The perfect engine for today’s small sedans and crossovers?
#76
#77
@SW17LS , you literally said "take that engine (referring to the 1.8L V6 in the MX-3 that I provided the 0-60 time for) and put it in the CX-5 and I bet it does 10+ in the 0-60". Lol. Anyway, aside from that, I think many of us are in agreement that while it would be nice to have that refinement, it just doesn't make sense to throw resources into improving a small V6 when there are other options better suited for the job.
#78
And I was totally right. If the NA 4 cyl does 0-60 in the CX-5 in 8.6 or so, that engine in a CX-5 would be 10+ seconds to 60.
I think it’s a great thread, thanks for posting it @mmarshall
I think it’s a great thread, thanks for posting it @mmarshall
#79
And I was totally right. If the NA 4 cyl does 0-60 in the CX-5 in 8.6 or so, that engine in a CX-5 would be 10+ seconds to 60.
I think it’s a great thread, thanks for posting it @mmarshall
I think it’s a great thread, thanks for posting it @mmarshall
#80
#81
I sampled one or two MX-3s with the 1.8L V6, and found it lacking in low-end torque, but otherwise bringing big-car engine smoothness and refinement to the small inexpensive entry-level class, which usually had somewhat raucous in-line threes and fours. Back then, it seemed like only Toyota and Honda could produce a truly refined in-line four…Mazda certainly didn’t, but compensated for it with the small V6. It was rated at 129 HP at 6000 RPM and 157 ft-lbs of torque at 5000 RPM….wimpy figures by today’s standards (and why the low-RPM response was poor), although the advances in power plant engineering in the last 30 years would probably give much better power figures in that same block today.
Nothing beats the I-6 outside of a V12, but a good V6 is far more refined than any 4-cylnder.
* 2.5 liter version of the 3VZ-FE, the 3VZ is a much different engine vs the 2VZ they really shouldn't be in the same engine family. 1VZ-FE is a 2.0 liter version of the 2VZ-FE.
#82
Seems like you and I are the only ones on this forum that has driven this Mazda. Engine is buttery smooth and also messed with my head was not used to such a small displacement V6, felt great but also very unfamiliar. Why Mazda didn't go with at least 2 liters is beyond me. Some Toyota's came with a 2.0 liter V6 (see below) these models never made it to North America.
Nothing beats the I-6 outside of a V12, but a good V6 is far more refined than any 4-cylnder.
I have two of these, one mated to a 5-speed manual. This engine sings, effortlessly winds out to redline. There have been multiple 2.5 liter Toyota V6's, 2VZ-FE, 4VZ-FE*, 2MZ-FE, and of course the 4GR-FE. 4VZ and 2MZ didn't show up in North America.
* 2.5 liter version of the 3VZ-FE, the 3VZ is a much different engine vs the 2VZ they really shouldn't be in the same engine family. 1VZ-FE is a 2.0 liter version of the 2VZ-FE.
Nothing beats the I-6 outside of a V12, but a good V6 is far more refined than any 4-cylnder.
I have two of these, one mated to a 5-speed manual. This engine sings, effortlessly winds out to redline. There have been multiple 2.5 liter Toyota V6's, 2VZ-FE, 4VZ-FE*, 2MZ-FE, and of course the 4GR-FE. 4VZ and 2MZ didn't show up in North America.
* 2.5 liter version of the 3VZ-FE, the 3VZ is a much different engine vs the 2VZ they really shouldn't be in the same engine family. 1VZ-FE is a 2.0 liter version of the 2VZ-FE.
#83
Mazda can't even make a modern 3.3L turbo inline 6 with more than 300 HP, what chance would they have of making a naturally aspirated <2.0L naturally aspirated V6 with power anywhere near a standard 2 liter turbo 4 pot?
#84
But it's smooth as butter, right? That's will be my defense when Grandma passes me up in her Prius...
#86
#88
#89
I wonder how your average customer would react when Mazda tells them that their 6-cylinder turbo engine will be slotted under their hybrid 4-cylinder in price and performance. They'll definitely be swayed by the "smooth" salesman.
#90