Mazda not downsizing Engines .

[nickofh]

Hello. I keep looking at new small family cars and one of my favorites is the new Mazda 3. I am really pleasantly surprised that they are powered by a NA 2.0 Petrol engine , especially when pretty much all their competitors are using very small turbo engines.

This would possibly be a contender for being one of the most reliable new cars for sale then? Does anyone have one , what's the economy and drive like compared to all the tsi , ecoboosts etc out there. Why are Mazda taking this approach?

[lukeharding]

Apparently its going to swing back to larger engines because turbocharged smaller engines aren't performing how they should (compared with emissions tests which they're only just discovering isn't anything like the real world)

I believe Fiat had the problem with the 0.9 500 in a certain city where they couldn't get it up any hills because it had zero power

[Evanivitch]

Instead of using Turbocharging Mazda are trying some quite radical things with the ICE Sky Activ engines, really pushing the limits of what can be mass produced with extensive work to manifolds and pistons. But also some quite outstanding compression ratios usually only seen on diesels.

[Evanivitch]

lukeharding said:

I believe Fiat had the problem with the 0.9 500 in a certain city where they couldn't get it up any hills because it had zero power

Not quite true. The electronic throttle mapping was very soft to allow the max eco score, but subsequently made the car undriveable in certain conditions like hill starts or tight, steep bends.

[lukeharding]

Evanivitch said:

Not quite true. The electronic throttle mapping was very soft to allow the max eco score, but subsequently made the car undriveable in certain conditions like hill starts or tight, steep bends.

Thats the one, I could just remember something about them having not being useable. Shouldn't be surprised about the eco being behind it..

[ZX10R NIN]

Toyota are now going up in engine size to because as someone's already pointed out the small turbo engines are failing on the emissions in real world scenarios so manufacturers are starting to make the turn towards upsizing.

Infact Toyota are now sharing technologies (mainly because Toyota wants to use Skyactiv tech) so expect similar things from them in the coming years.

The Mazda 3 will serve you well OP

[saaby93]

Isn't that why Toyota increased the size of it's Prius engine from 1.5 to 1.8 a few years back when the expectation was it was going to get smaller?

[poing]

lukeharding said:

Evanivitch said:

Not quite true. The electronic throttle mapping was very soft to allow the max eco score, but subsequently made the car undriveable in certain conditions like hill starts or tight, steep bends.

Thats the one, I could just remember something about them having not being useable. Shouldn't be surprised about the eco being behind it..

That was the 1.2, the 0.9 engine is much more powerful.

[marmitemania]

Basically what you lot are saying is that I/me was correct all along in the fact that from my third car onwards I have never owned a car with an engine smaller than 2.0 litres and I have also never owned and never will own a Diesel. I thankyou!

[lukeharding]

marmitemania said:

Basically what you lot are saying is that I/me was correct all along in the fact that from my third car onwards I have never owned a car with an engine smaller than 2.0 litres and I have also never owned and never will own a Diesel. I thankyou!

It'll probably work out best for you though you do cross out a whole load of fun cars when buying with those parameters.

[cj2013]

Evanivitch said:

But also some quite outstanding compression ratios usually only seen on diesels.

I was under the impression that this wasn't possible with the octane limits of pump petrol

[eliot]

I had a Mazda 3 rental 2.0 petrol and drove like a rental - returned 45mpg.

[anonymous-user]

It is starting to look like Mazda, and only Mazda, made the right call to avoid small heavily boosted engines and instead work to make a good car, rather than get good test scores.

If they didn't still have rust issues I'd have one.

[Evanivitch]

cj2013 said:

Evanivitch said:

But also some quite outstanding compression ratios usually only seen on diesels.

I was under the impression that this wasn't possible with the octane limits of pump petrol

It's easier to allow Mazda to explain.

http://www.mazda.com/en/innovation/technology/skya...

[cj2013]

Evanivitch said:

It's easier to allow Mazda to explain.

http://www.mazda.com/en/innovation/technology/skya...

That was underwhelming.

I wouldn't say that 14:1 is 'Diesel-like' compression - it's just about the entry level for low compression DI turbo diesel engines.

Traditional NA diesels were nearer 25:1.

Edited by cj2013 on Sunday 7th May 22:47

[talksthetorque]

Mazda are a favourite of the company car driver who claims for miles on expenses.
2.2 diesels mean 2p extra per mile on AFR compared to a 2 litre
If you do 40k a year that's half a pay rise and no loss in economy.
Also their P11d price tends to be lower than the competitors so tax savings there too for the user chooser

[MuscleSaloon]

lukeharding said:

Apparently its going to swing back to larger engines because turbocharged smaller engines aren't performing how they should (compared with emissions tests which they're only just discovering isn't anything like the real world)

Old news though - nothing is new !

I remember hearing about some research carried out relating to emissions in the late 80's - something to do with Lotus / GM if I remember rightly. It was found that a decent capacity V8 could be capable of producing lower emissions in many scenarios than smaller capacity engines with fewer cylinders.

[crofty1984]

dme123 said:

It is starting to look like Mazda, and only Mazda, made the right call to avoid small heavily boosted engines and instead work to make a good car, rather than get good test scores.

If they didn't still have rust issues I'd have one.

Rust issues? Mx5 aside, which ones rust? My 120k mile 2010 Mazda2 is still doing well.

[tannhauser]

crofty1984 said:

dme123 said:

It is starting to look like Mazda, and only Mazda, made the right call to avoid small heavily boosted engines and instead work to make a good car, rather than get good test scores.

If they didn't still have rust issues I'd have one.

Rust issues? Mx5 aside, which ones rust? My 120k mile 2010 Mazda2 is still doing well.

All of them! They all end up riddled with it!

[rainmakerraw]

cj2013 said:

That was underwhelming.

I wouldn't say that 14:1 is 'Diesel-like' compression - it's just about the entry level for low compression DI turbo diesel engines.

Traditional NA diesels were nearer 25:1.

Edited by cj2013 on Sunday 7th May 22:47

The 14:1 compression ratio is shared with the Mazda 2.2 diesel unit, which is where the claim comes from. It was possible thanks to modified piston crowns and the 4:2:1 exhaust manifold alluded to earlier in the thread. Unfortunately 14:1 was the limit because of the EU fuel laws requiring all new vehicles be capable of running on 95 RON unleaded, even if it was at reduced power/economy compared to the favoured fuel and map (see: TFSI engines). Running 14:1 was the best Mazda could squeeze out with the 95 RON restriction. In the US they tend to use slightly lower octane again (even accounting for their different AKI/PON system), and hence the same cars sold in the US run 13:1 instead.

I had a 2.0 Mazda 6 (2014 model) for a year and it's a nice engine. It could have done with a tad more poke, but I did only have the 145ps (they do a 165ps also). They're torquey enough around town at lower revs but fun to wind out on the B roads without losing your licence as well. We had a Mazda 3 courtesy car with the same engine, and as someone said above I couldn't get it below 45-50mpg even chucking it around the city at full chat.