SkyActiv-X may not reach US shores

[Buzzman12]

If he was, the interiors would be cheap POSs. Nissan interiors are atrocious.

Their entire product line is atrocious, and Infiniti is not much better.
They've been going down the toilet since around 2006, which is when they made their last decent car.
Here's a small quote from an article I read about a meeting between Nissan dealers and the new CEO.
It did not go well.

"While Nissan continues holding the line on fleet sales and reduced incentivization — an effort aimed at boosting residuals and placing the struggling automaker on a more solid financial footing — it hasn’t done anything for brand sales, especially in the United States. Volume shrunk 9.9 percent in 2019, with sales weighed down by an even worse-performing Infiniti.

As 2019 drew to a close, reports emerged of Nissan scrambling to cut costs wherever savings could be found, including on air travel. A two-day January furlough of U.S. workers only served to highlight the company’s desperation."

 

[ruthrj]

If he was, the interiors would be cheap POSs. Nissan interiors are atrocious.

So true. I remember shopping for cars in 2012. My wife and I opened the door to an Altima on the lot. No sales guy around yet. We peeked in, glanced at each other, and shut the door. Left immediately and never looked back. That velour type material on the doors was horrifying.

 

[dougal]

If he was, the interiors would be cheap POSs. Nissan interiors are atrocious.

No, if he was, they would look like the inside of a cello case!

 

[Dakd]

This looks more and more like diesel failure, by the time it gets here it will be to late and billions of dollars waisted.
If they invested in hybrid technology instead of skyactive X they would be in much better position now.

 

[MazMetalhead]

If he was, the interiors would be cheap POSs. Nissan interiors are atrocious.

*Nissans are atrocious. Fixed it for you

 

[finch204]

It's too bad actually that they're scared of trying to sell the SkyActiv-X engine over here. That or maybe the MPG is really not that good as they thought it would be. I had dreams of a Mazda3 or Mazda6 that could get 40 MPG on the highway. I guess that won't happen anytime soon.

As to the torsion beam suspension on the Mazda3. It is not a cost cutting thing. The general population will hardly notice the difference while gaining a bit more comfort going over big bumps.

 

[dougal]

It's too bad actually that they're scared of trying to sell the SkyActiv-X engine over here. That or maybe the MPG is really not that good as they thought it would be. I had dreams of a Mazda3 or Mazda6 that could get 40 MPG on the highway. I guess that won't happen anytime soon.

As to the torsion beam suspension on the Mazda3. It is not a cost cutting thing. The general population will hardly notice the difference while gaining a bit more comfort going over big bumps.

I do believe the Mazda 3 with with the Sky-X gets over 40 MPG on the highway. The other issue nobody wants to talk about is that the MPG improvement is much higher with the manual transmission as opposed to the automatic.

 

[finch204]

I do believe the Mazda 3 with with the Sky-X gets over 40 MPG on the highway. The other issue nobody wants to talk about is that the MPG improvement is much higher with the manual transmission as opposed to the automatic.

And hardly anyone here drives stick shift anymore... that makes sense.

 

[ruthrj]

They might be worried about US customer perception too. I’d be fine with the engine switching between two modes of ignition but maybe the general population in the states will be less willing to accept intermittent engine knocking as normal.

 

[finch204]

They might be worried about US customer perception too. I’d be fine with the engine switching between two modes of ignition but maybe the general population in the states will be less willing to accept intermittent engine knocking as normal.

That's a good point. They might be worried that people will just bring their cars back to the dealership saying, "I hear some weird knocking sounds coming from the engine." LOL.

 

[dougal]

And hardly anyone here drives stick shift anymore... that makes sense.

Yup. Not to mention that the new Mazda 3 with the 2.0 Sky-X does a 0-60 in ~ 8 seconds. That is fine but the old Mazda 3 with the 2.0 regular engine did it in ~7.5.

 

[yrwei52]

This looks more and more like diesel failure, by the time it gets here it will be to late and billions of dollars waisted.
If they invested in hybrid technology instead of skyactive X they would be in much better position now.

It sure looks like it, doesn’t it?

”While it produces almost the same HP (not the same, 176 vs 186), it only gains 9% better fuel economy and costs 27% more” simply doesn’t cut it.

Here’s a paragraph from Car and Driver’s article back on June 5, 2019:

“Most impressively, the Mazda 3 equipped with the Skyactiv-X 2.0-liter engine gets 50 mpg according to the optimistic NEDC European combined test cycle. On that governing body's highway cycle, which benefits the compression-ignition setup even more, the thriftiest Skyactiv-X-equipped Mazda 3 scores 60 mpg.”

 

[murky]

This looks more and more like diesel failure, by the time it gets here it will be to late and billions of dollars waisted.
If they invested in hybrid technology instead of skyactive X they would be in much better position now.

I think their relationship with Toyota will yield dividends in next generation of drivetrain options. I'm looking forward to a Mazda with a plug in hybrid option.

 

[yrwei52]

They might be worried about US customer perception too. I’d be fine with the engine switching between two modes of ignition but maybe the general population in the states will be less willing to accept intermittent engine knocking as normal.

The complexity of SkyActiv-X with SPCCI worries me since Mazda has to add more components such as spark ignition and super charger to original HCCI concept which’s supposed to be very simple. I’ve been saying at beginning that I’m not interested getting a SkyActiv-X even if it gets 40 mpg because it’s too complicated to be reliable.

 

[erigion]

It sure looks like it, doesn’t it?

”While it produces almost the same HP (not the same, 176 vs 186), it only gains 9% better fuel economy and costs 27% more” simply doesn’t cut it.

Here’s a paragraph from Car and Driver’s article back on June 5, 2019:

“Most impressively, the Mazda 3 equipped with the Skyactiv-X 2.0-liter engine gets 50 mpg according to the optimistic NEDC European combined test cycle. On that governing body's highway cycle, which benefits the compression-ignition setup even more, the thriftiest Skyactiv-X-equipped Mazda 3 scores 60 mpg.”

Here's Road and Track on the European MPG figures:

"The Euro-spec 2-liter naturally-aspirated Skyactiv-X four-cylinder makes 177 horsepower at 6000 RPM and 165 lb-ft of torque at 3000 RPM. Under Europe's (soon-to-be-updated) NEDC fuel economy testing, a front-drive, manual-transmission 3 hatchback returns the equivalent of 53.5 mpg combined, dropping to 44.4 mpg with the six-speed automatic.

That's a bit of an improvement over the base gasoline engine available in Europe, a 2.0-liter four-cylinder that makes 120 hp at 6000 RPM and 157 lb-ft at 4000 and returns the equivalent of 45.2 mpg combined in the hatchback with the manual transmission, or 42 mpg with the auto."

So the X improves a whole 2 MPG over the standard engine with their 6-speed auto. There's no chance Mazda brings this engine over to the US if the improvement is so awful with automatics. Mazda is a smaller company which means it's even more imperative that they don't dump money into research that doesn't prove worthwhile.

 

[RedBaron]

But that's 57hp more, at roughly the same MPG. You think nearly 50% better horsepower with (slightly) better efficiency is "awful"? Huh?

 

[Mazdiod2]

I notice there is a much larger spread between the MPG figures for the 2.0X -- over 9 MPG, and the base 2.0 numbers.

A number of newer cars W/auto have almost the same or even better MPG than the manual equipped versions.

Maybe there is a different gear ratio involved that accounts for the difference.

 

[ruthrj]

I would love a manual Skyactiv-X here in the US. I bounced between manual and auto over the years, and it’s been a while since I’ve went back to a manual.

 

[ceric]

If Mazda wants to improve MPG of their lineup, they just need to move to an 8-speed transmission. Problem solved.

I am, however, more interested in a Skyactive-X engine when it is more mature. Their Skyactive-D has caused many issues around the world. Mazda is not immune to 1st-year problem. I would stay away from 1st-year engine if possible.
Even 2nd or 3rd.

And, I own 3 Mazdas currently. I am a loyal customer.

 

[skyking]

Since the CX-5 is their bread-and-butter (meaning Mazda sells more CX-5s worldwide than all their other models combined), they will be very careful (meaning very conservative) in making wholesale changes to the lineup. I too have read about Mazda instituting a hybrid (CX-3 or CX-30) at some point in the not-too-distant future. Possibly Toyota's hybrid system?