Mazda 3 2.2 150bhp

GusGus

I was looking at one of these today . Has anyone got one? I'm just wondering what the fuel economy is like. I currently drive a 1.8 petrol saloon and it's lousy. Does anyone know if my insurance will increase due to new car and engine ? Any other comments on the car ?

jimgoose

The 2.2 is a turbodiesel, isn't it? Good bitta kit them, and I'd imagine they'd be quite decent on fuel. Hard to say about the insurance - give them a bell, you might just be pleasantly surprised.

Nonoperational

Great looking car in my opinion.

Old diesel

They are reportedly on the expensive side for their sector of the market the bigger 6 is the same - forget the exact figures.

So id be pricing up some of the opposition cars tbh

R.O.R

No idea on fuel consumption, but we've had a demo for the past couple of weeks, and it's good fun to drive.

Struggles to get the power down in the wet, but there's plenty of go once it bites.

Only done short, local journeys, but I'd seriously consider one if I was in the market for something that size.

About the only car in it's segment with a decent engine option, unless going for the Sports model.

bazz26

Didn't they drop the 1.6d PSA unit from this model?

R.O.R

bazz26 wrote: »

Didn't they drop the 1.6d PSA unit from this model?

Currently, it only has the very good 2.2 150ps engine, that so far (touch wood) hasn't caused any issues in the early new model 6's

ianobrien

Drove a demo recently. Nice and "light" to drive. It felt very surefooted but not heavy and lethargic when it came to changing direction. Dash was a bit higgildy-piggildy and a bit too black but well equipped. I don't like the seats as I couldn't get the driving position spot on for me.

GusGus

Is there any other car you'd consider in the price point? I really wanted a 6 but 3 with a bit of spec is fine. Can't decide between sedan or hatch either .

MuppetCheck

Seat Leon FR? Similar size, price and spec. Can be had with a slightly more powerful 184PS version as well as the 150. Doesn't look as nice as the 3 though.

JohnBoy26

AFAIK it has the same skyactiv engine as the cx5, which reportedly suffers from the same diesel in sump issues that have plagued previous Mazda diesel engines.

Lovely looking cars though.

ba_barabus

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

AFAIK it has the same skyactiv engine as the cx5, which reportedly suffers from the same diesel in sump issues that have plagued previous Mazda diesel engines.

Lovely looking cars though.

I haven't heard of the new 2.2 giving any such trouble in the CX5 and I've been researching them heavily for family at the minute. The only one I came across was in Oz and it turned out to be badly calibrated dipsticks.

JohnBoy26

ba_barabus wrote: »

I haven't heard of the new 2.2 giving any such trouble in the CX5 and I've been researching them heavily for family at the minute. The only one I came across was in Oz and it turned out to be badly calibrated dipsticks.

Apparently some in the UK have had issues with rising oil levels on these engines which appears to be more than just down to a badly calibrated dispstick.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

ba_barabus

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

Apparently some in the UK have had issues with rising oil levels on these engines which appears to be more than just down to a badly calibrated dispstick.

There was a recall issued in Oz for the dipsticks. As said I researched a lot but found nothing concrete regarding the oil levels rising.

JohnBoy26

ba_barabus wrote: »

There was a recall issued in Oz for the dipsticks. As said I researched a lot but found nothing concrete regarding the oil levels rising.

Not exactly concrete I know but given Mazda's efforts in the CR diesel department over the past ten years I wouldn't be one bit surprised if this engine also turned out to be the same.

http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=102168

MayoSalmon

Would ya be interested in an MPS?

No Pants

MayoSalmon wrote: »

Would ya be interested in an MPS?

If he's unhappy with the fuel consumption on a 1.8, he'll have a fit when the sees what the MPS does.

Old diesel

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

Apparently some in the UK have had issues with rising oil levels on these engines which appears to be more than just down to a badly calibrated dispstick.

Auto express mentioned it in their used car buyers guide for the CX 5 a couple of weeks ago - I just assumed someone had badly researched it - ie going on the fact that pre Skyactive models had this issue.

I wonder how common the reported issue is with skyactive - ie is Skyactive less prone to having the issue - albeit it still happens

Old diesel

Found this

http://www.dieselcarmagazine.co.uk/features/doctor/cx-5-updates/

Apparently - they've released a software update as well to "address the DPF regeneration issues"

Given the fact they've had this issue - wouldn't you think Mazda would have checked, double checked, fixed, double checked again this issue BEFORE releasing the cars the market.

Still don't know how common this is though

Btw above link also mentions an issue with a sensor failing????

MuppetCheck

Jesus, I can't comprehend how they've messed up the new engine given the importance of that market to the balance sheet.

Old diesel

MuppetCheck wrote: »

Jesus, I can't comprehend how they've messed up the new engine given the importance of that market to the balance sheet.

Stop the lights - Old diesel in a lets call for a balanced look rather then get the boot in at Mazda diesel reliability statement :D:D - Tea 1000 would spill his tea with the shock

Yes some have had issues - from reading it it appeared the worst affected were early ones.

It seems to be a lot of AUSTRALIAN spec cars that are reporting the issues - did Oz get the CX 5 before Europe????.

The buyers guide I mentioned earlier - STILL RECKONED the CX 5 was a very reliable car - they noted the issue as something that had cropped up - and thus watch out for but doubt they would say it was very reliable if it was happening left right and centre.

What id like to know is what UK forums are saying about it because - ba_barabus says hes done a lot of research and not found much evidence - and IF it were me - id be inclined to look towards Uk forums for info rather then US or Oz forums.

In relation to the link I published earlier today - I think the guy in the magazine alluded to the fact that the owner was in subsequent contact to say the car wasn't doing the raising oil thing anymore (ie it was fixed???).

I also find the fact that ROR notes that early versions of the new 6 have been trouble free is interesting.

Mind you I am indulging in a big of wishful thinking with the above I think - clutching at straws you might call it :eek:

In addition - there may will be lots of Skyactive diesels out there that are giving no issue with raising oil issues or anything else for that matter - we don't get to hear about those if they are out there - because their owners will just consider - RIGHTLY - that the cars are doing no more then what they expected. You will always hear of the bothersome ones.

Would be interested to know of actual owner experiences here in Ireland - friends/family etc

JohnBoy26

The new Mazda 6 is only out a very short period of time so I wouldn't read too much into it's reliability yet. The 2.2 skyactiv that's fitted to it though is suppose to be the same unit fitted to the CX5 for which there are reports of oil rise issues, a problem that has been prevalent in previous generations of Mazda's CR diesel units.

You'd think that they must have fixed what is a well know problem at this stage but then again Mazdas have also been plaqued with rust problems for many years with even relatively new cars developing rust, this is despite many complaints in the U.S and Canada. Poor rust protection effected cars right up to the last generation of Mazda's. Obviously it is still unclear yet weather the new models are any better in this regard.

Old diesel

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

The new Mazda 6 is only out a very short period of time so I wouldn't read too much into it's reliability yet. The 2.2 skyactiv that's fitted to it though is suppose to be the same unit fitted to the CX5 for which there are reports of oil rise issues, a problem that has been prevalent in previous generations of Mazda's CR diesel units.

You'd think that they must have fixed what is a well know problem at this stage but then again Mazdas have also been plaqued with rust problems for many years with even relatively new cars developing rust, this is despite many complaints in the U.S and Canada. Poor rust protection effected cars right up to the last generation of Mazda's. Obviously it is still unclear yet weather the new models are any better in this regard.

All good points - but given the internets ability to deliver only the horror stories - I wonder just what is the true reality of Skyactive reliability.

there is no doubt that older Mazda diesels were a bit of a disaster - and yes - youd actually think that having had the issue before - top of the to do list with Skyactive would be - make sure to bloody design the things so the DPF design wont cause raising oil levels.

I think someone in Mazda is trying to be FAR TOO CLEVER with this new technology rather then simply getting it right for the customer

MuppetCheck

Where is Tea actually? Haven't seen him posting in a while. Or Anan1 come to think of it.

Ardennes1944

I thought Anan1 closed his account

mailforkev

My old fella has 132 new model 6 with that engine. So he has it just over a year at this stage and no problems at all, he has nothing but good things to say about the car in general.

Zubeneschamali

Ardennes1944 wrote: »

I thought Anan1 closed his account

A quick search says it's not closed, but no posts since March.

No Pants

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

Mazdas have also been plaqued with rust problems for many years with even relatively new cars developing rust, this is despite many complaints in the U.S and Canada. Poor rust protection effected cars right up to the last generation of Mazda's. Obviously it is still unclear yet weather the new models are any better in this regard.

How old are we talking? I've recently got rid of a 03 Mazda 6 1.8 that didn't have any rust issues. My Da had a Mazda 626 from the late 90s that he put over 250,000 miles on, with no rust issues. I've a 08 Mazda 3 now and he has a 06 MX-5. No rust anywhere on mine that I can see, although I haven't checked under it since March.

Zubeneschamali

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

The 2.2 skyactiv that's fitted to it though is suppose to be the same unit fitted to the CX5 for which there are reports of oil rise issues

and the reliability issue with the old 6 went: DPF issue (no visible effect), "oil level rise" (ie - fuel into the sump), warning light (if you were lucky). The car can go for quite some time with diesel in the sump, but lubrication is affected, and eventually oil pump or engine bearings will go.

From browsing HonestJohn, it may be that some of the 2.2's problems were caused by attempts to fix the 2.0's issues, by triggering DPF regeneration too often, and a software fix has mitigated that.

But the fact that the DPF still allows fuel into the sump at all, under any circumstances, means I wouldn't touch it with a bargepole.

Old diesel

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

and the reliability issue with the old 6 went: DPF issue (no visible effect), "oil level rise" (ie - fuel into the sump), warning light (if you were lucky). The car can go for quite some time with diesel in the sump, but lubrication is affected, and eventually oil pump or engine bearings will go.

From browsing HonestJohn, it may be that some of the 2.2's problems were caused by attempts to fix the 2.0's issues, by triggering DPF regeneration too often, and a software fix has mitigated that.

But the fact that the DPF still allows fuel into the sump at all, under any circumstances, means I wouldn't touch it with a bargepole.

My understanding was that the old 2.2 still could have the issue - but it was less likely to happen then on the 2.0.

Is Mazda the only maker to use such a flawed regen process for their diesel engines.

Because if they are - the long term solution for them - is simple - stop trying to be clever by being different - recognise that theres a reason that other manufacturers don't use the same set up - and go with a set up that doesn't cause the same issues.

Ive heard of 2.7 diesel Jaguars having similar issues - but ive not heard of it on ANY OTHER MAKE.

Think theres a lesson in that last sentence for Mazda - other makes don't have the same issue - therefore Mazdas shouldn't either.

Its a shame really - its a brand new engine - and for all we know it could be a fabulous engine if it weren't for this issue.

I think though - we do need to get a better picture on whats actually happening with Skyactive on the ground - you mention Honest John for example - but under his current Mazda 6 review he mentions the Aussie situation with the CX 5 - and fears of oil levels raising - and says that this proved to be down to the dipstick and thus fears unfounded.

Im a bit sceptical of that however - but i think the key question is this - bearing in mind the CX 5 was the first car to use this engine - have we heard of this issue on the 3 or the 6 at all????

MuppetCheck

There were also timing chain problems on the 2.2s that weren't serviced by the book (for the most part).

Old diesel

would it really be that hard for Mazda to change the DPF on Skyactive engines to eliminate the raising oil levels issue once and for all.

Won't be possible to retrofit to existing cars - but at least if they fixed the DPF once and for all on new cars coming off the production line - they could move on from the issue once and for all.

Both Renault with the Laguna - and Scania with the 4 series range of trucks - have both publically admitted that mistakes WERE made with Laguna II - and with the 4 series trucks. They both did this at the launch of replacement models.

So time for Mazda to get Skyactive Mk 2 with PROPER DPF to development and to market

Old diesel

Just on clarification - the last post ASSUMES that they haven't addressed the early CX 5 reported issues on the 3 or the 6 versions - i think given their history - assuming they HAVEN'T fixed the issue - is a reasonable assumption - until we start seeing evidence of the 3 or 6 NOT HAVING the issue.

Outsourcing the DPF development to another manufacturer - especially as part of a joint venture would be no shame at all - the shame is in consistently NOT addressing the issue.

Old diesel

Im disappointed that this issue is popping up again for Mazda on Skyactive - hopefully it may be just confined to early CX 5s - but as an enthusiast it bothers me that Mazda are POTENTIALLY dropping the ball like this.

Their new products in the 6 and 3 seem to be cars with LOTS OF potential - and i think the industry NEEDS Mazda on full form delivering products that work.

If Skyactive was to prove reliable long term - it would be a great addition to the market - and the industry - we need something more then just - KIA and Hyundai driving the pace with - nice enough stuff - but nothing to move the game on.

Not a happy car enthusiast right now

JohnBoy26

No Pants wrote: »

How old are we talking? I've recently got rid of a 03 Mazda 6 1.8 that didn't have any rust issues. My Da had a Mazda 626 from the late 90s that he put over 250,000 miles on, with no rust issues. I've a 08 Mazda 3 now and he has a 06 MX-5. No rust anywhere on mine that I can see, although I haven't checked under it since March.

Way back to the late 90's, previous Mazda's to this had a tendency to rust too but were more resistant than later cars for some reason. The 626 from the late 90's along with the 323 (and all Mazda's really) had very poor rust protection and they rusted badly underneath with some rusting on the sills and arches too. It was the same story with the later generations of Mazda's including the 6.

Often you won't see it on the outer body with most of the rust lurking on the chassis underneath. Many 6's though develop rusty arches too. I've yet to see a 4-5 year old 6 with out some degree of rust underneath. Other cars of the same age seem to be able to resist rust far far better.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

Old diesel

Patww79 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I heard the one about the weld too - but the way I heard was that it wasn't the weld - it was the "anti rust treatment" or paint or something around the weld area.

What mileage did yours have on it when it went bang???

Tea 1000

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

Apparently some in the UK have had issues with rising oil levels on these engines which appears to be more than just down to a badly calibrated dispstick.

None of those reported are the new Skyactiv units so far as I can see.

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

Not exactly concrete I know but given Mazda's efforts in the CR diesel department over the past ten years I wouldn't be one bit surprised if this engine also turned out to be the same.

http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=102168

CX5 came out without the Skyactiv engine, so I'd say that might be the older unit.

Old diesel wrote: »

Stop the lights - Old diesel in a lets call for a balanced look rather then get the boot in at Mazda diesel reliability statement :D:D - Tea 1000 would spill his tea with the shock

Yes some have had issues - from reading it it appeared the worst affected were early ones.

It seems to be a lot of AUSTRALIAN spec cars that are reporting the issues - did Oz get the CX 5 before Europe????.

The buyers guide I mentioned earlier - STILL RECKONED the CX 5 was a very reliable car - they noted the issue as something that had cropped up - and thus watch out for but doubt they would say it was very reliable if it was happening left right and centre.

What id like to know is what UK forums are saying about it because - ba_barabus says hes done a lot of research and not found much evidence - and IF it were me - id be inclined to look towards Uk forums for info rather then US or Oz forums.

In relation to the link I published earlier today - I think the guy in the magazine alluded to the fact that the owner was in subsequent contact to say the car wasn't doing the raising oil thing anymore (ie it was fixed???).

I also find the fact that ROR notes that early versions of the new 6 have been trouble free is interesting.

Mind you I am indulging in a big of wishful thinking with the above I think - clutching at straws you might call it :eek:

In addition - there may will be lots of Skyactive diesels out there that are giving no issue with raising oil issues or anything else for that matter - we don't get to hear about those if they are out there - because their owners will just consider - RIGHTLY - that the cars are doing no more then what they expected. You will always hear of the bothersome ones.

Would be interested to know of actual owner experiences here in Ireland - friends/family etc

My tea is well and truly spilt!
The number of issues on the older 2.2 unit were fairly few. The previous 2 litre was a hit and miss engine for sure. I'd suspect that the CX5 with the issue on Honest John might be an older unit.
In any case, I wouldn't worry about it. The new 3 is probably the nicest car in it's class to look at and drive. And a decent bit of poke too.
Had a Leon rental earlier in the year for a couple of weeks and while it's a nice car, it was far too crashy over rough roads with the typical VAG feck-all-feedback from the steering or chassis. Drove a previous model 3 immediately afterwards, and apart from the coarse by newer standards PSA engine and too little in the way of good sound insulation, the chassis was leaps and bounds ahead of the Leon, it was much nicer to drive.
Pity for the Leon, they're a nice car alright. Interior is reasonably good in them, which couldn't be said about the previous one.

Old diesel

So your saying Tea 1000 that early CX 5 diesels WEREN'T skyactive????

Genuinely didn't realise that

Tea 1000

Old diesel wrote: »

So your saying Tea 1000 that early CX 5 diesels WEREN'T skyactive????

Genuinely didn't realise that

I don't think they were. I'll need to check though, could be wrong.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

JohnBoy26

Tea 1000 wrote: »

None of those reported are the new Skyactiv units so far as I can see.

CX5 came out without the Skyactiv engine, so I'd say that might be the older unit.


My tea is well and truly spilt!
The number of issues on the older 2.2 unit were fairly few. The previous 2 litre was a hit and miss engine for sure. I'd suspect that the CX5 with the issue on Honest John might be an older unit.
In any case, I wouldn't worry about it. The new 3 is probably the nicest car in it's class to look at and drive. And a decent bit of poke too.
Had a Leon rental earlier in the year for a couple of weeks and while it's a nice car, it was far too crashy over rough roads with the typical VAG feck-all-feedback from the steering or chassis. Drove a previous model 3 immediately afterwards, and apart from the coarse by newer standards PSA engine and too little in the way of good sound insulation, the chassis was leaps and bounds ahead of the Leon, it was much nicer to drive.
Pity for the Leon, they're a nice car alright. Interior is reasonably good in them, which couldn't be said about the previous one.

Incorrect, The cx5 was built on the sky active platform and came with skyactiv engines from the beginning.
http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/reviews/mazda/cx-5/estate/

Also the old 2.2 was just as bad as the previous 2.0 as far as issues are concerned and that was far from "hit and miss", it was an outright disaster of an engine.

Your also being very harsh on the Leon. The new Leon and golf are both very quiet and refined and are defiantly better cars on the road than the old Mazda 3 and both are more refined than the new Mazda 3 too. Id wager that they will age better than the 3 also.

The 3 is the sharper handling car though but driving dynamics isn't the most important thing to most people buying a car in this sector.

JohnBoy26

Patww79 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I've seen plenty of rusty petrol 6s too. Imo it's just as much down to poor quality metal as it is down to poor rust protection.

Old diesel

Patww79 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Okay no worries - so the faulty injector seals caused diesel in the sump.

I assumed when you said diesel in the sump that it was DPF

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

Tea 1000

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

Also the old 2.2 was just as bad as the previous 2.0 as far as issues are concerned and that was far from "hit and miss", it was an outright disaster of an engine.

Incorrect. The 2.2 was nowhere near as bad as the 2 litre.

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

Your also being very harsh on the Leon. The new Leon and golf are both very quiet and refined and are defiantly better cars on the road than the old Mazda 3 and both are more refined than the new Mazda 3 too. Id wager that they will age better than the 3 also.

The 3 is the sharper handling car though but driving dynamics isn't the most important thing to most people buying a car in this sector.

I'm not being very harsh on the Leon. I'm stating a fact that most buyers are ignorant to because if you stuff the doors with fluff to deaden the sound they're fooled into thinking they own a better car. A better car constitutes better design and build quality in my books. You're always overly hard on Mazda's, I'd say VAG cars are just as poorly built. Look at the history of engines in each, VAG have a longer list of shít engines.
Better cars on the road is down to one thing. How it copes with the road itself. The old Mazda 3 copes better than the new Leon. That's a fact, and if you prefer fluff in the doors than fair play to you.
The old 3 didn't age fantastically, but the Golf is a bland design and the Leon isn't a patch on the previous one when that came out. The new 3 is leagues ahead in design stakes.
But I suppose there's no changing a VAG head from their opinions!

HandsomeDan

Tea 1000 wrote: »

I'm stating a fact that most buyers are ignorant to because if you stuff the doors with fluff to deaden the sound they're fooled into thinking they own a better car.

A lot more to marking a car refined than 'stuffing a door with fluff'.

Everything from frame torsional rigidity to the type of paint used on the body contributes.

It's a huge area and is important to buyers.

Tea 1000

HandsomeDan wrote: »

A lot more to marking a car refined than 'stuffing a door with fluff'.

Everything from frame torsional rigidity to the type of paint used on the body contributes.

It's a huge area and is important to buyers.

The difference in torsinal rigidity between cars these days won't be noticed by 99.9% of buyers and owners. And no one does cheap paint like the Germans these days. VW Passat paint is stupidly thin these days and dulls far too quickly. And compare Lexus paint quality beside BMW and the difference is night and day.
People just don't know the difference. Why do you think the Mk 4 Golf sold so well? Horrible petrol engines, terrible chassis, wooly steering, but good quality plastic interior and plenty of door and enginebay fluff and everyone thought anyone who didn't have a Golf was a fool, and a Corolla was "just tin".

JohnBoy26

Tea 1000 wrote: »

Incorrect. The 2.2 was nowhere near as bad as the 2 litre.

It seems that they are, not only are there reports of oil rise issues but also of leaking injector seals causing sludge and engine failure, and they also reportedly stretch their timing chains.

Tea 1000 wrote: »

I'm not being very harsh on the Leon. I'm stating a fact that most buyers are ignorant to because if you stuff the doors with fluff to deaden the sound they're fooled into thinking they own a better car. A better car constitutes better design and build quality in my books. You're always overly hard on Mazda's, I'd say VAG cars are just as poorly built. Look at the history of engines in each, VAG have a longer list of shít engines.
Better cars on the road is down to one thing. How it copes with the road itself. The old Mazda 3 copes better than the new Leon. That's a fact, and if you prefer fluff in the doors than fair play to you.
The old 3 didn't age fantastically, but the Golf is a bland design and the Leon isn't a patch on the previous one when that came out. The new 3 is leagues ahead in design stakes.
But I suppose there's no changing a VAG head from their opinions!

I'm no "VAG head" but the Leon and golf for that matter are better cars than the old and new 3 imo. It's more than just "fluff" in the doors. From a refinement and comfort point of view they are better and I'd wager that they are better built too going on past examples. They can also be got with decent petrol engines and decent spec whereas with the 3 if you want a petrol you are left with only one option, a 1.5 na unit in an overpriced and underspecced car.


Now I'm not saying that vag is the holy grail of build quality because IMO they are not, years back Mazda made better cars than them but nowadays vag make some very good cars and are ahead of Mazda imo.

One positive with the mazdas is that, unlike their diesels, their petrol engines have been consistently reliable.

As for the design the new 3 is an extremely good looking car but the golf is also a good looking car even if the styling is more reserved but that could end up being a good thing further down the road.

The Leon I must say I'm not a great fan of its styling though.

JohnBoy26

Tea 1000 wrote: »

The difference in torsinal rigidity between cars these days won't be noticed by 99.9% of buyers and owners. And no one does cheap paint like the Germans these days. VW Passat paint is stupidly thin these days and dulls far too quickly. And compare Lexus paint quality beside BMW and the difference is night and day.
People just don't know the difference. Why do you think the Mk 4 Golf sold so well? Horrible petrol engines, terrible chassis, wooly steering, but good quality plastic interior and plenty of door and enginebay fluff and everyone thought anyone who didn't have a Golf was a fool, and a Corolla was "just tin".

The mk4 golf in 1.4 petrol form was a poor car imo. The engine was underpowered, soft, and imo the interior plastics were far from high quality, even if they did give the illusion of quality. They did come with a decent diesel engine however, superb rust protection, and the design though understated at the time compared to the much hyped focus, has aged very well imo.

The corolla of the time was of course a better built car though. Back then I think many jap cars were better made products compared to their European rivals.