Mazda 6 Forums banner

21 - 40 of 47 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
526 Posts
Dated infotainment. Softest and thinnest paint that i've ever seen on any car. Lack of power below 3k rpm. Horrible, horrible stock dunlops that wore out on me with less than 20k miles. Rotor warping issues on 2015s and 2016s. Otherwise its a great car for the money.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
266 Posts
I don't get the lack of low end power comment that gets mentioned often, it's a NA 4 cylinder, what do you expect?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
133 Posts
I also find this SkyActive engine to have better low-end power than previous same-displacement engines.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
693 Posts
U guys have automatics, I would wager. In the manual (i.e. no torque converter to multiply torque when torque converter is at stall-speed) bottom-end torque deficiency is evident. Even though max torque is at 3250 rpm (quite low) it IS low at 2000... and it really comes alive at , oh, 2800. So it feels "cammy". Solution: a tune focusing on this (deficient, in my view) engine rpm regime.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
467 Posts
Discussion Starter #25
U guys have automatics, I would wager. In the manual (i.e. no torque converter to multiply torque when torque converter is at stall-speed) bottom-end torque deficiency is evident. Even though max torque is at 3250 rpm (quite low) it IS low at 2000... and it really comes alive at , oh, 2800. So it feels "cammy". Solution: a tune focusing on this (deficient, in my view) engine rpm regime.
I will be doing the OV Tune soon, I'm looking forward to increasing its low end torque and gaining a bit of hp to add to the 6's spunk!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
133 Posts
Certainly, it would have been great had N. America received the same compression ratio as the rest of the world. Would likely have had to run 89 AKI, though.

It’s not that I don’t understand a desire to have a large-displacement engine that delivers a lot more low-rpm power (isn’t it ironic how the American brands which delivered exactly that for so very long were supplanted by the imports who never have delivered that?). It’s that when I compare the 6 to other cars or older cars of the same displacement, I find the SkyActive engine very good.

Anyway, it’s in poor taste for me to argue with others’ likes or dislikes. Sorry.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
693 Posts
Not in poor taste. What I will say is that I had- or have two cars that I compare the 2.5 SkyActiv-G (for North America) with:

i) have a 1999 Toyota Camry 5MT. 2.2 litre engine. I think about 134 HP, and I forget the torque. A lot less top-end... but a wonderful bottom-end, combined with a taller first-gear and a pleasing ratio-difference with 2nd gear... so that it just drives nicely. Say what you will about Toyota "Appliances" - but I say that that engine, and that Aisin transaxle are a pleasant combination... that, undoubtedly, very, very few people in North American have owned or tried... 'cuz who buys a manual transmission Camry????

ii) don't laugh, now... but what I had for many, many years (because it treated me so well, and drove well, for what it was) was a 1987 Plymouth Reliant 2.5 3AT (the 1987 was the fuel injected - 2nd year of fuel injection - 7th model year iteration of largely an unchanged design car). That 2.5 was a 4.09" stroke 2.5... longstroke, for sure (but then, so are our 2.5 SkyActiv's... though not as long). The Chrysler 2.5 was a stroked 2.2, with balance shafts under the crankshaft (unlike the Mitsubishi 2.6 which had one balance shaft - low-down on the engine, and one up top). Chrysler did this to avert the patent matter with Mitsubishi (whereas, for instance, Porsche with their 2.5 944 and 3.0 968 (???) engines - DID have to pay patent rights to Mitsu).

Any ways, the Chrysler 2.5, though automatic - which is a point to add-to bottom end performance - was brilliant. Ran out of steam quick, but a briliant bottom-end.

So, I have higher expectations than perhaps some have, that the 2.5 litre engine - is, at least in European terms - a big engine.

Insightful comment re the Rest of the World - having gotten 14:1 compression, demanding higher octane fuel, but probably dealing with this (deficiency, in my mind) matter.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
693 Posts
Strange thing is that it is NOT a granny-gear in first. It SHOULD be more peaky- what with 4700 rpm torque-peak... but empirically, my impressions are my impressions. I should find out what the final drive gear is, and first gear ratio is....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
133 Posts
Hey! I had a 2.5 Mopar as well! Mine was in a Dodge Shadow with the A/T.

What I think is a significant (I think maybe the biggest) factor in the lack of low end power is simple perception. The 2.5 in my Shadow was a 100 hp engine, with 135 lb-ft of torque. My 6, despite being a heavier car, would handily walk away from it in any practical acceleration test with either transmission. I think gearing likely does have a significant impact, but I think the perception issue is that the low end power on those older cars was a higher proportion of the peak power than what we get today (the 2.5 in the Shadow might not actually be a higher proportion; I don't have the whole power curve on that engine. Your Camry example is definitely a higher proportion of the peak power, though).

IOW, the SkyActive-G engine has better low end power than those older engines, actually by quite a bit, but it then goes on to a much higher peak power than the old ones did. So we're left with the perception that our current cars have fairly little low end mostly (I believe) because our current cars then pull so much harder and farther than the old ones did.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
693 Posts
I'm getting the gearing info for the Camry versus the Mazda6... but eyeballing it, the Mazda6 is geared shorter in 1st than the Camry. I think what's happening here is that the electronic throttle on the Mazda6 is not linear in nature. The Camry throttle is cable operated by comparison... no manipulation of "the truth" so to speak. I suspect that Mazda Engineers wanted to imbue the 6 with fine and delicate throttle control at tip-in, and in the 6mt car that is a bit counter productive, versus in the 6AT car with torque multiplication. With throttle "mapping" the whole can be "linearized" to reduce this feel.

I've heard that "25% TMap" works well, with the caveat that the 25% be smoothly transitioned to zero as engine rpm / torque builds.

Orange Virus Tuning: WE NEED YOU!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
138 Posts
The head unit sucks balls.
The front calipers should have been at least dual piston.
Soul red is thin as heck.
I would have liked at least 200 HP.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
57 Posts
I find this thread interesting. I don’t own a 6 yet but think it’s the best midsize sedan for the money. From several test drives I’d say the head unit/camera system is terrible. However there is no perfect car in my opinion. I think the turbo engine is great and doesn’t really slouch at any speed or in any gear. I would definitely get Soul Red so the thin paint is sort of concerning, however on my last two vehicles Ice Silver Subaru had several chips in the front bumper (13,000 miles) and my blazing blue Toyota has several chips on it as well (32,000 miles and climbing) so is it really that much thinner?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
133 Posts
I have to admit I e noticed the thin bodywork because part of the front door panels vibrates visibly when they’re shut, unless I shut them consciously gently.

The paint does seem to have chipped and scratched quite easily, too. I notice the same on my Honda pickup, so that might be a general trend? Not sure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
I also find this SkyActive engine to have better low-end power than previous same-displacement engines.
Back in 2013 I was quite impressed with the combination of fuel economy and power however now had to move up to a turbo. There is a definite loss in fuel economy but the power feel is pretty good. I don't know if it's the best but it seems to keep me contented for now. Probably should have shopped around a little more but the car is good-looking but it does sacrifice on visibility. The A-pillars are huge and a rear quarters have massive blind spots probably due to the cropped windows and sport sedan styling.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Relates to Soul Red 2017 Grand Touring AT:
  • A-pillar visibility, both thickness and placement (due to windshield rake)
  • Fragility of paint
  • Fragility of interior materials
  • Low-end get-up-and-go, or lack thereof
  • Can't add another BT source mid-drive. To add another phone you must go <5mph
  • Clear coat on my wheels is flaking
  • Doors don't always lock on their own, usually do, but not always.
  • Brakes rotors warped at about 10k miles, here's to hoping new aftermarket ones don't warp that quick
  • Location for floor jack is a pain. I know not everyone works on their own cars anymore, but a pain for me.
The 3rd Gen 6 is a beautiful car with pretty good mpg and decent power (though I miss my '06 V6 Altima at times) but there are a few things I'd like to have Mazda address.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
467 Posts
Discussion Starter #37
The head unit sucks balls.
The front calipers should have been at least dual piston.
Soul red is thin as heck.
I would have liked at least 200 HP.

This actually is the best breakdown of the flaws of the 6 lol
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
693 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Relates to Soul Red 2017 Grand Touring AT:
  • A-pillar visibility, both thickness and placement (due to windshield take)
  • Fragility of paint
  • Fragility of interior materials
  • Low-end get-up-and-go, or lack thereof
  • Can't add another BT source mid-drive. To add another phone you must go <5mph
  • Clear coat on my wheels is flaking
  • Doors don't always lock on their own, usually do, but not always.
  • Brakes rotors warped at about 10k miles, here's to hoping new aftermarket ones don't warp that quick
  • Location for floor jack is a pain. I know not everyone works on their own cars anymore, but a pain for me.
The 3rd Gen 6 is a beautiful car with pretty good mpg and decent power (though I miss my '06 V6 Altima at times) but there are a few things I'd like to have Mazda address.
Forgot to add buttons on cruise control frequently, randomly get confused, as per http://www.carproblemzoo.com/mazda/mazda6/cruise-control-problems.php
 
21 - 40 of 47 Posts
Top