Mazda 6 Forums banner

1 - 20 of 28 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
412 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
So I have an '03 6s Sport, and I love my baby to death.

I've just been amazed lately that every time I look at the newer models... they seem to not be getting better, more the opposite.

First it was the antenna. Personally, I thought the fact that the Mazda6 didn't have an external antenna was a selling point when I bought it, makes it look more sleek. I have never had a problem with the antenna built into the rear windshield. But for the newer models they now have an antenna sticking out of the middle of the back of the roof, which I think is downright dorky.


BUT, on to the point of this thread, the engine. My car is a 3.0L V6, 220HP. Looking at mazda's site, the new models are all 3.0L V6s, but they're only 215HP??


Why on earth would mazda be making newer engines with LESS horsepower? I just don't get it. Can anybody enlighten me as to why they are toning back on the engine's power? Gas mileage maybe?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,906 Posts
Its not really less, the way they rated HP just changed. People always thought 220HP was over-rated too.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,997 Posts
Its not really less, the way they rated HP just changed. People always thought 220HP was over-rated too.
[/b]
Not to those who broke their engine in properly (Not Mazda's way) and made in the 180s WHP stock which is in the acceptable 16% to 20% drivetrain loss rule of thumb.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,912 Posts
Don't forget, the exhaust system was redesigned for 06 as well, as well as other possible timing changes to bump up low end torque. Based upon the CP-E headers/midpipe discussions alot of these issues are designed to meet low emissions standards. With a few bolt on modifications the V6 is quite comparible to other V6's out there with a 3.0L displacement.

06:
http://forum.mazda6tech.com/about4209.html

03-05:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,997 Posts
first of all , If you think about it out cars lose 41 hp from crank to wheel hp. That is the most of all the v-6 in its class!!! ford sure knows how to cut back the power.
[/b]
Again, when you fail to break an engine in properly you will lose power as a result, but if you want to complain about misrepresentation of power output, I take it you were never a Mitsubishi owner. The 3000GT VR-4 lost 83.2 BHP in it's travel to all four wheels, a 26% drivetrain loss, highest ever recorded out of a modern performance vehicle.

We have stock MTX 6s dyno'ing as high as 183 FWHP and ATX 6s dyno'ing as high as 183 FWHP. We also have ATX 6s dyno'ing as little as 159 FWHP, this is the giant gap that is formed between those who broke their engine in properly and those who didn't.

EVERY car loses at least 16 to 18% in drivetrain loss from the engine dyno to a Dynojet or Mustang Dyno and obviously the larger the original number on the engine dyno, the larger the loss number is going to be on the DJ or MD.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,997 Posts
How were u supposed to do that fordman?
[/b]
Utilize the ENTIRE RPM range from mile 0, all the way up to the redline and use the ENTIRE range CONSTANTLY.

Some recommend breaking it in on a dyno, if you can afford about a dozen pulls or break it in on a track and then immediately after either, change the oil and filter and perform it again. With the dyno method, you can see the gradual build from the low end of what breaking your engine in softly (the manufacturer's way) gets you to what breaking your engine in properly will net you as those cylinder walls are being scored up and cleaned by the fast, sweeping pistons and as the piston rings FULLY seat. It is recommended to run a slightly thicker oil than factory recommends, so you won't get blow-by while the rings seat, but the trade-off there is you are losing the dealer's oil with the break-in detergents. You also MUST make sure you have proper crankcase ventillation, with the shoddy factory PCV valve going at any time, I recommend running a secondary, inline PCV valve between the factory one and the intake manifold, like I am running (Article on 6Tech). Without proper crankcase ventillation, it can affect piston ring sealing/seating.

If you don't do it on a dyno or a track, and break it in just on the street and highway, change your oil under the first 1,000 miles, I recommend between 500 and 800 miles. Then again at 3,000 miles, after that, change it at whatever recommended interval it says on the oil you are using (Off the shelf full synthetics, 5,000 to 7,500 miles).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
676 Posts
With a few bolt on modifications the V6 is quite comparible to other V6's out there with a 3.0L displacement.
[/b]
HA-HA, and then what happens when those engines have bolt ons? :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,757 Posts
Like Spidy said, the exhaust was redesigned. There may have been some electronic tweaks as well. Mazda claims the 06 to have improved drivability.

The proper way to break in a vehicle is frequently debated. Some say to drive the hell out of the engine. Mazda says to go easy on it but to still use the entire rev range. I did the latter- I went relatively easy on the engine up until 600 miles, but I sat there and revved the thing whenever stopped and continuously changed speed and gears on the highway. I never let the RPMs stay constant, even though I kept it below 5000rpm. My car dynos pretty high. I've beat the shit out of my engine since.

That's the one thing both camps agree on: whether you break the engine in by beating on it or by babying it, everyone agrees to vary your RPM constantly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,912 Posts
HA-HA, and then what happens when those engines have bolt ons? :p
[/b]
:headscrat: Huh? You know something the rest of us don't?

I haven't heard anything bad in regards to the CP-E intake and headers. The intake has been around for ages and they've sold a ton. The headers are still new so no feedback yet. But traditionally, headers have been one of the most basic stage 1 or 2 upgrades that are not error prone.

I've read people with NOS blowing their engines, but that isn't exactly a simple bolt on.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
676 Posts
:headscrat: Huh? You know something the rest of us don't?[/b]
We need bolt on's just to match the output of similiar displacement v6's. In other words, we are vastly underpowered compared to the competition.

I've learned that there's no point in modding the snot out of a car when you could have just used that money towards a car with a better engine that already has the output.

The AEM intake is where I'm stopping.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,217 Posts
We need bolt on's just to match the output of similiar displacement v6's. In other words, we are vastly underpowered compared to the competition.

I've learned that there's no point in modding the snot out of a car when you could have just used that money towards a car with a better engine that already has the output.

The AEM intake is where I'm stopping.
[/b]
The moral of this story is that we should all stop modding our cars and go buy Bugatti Veyrons.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,997 Posts
We need bolt on's just to match the output of similiar displacement v6's. In other words, we are vastly underpowered compared to the competition.

I've learned that there's no point in modding the snot out of a car when you could have just used that money towards a car with a better engine that already has the output.

The AEM intake is where I'm stopping.
[/b]
Similar displacement V6s in the competition...

Toyota Camry 3.0L V6
190 BHP / 197 lb-ft

Saab 9-3 2.8L TURBOCHARGED V6
250 BHP / 258 lb-ft

Honda Accord 3.0L
244 BHP / 211 lb-ft

Vastly underpowered? The rest of the "competition" is full of 3.5s and 3.8s, some of which net only as high as in the 190s with nearly a full liter more in displacement over our underpowered engine. A single naturally aspirated car beats peak output in our competition and you call it quits? :wtf:

You know more things matter than just RATED peak output, there is this thing called a powerband and there is also this thing of the manufacturer overrating their engines. In 2001, Honda rated the 3.0L at 200 BHP, it put out 159 FWHP with an intake in the hands of a manufacturer that knows how to properly break engines in for maximum potential. Again in 03, same company, same intake system, now the 244 BHP rated 3.0 and again a nice loss of actual power as it skirmishes just over 200 FWHP.

Those who broke their engine in properly and tossed on an intake made exactly what the 244 BHP Honda engine made. Now who is underpowered?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,912 Posts
Lets throw one more into the mix.

Toyota Solara 3.3L ( note, .3L more displacement)
225 BHP / 240 lbs/ft

Now lets see what it looks like in the real world at the wheels:

Solara 3.3L + Mafci : 181/171 *
6s + Mafci : 196.9/186 *

These are peaks too. Take at the look of the rate of TQ drop-off of the 3.3L engine after 4.86K RPM. Its extremely negatively sloped compared to the more tapered dropoff of the 3.0L Duratec.

Reference:
Toyota Solara dyno
http://www.cp-e.com/2018.html
Mazda6s dyno
http://www.cp-e.com/2001.html

* yes, dyno variances can cause a difference. but both were dyno'ed by CP-E which should reduce some variance. but even at a variance, there's no evidence that the 3.3L Solara engine is significantly overpowering the 3.0L Duratec. evidence would suggest the opposite.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
676 Posts
The moral of this story is that we should all stop modding our cars and go buy Bugatti Veyrons.
[/b]
Excuse me if I'm being sensible old fart. but I have better things to do with my money and time. If it wasn't for the fact this car was offered in a hatch form, I would never have bought it. I would have gladly have spent the extra $ upfront for something else if I knew beforehand the "uniqueness" of this car.

I've already "Been there, done that." and would like to add "pointlesss" to that list from my last car. I don't feel like jumping through hoops "fixing" things that are "wrong" on this car. Plus being in the shop for 5+ weeks within the first year of operation doesn't give me the warm and fuzzies that I should be dumping cash into this car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,769 Posts
Excuse me if I'm being sensible old fart. but I have better things to do with my money and time. If it wasn't for the fact this car was offered in a hatch form, I would never have bought it. I would have gladly have spent the extra $ upfront for something else if I knew beforehand the "uniqueness" of this car.

I've already "Been there, done that." and would like to add "pointlesss" to that list from my last car. I don't feel like jumping through hoops "fixing" things that are "wrong" on this car. Plus being in the shop for 5+ weeks within the first year of operation doesn't give me the warm and fuzzies that I should be dumping cash into this car.
[/b]
Well, 5+ weeks in the shop is either the shops fault, or the fact that you got lucky. Id utilize the lemon law or change shops. If it has to go there over and over, who knows what they are doing to it. "Knock on wood" mine has been flawless, and the only time its been to the shop is to get an oil change. Im sorry you dont like your car, and if its not making you happy you should trade it in or if its really a pain in the ass and keeps breaking down complain to your dealer to buy it back. Look into the lemon law. 5+ weeks is very exessive, but definately far from common.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
901 Posts
Ive had my car form coming up on a year and have I have had ZERO problems with this car. Its fun as hell to drive and has PLENTY of power. I have not driven this car lightly and have lightly modded it and I could not be happier. If your not happy with the car then go trade it in for something more "old fartsy".
 
1 - 20 of 28 Posts
About this Discussion
27 Replies
15 Participants
arch4life
Mazda 6 Forums
Mazda6club.com is a forum dedicated to the Mazda6 / Atenza. Come and discuss reliability, performance, modifications, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Top