SKYACTIV II with HCCI to debut within weeks

[mangoconchile]

Again, you have an old Mazda, meaning you have no experience with the newer tech so you're just spewing s*it all over this thread right now. The technology is meant to improve torque delivery which makes the car not only more efficient, but more peppy and fun to drive as well.

Bro I rented a CX-5 for a full week(2016.5 GT), even took an entire week off of work to drive it all day and night so I have PLENTY of experience to know what it's like. Last time I checked, Mazda was an enthusiast brand so why not make a drivetrain that appeals to them? 187 HP is fine for a Honda or Kia, but it doesn't cut it for a Mazda. Not only that but a turbo motor add more fun to the experience due to it being able to deliver more torque at lower rpms.

-2.5T across the 3/6/CX-5
-Add CarPlay/AA

Why is that too much to ask for? Last time I checked, there weren't too many people here complaining about the fuel economy, but lots of people complaining about the lack of power and lack of CarPlay/AA. Start making these cars fun again instead of trying to turn them into a cheap imitation of an Audi.

 

[Unobtanium]

You lost me @250+hp in a fwd car...my experience with an lsd on the manual version of the 2006 Acura TL..nope, sucks, wrong, bye

I've never driven one, but the new civic type r is lapping the 'Ring deep in the 7s....

 

[Monterra]

I've never driven one, but the new civic type r is lapping the 'Ring deep in the 7s....

Yeah butterface?..and any performance/fun car i ever own torque steer or not sure as s*** ain't gonna be fwd...nevereverever

 

[GJ-Molestor]

Bro I rented a CX-5 for a full week(2016.5 GT), even took an entire week off of work to drive it all day and night so I have PLENTY of experience to know what it's like. Last time I checked, Mazda was an enthusiast brand so why not make a drivetrain that appeals to them? 187 HP is fine for a Honda or Kia, but it doesn't cut it for a Mazda. Not only that but a turbo motor add more fun to the experience due to it being able to deliver more torque at lower rpms.

-2.5T across the 3/6/CX-5
-Add CarPlay/AA

Why is that too much to ask for? Last time I checked, there weren't too many people here complaining about the fuel economy, but lots of people complaining about the lack of power and lack of CarPlay/AA. Start making these cars fun again instead of trying to turn them into a cheap imitation of an Audi.

You drove a crossover! Obviously it's not going to be fun... you haven't tried a mazda 3 or 6 with the 2.5L, now those are fun...

You're missing the point of the brand entirely. There is much more to a fun driving experience then just sheer power. Once you get a feel for the chassis and how it handles (of a sedan/hatch, not a ******* crossover) then you would understand.

The other thing you seem to have trouble grasping is the concept of marketing. Mazda stopped offering the 3.7 v6 in the Mazda 6 last generation becsuse no one bought it. The reason why they offer nothing more then the adequate 2.5 is because that's the only engine that people are willing to buy.

How that Mazda is growing, they are offering more powerful engines with the next gen.

 

[Xeler8ing]

Mazda stopped offering the 3.7 v6 in the Mazda 6 last generation becsuse no one bought it. The reason why they offer nothing more then the adequate 2.5 is because that's the only engine that people are willing to buy.

Actually people here were buying this motor (last generation CX-9 which sold well) but it was woefully fuel inefficient.

 

[mangoconchile]

You drove a crossover! Obviously it's not going to be fun... you haven't tried a mazda 3 or 6 with the 2.5L, now those are fun...

That's funny, everyone else here says IT IS fun to drive. But I will agree with you there, it is not a 'fun' vehicle to drive at all. Mazda3 is a decent vehicle but this is a CX-5 forum, not a Mazda3 forum so what is the point of your point exactly? The 2.5 is adequate for the Mazda3, but not for the Mazda6 and definitely not for the CX-5. The Mazdaspeed3 had more power than anything in Mazda's lineup today including their 3 row crossover. They have a nice turbo engine that for whatever reason they don't want to include in their other vehicles. They also lack CarPlay and AA. Both the 2.5T and CarPlay/AA are 2 features people want but Mazda doesn't deliver them for whatever reason. Instead they're more concerned about saving a few bucks at the pump it seems.

 

[Unobtanium]

Yeah butterface?..and any performance/fun car i ever own torque steer or not sure as s*** ain't gonna be fwd...nevereverever

I agree, which is why I was so sad that the Type R was the only one of its breed that isn't AWD.

 

[Unobtanium]

You drove a crossover! Obviously it's not going to be fun... you haven't tried a mazda 3 or 6 with the 2.5L, now those are fun...

You're missing the point of the brand entirely. There is much more to a fun driving experience then just sheer power. Once you get a feel for the chassis and how it handles (of a sedan/hatch, not a ******* crossover) then you would understand.

The other thing you seem to have trouble grasping is the concept of marketing. Mazda stopped offering the 3.7 v6 in the Mazda 6 last generation becsuse no one bought it. The reason why they offer nothing more then the adequate 2.5 is because that's the only engine that people are willing to buy.

How that Mazda is growing, they are offering more powerful engines with the next gen.

Now you're on thin ice on this forum. People here view their CX-5's as though they were F40's. Stripped down, no insulation because "it would harm handling", and so on and so forth. They have LITERALLY SAID THAT on this forum before, back when I joined in 2015. In fact, it's so stupid I have to show it so you won't think I'm twisting their words:
https://www.mazdas247.com/forum/sho...ns-questions&p=6417686&viewfull=1#post6417686


Luckily for 2017 owners, Mazda did what I thought they should have, and now all of those "enthusiasts" are all like "it's cool...we gots sportz mode! ZOOM ZOOM!" lol

 

[GJ-Molestor]

That's funny, everyone else here says IT IS fun to drive. But I will agree with you there, it is not a 'fun' vehicle to drive at all. Mazda3 is a decent vehicle but this is a CX-5 forum, not a Mazda3 forum so what is the point of your point exactly? The 2.5 is adequate for the Mazda3, but not for the Mazda6 and definitely not for the CX-5. The Mazdaspeed3 had more power than anything in Mazda's lineup today including their 3 row crossover. They have a nice turbo engine that for whatever reason they don't want to include in their other vehicles. They also lack CarPlay and AA. Both the 2.5T and CarPlay/AA are 2 features people want but Mazda doesn't deliver them for whatever reason. Instead they're more concerned about saving a few bucks at the pump it seems.

I mentioned the Mazda 3 and 6 in this forum because this guy made it seem that Mazda as a whole isn't fun because he drove a 185hp crossover. Big difference between that and the actual fun stuff that Mazda builds.

185hp doesn't sound like much, but you're forgetting that it makes that same amount in torque at 3250rpm which is perfectly fine for a 3200 pound family sedan. That much torque at 3250 rpm is much more important then the Hp at 5700rpm. Come on, how often is the average driver going to see near-redline?

For an aggressive daily driver, I can assure you that the 2.5L is enough power in the Mazda 6. May not be the case for the heavier crossover though.

I'm sure Mazda knows what they are doing over at the marketing department. They removed the 3.7L from the 6 because no one bought it and they are busy developing the next generation of engines and chassis which is why they are not putting the 2.5T into their cars despite Everyone's whining. This is also why they are delaying the mazdaoseed 3. It all will come... just have some patience.

I don't know which car you drive, but if you daily drove a 3 or even 6 you wouldn't complain about the power output while waiting for the more powerful engine.

 

[Unobtanium]

I mentioned the Mazda 3 and 6 in this forum because this guy made it seem that Mazda as a whole isn't fun because he drove a 185hp crossover. Big difference between that and the actual fun stuff that Mazda builds.

185hp doesn't sound like much, but you're forgetting that it makes that same figure in torque at 3250rpm which is perfectly fine for a 3200 pound family sedan. That figure is much more important then the Hp at 5700rpm. Come on, how often is the average driver going to see near-redline?

For an aggressive daily driver, I can assure you that the 2.5L is enough power in the Mazda 6. May not be the case for the heavier crossover though.

I'm sure Mazda knows what they are doing over at the marketing department. They removed the 3.7L from the 6 because no one bought it and they are busy developing the next generation of engines and chassis which is why they are not putting the 2.5T into their cars despite the fact that everyone is asking for more power. It will come... just have some patience.

I don't know which care you drive, but if you daily drove a 3 or even 6 you wouldn't complain about the power output while waiting for the more powerful engine... it's got good torque and the engine is willing to rev.

It all depends on personal expectations and experiences. Imagine how a 1860's cowboy would have felt doing 0-60 in under 8 seconds? DOING 60 MPH AT ALL!!!?!? It takes 500+hp in a 3200# car to get my attention. Others may find 300hp in the same, "fast". This forum is total evidence of that. Noone here on stock suspension is pulling even 0.9g, and yet all they do is RRAAAVVEEEE about how this thing just DOMINATES corners, lol!

 

[Monterra]

haha but honestly add me to that mikem purist cx5 s*** not ashamed! ill concede the lighter, simpler, weightier steering cx5 is where i want to be it almost defies reason how much i actually like driving the thing and my fondness hasn't waned nearly 4 years 70+k on now and that's definitely not like me...fwiw

 

[Unobtanium]

^^haha add me to that mikem s***! ill concede the lighter, simpler, weightier steering cx5 is where i want to be it almost defies reason how much i actually like driving the thing and my fondness hasn't waned nearly 4 years 70+k on now

I enjoyed my 2002 Infiniti G20, even though 0-60 was a 10+ second experience, lol. I owned a Z06 at the time, as well. You can learn to enjoy anything (I truly enjoyed the G20).

That said, yes, my 2015 is the "R model" of CX5's. The last year with no insulation, the AWD, 2.5, no roof-rack, no stupid sport mode. It was the lightest and bestest and fastest, and I expect that to reflect on trade-in value, rofl!

 

[GJ-Molestor]

It all depends on personal expectations and experiences. Imagine how a 1860's cowboy would have felt doing 0-60 in under 8 seconds? DOING 60 MPH AT ALL!!!?!? It takes 500+hp in a 3200# car to get my attention. Others may find 300hp in the same, "fast". This forum is total evidence of that. Noone here on stock suspension is pulling even 0.9g, and yet all they do is RRAAAVVEEEE about how this thing just DOMINATES corners, lol!

Judging a car by its 0-60 time? Are you 16 years old? This engine rips in the mid-range which is actually what's important during daily driving.

The fact that many of the owners enjoy the cars chassis to the point where the power deficiency doesn't bother them speaks for itself. Maybe you're just being ignorant.

 

[Xeler8ing]

It all depends on personal expectations and experiences. Imagine how a 1860's cowboy would have felt doing 0-60 in under 8 seconds? DOING 60 MPH AT ALL!!!?!? It takes 500+hp in a 3200# car to get my attention. Others may find 300hp in the same, "fast". This forum is total evidence of that. Noone here on stock suspension is pulling even 0.9g, and yet all they do is RRAAAVVEEEE about how this thing just DOMINATES corners, lol!

(drive) (drive2)

 

[Xeler8ing]

Would be good to have both quick off the mark performance as well as mid range performance.

 

[mangoconchile]

I'm sure Mazda knows what they are doing over at the marketing department. They removed the 3.7L from the 6 because no one bought it and they are busy developing the next generation of engines and chassis which is why they are not putting the 2.5T into their cars despite the fact that everyone is asking for more power. It will come... just have some patience.

I don't know which care you drive, but if you daily drove a 3 or even 6 you wouldn't complain about the power output while waiting for the more powerful engine... it's got good torque and the engine is willing to rev.

There is 0 evidence to suggest any of Mazda's future vehicles will add additional power, so let's not say stuff like 'have patience it's coming' otherwise you end up sounding like one of these Mazda salesman telling their customers CarPlay is coming this fall.. And they dropped the V6 because it had poor fuel effiency compared to the rest of the V6 competitors. And what does developing the next generation of engines have anything to do with being unable to include a good engine that they can produce NOW in their vehicles? Nothing at all.

Furthermore I would disagree that Mazda marketing knows what they're doing. Those 'hand sculping CX-5' commercials only appeal to enthusiasts and they've been stuck at under 2% market share since 1992.

And I've never driven a 6 but why would I get one would I could get a new Camry with 300+HP, quad exhaust, and 8 speed automatic transmission with paddle shifters for the same price? The new Camry IMO looks like it's going to be a beast and the best bang for your buck in the class.

 

[jhu8]

My god people stop quoting this anti Mazda troll.

 

[Unobtanium]

Judging a car by its 0-60 time? Are you 16 years old? This engine rips in the mid-range which is actually what's important during daily driving.

The fact that many of the owners enjoy the cars chassis to the point where the power deficiency doesn't bother them speaks for itself. Maybe you're just being ignorant.

By "rips", do you mean "sucks"? Because yeah, it does. For a 4 cylinder non-FI AWD SUV though, I think it's actually impressive. Just not "in the grand scheme of things". I view it as "adequate for the task at hand".

Ultimately though, people don't really care about actual performance data/numbers. They care about "feel", and the CX5 certainly "feels" good for what it is, I agree.

 

[Xeler8ing]

Ultimately though, people don't really care about actual performance data/numbers. They care about "feel", and the CX5 certainly "feels" good for what it is, I agree.

That's what I got when test driving 2017 CX-5. Felt quicker than actual performance stats.

 

[Nelson de Leon]

Who said there won't be a need for fossil fuels in 10 years?

Nobody said that.

I said the reason they developed this is to pass stricter emission testing in the next 5-10 years

Cuz it's logical and that's the main point of most manufacturers.

why do you think they keep mentioning efficiency over and over again in these articles?

Because most vehicle buyers are interested in efficiency.

I said nothing about fossil fuels going extinct in 10 years.

I didn't say that you said that.

Regarding your batteries comment, the Tesla Model 3 is a 35k(the same price as a fully loaded Mazda6) fully electric vehicle with a range of 220 miles(300+ if you buy an optional battery pack). You don't think in 5-6 years those numbers(not just mileage, but vehicle pricing) won't improve?

It will improve but you still have to pay for electricity.

I don't know about you, but I would think the prospect of never having to go to the gas station and spends thousands of dollars on gas ever again sure sounds nice to me.

Do you have the numbers that can enlighten us about efficiency (in terms of per kilometer for comparison?)

This engine was created to pass stricter emission testing around the world in the near future, not because it is actually better than a typical engine.

Better compared to what?

If it was, you would have seen this implemented long ago.

If electricity is better they they should also have implemented it long ago. Electric cars have long been developed though not longer than ICE of course.

This whole notion of Mazda 'sharing' their Skyactiv tech is ridiculous as well. Last time I checked, Toyota was a pretty competent engine maker, with lots of hybrids, even a Hydrogen powered vehicle. They've also invested heavily in fully electric vehicles.

Then you should at least point some facts as to why Toyota agreed.