Mazda6 V6 6-speed auto gets 17/25. The difference is so small. Lets be real here.
The only advantage I see with Nissan's VQ series engine is they use a more advanced VV-T system, which is something Mazda is behind on. Currently, Mazda is working on one that changes both intake and exhaust valves, as opposed to just the intake valves.
What matters most is what is in the vehicles now, not what was in them in the past. If you wanna go that route, that's fine by me. Lets go back to the mid 80's when Nissan Maxima had a 3.0L V6 that had an output of 157hp and Ford Taurus had a 3.0L V6 with 182hp. Please, this history arguement is just plain stupid.
Plain and simple, Mazda has put a very smooth, powerful V6 in the Mazda6 that makes this car more then competitive.
Had the oil changed today in my Speed6 --- Ed Morse in Port Richey Fl. Took out a 2009 Mazda6 i4 grand touring--5 speed automatic. Drove it for about a half hour ,the sales person was a good Guy . Drove on secondary roads and highway. This would be a car for my wife , who now has a 2006 i4 touring .Direct comparison to the 2006 is.The 2009 is somewhat quieter, not as much as I expected-- but good.The 2009 has better pickup and the 5 speed auto was more responsive than the 2006. Even though the 2009 is larger , it drives like the 2006-- which is good. The interior is nice, especially in this price range -- maybe one step ahead of the 2006.I believe the seats are more comfortable-- and Im not extra large or heavy . Looks of a car is an individual type thing -- I like it-- If you dont like it dont buy it. Also the a/c seems improved, here in Florida its a necessity -- better than the 2006. The overall fit and finish is very good , as is my 2006--- which is good. As we all know there are numerous additional fetures , but my point is on the basic car and its good. The base 2009 model is a good deal , especially if some incentives come later on. Maybe the one change I would make is put on different tires. Even though the stock tires wear like iron , they make a lot of noise, which undermines the feel of quality of a really good car---anyway thats my put. Did not talk about pricing.
actually a good question - is the 3.5 a bored/stroked 3.0? Each share the same architecture - 24 valve DOHC with somewhat simple VVT and an apparently identical external appearance and size although the 'new' 3.5/3.7 is fitted for direct injectors unlike the 3.0. Ford (and Mazda FTM) seems to manage to do everything late possibly due to financial constraints and Ford has obvious marketing reasons to try to convince us that is is a truly new 'ground up' new engine. I am not so sure. Ward's JDP and other 'awards' are suspect if only because those organizations are in it for the money and some of the 'refinement' issues with the old Duratech are also resurfacing with the 'new' 3.5 in some reviews I have read.
the 3.7 may be assembled by Mazda but it is still a Ford engine... recent reviews by both CR (on the Taurus) and MT (on the Edge) shouldn't have to say things like 'still behind the class leaders' and/or 'rough and unrefined' respectively. Remember that Ford for what ever financial problems it has had getting the engine in production still had a lot of good examples to follow from Nissan, Toyota, Honda, and even Hyundai. Even the GM 3.6 is technologically more advanced than the DT. The 3.5/3.7 should be class leading, given how late it is in terms of availability. Mazda and Ford shouldn't be behind on anything at this point. Did recently shop the AWD crossovers and actually found the CX9 to be a pleasant surprise, but like its bethren about 10% worse in FE when compared to something like a Murano. The CX was definitely selling for a whole lot less money however.
It's funny that some reviewers call the V6 rough. After nearly two years of driving a 1.6 liter turbo built by Peugeot that 3.7 felt smooth even at WOT. Guess it's all perspective. The chassis felt far more isolated than the current gen Altima too. Weird though, as I find the 3.5 VQ to be a really coarse engine...
I've driven the 2007 Infiniti G35. My CX-9's engine feels definitely more refined and smoother than that of the G's. The G's was in fact one of the roughest V6 engines I've driven.
the 3.7 may be assembled by Mazda but it is still a Ford engine...
...In block and basic architecture ONLY. Mazda has their own heads and other internals, as well as their own tuning.
Even the GM 3.6 is technologically more advanced than the DT.
I'd hope so, since you said yourself that the DT has been around for nearly 20 years, but the new 3.5/3.7L, as pointed out before, is a "DT" in name only. If you'd actually do some research, instead of deluding yourself, you'd discover this. Let me reference post #961 since you obviously missed it: The Duratec 35 is a 3.5 L (3496 cc/213 CID) V6 that began production in fall 2006 and is the first member of the all-new Ford Cyclone engine family.
Did recently shop the AWD crossovers and actually found the CX9 to be a pleasant surprise, but like its bethren about 10% worse in FE when compared to something like a Murano.
Well, since the Murano is considered midsize, and the CX-9 a large crossover, a 10% worse FE isn't so bad, with the extra row of seating, larger size and cargo capacity, and more HP that the CX-9 offers...
"Well, since the Murano is considered midsize, and the CX-9 a large crossover, a 10% worse FE isn't so bad, with the extra row of seating, larger size and cargo capacity, and more HP that the CX-9 offers..."
8 more hp and 22 ft-lbs is quite a power difference.
There are those who believe press releases and there are those of us that are from Missouri. GM for many many years tried to convince us that Pontiac engines were different from Buick and Chevys etc. - until they finally got sued and had to come off of that. So now we have Ford, in this case, claiming what they are terming a 'new engine family' and I'm not sure what if anything that means. Perhaps nothing more than just some well disguised PR? People do buy things because they think it is new and/or improved whether it is true or not. I, for one, look at an engine with the same physical size and appearance the same valvetrain specs. and most importantly similar specific engine output (per unit volume) and and a mfgr. that would like to have us believe is all new - when generally this is NOT how the industry works. Its kinda like the 283-302-327-350-396-400 smallblock V8 sequence. GM wanted us to believe these were all different engines when in fact they weren't. Like that poor guy that posted here that apparently believes that the 221 HP Duratec (or 210 in the Mazda) is really any different than the DT 200 hp engine of 10 years ago. Detroit has for many many years attacked HP problems with one of the simpliest and cheapest solutions - displacement increases - and now all of a sudden we can not acknowledge that perhaps Ford (who has no money) is doing exactly the same thing? :confuse: Not that this is all necessarily bad either, the Toyota 2GR started out life as a 4 liter small truck engine, the Nissan VQ with 3 liter roots dating to the early 90s, the Honda 3.5 obviously very close kin to the old 3.0s and 3.2s and these are the engines that most folks would agree that have defined the 'performance' V6 engines for many years now. You folks are certainly welcome to reference whatever press release garbage you would like - I will continue to take it for what it oft times is worth!
In other words, when a domestic improves a product or introduces an "all-new" product, according to you, it's not "all-new" because it's more of the same.
But when Honda, Toyota, and Nissan do the SAME THING, it's "not... all necessarily bad...".
:confuse:
AFAIC, the only "garbage" in this conversation isn't from the press releases...
think you misread what I said - it's not necessarily bad if the Ford/Mazda DT does happen to be a reworked engine and used those 3 generally revered engines as examples of where and when that has been done successfully.
dumb - not likely poor - how many billions do you have to lose before you run out of funds you can dedicate to product development?? When you have nothing to spend, it might be damn difficult even to find the relatively few dollars need to resize an existing engine - never mind develop a completely new one. THIS more than any other reason is why I'm guessing that Ford just might have taken the cheap way out.
except, of course that the engine in the Murano is flexible enough to run just fine on the regular - as do all other Nissans short of the 350Z. And yes, my 03 Altima 3.5 has had nothing but regular run thru it for 100k now - and it's never been in the shop. In short, it has been (knock on wood) the legendary engine that it is supposed to be :P
THIS more than any other reason is why I'm guessing that Ford just might have taken the cheap way out.
But you are guessing, and I think you're wrong in this case. This engine was badly needed, and Ford took their time in development, to make SURE the engine was not a failure in any way. A year longer than they should have actually, but it appears to be worth it. The engine is a good one. I don't think it is the offspring of an old design.
actually more than 3 years - I believe the 3.5 was orginally intended for the 05 500. Had the 500 had the 260 hp we wouldn't have the Taurus today I bet.
Our all-new 3.5-liter Duratec 35 V6 engine has been named among "Ward's 10 Best Engines" by Ward's Auto World. This award is high praise for our engineers, as the 3.5-liter engine class is one of the most competitive in the industry.
The all-new 3.5-liter V6 architecture also provides significant flexibility to incorporate additional engine technologies. The 3.5-liter engineering team included extra provisions to make upgrades easier. These upgrades include such potential features as hybrid capability, gasoline direct injection and direct injection with turbocharging.
The all-new 3.5-liter V6 architecture also provides significant flexibility etc
1. you don't think that maybe just maybe this is a Ford press release? If you want to find something out something good about anything go to that company's website! 2. as far as Ward's 'best' - wonder if maybe just maybe Ford pays Ward's to use their name?? The new Malibu just received the JDP award for 'best initial quality' - give me a break - there are many cars in this class including the Fusion and 6 that might easily best the GM product, except, of course that GM needs all the 'awards' it can get and will certainly pay somebody to get them.
Do either of you have any idea about what percentage of Mazda's overall build on the s (V6) model will be devoted to sport, touring, and grand touring models? If you don't have any information in general, how about your own dealership's allocations?
I've pretty well decided that the sport model at $24,800 gives me everything I need, and leaves out many things I don't want. At that price, it's a lot of car for the money, IMO. So far, as we near the first month of availability, I've seen nothing but grand touring models at the three dealerships I've visited. One of them told me they have no plans to have any sport V6 models ever. I'm wondering what my odds are going to be of finding any availability on the sport model anytime soon.
Thanks for any insights you may have. I like the car a lot and will probably soon be an owner of an s sport...provided I can find one. And yes, I realize dealers will trade cars from their inventories back and forth, and I would accept that if all the sport models seem to avoid my neck of the woods, but I would prefer a car that came directly from the factory to my dealer.
Right now, Mazda is kinda forcing our hand on allocations a bit. We wanted to order almost only I GT and I Tourings, but they made us up our selection of V6's. Now granted, of the 4 I've sold thus far, 2 have been V6 Gt's (actually, they were identical, V6 gt's, black with black with nav), 1 I Gt with moon and 1 i touring with moon.
What we plan on ordering when they loosen up a bit, depending on how the demand plays out, is probably 80% i's (with a split of about 5/75/20 between sport, touring and gt) and 20% v6 with those being 10/40/50.
I agree the S Sport is a good car. We have one so far, but we are not to any of the cars that we ordered yet. Thus far it is all mazda pre-allocation stuff. The I Sport to us is kinda dumb because to us, Mazda people don't like hubcaps, and considering there were no hub's in 2008, bringing them back in 09 is goofy.
We hadn't ordered any convenience pack cars because we had no idea what to expect of the half and half leather, but after seeing it, it makes sense. I still think it'll be a very niche thing, but it fills a gap. Should just be a trim level though. Grand Sport or something.
We figure our demand will be, once things level off, itr, igt, sgt, str, s sp, i sp.
The wildcard will be where the car ends up slotting though. When the CX-9 Launched, everyone, Mazda included, thought it was going up against the pilot and highlander. So everyone ordered Sports and Tourings with about 10% Gt's. Well, 50% of the CX-9's sold (and in areas like ours, more like 80%) are Grand tourings and the vehicle is primarily compared with the Acura MDX and the Buick Enclave. The CX-7 similarly compares usually with Murano and RDX, not Rav4 or CR-v, although the distribution is more even there, with sports making up a good portion of sales too.
So if the 6 ends up being mainly compared with Camry and Accord, we'll see a similar build distribution to them. But, if it ends up being more vs. the Maxima, ES, or TL, then the distribution with be more heavy toward V6's.
As for getting the car you want. Order to delivery on the car is about 2.5 months. Just go in to a dealership that you've heard good things about and order what you want. You'll have to make a deposit, at ours it's 250 dollars and fully refundable unless the car is goofy or heavily accessorized (someone orders a car with 3000 in accessories, you want to be sure he takes it). While they'll try to find the exact car of course, if they're a good dealership, they won't have any problem just ordering it. A sale is a sale.
I really appreciate all that background. If your dealership is typical, then it confirms what I think I already knew, that the s sport will be relatively scarce.
I agree about the i sport -- wheel covers just don't seem right on a zoom-zoom Mazda. The nice thing about the s sport is that it has alloys, and I like those alloys as well, if not better, than the touring or grand touring alloys.
Your comments about ordering a car are interesting. I've had varied success in that area. When I purchased my current car -- '04 Accord -- the dealership showed me their allocation a few months out, we didn't see what I wanted, and they traded with another dealer's allocation before the car left the factory to get exactly what I wanted. In other words, they could not have been any more helpful. A great buying experience. I had a similar experience with my previous car, a Camry.
So far, of the three Mazda dealerships I've visited shopping the new 6, only one has been accommodating with their information. They let me look at their allocation over the coming month or so on the computer screen, we didn't see an s sport, and they agreed to order one if I decided exactly what I wanted. I haven't taken them up on this offer yet, since they're sticking to sticker price (understandable, I suppose, with a new model) and I'm willing to wait until someone is willing to negotiate at least a reasonable amount. Still, a very good shopping experience -- they were willing to share information and be helpful.
However, the other two dealerships are the kind that give dealerships a bad reputation with consumers. They insisted they have no idea what they're getting until the truck pulls up. That's nonesense, of course (at least based on what the other Madza dealership was telling me), and the idea that they expect customers to believe that is patronizing and insulting. And they said they were unable to order a car for me. They were the kind of salespeople that have only focus -- have the customer buy a car today that's on the lot, with no regard to what the customer would actually like to have.
Fortunately, you sound like a dealership that would try to accomodate what the customer would actually be happy with, and be willing so share information.
Thanks again for all the background -- it's very helpful. Either ordering an s sport or finding one in someone's inventory, it tells me I'll more than likely jump on it when I find it, since the selection over time may be very limited.
Join www.worldkarting.com for $55. They are Mazda S-Plan and will generate an S-Plan PIN for their members. This will get you a no-haggle price of invoice + $255. I'm not sure if the $255 is nationwide, but it is the amount for all of Texas. This is the cheapest legit way to get an S-Plan PIN that I know of.
I used S-Plan (along with $500 loyalty and another $500 discount) to get my iGT with 1MC package that had an MSRP of $28,240 for $25,147. The only fee I had to pay was a $50 documentation fee which didn't bother me in the least....some dealers try and charge upwards of $300 for doc fees. Make sure to ask each dealer what their doc fee is as it can vary quite widely. Also ask if they have an advertising fee.
The rules of S-Plan clearly state that you can order exactly what you want from the factory (or choose from the dealer's inventory, if they are willing).
Well, after spending lots of time in the 09 Mazda6, and then driving home in my 05, it has really dawned on me how obsolete the 1st gen Mazda6 has become. Keep in mind, I really really like my 05!!
With all the added technology (BSMS, DSC, custom personalization features, upgraded nav system, Bluetooth audio / phone, rain sensing wipers, advanced keyless system etc, etc, etc...), this car should have been called a Mazda7, IMO. The sophistication, refinement, quality and design I think will draw attention from those looking at not only Honda and Toyota but possibly Acura, Lexus and Audi and it does not carry the premium price tag.
While fuel economy, is not class leading, it does not lag far behind, especially with the 4cyl, I still think it will be a hit because of the total package and what the car offers. If we all bought based on fuel economy, we would all drive a Toyota Prius.
Sat in a new 6 this morning during an oil change on my '07 Mazda6 I4 auto and noticed that a lot of storage has been removed vs. the 1st gen. I noticed that the little area just in front of the gear shift was gone, replaced by the "start button". This is wear I normally keep my cell phone. The upper dash compartment is gone and the double space console is now a single space. I really like the 1st gen console as it was a handy little storage space that you didn't have to dig around in to find something that you might use a lot. I assume the adjustible, sliding console top caused the elimination of this nice little storage space. Not huge deals but something that will enter into my buying decision.
They must have removed the tray from the console of the 6 on the showroom floor. I guess you would have to remove the tray to get a stuff underneath in the deeper space, huh?
I think the ash tray was removed from later models of the 1st gen which leaves almost a perfect space to rest a cell phone next to the acc. plug. Held it nice and snug for those "manuevers".
The tray does not take up the whole length of the console, it only takes up about half, and it's pretty deep. You don't really need to remove it, and if you do, it's not a big deal.
Yes, the ash tray was removed as a result of the MY06 face lift.
Thanks -- that's interesting information. Is it really that easy with Mazda to get that much of a discount? Seems almost too good to be true. Are all Mazda dealers obligated to accept S-Plan?
Had the 500 had the 260 hp we wouldn't have the Taurus today I bet.
mmmmmmmm ......maybe, but I agree with Mulally - it was a mistake to throw away the Taurus brand, even though it had been devalued and cheapened so horribly over the years, it was still a very well recognized brand, if no longer respected. If he can re-do the Taurus, as they now have, and make it a world class mid sized (or full sized as they now call it) car again, the brand will work where the 500 was an f-ing mistake with Bill Ford's obsession about alliteration. Sure, it needed the engine, but it needed to be a Taurus too. Now it is. The new Taurus looks a lot like the Mazda 6 from what I've seen, and that should be a hit.
Not all dealers are required to accept S-Plan, but I've never heard of one who doesn't.
First off, make sure to indentify yourself as S-Plan from the start. I was treated EXTREMELY well by the 2 dealerships I visited. I can only guess that they prefer S-Plan members as the price is set by Mazda and makes the whole procedure a no-haggle process.
The first (TownNorth) allowed me to look at the invoice book for each model I was considering. I was also allowed to look at the dealership's future allocation. Unfortunately for this dealer, they didn't have what I wanted (iGT 1MC black/black) on the lot and didn't have any coming in the very near future (most of their allocation hadn't even hit the assembly line yet). They tried to swap with another dealership; but, with such a hot new model, the other dealerships weren't in the mood for swapping. The sales manager's name was Alex and he was EXTREMELY forthright with everything........a complete 180* from most dealers. I really wanted to buy from him but he simply couldn't get the car I wanted.
I knew that Freeman Mazda had the exact model I wanted so I called them and got their Internet/Fleet sales guy on the phone (Clay). Told him I was S-Plan and that I wanted to buy the Black/Black iGT he had on the lot. He said no problem and I bought the car that night.
I'm pretty sure Mazda gives the dealers some form of extra holdback when a vehicle is purchased under S-Plan. What this means is that you get the car for invoice yet the dealer still makes money. A win for both parties involved.
attempting to capitalize on the 'retro' craze is where the 'Five Hundred' name came from . From about the same era as the Chrysler 300 - it worked to some extent for Chrysler, but nobody seemingly remembered things like the Galaxie 500s that Ford was attempting to capitalize on. The Five Hundred in 05 was a real 'space ship' and pretty well conceived with its Volvo roots - except that it had to fail at least in part due to the wheezy DT3.0 in a near 2 ton car. The Taurus OTH had unfortunately evolved into the star of the Hertz lots., remained in production for awhile specifically and only for 'fleet' sales,and IMO also represents a poor naming choice because of this. It is nothing more than a thinly disguised Five Hundred (new grille and tailights) but obviously with a whole lot less 'wheeze'. The Taurus name may indeed more recognizable to anybody under 60 or so but I'm not so sure that it is remembered especially well. The Taurus continues to struggle salewise -despite rather aggressive initial pricing., the car can be bought at several thousands in discounts, rebates and/or financing incentives How you would think that is even related to the rather credible effort Mazda stylists did with the new 6 is beyond me, the 6 is a good looking car, the Taurus looked better IMO when it was called the Five Hundred.
I'm pretty sure he meant the upcoming 2010 Taurus. The spy photos out on the net show a more muscular stance and incorporate Ford's kinetic design language seen on the upcoming Fiesta.
I don't think anyone in their right mind would liken a current Taurus to a Mazda6.
When the current 3 was launched none of the local Seattle dealer would honer S plan pricing, that said the dealer close to me treated me well and we came to an agreement below MSRP - No pressure or hassle. I could have waited ~ 6 months, but really wanted (needed?) a car.
S-plan is pretty cool, but don't be surprised if your local dealer is not eager to offer it on a 6 right now - though clearly overall conditions have changed. If they are not participating now I would expect they will soon!
FWIW - The 6 is high on my list for replacement to my 3 - wish the wagon made the cut...
All the dealers I contacted in DFW had no problem in selling the '09 6 under the S-Plan. They actually seemed happy that I was S-Plan.
Under normal circumstances (car been on the market for months and isn't in super high demand) most people who know what they are doing should be albe to negotiate to S-Plan pricing levels (or better) without having to be S-Plan. However, with the new 6 I doubt we'll hear many good deals for quite a while that don't involve S-Plan.
why don't you buy a 2003 3.0L V6 Mazda6s and a 2009 Mazda6s 3.7L V6 and tear down the engine YOURSELF? that will satisfy you. :sick:
The new 3.5L is not part of the Duratec family, but rather an all new design. It was engineered from the beginning, however, to have the same height and width dimensions as the current 3.0L Duratec.
I'm getting intrigued by this S-Plan business you're telling us about and the Karting Association, having visited their website and seen the offer. They say Mazda has partnered with them to provide this benefit for their members. It still seems a little uncertain, since one of the dealers we're talking with here has said they don't have to honor it. But, I'm thinking it's worth a try.
I'll post any experiences I have here with the S-Plan. But it may be too early, as someone else said, to get any discount on an 09 Mazda6. I wonder how long the Karting Association will have this up on their website?
Simply said, it is up to the discretion of the dealership. In general, the more S-Plan business they do, the better you're treated. At my dealership, easily 50% of our business on the new car side is S-plan as we are located in close proximity to many Mazda and Ford suppliers. Plus, the list of companies that get Ford Partner Pricing (P-Plan, basically X Plan) which ends up being S Plan is quite large. UPS, Fed Ex, Chase, etc.
The only instances of S-Plan not being honored in general are on Mazdaspeed3's and Power Hard Top Miata's. The reason for this is these two vehicles don't count in the same manner as normal vehicles and are limited in production.
A dealership just risks too much by turning away S-plan business. Unless they're in an area where they don't see S-plan often and either don't need it, or don't understand it, or unless they're the only Mazda dealership around (Hawaiian islands for instance. One Mazda dealership per island).
And to clear up what S-Plan pricing is, it is a top line of invoice, plus the states allowable documentation fee (and any other taxable extras like dealer installed options, which are NOT subject to it. Only factory options are), and then, once you have your out the door price, you (in most cases) receive an S-plan rebate in addition to all other availible rebates and incentives. This rebate is 500 dollars in most cases (including the new 6). As of right now, only the Mazda5 and Mazda3 don't receive the 500, getting 250 instead.
The invoice can also very slightly depending on if the area is subject to an assessment fee. This is a fee Mazda charges the dealership on each car and is part of the invoice. No, it's not negotiable.
S-plan is the best price you can get unless the dealership is literally willing to lose money on a deal. Those cases are few and far between however and hinge completely on coming to a dealership at the exact moment when a single car will make them hit their store quota and it pretty much means you have to take something on the lot, because they're not going to be able to dealer trade for a car in a single day. I've only ever done one deal like that, on a CX-7 and it ended up not being required for us to hit our quota, but we lost 1000 dollars on the deal. The difference in the price between S-plan and what we did was a whole 500 dollars. For those looking for the crazy deal, that's the difference. Is it worth 500 dollars to spend days looking for that certain dealership and hope they have the right car?
Right now, an S-Plan customer coming out of a Mazda lease basically get's a new 6 at $1500 behind invoice. If you are leasing the new 6, it's $2000. If you purchased your current mazda, you lose 500 of those bonuses.
As for the question of the lease earlier when someone said the residual wasn't high enough to be a good lease, well, all I know is that if I had the choice between a high residual, high money factor (interest) lease (I.E. Toyota and Honda) or a realistic residual, low money factor lease, give me that any day. You can actually build equity in that. As a point of reference, a normal customer with 3000 total due at signing can lease a V6 GT with Moon and nav (32690) for about 380 a month. That's pretty good for a car they haven't even started advertising yet!
I bought a 09 6 iGT auto with moonroof 2 weeks ago. The MSRP is 28,240 and I got it for 26,240 from the dealership. They were able to give it less 2,000. Do you think this is a good buy?
Comments
"- if engine efficiency is a combination of delivered fuel economy AS WELL AS HP per unit engine volume then the Nissan (and Toyota engines FTM) deliver 77 HP per liter while the Ford/Mazda engine checks in at 73 and further the Ford engine is also about 10% behind in FE (17/25 compared to 19/27) - this all makes the brand new 3.7 about 15%in total LESS EFFICIENT than the much 'older' Nissan VQ or the not quite as old Toyota 2GR "
The big question is "if". Really, what is the big deal if the engine is bigger, more powerful and yet has very very similar FE to the smaller engines. I have yet to see your point, You are also taking into account the Nissan V6 with a manual transmission compared to the Mazda automatic. It does not work that way. The Nissan V6 CVT is 19/26. The CVT is supposed to offer superior FE over a geared automatic. The Mazda6 V6 6-speed auto gets 17/25. The difference is so small. Lets be real here.
The only advantage I see with Nissan's VQ series engine is they use a more advanced VV-T system, which is something Mazda is behind on. Currently, Mazda is working on one that changes both intake and exhaust valves, as opposed to just the intake valves.
What matters most is what is in the vehicles now, not what was in them in the past. If you wanna go that route, that's fine by me. Lets go back to the mid 80's when Nissan Maxima had a 3.0L V6 that had an output of 157hp and Ford Taurus had a 3.0L V6 with 182hp. Please, this history arguement is just plain stupid.
Plain and simple, Mazda has put a very smooth, powerful V6 in the Mazda6 that makes this car more then competitive.
Did recently shop the AWD crossovers and actually found the CX9 to be a pleasant surprise, but like its bethren about 10% worse in FE when compared to something like a Murano. The CX was definitely selling for a whole lot less money however.
Different strokes...
the 3.7 may be assembled by Mazda but it is still a Ford engine...
...In block and basic architecture ONLY. Mazda has their own heads and other internals, as well as their own tuning.
Even the GM 3.6 is technologically more advanced than the DT.
I'd hope so, since you said yourself that the DT has been around for nearly 20 years, but the new 3.5/3.7L, as pointed out before, is a "DT" in name only. If you'd actually do some research, instead of deluding yourself, you'd discover this. Let me reference post #961 since you obviously missed it:
The Duratec 35 is a 3.5 L (3496 cc/213 CID) V6 that began production in fall 2006 and is the first member of the all-new Ford Cyclone engine family.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Duratec_engine
New Engine Family. The engine that will be built at Lima--which was code named "Cyclone"--will bear the name "Duratec 35"
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0KJI/is_10_115/ai_n6010896
Thanks to Jeffryscott for finding this.
Did recently shop the AWD crossovers and actually found the CX9 to be a pleasant surprise, but like its bethren about 10% worse in FE when compared to something like a Murano.
Well, since the Murano is considered midsize, and the CX-9 a large crossover, a 10% worse FE isn't so bad, with the extra row of seating, larger size and cargo capacity, and more HP that the CX-9 offers...
8 more hp and 22 ft-lbs is quite a power difference.
You folks are certainly welcome to reference whatever press release garbage you would like - I will continue to take it for what it oft times is worth!
But when Honda, Toyota, and Nissan do the SAME THING, it's "not... all necessarily bad...".
:confuse:
AFAIC, the only "garbage" in this conversation isn't from the press releases...
...and all on regular unleaded, I might add. That price difference alone kills the "10% worse FE" argument.
Clearly Ford and Mazda are so dumb and poor that it took them 5 years to figure out how to bore the DT 3.0 out to a 3.5...aye aye, sir.
poor - how many billions do you have to lose before you run out of funds you can dedicate to product development?? When you have nothing to spend, it might be damn difficult even to find the relatively few dollars need to resize an existing engine - never mind develop a completely new one. THIS more than any other reason is why I'm guessing that Ford just might have taken the cheap way out.
But you are guessing, and I think you're wrong in this case. This engine was badly needed, and Ford took their time in development, to make SURE the engine was not a failure in any way. A year longer than they should have actually, but it appears to be worth it. The engine is a good one. I don't think it is the offspring of an old design.
You got that wrong Captain.
http://www.ford.com/innovation/environmentally-friendly/gasoline/3-5-liter-durat- - ec-35-v6-engine/fuel-efficient-v6-365p
Named To Ward's 10-Best Engines List
Our all-new 3.5-liter Duratec 35 V6 engine has been named among "Ward's 10 Best Engines" by Ward's Auto World. This award is high praise for our engineers, as the 3.5-liter engine class is one of the most competitive in the industry.
The all-new 3.5-liter V6 architecture also provides significant flexibility to incorporate additional engine technologies. The 3.5-liter engineering team included extra provisions to make upgrades easier. These upgrades include such potential features as hybrid capability, gasoline direct injection and direct injection with turbocharging.
Duratec 3.0
Duratec 3.5
1. you don't think that maybe just maybe this is a Ford press release? If you want to find something out something good about anything go to that company's website!
2. as far as Ward's 'best' - wonder if maybe just maybe Ford pays Ward's to use their name??
The new Malibu just received the JDP award for 'best initial quality' - give me a break - there are many cars in this class including the Fusion and 6 that might easily best the GM product, except, of course that GM needs all the 'awards' it can get and will certainly pay somebody to get them.
Got some swampland for sale - in Arizona.
The subject is the new Mazda6, not all these other vehicles and engines.
Thank you for your cooperation.
kapaaian
Do either of you have any idea about what percentage of Mazda's overall build on the s (V6) model will be devoted to sport, touring, and grand touring models? If you don't have any information in general, how about your own dealership's allocations?
I've pretty well decided that the sport model at $24,800 gives me everything I need, and leaves out many things I don't want. At that price, it's a lot of car for the money, IMO. So far, as we near the first month of availability, I've seen nothing but grand touring models at the three dealerships I've visited. One of them told me they have no plans to have any sport V6 models ever. I'm wondering what my odds are going to be of finding any availability on the sport model anytime soon.
Thanks for any insights you may have. I like the car a lot and will probably soon be an owner of an s sport...provided I can find one. And yes, I realize dealers will trade cars from their inventories back and forth, and I would accept that if all the sport models seem to avoid my neck of the woods, but I would prefer a car that came directly from the factory to my dealer.
What we plan on ordering when they loosen up a bit, depending on how the demand plays out, is probably 80% i's (with a split of about 5/75/20 between sport, touring and gt) and 20% v6 with those being 10/40/50.
I agree the S Sport is a good car. We have one so far, but we are not to any of the cars that we ordered yet. Thus far it is all mazda pre-allocation stuff. The I Sport to us is kinda dumb because to us, Mazda people don't like hubcaps, and considering there were no hub's in 2008, bringing them back in 09 is goofy.
We hadn't ordered any convenience pack cars because we had no idea what to expect of the half and half leather, but after seeing it, it makes sense. I still think it'll be a very niche thing, but it fills a gap. Should just be a trim level though. Grand Sport or something.
We figure our demand will be, once things level off, itr, igt, sgt, str, s sp, i sp.
The wildcard will be where the car ends up slotting though. When the CX-9 Launched, everyone, Mazda included, thought it was going up against the pilot and highlander. So everyone ordered Sports and Tourings with about 10% Gt's. Well, 50% of the CX-9's sold (and in areas like ours, more like 80%) are Grand tourings and the vehicle is primarily compared with the Acura MDX and the Buick Enclave. The CX-7 similarly compares usually with Murano and RDX, not Rav4 or CR-v, although the distribution is more even there, with sports making up a good portion of sales too.
So if the 6 ends up being mainly compared with Camry and Accord, we'll see a similar build distribution to them. But, if it ends up being more vs. the Maxima, ES, or TL, then the distribution with be more heavy toward V6's.
As for getting the car you want. Order to delivery on the car is about 2.5 months. Just go in to a dealership that you've heard good things about and order what you want. You'll have to make a deposit, at ours it's 250 dollars and fully refundable unless the car is goofy or heavily accessorized (someone orders a car with 3000 in accessories, you want to be sure he takes it). While they'll try to find the exact car of course, if they're a good dealership, they won't have any problem just ordering it. A sale is a sale.
I really appreciate all that background. If your dealership is typical, then it confirms what I think I already knew, that the s sport will be relatively scarce.
I agree about the i sport -- wheel covers just don't seem right on a zoom-zoom Mazda. The nice thing about the s sport is that it has alloys, and I like those alloys as well, if not better, than the touring or grand touring alloys.
Your comments about ordering a car are interesting. I've had varied success in that area. When I purchased my current car -- '04 Accord -- the dealership showed me their allocation a few months out, we didn't see what I wanted, and they traded with another dealer's allocation before the car left the factory to get exactly what I wanted. In other words, they could not have been any more helpful. A great buying experience. I had a similar experience with my previous car, a Camry.
So far, of the three Mazda dealerships I've visited shopping the new 6, only one has been accommodating with their information. They let me look at their allocation over the coming month or so on the computer screen, we didn't see an s sport, and they agreed to order one if I decided exactly what I wanted. I haven't taken them up on this offer yet, since they're sticking to sticker price (understandable, I suppose, with a new model) and I'm willing to wait until someone is willing to negotiate at least a reasonable amount. Still, a very good shopping experience -- they were willing to share information and be helpful.
However, the other two dealerships are the kind that give dealerships a bad reputation with consumers. They insisted they have no idea what they're getting until the truck pulls up. That's nonesense, of course (at least based on what the other Madza dealership was telling me), and the idea that they expect customers to believe that is patronizing and insulting. And they said they were unable to order a car for me. They were the kind of salespeople that have only focus -- have the customer buy a car today that's on the lot, with no regard to what the customer would actually like to have.
Fortunately, you sound like a dealership that would try to accomodate what the customer would actually be happy with, and be willing so share information.
Thanks again for all the background -- it's very helpful. Either ordering an s sport or finding one in someone's inventory, it tells me I'll more than likely jump on it when I find it, since the selection over time may be very limited.
Join www.worldkarting.com for $55. They are Mazda S-Plan and will generate an S-Plan PIN for their members. This will get you a no-haggle price of invoice + $255. I'm not sure if the $255 is nationwide, but it is the amount for all of Texas. This is the cheapest legit way to get an S-Plan PIN that I know of.
I used S-Plan (along with $500 loyalty and another $500 discount) to get my iGT with 1MC package that had an MSRP of $28,240 for $25,147. The only fee I had to pay was a $50 documentation fee which didn't bother me in the least....some dealers try and charge upwards of $300 for doc fees. Make sure to ask each dealer what their doc fee is as it can vary quite widely. Also ask if they have an advertising fee.
The rules of S-Plan clearly state that you can order exactly what you want from the factory (or choose from the dealer's inventory, if they are willing).
Here are the details regarding S-Plan: https://portal.mazdausa.com/prod/emazda/intranet/vehicles/vehiclepurchaseplan/he- lp/splan_supplier/brochure/splan_info.htm
With all the added technology (BSMS, DSC, custom personalization features, upgraded nav system, Bluetooth audio / phone, rain sensing wipers, advanced keyless system etc, etc, etc...), this car should have been called a Mazda7, IMO. The sophistication, refinement, quality and design I think will draw attention from those looking at not only Honda and Toyota but possibly Acura, Lexus and Audi and it does not carry the premium price tag.
While fuel economy, is not class leading, it does not lag far behind, especially with the 4cyl, I still think it will be a hit because of the total package and what the car offers. If we all bought based on fuel economy, we would all drive a Toyota Prius.
In my Mazda6, in front of the gear shifter is an ash tray (I use as my coin tray). I do think that the dashboard storage area will be missed.
I think the ash tray was removed from later models of the 1st gen which leaves almost a perfect space to rest a cell phone next to the acc. plug. Held it nice and snug for those "manuevers".
Yes, the ash tray was removed as a result of the MY06 face lift.
mmmmmmmm ......maybe, but I agree with Mulally - it was a mistake to throw away the Taurus brand, even though it had been devalued and cheapened so horribly over the years, it was still a very well recognized brand, if no longer respected. If he can re-do the Taurus, as they now have, and make it a world class mid sized (or full sized as they now call it) car again, the brand will work where the 500 was an f-ing mistake with Bill Ford's obsession about alliteration.
Sure, it needed the engine, but it needed to be a Taurus too. Now it is. The new Taurus looks a lot like the Mazda 6 from what I've seen, and that should be a hit.
First off, make sure to indentify yourself as S-Plan from the start. I was treated EXTREMELY well by the 2 dealerships I visited. I can only guess that they prefer S-Plan members as the price is set by Mazda and makes the whole procedure a no-haggle process.
The first (TownNorth) allowed me to look at the invoice book for each model I was considering. I was also allowed to look at the dealership's future allocation. Unfortunately for this dealer, they didn't have what I wanted (iGT 1MC black/black) on the lot and didn't have any coming in the very near future (most of their allocation hadn't even hit the assembly line yet). They tried to swap with another dealership; but, with such a hot new model, the other dealerships weren't in the mood for swapping. The sales manager's name was Alex and he was EXTREMELY forthright with everything........a complete 180* from most dealers. I really wanted to buy from him but he simply couldn't get the car I wanted.
I knew that Freeman Mazda had the exact model I wanted so I called them and got their Internet/Fleet sales guy on the phone (Clay). Told him I was S-Plan and that I wanted to buy the Black/Black iGT he had on the lot. He said no problem and I bought the car that night.
I'm pretty sure Mazda gives the dealers some form of extra holdback when a vehicle is purchased under S-Plan. What this means is that you get the car for invoice yet the dealer still makes money. A win for both parties involved.
How you would think that is even related to the rather credible effort Mazda stylists did with the new 6 is beyond me, the 6 is a good looking car, the Taurus looked better IMO when it was called the Five Hundred.
I don't think anyone in their right mind would liken a current Taurus to a Mazda6.
Dave
S-plan is pretty cool, but don't be surprised if your local dealer is not eager to offer it on a 6 right now - though clearly overall conditions have changed. If they are not participating now I would expect they will soon!
FWIW - The 6 is high on my list for replacement to my 3 - wish the wagon made the cut...
Under normal circumstances (car been on the market for months and isn't in super high demand) most people who know what they are doing should be albe to negotiate to S-Plan pricing levels (or better) without having to be S-Plan. However, with the new 6 I doubt we'll hear many good deals for quite a while that don't involve S-Plan.
why don't you buy a 2003 3.0L V6 Mazda6s and a 2009 Mazda6s 3.7L V6 and tear down the engine YOURSELF? that will satisfy you. :sick:
The new 3.5L is not part of the Duratec family, but rather an all new design. It was engineered from the beginning, however, to have the same height and width dimensions as the current 3.0L Duratec.
http://www.autoblog.com/2005/11/09/breaking-news-ford-announces-new-3-5l-v6-and-- six-speed/
And you're right - I'm crazy, but not that crazy...... The current Taurus is a great car, in a sad suit of clothes.....
Please let's move on now.
I couldn't care less.
I care how reliable it is...how much power (refinement comes into here too), and the gas it uses...pretty simple.
I'm getting intrigued by this S-Plan business you're telling us about and the Karting Association, having visited their website and seen the offer. They say Mazda has partnered with them to provide this benefit for their members. It still seems a little uncertain, since one of the dealers we're talking with here has said they don't have to honor it. But, I'm thinking it's worth a try.
I'll post any experiences I have here with the S-Plan. But it may be too early, as someone else said, to get any discount on an 09 Mazda6. I wonder how long the Karting Association will have this up on their website?
The only instances of S-Plan not being honored in general are on Mazdaspeed3's and Power Hard Top Miata's. The reason for this is these two vehicles don't count in the same manner as normal vehicles and are limited in production.
A dealership just risks too much by turning away S-plan business. Unless they're in an area where they don't see S-plan often and either don't need it, or don't understand it, or unless they're the only Mazda dealership around (Hawaiian islands for instance. One Mazda dealership per island).
And to clear up what S-Plan pricing is, it is a top line of invoice, plus the states allowable documentation fee (and any other taxable extras like dealer installed options, which are NOT subject to it. Only factory options are), and then, once you have your out the door price, you (in most cases) receive an S-plan rebate in addition to all other availible rebates and incentives. This rebate is 500 dollars in most cases (including the new 6). As of right now, only the Mazda5 and Mazda3 don't receive the 500, getting 250 instead.
The invoice can also very slightly depending on if the area is subject to an assessment fee. This is a fee Mazda charges the dealership on each car and is part of the invoice. No, it's not negotiable.
S-plan is the best price you can get unless the dealership is literally willing to lose money on a deal. Those cases are few and far between however and hinge completely on coming to a dealership at the exact moment when a single car will make them hit their store quota and it pretty much means you have to take something on the lot, because they're not going to be able to dealer trade for a car in a single day. I've only ever done one deal like that, on a CX-7 and it ended up not being required for us to hit our quota, but we lost 1000 dollars on the deal. The difference in the price between S-plan and what we did was a whole 500 dollars. For those looking for the crazy deal, that's the difference. Is it worth 500 dollars to spend days looking for that certain dealership and hope they have the right car?
Right now, an S-Plan customer coming out of a Mazda lease basically get's a new 6 at $1500 behind invoice. If you are leasing the new 6, it's $2000. If you purchased your current mazda, you lose 500 of those bonuses.
As for the question of the lease earlier when someone said the residual wasn't high enough to be a good lease, well, all I know is that if I had the choice between a high residual, high money factor (interest) lease (I.E. Toyota and Honda) or a realistic residual, low money factor lease, give me that any day. You can actually build equity in that. As a point of reference, a normal customer with 3000 total due at signing can lease a V6 GT with Moon and nav (32690) for about 380 a month. That's pretty good for a car they haven't even started advertising yet!
I bought a 09 6 iGT auto with moonroof 2 weeks ago. The MSRP is 28,240 and I got it for 26,240 from the dealership. They were able to give it less 2,000. Do you think this is a good buy?