why the 2.3L instead of the V-6?

[dmitrik4]

why didn't mazda turbo the V6 instead of the 2.3?

i was asked this question and couldn't come up w/ a technically-based answer. i thought it was b/c the 2.3 was a stronger engine, but that doesn't seem to be the case (e.g., 2.3L has a cast crank while the V6's is forged).

?

thanks!

[Mike R]

Too much power! They don't have a drivetrain that could handle a turbo 6.

[dmitrik4]

is that an actual reason, or a guess?

why couldn't they have tuned a turbo 6 to be 274hp/280lb-ft?

IIRC, the drivetrain is the same as that in the volvo S60R, which is 300/300. ???

[Mike R]

Dunno, that was a guess....the drivetrain is also the same as the jag.

[Powells85]

Lack of room in the engine bay?

[Mikey444]

3.0 liter turbo, you do the Math, no one wants a car that burns a bitching amount of gas, and anyways, do you really need more than 274 horsepower for that type of car.

[mdaj]

Among many reasons the 2.3l is a global engine. The V6, I assume, is only for the American market. Why provide two complete engine choices for the Speed 6 when its going to lose money? Therefore, Mazda used the turbo four since it can adapt to all markets and cost much less than that of a turbo 6 that will only be available for the american market.

[ZoomZoomH]

plus, IIRC, only the Flat Rock, MI plant has the capacity to build the V6 Mazda6's, while ALL MS6 WILL be built in Japan.... doesn't make sense to add extra tooling cost for a limited production car...

[sjimmy]

This is my theory. Mazda chose the 2.3 for a number of reasons. One being that the v6 currently in the mazda 6 S is on it's way out I believe because Ford is making a new V6. Aside from that, Mazda intends on making a Mazdaspeed 3 I believe. If you're a car compnay and you want to make the most profit you try to use the same engine more than in one car. So mazda can just detune the the 2.3 by say lowering the boost and it'll workout fine. Also the 2.3 is goin to be used in many cars ford has control of i believe so they're advancing the engine.

[crossbow]

The reason mazda turbo'd the 2.3 liter is only because they already had an AWD system setup for that particular engine in europe. They just took the same system and plopped another 140+ ft/lbs of torque into it. (eurospec Mazda 6s (2.3 liter Euro) is AWD)

Going with an AWD system on the V6 would have required a redesign of the AWD system...work smarter not harder.

[dmitrik4]

ok, i can buy that. thanks.

[Shane5425]

This is my theory. Mazda chose the 2.3 for a number of reasons. One being that the v6 currently in the mazda 6 S is on it's way out I believe because Ford is making a new V6. Aside from that, Mazda intends on making a Mazdaspeed 3 I believe. If you're a car compnay and you want to make the most profit you try to use the same engine more than in one car. So mazda can just detune the the 2.3 by say lowering the boost and it'll workout fine. Also the 2.3 is goin to be used in many cars ford has control of i believe so they're advancing the engine.
so i am guessin a common mod for the MS3 will be to put a MS6 ECU to get allot more power... hehe can you say 300hp 3.. all i can say is damn..

[rx7gslse]

The reason mazda turbo'd the 2.3 liter is only because they already had an AWD system setup for that particular engine in europe. They just took the same system and plopped another 140+ ft/lbs of torque into it. (eurospec Mazda 6s (2.3 liter Euro) is AWD)

Going with an AWD system on the V6 would have required a redesign of the AWD system...work smarter not harder.
good theory, but you forget that the Tribute is already AWD with that same V6 motor... No redesign needed..

[crossbow]

Except for the fact that the Tribute and Mazda 6 are built on entirely different platforms. (and Chassis's)

The AWD on the euro wagon was on a Mazda 6 (2.3 Liter L3)...plug and play baby. Well not plug n play...but would be easier then porting the system.

I mean if they wanted to just port a system, they would have snagged the awesome Jaguar X-type AWD...which is a 40:60 split and mounts right up to the Duratec 3.0 Liter V6.

[lasermp5]

they went with the 2.3 as to not totally discredit the protege :D

[Foolish]

Besides, don't you have to twin-turbo a V-6? Two turbos would cost much more $$$!

I could be wrong, it's happened before.

[dmitrik4]

it's happened again. :)

you can run a V6 off a single turbo...the number of cylinder banks has nothing to do w/ it.

[Foolish]

it's happened again. :)

you can run a V6 off a single turbo...the number of cylinder banks has nothing to do w/ it.
Fair enough. I've seen single turbo I6's (supra) and twin turbo V-6's, so I made a leap of logic that you needed two turbos for V-engines. So do they just run the turbo off of one exhaust manifold?

Did I mention I dropped out of auto mechanic's school? :)

[Mike R]

They just use a y pipe from both manifolds to connect to one turbo.

[vindication]

Like stated before the 2.3T is gonna be sold world wide and the only country that uses bigger engines is America. They would probably loose money on having two different platforms. Also, the MS3 will most likely have 2.0T and if each and everyone of us pray hard enough, it might be in WRC.

[Mikey444]

Bottom line, the sound of the engine of a turbo 4 is a lot sweeter than a turbo 6, and the car is lighter, less understeer, better gas consumption, and why more than 274 horsepower thats going to be a daily car for a lot of people that buy, it's not like speed limits are 200 mph.

[BinaryRotary]

There is no V-6 in Japan or Europe. If they plan on distributing the car to other countries it would be a total waste of time and money to make two different cars.

[BinaryRotary]

There is a difference between Twin Turbos and Sequential Turbos.

[Da 6]

twin are the same size and mostly found on dual header projects where sequential solves the problem of to small or too big a turbo issue. 2 size turbos used in sequential. smaller turbo spools for low end and once it boosts enough to start spooling the bigger one IIRC wastegate opens for smaller one and bigger take it from there.

[crossbow]

the sound of the engine of a turbo 4 is a lot sweeter than a turbo 6, and the car is lighter, less understeeSeems someone hasn't heard many V6 Twin Turbo's... :)

As for weight...the Ms6 will be around 200-300 lbs heavier then a standard 6i MTX...which will result in more plowing. (It technically should be heavier then a 6s MTX based on the specs and included packages) Though the AWD will help with understeer issues, the fact it will never allow for more then a 50% rear bias (unlike almost every other AWD car on the market) will mean that "power on understeer" will still be a massive issue with this vehicle.

[Mikey444]

Seems someone hasn't heard many V6 Twin Turbo's...
I have, but I like the sound of a turbo 4 cylinder giving it all it got much better

[93RedX7]

There is a difference between Twin Turbos and Sequential Turbos.

I realize that I'm new here, but I wanted to clear this up. The difference isn't between twin tubos and sequential turbos. It's between twin sequential and twin parallel turbos. I'm running twin sequential tubos in my FD.

Back to the thread, I agree that using the more mass produced 2.3L makes more financial sense. Look at Nissan/Infiniti, they put different versions of the VQ35DE in almost every thing they make.

[scapamouche]

Though the AWD will help with understeer issues, the fact it will never allow for more then a 50% rear bias (unlike almost every other AWD car on the market) will mean that "power on understeer" will still be a massive issue with this vehicle.???? Most AWD vehicles are VERY nose heavy... I really can't think of ANY off the top of my head that are not heavy in the nose (except for a very small number of mod engine AWD cars like the old (now) Diablo VT) Even the EVO has something like a 64/36 f/r weight split.

The WRX is another good example... and yes, it DOES plow... BADLY.... That is why very few WRXs are running in the stock class for autox (and why the MSP can eat them up when they do run DS...)

That said, I do agree that a 3400-3500lb MS6 is going to have understeer issues unless Mazda is very careful. It can be done: the EVO has WONDERFUL handling, despite the heavy front end, but like I said, Mazda will have to come thru again. One note, though: Power has never been Mazda's strong suit, but handling has, so I'm optimistic about the balance of the MS6.

[crossbow]

Evo Mr is 60/40 btw, and it just beat the lotus extige in top gear's track scoreboard. (It was only 0.2 seconds away from beating the 250k lambo!!!) And thats with an old school strut based suspension. (With the 6 having a wonderful double wishbone front).

The bias btw I was talking about...was the torque distribution, not the weight distribution.

The ms6's AWD system runs 100:0 till slippage occurs, then it can transfer a maximum of 50% of the power to the rear wheels for a 50/50 torque bias. I'd rather the car have a more neutral bias, and then be able to transfer the torque around...like pretty much every other AWD car on the market thats currently competitive.

Here's a cut and paste of competitive AWD setups from other cars...

Jaguar X-Type
http://www.jaguarusa.com/us/en/vehicles/x-type/performance/performance.htm


AWD That Feels Like Rear-Wheel Drive
Traction 4™ automatically compensates for any difference in speed between the front and rear wheels. Under normal conditions, 40 percent of the engine´s power goes to the front wheels and 60 percent to the rear, making the X-TYPE feel like an enthusiastic rear-wheel drive car. If one wheel starts to slip, as it could under hard acceleration on a patch of ice or gravel, the engine´s power is automatically and seamlessly directed to the other wheels. Duratec V6 3.0 Liter Platform. I think the 02's have 30:70...though I could just be wrong and its actually 40:60. (Thats the standard distribution)

There are some 6s members who have started (and not succeeded yet) at figuring out a way to take the jag's system (from a junkyard) and throw it on a 6s.

Infiniti G35x
http://www4.xpresssites.com/lee/lacrosse/au/story.jsp;jsessionid=D9D203765338D6B7F2EA640681F89 D1A?_RND=-467440885
addition, Infiniti's system represents minimal compromise of the rear-wheel driving characteristics on dry road favored by true driving enthusiasts. Employing true variable torque distribution, the all-wheel drive system can range from a torque split of 50/50 up to zero/100 percent front-to-rear ratio. Legacy 2.5 GT
http://www.engine-power.com/subaru/legacy_gt_press.html
Subaru offers three different Symmetrical All-Wheel Drive systems in the 2005 Legacy models, each tailored to the type of transmission. With the 5-speed manual transmission, the system uses a viscous-coupling locking center differential to distribute the power 50/50 front to rear. Slippage at either set of wheels will send more power to the other set of wheels. Legacy 2.5 GT models equipped with the optional 5-speed automatic transmission use a system called Variable Torque Distribution (VTD). A planetary center differential works with an electronically controlled continuously variable hydraulic transfer clutch to manage power distribution. The system normally sends more power to the rear wheels to enhance handling agility, and it continuously adjusts the power distribution in response to driving and road conditions. Acura 3.5 RL
http://www.acura.com/models/model_perf_index.asp?module=rl#
Helps steer the vehicle and enhances its maneuverability. It helps compensate for understeer (push) or oversteer (the rear end feels loose), when cornering. The RL feels agile and nimble and tracks smoothly through turns without unnecessary steering correction. It sends up to 70% of the engine's torque to the front or rear wheels, but it can also send up to 100% of that same rear-wheel torque to either the left or right outside-rear wheel when cornering. It will even accelerate the outside rear wheel to enhance handling while cornering. No other all-wheel drive system can do this.Subaru WRX
http://www.subaru.com/shop/specifications/noframes.jsp?trim=WRX_SEDAN&model=IMPREZA
Continuous AWD: Models equipped with 5-speed manual transmission utilize a viscous-type locking center differential with torque distribution configured at a 50/50-split front-to-rear. WRX models also feature a viscous-type limited-slip rear differential.
VTD AWD: WRX models equipped with 4-speed automatic transimission utilize an electronically controlled variable transfer clutch in conjunction with a planetary-type center differential. Rear wheel-biased torque distribution normally configured at 45/55-split front-to-rear. Variable Torque Distribution (VTD) also features a viscous-type limited-slip rear differential. I could snag a whole lot more examples...but you get the idea.

Mitsu Evo
Full-Time All-Wheel Drive with Active Center Differential, Front Helical Torque-Sensing Limited Slip Differential and a Rear Mechanical 1.5 Limited-Slip Differential. 50/50 front/rear torque split
These are examples of competitive AWD sedans. Note that in all instances, power is to all 4 wheels to at least SOME extent. The Mazdaspeed 6 doesn't follow this system as its standard setup is 100:0. Its a FWD sedan that "can become" an AWD one. This is the most disappointing aspect of it in my eyes. :(

[ZoomZoomH]

damn greg you've been doing your homework!!!

[anarchistchiken]

I realize that I'm new here, but I wanted to clear this up. The difference isn't between twin tubos and sequential turbos. It's between twin sequential and twin parallel turbos. I'm running twin sequential tubos in my FD.

Binary got pwn3d (lol2)

[dmitrik4]

why power all 4 wheels when you don't need to? all that does is eat up gas and increase driveline losses.

well, and make you look cool on intArweb message boards. ;)

actually, infiniti's system is the same as mazda's, but opposite. the G35x is normally 100% RWD. when wheel slippage occurs, it "becomes" an AWD sedan.

****

i don't think binary got pwnd. i think he and redx7 were talking about different things. unless i'm missing some weird, obscure meaning of the word "twin," i understand it to mean "two, identical" things.

so "twin sequential" turbos would be sequential identical turbos...and i'm not sure i can recognize the benefit of such a setup.

what i understood binary to mean was "two turbos of differing sizes." one smaller which spools up first, the second being larger which spools up later.

...by definition, NOT "twin."

[crossbow]

why power all 4 wheels when you don't need to? Its all about handling dynamics. For the general boring consumer...no, it doesn't matter one bit. But when your talking about performance, on a car thats possibly going to be tracked or autocrossed, it makes all the difference.

Thats why some manufacturers have purposely setup AWD cars to have rear bias's..because it then drives like a RWD car.

Having a FWD setup which swaps back and forth between AWD and FWD just seems like it would be really annoying if you were trying to do something performance wise on a track. Can you imagine going into one turn and the car behaving like a FWD car...then the next turn its AWD? Give me one or the other please :).

Btw the G35x quote is direct from their website. I've heard the exact same comments you made in regards to its drivetrain bias, but thats not whats on the website.

Regardless, as far as I'm aware (please correct me if I'm wrong), the Mazdaspeed 6 is the ONLY AWD car in the 20k to 40k segment that runs with a 100:0 bias standard. All the rest are running some sort of "mixed" torque distribution standard. My reasoning behind this decision was that the AWD system is from the euro 6 wagon...which has less then half the torque of the ms6 (which is also why the transfer case is watercooled), and that the standard system can't handle the increased torque load enough to warrant a different torque bias. I could be wrong, but thats still my theory.

Cause honestly...when your buying a 270+ bhp turbocharged car...gas mileage isn't one of your primary concerns.(boom02)

[Mazda3]

Its all about handling dynamics. For the general boring consumer...no, it doesn't matter one bit. But when your talking about performance, on a car thats possibly going to be tracked or autocrossed, it makes all the difference.

Thats why some manufacturers have purposely setup AWD cars to have rear bias's..because it then drives like a RWD car.

Having a FWD setup which swaps back and forth between AWD and FWD just seems like it would be really annoying if you were trying to do something performance wise on a track. Can you imagine going into one turn and the car behaving like a FWD car...then the next turn its AWD? Give me one or the other please :).

Btw the G35x quote is direct from their website. I've heard the exact same comments you made in regards to its drivetrain bias, but thats not whats on the website.

Regardless, as far as I'm aware (please correct me if I'm wrong), the Mazdaspeed 6 is the ONLY AWD car in the 20k to 40k segment that runs with a 100:0 bias standard. All the rest are running some sort of "mixed" torque distribution standard. My reasoning behind this decision was that the AWD system is from the euro 6 wagon...which has less then half the torque of the ms6 (which is also why the transfer case is watercooled), and that the standard system can't handle the increased torque load enough to warrant a different torque bias. I could be wrong, but thats still my theory.

Cause honestly...when your buying a 270+ bhp turbocharged car...gas mileage isn't one of your primary concerns.(boom02)

Everything crossbow says makes sense. Supposedly Mazda has made changes to this AWD system to handle the extra power and make the power transfer to the rear wheels quicker than the regular system. However they haven't said exactly how this was done so we really won't know until someone drives one. From Mazdas stand point I don't think this car is aimed at people who are going to actually autocross it on a regular basis.

My biggest worry at this point is how fast will this car be? I won't pay $39k CDN for this car if it runs a 14.5 1/4 mile. The STi and EVO run low to mid 13's, there is know reason this car shouldn't run 13.8-13.9 if it makes the power its rated at. If its that fast I want one, if not I don't.

[dmitrik4]

From Mazdas stand point I don't think this car is aimed at people who are going to actually autocross it on a regular basis.

exactly. hence my statement about the low utility of powering all 4 wheels all the time. i understand the effect on handling balance, but it's not a 911. it's a midsize sedan.

[crossbow]

See I debate this fact. This is a MAZDASPEED car...not a normal mazda. The car's supposed to be designed to be driven by aggressive owners...and even in competitive events.

The MSP's really tear up the autox courses due to their setup/design. I'd imagine with their race divisons mazda would be doing the same.

You don't get mazdaspeed 6 sales from walk ons...9 times out of 10 the individual has gone to the dealership (a mazdaspeed dealer...which eliminates alot of dealers from the get go) specifically wanting the speed.

I guess you could just be like "i like how it looks and i won't die in the snow" type person...but then if your along that thinking, there is a bunch of other nice cars you could get that fullfill the same purpose, at less cost.

And before you get into the "its a sedan"...remember that this mid-sized sedan just took first at laguna seca...and is winning competitions all over the US. Its chassis/suspension setup is one of the best in its range.

[dmitrik4]

and my point is that, regardless of the (undeniable) success of the 6 in roadracing, most serious autoXers aren't going to be running such a big car.

for those who are going to run the car, i have my doubts about how much of a handicap the AWD system's setup will prove to be. regardless, the design itself proves Mazda3's point- if it were mainly aimed at those who will compete in it, it wouldn't have a lot of the attributes it seems to have.

instead, it's aimed at those who might otherwise get into a Legacy or something similar. and for those people, the mazda system will work just fine.

[Mazda3]

See I debate this fact.
You make some valid points. I guess we'll have to see how the car performs and who buys it. And how well it sells.

[crossbow]

I have to agree. I guess I'm just disappointed is all :(. At least the mazdaspeed rx8 (previewed by the new R&T Speed Magazine) looks nice :). Mmm...supercharged rotary.

[dmitrik4]

At least the mazdaspeed rx8 (previewed by the new R&T Speed Magazine) looks nice :). Mmm...supercharged rotary.

who shot who in the what now?

where's this info? :D

[scapamouche]

Crossbow: I stand corrected on your point. I agree that the front bias on the AWD is a liability for spirited driving.

Speaking as someone who has driven both the 6 and 3 competitively, and done quite well... (at MRIU...) I would take the light weight 10 times out of 10 over power. In fact, with my own autox, that's my choice: 170hp/2800lb MSP vs 227hp/3100lb WRX... I had the choice of either, and chose the MSP because of the handling.

I don't doubt that Mazda will do their best with the handling, and I know from experience exactly how well the 6 handles BEFORE they get to it, but I think the better choice will be to wait until a MS3 comes out, even without the AWD...

Although.... I already have 2 MS cars in the stable, so why not keep the streak alive, and keep buying them as they come out ;)

[crossbow]

scapamouche,

Awesome. Sounds like a killer garage. You know the most ironic thing about the Mazda 6...was before I bought it...I didn't even understand the meaning of performance. The car's taught me so much about driving, vehicles, suspension setups, the important of weight, tires, etc etc...and yet its a relatively large FWD open diffy land yaht :).

Its like the car teaches you to appreciate it less ha.

dmitrik4,

http://www.roadandtrack.com/assets/image/101320041189.jpg http://www.roadandtrack.com/assets/image/10152004105747.jpg

SPEED Editor Sam Mitani gains exclusive access to Mazda's super-secret RX-8. With its specially-designed Mazdaspeed suspension improvements (shocks and springs, anti-roll bars) and supercharged rotary, this is one mean sports car, lapping Willow Springs faster than a Porsche Boxster S or the Nissan 350Z.http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=39&article_id=1627

Should be on newstands this week. (280-300 bhp) And it should be lighter then a standard 8...(which btw weighs 2900 lbs in a loaded 6spd MTX sans driver)

[BlkZoomZoom]

If you guys have ever seen the view underneath a v6 Mazda6 then you would understand why they didnt turbo it. Theres absolutley no room for anything else......

[crossbow]

However there is a twin turbo Mazda 6s by wagner motorsports :).
http://forum.mazda6tech.com/about541-0.html

Remember...money can always solve space issues :).

[BlkZoomZoom]

God damn.....that shit is amazing....I think you have to see the stock exhuast system to fully appreciate the lack of room.

[Da 6]

there is alot of 6 autocrossers out there...some beating evos and wrx sti's (on dry land) understeer just means you have to turn early before you reach the gate ;) What crosbow an I are trying to say is how quick is the switch and will it cause an autoxer who is already understeering to now oversteer to try and counteract the understeer?

[CrazyXZac]

However there is a twin turbo Mazda 6s by wagner motorsports :).
http://forum.mazda6tech.com/about541-0.html

Remember...money can always solve space issues :).

oh baby baby! (wow)