Mazda6 Sedan



  • mazda6smazda6s Member Posts: 1,901
    Yeah, I'd rather get it without the spoiler, but I'll roll over on that one. Maybe I'll see if I can get it up to 120MPH or so to see if it really works. ;)
  • zc1zc1 Member Posts: 34
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that makes the USA the only market where consumers can't buy a 6 hatch w/o the ground effects and spoiler.
  • rock44xrock44x Member Posts: 78
    but the 6 is plan and ugly without the ground effects(in my opinion).

    and in the new car and driver it shows off the 2005 mazdaspeed a-spec 6 with a turbo charge 2.3 pushing out a mind blowing 280hp hatch and wagon but for japan only shown at the Tokyo Auto Salon '04.
  • radocharadocha Member Posts: 26
    Anyone seen hp & torque curves posted for V6 in M6s ?
  • ddeliseddelise Member Posts: 355
    Can someone tell me what is the 2004 Mazda Warranty timeframe? I checked the website, and it specifies 2001, 2002, and 2003 information, but not 2004. From what I can tell, 2001-2003 is 48 month, 50k miles. Is this the same for 2004?

    Thanks - Damon
  • mazda6smazda6s Member Posts: 1,901
    Yes it is.
  • dudleyrdudleyr Member Posts: 3,469
    To me the GFX and spoiler are garrish and overdone. I might have liked them 25 years ago, but now they just scream "I am trying too hard to look fast".

    I also wish a sunroof was a stand alone option, takes away too much headroom.

    My prefered 6 is the wagon, (which now is only available with a V-6 that gets worse mileage than a much larger Toyota minivan) but I want the 4-cyl manual tranny.

    To me the whole point of a wagon over a minivan is to be more fun to drive and efficient. With the 4-cyl you can have both.
  • r2s2r2s2 Member Posts: 93
    To me, the owner of a "garrish [sic] and overdone" 6s w/GFX and spoiler, the 6 wagon resembles a low top sneaker and screams "Old-fashioned elderly grandpa."

    But I would never post such a statement here because it might be personally offensive to another member . . .
  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    "But I would never post such a statement here because it might be personally offensive to another member . . ."

    Lol, you just did post such a statement. I think dudley was responding to a post that called the non-sport 6 plain and ugly.

    Regardless, sport or no sport, wagon or sedan, NO Mazda6 screams "Old fashioned elderly grandpa" IMO.
  • jgriffjgriff Member Posts: 362
    Is it me, or does the 6-wagon look too much like a, well like a station-wagon instead of more like a sport-wagon. I like the way M3 5-door looks over the both the 6's wagon & hatch.
  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    and I think it looks pretty sporty. If you want a 6 cylinder wagon with a manual transmission, it's either go European or get a Mazda6. I do think they should have offered the 4 cyl in the wagon though.
  • microrepairmicrorepair Eastern MassachusettsMember Posts: 508
    up the issue again? Well, I'll keep it short.

    Moonroof required if you opt for the SAC and SAB on the MZ6.
    I just looked at the new Maxima and they have options arranged in ladder form. Option package 2 includes package #1 and package #3 includes #1 & #2, etc. NONE OF THEM FORCE YOU TO GET A MOONROOF !!!!! The moonroof is a standalone option; period.!!! SAC and SAB appear to be standard on the SE and SL models. And without a moonroof you get their "Skyview" which is just a one foot wide glass panel running front to rear and it has 2 sunshades inside for front and rear passengers. Real slick and it gives back the headroom. Now that's the way to package the options MAZDA..!! Are you listening?>?
    And both the SE and SL are available with 265 HP.. Of course the Maxima is about $4-5K more than the MZ6 at the same option level.
    Dilemna... Zoom zoom vs. safety options and headroom.
  • rock44xrock44x Member Posts: 78
    the bad part with Maxima's options arrangement to get the safety options you have to get the car load(leather and bose just to get traction and side bag for 32k)

    and 0.7 less headroom can't mean that much can it?
  • dudleyrdudleyr Member Posts: 3,469
    .7 can mean a lot if that is the space where you head needs to be.
  • ebeneben Member Posts: 26
    I wonder if Mazda asked Edmunds to take down the build-and-buy for the wagon and hatch, because they're gone!
  • patpat Member Posts: 10,421
    Eben, use the Help link at either the top or the bottom of the page to ask why it is gone. Then come back and tell us what you find out.

    I haven't heard a thing, but lots of stuff goes on at the main site that the hosts don't hear about. :)
  • the_big_hthe_big_h Member Posts: 1,583
    the car would be such a SLOW DOG with the extra 80-100lb. added by the wagon tail.

    i say good call on Mazda's part.
  • mazda6smazda6s Member Posts: 1,901
    Yes, it's kind of an embarrassment to Mazda for Edmunds to have it long before Mazda does.
  • nedc2nedc2 Member Posts: 192
    "the car would be such a SLOW DOG with the extra 80-100lb. added by the wagon tail.

    i say good call on Mazda's part. "

    Not really, just the extra weight of the glass and sheetmetal for the wagon back alone wouldn't make too much difference. The trouble comes when people start to fill all that extra space with stuff. And they WILL, why else would they buy the wagon. Once you put a couple people in the car AND 4 or 5 hundred lbs. of luggage, antique furniture, etc.; THEN the car starts to get slow, mostly due to the lack of low end torque in the 2.3l i4. A torquey diesel with horsepower comparable to the 2.3l wouldn't be so bad. But don't expect that in North America any time soon.
  • dudleyrdudleyr Member Posts: 3,469
    The 4-cyl 5- speed wagon would sure be a lot faster than a 4-cyl automatic sedan, and Mazda sells plenty of those.

    The wagon and sedan have about the same weight capacity.

    The extra hundred pounds is the equivalent of loosing 4 or 5 hp depending how the car is loaded. Not an issue, unless 5 hp is the difference between a "slow dog" and nicely powered vehicle.

    I think 6i MT owners will chime in that the car is plenty powerfull and that they cannot tell the diff in acceleration when their hundred lb kid is in the back seat.
  • buggywhipbuggywhip Member Posts: 188
    Well, my Achieva finally died this wk. Mechanic wants $1700 for the head gasket, which had been done 3 yrs earlier. Car had been babied too, some gratitude. I think it's time to go with an Asian brand, something I've never ever done. (I want domestic but they don't make a decent-sized sedan with a stick. Sorry Malibu!) The Galant is too heavy and lacks a stick; the Camry/Accord are too expensive to insure in MA (huge theft cars here); and I'm leery of Altima quality after Peugeot bought Nissan. So it's a 6 or nothing, except perhaps the Ion, which has abysmal quality IMO........I really hope I get a good price. Maybe a leftover 2003, if possible and if no rust. I'm not crazy about the 6's oil filter element, but I see that its price has dropped dramatically.
  • carguy58carguy58 Member Posts: 2,303
    where I live and it doesn't look the 3 will eat into 6 sales at least not where I live. If the 6 sells like the last generation Protege(99-03) Mazda should be very happy. I still don't like that day in about 4 years where Mazda is going to try to battle Honda and Toyota with a super-size 6. I dread that day because it may backfire big time on Mazda.
  • carguy58carguy58 Member Posts: 2,303
    Well good luck with your 6 shopping. By the way Nissan has a partenership with Renault not Peugeot. I have seen the Ion a little bit, if I were driving in Ion I couldn't the speedometer in the center stack of the car like it is.
  • buggywhipbuggywhip Member Posts: 188
    Oh, of course, it is Renault. my mistake. The Ion center stack bothers me too............I just looked at Feb 04 Mazda sales. The 6 sales are holding steady, quite decent too. BUT the 3 outsold the 6 in Feb. It's selling great, just as I predicted. Not really surprising--the 3 sedan is gorgeous and arguably better-looking than the 6, or at least equal. And indisputably, the 3 interior is a cut above ANY small car. I think, perhaps, the 6 may become the jealous older sister!!
  • chikoochikoo Member Posts: 3,008
    they own Nissan.
  • carguy58carguy58 Member Posts: 2,303
    Nissan owns some of Renault and Renault owns some of Nissan.


    I haven't seen a 3 in 2 weeks while I have seen 6's alot more despite the 3 statisically outselling the 6.

    I don't like the like 3's styling myself: not for me. Styling is subjective though.
  • rock44xrock44x Member Posts: 78
    Renault controls 44.4% of Nissan, while the Japanese company owns 15% of its French partner.

    (look for "Renault and Nissan Relationship Strengthens" on in more news)
  • chikoochikoo Member Posts: 3,008
    when a single entity owns so much of your business, for all practical purposes they own you.
    It would rather be very hard for Nissan to do something w/o getting approval from Renault.
  • buggywhipbuggywhip Member Posts: 188
    Well, chikoo has a point. IMO, Renault is a bad influence on Nissan. Nissan design is superb but I question its quality. Were Renault a major player, it would still be competing in the hottest car market in the world--the U.S. It is not...........this relates to Mazda b/c Mazda is basicially controlled by Ford. Ford controls its purse-strings I've read that 626 quality took a nosedive when the Ford partnership started. The thing is, the Mazda3 is made in Japan (I am pretty sure), and the 6 is made here. People see that on the window sticker, so it's no wonder the 3 is outselling the 6. Also note that while the 3 is shorter overall than the 6, the wheelbases are almost identical. So the 3 has a better interior and almost as much interior room, plus it's cheaper and made in Japan. I do NOT think the 3 will cannibalize 6s 6cyl sales. But it surely will affect 6i 4cyl sales. Not good..........but once again, I'm not knocking the 6, only market-musing. I'm pretty sure the 6 will be my next car.
  • buggywhipbuggywhip Member Posts: 188
    BTW, I just compared interior measurement specs between the 3 and 6. They're almost identical! In fact, the 3 actually has a tiny bit more headroom. (assuming my source is correct). Numbers are just numbers, of course. And real-world practical comfort would probably favor the 6. But it's interesting to wonder what Mazda was thinking. My opinion is that the 6 is a European car brought to the U.S. with few changes, while the 3 is a car specifically designed for our country. The 6 is a better car but the 3 is a better value.
  • rock44xrock44x Member Posts: 78
    Acura TL,Honda ACCORD,Honda CIVIC,Mazda 6,Nissan ALTIMA, Toyota CAMRY, and Toyota COROLLA are all assembled in the US and have great quality, Renault is helping Nissan financially and in the European car market while nissan design and assemble nissans and Renaults cars in fact the quality for Renault may improve. while ford has out right owner ship of Mazda like Gm to Chevrolet.

     "the 3 will affect 6i 4cyl sales"
    i agree 100% with that, mazda made a hell of a car with the mazda3 if i want 4cyl hands down it would be a 3 load, and the 3s interior seats leather or cloth blows away the 6 that's sad.
  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    For new vehicle problems, Mazda comes in 6th behind Lexus, Infiniti, Honda, Toyota, and Acura. Mazda is 7th for 3 year old vehicles and 8th for 5 year old vehicles, right behind Honda at 7th. According to CR, the most consistently reliable makes are Lexus, Infiniti, Honda, Toyota, Acura, and Mazda. Not too bad for Mazda considering they have a little Ford in some of their vehicles (Tribute, Escape, pickup truck) to drag their ratings down.

    CR rates the Mazda6 #1 in it's safety assesment citing excellent accident avoidance, crash protection, strong brakes, forgiving handling, and good offset-crash results as the reasons.

    "People see that on the window sticker, so it's no wonder the 3 is outselling the 6."

    That is not why the 3 is outselling the 6. Most people don't give a rip, otherwise the Impreza, Protege, and Lancer would have been the top selling small cars, not the Corolla and Civic.

    I went to the Minneapolis/St. Paul Autoshow yesterday. After all of the hype on the Altima's new interior, I was disapointed. People were saying it's ten times better than the Mazda6 and maybe even the Accord......uh...yeah, sure. It's better in that it's an improvement over the old one, I'll give it that.

    I like the Mazda3, I just wish they would have used the red tailights for all of the models. As far as the 3 looking better than the 6, it doesn't IMO. The 6 is one of the very few cars that doesn't have a bad looking area of the car at any angle. The only other sedans like that IMO are the first Lexus LS 400, the last BMW 5 series, and the last Audi A4. The back of the 3 isn't ugly, but it isn't perfect like the 6 either.
  • mazda6smazda6s Member Posts: 1,901
    I think the "made in Japan" factor is small in considering Mazda3 vs. Mazda6 sales. A much bigger factor is price/value. The Mazda3 is hard to beat in bang-for-the-buck. I'm sure I'd be happy owning one, considering the several thousand dollar difference between the Mazda3 5-door and a similarly equipped Mazda6 s 5-door. But, as it is, I'll probably get the Mazda6.
  • mazda6smazda6s Member Posts: 1,901
    "The 6 is a better car but the 3 is a better value."

    That about sums it up.
  • carguy58carguy58 Member Posts: 2,303
    No I checked the 626's reliability record and CR also included the 03 6's reliability record and its ok. The thing that killed the 626 it was the Ford Tranny in the 93-97 models. The 626 rates above average reliability from 98-02 model years. 96-97's have average reliability so not much of a difference vs Japanese made Mazda's. Now if we were talking about the Rebadged Ford Ranger(Mazda B-Series) that a whole different ball game because its all Ford. I think Flat Rock builds good cars. They can't be lamed be blamed for a Ford Tranny that was terrible anyway.

    To go further with Mazda's built in America Consumer Reports now reccomends the Tribute. 01 Tribute's have that starting and stalling problems so they don't reccomend them. So I guess the Tribute doesn't drag Mazda reliability rating's down anymore. I have to change my tube on the Tribute because I have knocked the Tribute's quality/reliability before this current edition of Consumer Reports came out.

    As for the 3 vs 6 yeah the 3 does have the better interior of the 2 cars I'll say that. When I first saw the 3's interior in a picture the center satack in the 3 reminded me of the one in the Audi A4.

    Rock44X: Chevrolet is part of GM. Ford does not include Mazda's sales in their overall sales on any basis. Ford knows to let Mazda do their own thing now.

    As for perfect looking sedans the current Passat, 6, and the current TL take the cake. I would also throw the 96-97 Honda Accord in there.
  • cheesehead6cheesehead6 Member Posts: 68
    Take a look at the new Volvo S40. To my mind it blows everything else away in the looks dept.--even the 6 (boo hoo)
  • robr2robr2 BostonMember Posts: 8,863
    My understanding is that Ford does not own Mazda outright. They own enough shares of Mazda in Japan that under Japanese corporate law Ford controls the company.
  • buggywhipbuggywhip Member Posts: 188
    I think Ford only owns 33 percent of Mazda. As robr2 suggests, that's probably enough to control the co. under Japanese law..........please note that I wasn't suggesting that transplant factories churn out bad quality cars. Quite the opposite!! I merely opined that Renault's influence on Nissan's overall quality may not be the healthiest arrangement. Honda and Toyota may have factories here, but they're not controlled by an outside and (IMO) inferior corporate source such as Renault or Ford. But ultimately, only time will tell. Indisputably, the 6 has splendid quality.
  • carguy58carguy58 Member Posts: 2,303
    It looks better than the current one yeah but the interior doesn't look good as the current one. It looks alot of stuff was deleted in the center stack of the new one from the pictures I saw.

    As far as Toyota vs Honda vs Mazda factory in the US I think Honda's and Toyota's factory is better than Mazda's Us factory(Flat Rock) but not by much. How can you base a factory's performance on a bad tranny and a rebadged Ford pick-up? Even the current Camry and Accord had first year bugs.
  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    the new Volvo S40 at the auto show this weekend. It looks really, really slick. It's the best looking Volvo ever IMO.
  • tomcat630tomcat630 Member Posts: 854
    "Buggywhip" let us know if you find dealers that have Manual tranny Mazda 6's in stock, when you go car shopping.
  • PF_FlyerPF_Flyer Pennsylvania Furnace, PAMember Posts: 9,400
    Mazda Mania

    Welcome to the Mazda Mania Weekly Chat!

    Liven up your evening and join your fellow enthusiasts every Tuesday from 6-7pm PT/9-10pm ET for our Mazda Mania Chat!

    We'll be testing your knowledge with some Mazda-related trivia questions this week, so be prepared! Hope to see YOU there on Tuesday!

    Mazda Mania Chat Room

    PF Flyer
    Pickups & News & Views Message Boards
  • buggywhipbuggywhip Member Posts: 188
    I went to a major Mazda dealer in MA last wk. I saw many rows of 6's and plenty of sticks, at least with the 4cyl., and certainly many more than 6 mos. ago. I regret that I didn't check for 6cyl sticks b/c, well, I can't afford one!! I saw a frighteningly huge surplus of the RX-8 too. I wonder if people are buying the 6s instead of Mazda's flagship???
  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    "I saw a frighteningly huge surplus of the RX-8 too"

    The RX8 probably doesn't sell very well in the winter in MA. Seriously, who would buy an RX8 in MA in February? I guess you probably could get a better deal if you bought one then.

    When I worked at the Ford dealer, somebody jacked a bunch of airbags from brand new Tauruses. It was winter and there was a surplus of brand new Mustangs. Guess where they got the airbags for the Tauruses?
  • mazdajkmazdajk Member Posts: 28
    The Volvo S40 is an O.K. looking car. Saw it at the auto show. I'm sorry, but that rear end looks like crap-IMO. I agree with newcar31. The 6 has a sharp look at all angles. Simple yet elegant.
    Just hit 600 miles on mine. Perfect so far. Drives like a dream.
    Did the brake-tail light MOD. I like it better with both pods coming on when I hit the brakes.
    Also did the throttle body ground MOD. Seems to be a little snappier off the line.
    Cheese! Please tell me you were joking on that Volvo thing (Boo Hoo) !!! My curds will never be the same :(
  • cheesehead6cheesehead6 Member Posts: 68
    Sad,perhaps, but true. The Volvo S40 rocks. Its exterior anyway. Recheck what Newcar31 had to say in post 16350. He likes the S40 a lot. And he's from Minnesota!

    But look, I love the appearance of the Mazda 6; it was one of the reasons I bought one-- but when one sees another beautiful ride one should acknowlege it generously :)
  • oceana142oceana142 Member Posts: 9
    I drive about 18 miles/day round trip to work on local roads and with additional highway driving, log about 11,000 miles/year. In my area (Upper Midwest) a Mazda3 and Mazda6 four cylinder lease out (3yrs, 36,000 miles) for about the same/month due to Mazda6 rebates. Here are my questions:

    1) the dealer said that Mazda6 orders are about 75%/25% 6 vs. 4 cylinder. Why is this the opposite of Accord/Camry ratio?

    2) for the type of driving that I do, would you rather have the M3 or 4-cylinder M6?

    3) how does M3 quality look vs. M6?

    4) is the 4-cyliner M6 powerplant considered a state-of the art engine?

    Thank you for your informed answers. Go Mazda!
  • cheesehead6cheesehead6 Member Posts: 68
    Strongly suggest some test drives;then make up your mind.

    The Mazda 2.3 liter is in fact "a state of the art" engine incorporating variable valve technology. It's in the same league with the Honda engine, although somewhat less sophisticated. Honda's 4 is better, no doubt.

    With a manual transmission the 2.3 is quite lively--above all over 2500-3000 rpm-- when it really blasts off. Plenty of power to enter freeways safely. Another plus is economy (with gasoline at historic highs).

    Why 75% of MZ6 sales are V6s? Most Americans nowadays want an engine with as much power as possible. And the car companies are competing with each other in the horsepower derby. IMHO most people don't need or even fully use what they buy.

    The 6S is not a monster, just a powerful, refined machine on the hwy.--again above 2500-3000 revs. (Read the set of Edmunds editors' reviews of the car on this site). The 6S is an absolute blast to drive, but of course you pay a penalty in terms of mpg. Some people also report that the 4 cylinder version has marginally better handling characteristics than the 3.0, but I can't vouch for it personally. Go out and compare the 6 in these two versions.

    I cannot comment on the automatic versions of these vehicles. I never drove them since I haven't used an automatic for a very long term and prefer a manual.

    Then drive the 3 with the 2.3. I have never done so, but I imagine that it will be slightly livelier than the 2.3 MZ6 since it weighs a few hundred pounds less. Others will chime in with firsthand comments on the MZ3.

    My advice is to drive the 2.3 MZ6, and test it to see if, in *your* opinion, it's got enough oomph to get you onto a freeway or interstate briskly. I think it does. That was my "litmus test." The 2.3 MT passed it and I decided buy one, but I did also drive the 6 cylinder & enjoyed it immensely. I put over 25k a year on a car, so the price of gasoline was a big factor in my calculations. But your tastes and needs may be different. Just the fruits of my own experience here...
  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    I have the 6i MT and it’s more than enough ooomph for me. It’s just as quick as the previous generation Accord and Camry V6s and nobody ever complained about those being underpowered. The 2.3L MT actually has quicker 0-60 times than the V6 auto and gets much better mileage. I drove the V6 too and I really liked it and thought that was what I would get until I drove the 4 cyl and realized that it wasn’t the slouch I was expecting it to be. With the gas prices getting higher and higher, I’m really glad I have the 4cyl MT. It’s plenty fast and can still get you in trouble just like the V6. The MT 4cyl actually revs lower at freeway speeds than the V6 and it’s really quiet too. Contrary to what many people think about 4 cyl powered cars, the 6i ain’t no buzzy Integra at freeway speeds. You might find yourself doing 85 mph in a 55 mph zone if you’re not careful.

    Since the bus strike started here, I have to use my car for the carpool all the time instead of taking turns because I have the biggest car and we have an extra carpooler. The 2.3L handles all 4 people in rush hour traffic just fine.

    Now, if I needed an automatic, it’d be whole different story. I probably wouldn’t get a Mazda6 if I needed an automatic.
  • ANT14ANT14 Member Posts: 2,687
    "Honda's 4 is better, no doubt."

    Actually many would be surprised, but the Mazda/Ford 2.3L is more sophisticated overall than it's given credit for. And in one writter's view, breaks more ground than Audi's 4.2L V8 when rating Ward's 10 Best Engines of 2004. rticleid=2707165&srid=10088&instanceid=45975&pageid=8- 509&magazineid=1004&siteid=26
Sign In or Register to comment.