Federighi

iTrader: (7)

Hey 8Club!

I sincerely hope Mazda receives the love it deserves. Otherwise they will stop making the 'subjectively' cool cars which brought us all here in the first place.

How many more 'cool' cars will mazda be able to produce if no one buys them??? My guess is not many. Back to the drawing boards I suppose.

Have a good day club

https://www.motortrend.com/news/mazd...terview-rumor/

BigCajun

iTrader: (1)

You'd think with all the crying and moaning about gas prices that SUVs sales would start dropping.
They might be thinking by the time they could get it into production the gas prices might come down again.

Meat Head

There’s just too many people wanting bloated SUV’s to mindlessly go about their travels in a sensory vacuum to support manufacture of decent new cars. Bleak opinion I know.

UnknownJinX

After some discussions with some non-Mazda-head car guys, I am starting to see why Mazda is having trouble, to put lightly.

The new CX-60's performance really isn't too different from a RAV-4 plug-in, just different mounting configuration. While the power is impressive for RAV-4 hybrid, I don't think it's all that impressive for an "upmarket" vehicle. Luxury car with a naturally aspirated I4 engine? Oh boy... At least throw the turbo in there.

I think Mazda is stuck in the trap of trying to sell efficient luxury cars. The flop of BMW i8 and upcoming death of NSX should have been warning enough of how much that doesn't work. Really, the only ones to pull it off is Lexus, but it more or less fits their brand image and even then, I would think there are many more LC500 out there than LC500h.

The luxury cars that are efficient don't even use efficiency as the main selling point. Tesla focuses on cool techs and performance advantages of EVs. The savings on the gas bill is more of a bonus. When you can afford a luxury car, chances are you don't give a crap about gas bills. Just give the buyers what actually matter to them.

But then, Mazda hasn't made a performance engine in a long while. The last performance engines were the Renesis and MZR 2.3T. SkyActiv engines are all about efficiency, which isn't a bad thing when you are trying to sell economy cars, but I have my doubts if Mazda can even make any performance engines nowadays because of their tight budgets.

I know some of you will be like "oh but it's not all about power and it's about the lightweight and handling." Well, that's pretty much a joke when we are talking about SUVs(let alone a heavy hybrid like CX-60) in general, and look at how Lotus and Alfa Romeo - who focus a lot on driving dynamics - are doing. At least Alfa Romeo's got FCA's daddy support, which Mazda doesn't have. You gotta sell the mainstream nonsense so you have the money to burn on passion projects for car people. That's what Toyota is doing. They have the money to afford building Yaris GR.

From what I have heard(from someone who had first-hand experience talking to Mazda people at Hiroshima), Mazda higher-ups tend to be on the more stubborn side of things, so really, you can only hope they know what they are doing.

Compared to 10 years ago, we have:

- More hybrid/electric vehicles, including SUVs

- Work from home is much more popular so people don't have to drive as much for certain jobs

- Much more insane car prices, so the spending on another car kills the whole point of gas savings

So not surprised about the SUV heat not stopping.

If you can't fight them, join them, and thrive in them. Reel in the money to make the loss-making passion projects.

Toyota, BMW, and GM all provide decent examples.

9krpmrx8

iTrader: (46)

And the Renesis and the MZR are both pretty shitty engines overall.

UnknownJinX

...which showcases what happens when you have peanuts for your engine R&D budget.

kevink0000

Totally disagree. The MZR series is a fantastic engine for what it is designed for, and can accept abuse and power adds without much complaint. They also last a long, long time in stock form. (300k mile 2006 Mazda 3 in the family, still runs strong, and uses no oil in 5k OCI.)

The Renesis is a great design, with some known flaws, that Mazda, admittedly, could have done a better job addressing. But, its the pinnacle of street Rotaries in my opinion, not a big fan of the REW like some here, since I tend to prefer NA. To each, his own.

That Mazda has such a limited budget for R/D, makes the above achievements even more noteworthy. Especially the Renesis.

I'm a BMW fan, and they have had quite a few design and execution issues over the years, especially recently. I would rate Mazda over BMW in terms of execution, having worked on and owned (own) both. BMW definitely pushes the envelope on tech and manufacturing prowess, and often goofs on the simple stuff.

Honda, Toyota, MB, VAG, and especially Kia/Hyundai have had some bad times with flawed engine designs, esp. K/H, which makes the Renesis issues look like very small problems.

UnknownJinX

I believe 9k is specifically talking about the turbocharged 2.3 variants of the MZR lineup, which, well, I think this YouTube channel explains pretty well.


As for the NA stuff, they are fine reliability-wise, but I think most people do note that the 2.3 variant is a bit thirsty for what it is. I had one for a couple of months and while I know I am a bit heavy on the foot, I think I could probably get the same gas mileage in a Honda Accord with 2.4 from the same time period, with the Accord being a heavier car. The 2.0 is supposedly pretty solid with better efficiency, but the BK hatch only came with the 2.3 here. The lack of crank key supposedly adds some challenge to when you want to boost for big power, as the friction washer will start slipping above a certain power. This even plagues Ecoboost I4 engines since they are based on MZR I4. It also makes any timing work a PITA.

The issue here is that people don't care if it's a great design given the limited budget, they care about if it's a great engine, full stop. Other than brand loyalists, no one will dig that deep to find out more about the R&D background of the engines.

Mazda's issue is that they tend to be stubborn about the wrong direction they go in. Skyactiv-X is kinda cool, but not helpful for a luxury car that should be focusing more on performance over efficiency. They could have made an engine that will hold up to boost very well, which IMO will be much more helpful for their plan of going upmarket.

BMW isn't perfect, but you gotta give it to them that they are thriving with their X12345678 and they are pleasing the car people crowd well enough. Mazda isn't exactly thriving and as a result, can't come out with anything other than Miata that catches the enthusiasts' attention.

They tend to make more engines, so they are bound to make more mistakes as well. Just compare the number of BMW engines to Mazda's engines from a given time period. BMW and Honda's missteps happened when they first started turbocharging their engines... which Mazda also screwed up when they made the 2.3T MZR.

inviscid

Even Porsche needed the Cayenne to keep making 911s. So too must Mazda turn to the industry cash cows as un-sexy as they may be.

Bummer that the large RWD platform won't extend to the Mazda6 in the near term. However, it does give me hope for keeping the Miata in the lineup for the future (as it won't be the oddball RWD architecture in a sea of FWD platforms) as well as future RWD sports cars in general.

The auto industry is going through major changes and the decisions made today will make or break legacy auto over the next decade. A niche player like Mazda needs all the cash it can get.

kevink0000

For it's intended use, it is a great engine, period, without qualification. I wasn't clear. There are millions still on the road, lots with indifferent maintenance at best. Comparing to a I6 is not valid. It is a good engine that is much better than it needs to be for the vehicles it powers.

All manufacturer's FI engines have more issues than NA. All of them. So to say the 2.3 T is S*****, is not accurate. Same for the Renesis. Not a mass market engine to be sure, but the best street Rotary, as I have said. Also, lots of engines equipped with what I call "high dynamic range" (clunky but that's all I can think of) cam timing actuation have keyless cranks, and require tools to time. It's common, and its not that big of a deal.

BMW and others have had issues on their NA engines, lots of them, from today, back 25+ years. Like I said, I have owned and seen enough, where BMW gets the interesting tech stuff right but misses on silly stuff, that ultimately causes problems. Raw numbers are immaterial. You can see where the emphasis/engineering was, and the money/time was spent. Mazda executes better in my opinion. But, BMW has outstanding designs, and they still have the enthusiast market, as you indicated.

Mazda has an identity crisis, to be sure. Totally agree. They definitely need to sell more cars to the masses so maybe we see a great upmarket rear drive platform, or, dare I say it, a 16X engined car. I'm still hoping...

The guy in that video was a lightweight. Total. Lightweight. I watched the whole thing. Please don't send videos from him if you want to make a point.


But back to what I was responding to, neither the MZR or Renesis are S****** engines. Not by a long shot.

UnknownJinX

I am curious what you would consider a bad engine, then. One can debate that N54 is a bad engine, but it has excellent power potential. Anything has a silver lining to it if you look hard enough, but at some point, you just have gotta admit that, yeah, they have issues.

I am sure there are other engines that are keyless, but putting that on a family car is a bit of an odd choice. If you are talking about VVT, it wasn't anything new back then, either. Even Mazda realized this and added a crank key to the SkyActiv engines, which have a more dynamic VVT system than MZR.

And lightweight? The dude owns a reputable used part shop, and also owns a small fleet of older BMWs(he made a video talking about them if you can put down your prejudice for a sec), let alone a bunch of other project cars. He also tears down a lot of other engines, some much more complex and/or gross than that MZR(that MB diesel V6 with a bucket worth of sludge being debatably the worst) and they get smack as well if they have design flaws(FYI he makes fun of Chrysler valve seats and GM DOD all the time). He is especially harsh on the 2.3T MZR because he is a Mazda guy as well; it hurts even more to people that care about a brand. Don't rush to prejudice when he is being mean to MZR; it's just that everyone gets crap on his channel if it's a bad engine.

Either way, the past is in the past. As long as they learned from it, that's what matters. If you want to say how great SkyActiv-G is for what they are designed for, I don't think there are many valid points that can be used against that. They just need to now make engines fit for their new identity, that's really all.

kevink0000

Bad engines?

Off the top of my head:


Recent ones

BMW N12- N14, (and probably the PSA equivalent in Europe.)
FORD 6.0 and 6.4 diesel
Ford V6 3.5 with water pump chain driven mounted backwards
K/H Theta and Theta 2
Maybe the BMW 10 and 8 cyl M engines with rod bearing issues. (I will probably buy one though).
Some GM stuff I can't think of at the moment.

More if I think about it for awhile, especially engines in the more distant past.


Yes, that guy is a lightweight. I have no prejudice, don't make those assumptions please. I find that annoying in your posts, it comes out a lot when you and I are in discussion. I looked at the substance of what he presented. In the first 3-4 minutes I heard enough, but I watched all the way through and it did not get better. I may or may not watch another of his videos, but he did not impress me in this one. Maybe put one up that you feel is his best effort and I'll check it out. It sounds like you appreciate what he does, I will be willing to watch another and see if my view changes if you do that.

Like I said lots of engines are keyless. Toyota, BMW, Mini, etc. Different uses, family cars, performance, etc.

UnknownJinX

Eh the S65 at least has a sweet exhaust note, much better than S55. I think usually if it's a family/economy engine with big reliability issues then that's a bad engine. The definition will vary person by person. I think N54 is bad, have a buddy who had an E90 3-Series with a thick stack of repair bills, but I understand that they do have good power potential.

And I mean, you watched one video of him bashing the 2.3T MZR(which you think is fine) and came to the conclusion so naturally I think you would be a bit biased. Explain what you mean by lightweight. Too cheeky? Can't handle much? Do keep in mind that these videos have to keep your average guy engaged, so the cheekiness and humour are nice to have and it won't get too technical. Like I said, everyone gets smack for terrible designs. I dunno which one exactly to recommend you, but if you don't like his teardown videos, he does do other things here and there like restoration and getting wrecked vehicles running so he knows if the engine is still any good for sale. Again, I like his channel, one of the few I actually subscribe to so I can get his weekly teardown video, but of course, not everyone has to like that style.

And while I realize that there are of course other engines that use this design, using it as an out is like trying to excuse yourself out of a speeding ticket because other people are doing it. That's not gonna hold up in the court. I did some reading and the main advantages are from cost and manufacturing standpoints. There are also kits out there that add a crank key to the MZR/Ecoboost I4 engines because supposedly, the friction washers can start slipping above a certain power. I am sure that other engines probably get smacked for that if they are designed that way; it's not just a few people that complain, I would think a lot of mechanics and DIYers won't understand the design. Anyway, SkyActiv fixes that issue. All good there.

kevink0000

I feel a bad engine design is one where the failure rate is very high, and is not permanently correctable in the field. Or, if there are so many missteps in the design and manufacture, its not really worth trying to fix all the problems. Most of my emphasis in on longevity, making more power is secondary, but I also appreciate an engine design that has large margin for power increase.

I believe the N54, and more than a few more BMW I6 engines don't use a key. Some Toyota and Lexus V8s don't. Again, its not that big of a deal. The reading material you found was misguided or incomplete, but great that you read up on it. It is not due to cost. The key should not prevent slippage due to torque, the bolt and whatever fixture is used do that, primarily. The key is a last resort to keep things aligned, and for initial alignment. Keys are generally softer than crank metal and designed to shear under high torque to protect the crank. I have pulled a few that have sheared. It depends on the engine design ,vibration, harmonics, stress risers, crank material, service rpm, and a bunch of other things I don't know about as to weather one is used. It is not only cost or manufacturing ease.

The guy on that channel doesn't know what he doesn't know, that's why I deem him a lightweight. He made many statements that show he has a narrow range of understanding and experience. It was not his tone or demeanor at all, honestly I really don't care about that.

UnknownJinX

I admit that I focused a bit too much on the serviceability part. If you have the right tools and some experience, I have seen people do it just fine, and at least on the NA MZR engines, you probably don't really need to ever touch anything timing-related, ever. And your knowledge is always appreciated.

And yep, Eric, at least in his more recent videos, will start up saying that he doesn't know an engine if he is tearing down something unfamiliar and he says he is open to suggestions and criticism at the end of his teardown videos. I would imagine he views things essentially from what he sees at his work, and would lean a lot closer to how mechanics see things rather than how engineers see things.

Running a business + having multiple project cars + making weekly YouTube videos + taking care of a family will leave anyone little time to dive super deep into one particular engine family.

Another thing to note, remember he is doing these videos as a part of his business, and he has at least some idea on what the market is generally like for the engines he is familiar with. Now there are of course people buying parts because they screwed up their engines during the modding process, but I would think there are also people who just need good used parts for standard rebuilds. He says the 2.3T parts are worth some money and they get sold pretty quickly, so I would think there are some parts that can get chewed up easily.

UnknownJinX

Back to the CX-60:

One thing I just realized, while this car has some decent power with the electric motor, what happens when the battery runs out? With an NA 2.5 alone dragging a car of this size around, that's not gonna be very premium-like.

Maybe someone with better knowledge and experience on PHEV can help me understand this better.

inviscid

Typically PHEV's have a certain number of miles they can run on the battery alone ('EV only range'). Once that goes down to zero, the system switches over to a hybrid mode only mode until it gets charged back up, via plug in or regen braking or what have you. Even if the 'EV only' range is depleted, the battery still maintains some baseline level of charge to ensure the driver always has the full 300+ combined HP. You'll never have the ICE lugging everything on its own.

With a baseline of ~40 miles on EV only, it's pretty brilliant solution for those who make frequent short hops and can top off at home or at work. All the benefits of zero emissions in the day to day, while none of the range anxiety for long hauls. Of course it comes with additional complexity + weight + things that can go wrong.

Would love to see an RX implementation in a similar setup, rather than simply relegating the rotary to battery regenerating duties.

kevink0000

Yikes, I didn't realize how far I took this thread off topic. Sorry about that! I think Mazda will bring the I6 to market, for one reason: They have to. Like Jinx and others have posted here, the engine choice they have now is not enough to do a true lux, or semi lux platform. They seem committed to that movement upmarket.

They are almost doing what Iacocca did with Chrysler. Having one powertrain and putting it in many packages, and it makes sense that an I6 is the next design, since it will be stout enough to power larger lux vehicles successfully, while keeping the 4 for lesser designs.

My Dad owned a K car in 1985 that I drove a lot, and it actually wasn't bad for the time. That, and GuvBucks, saved Chrysler. For a time...

Ol' Lee ( he was great as the spokesman/frontman for the company) would come on TV and say, "If you can find a better-built car, buy it." Man, how times have changed.

smokatoke

So basically the RX-9 dream is dead since it was sharing the same platform

kevink0000

Maybe, maybe not. The sporadic sightings of RX8 test mules indicates to me that rotary development has not ceased. The world of sedans is shrinking, so there are cross-currents to Mazda's announcement that may or may not come into play for a future rotary. That's my hope, anyway.

UnknownJinX

I really doubt if anything will come to fruition or not, outside of the shoebox range extender.

The problem is that everything nowadays needs a certain level of economy of scale, and unfortunately, rotary engines don't offer that. That's unless Mazda stuff rotaries into CX SUVs, then there may be a business case, but given the poor reliability legacy RX-8 left behind, fair or unfair it may be, Mazda won't do anything like that.

Sure, you see GM or Toyota doing crazy passion projects for fun like C8 Corvette Z06, Cadillac Black Wing with manual trans options, Yaris GR and LFA(in the past) with no economy of scale to speak of, but those companies have the money to burn. Mazda doesn't.