If you want a Mazda, buy one with a petrol engine.
But be aware they are not a great driving engine since they have very little torque low down, you need to thrash them which is not a relaxing way to drive.
Also be aware that getting a test drive in a petrol is near impossible.
Our stupid local dealer told me that I did not need to test drive a petrol since the diesel and petrol used the same engine and drove exactly the same, just used different fuel. I just laughed at him and walked across to the Skoda dealer.
|
|
Not a fair comment skid pan, the current Mazda petrol range differs quite a bit and I would have no hesitation reccomending the Mazda 2 1.5 petrol in 89bhp form, it’s a nice drive
|
|
|
If you want a Mazda, buy one with a petrol engine.
But be aware they are not a great driving engine since they have very little torque low down, you need to thrash them which is not a relaxing way to drive.
Also be aware that getting a test drive in a petrol is near impossible.
Our stupid local dealer told me that I did not need to test drive a petrol since the diesel and petrol used the same engine and drove exactly the same, just used different fuel. I just laughed at him and walked across to the Skoda dealer.
Dealer quality seems to vary far more than at, say, Honda or Toyota so you probably got a not so good one - no excuse though. My local one was able to get me back to back test drives of a brand new CX-3 and 3 in 2ltr petrol form and the former in auto form as well, but you do need to book a few days in advance if you want one on a Saturday.
|
|
Don't assume a Honda petrol engine is going to be trouble free.
The 1.5 engine sold in the USA has a very poor reputation prone to petrol in the sump.
Over there its fitted into the CRV.
|
|
They've all had their mess ups in recent years but, in general terms, if you want a reliable car and in particular if you're buying used I'd still say Japanese is best.
With one exception. Mazda.
I'm sorry but they have had far too many design cock ups in recent years to put them in the same bracket as Toyota (who themselves are by no means perfect). Disasterous diesels, rusting models, calamitous rotary engines.....all combined with some appalling customer service and denial of issues.
Just look back 10 years on this very forum and find the hundreds of posts on terribly treated owners of the original Mazda 6. It's all there in black and white.
There is a very good reason the average 8 year old Mazda is worth about £2.50.
|
|
All i can comment on is my own dealings with Mazda CS, and i have found them top shop in every dealing I've had.
1/ BT issues with phone, new phone paid for £200.
2/ Delay in getting service plan paper work, service plan paid for , cost £299.
3/ Wifi hotspot connect problems phone related, 3 year cover paid for, i forget the cost but it was around £60.
4/ Reliability apart from phone issues =100% with 2015 model.
IMO having owned 8 jap cars from new they all appear to have slipped in reliability, and the styling off all of them apart from Mazda is dire. I keep looking at the competition trying to balance performance, space, value for money, residuals which i found exceptional when selling my 2013 cx-5, power and torque, towing capability, and still come back to the CX-5.
I will probably buy another, but not before test driving a 190 Tiguan, 184 Tucson etc, but neither of those give me 420nm of torque, or a torque converter auto with a excellent record for reliability. Unliike DSG autos.
|
Not a fair comment skid pan, the current Mazda petrol range differs quite a bit and I would have no hesitation reccomending the Mazda 2 1.5 petrol in 89bhp form, it’s a nice drive
They were current engines. The first I tried was in a 2015 3, the 120 PS 2 litre one. It was in a word dire. The 98 PS Nissan Notre we bought was way better. In truth tthe 80 PS Nissan Micra was better.
The next I tried was a 145 PS 2 litre in the 6, still poor but I wanted to try the 165 PS CX5 before comitting to a new car. That was when I got the stupid salesman.
I do not think Mazda have replaced those engines with new ones. The VAG TSi's are superior in every way.
|
|
"I wanted to try the 165 PS CX5 before comitting to a new car. That was when I got the stupid salesman."
I have the CX-5 with the 165 PS petrol engine. I have never tried the diesel alternative, as that was not even a possibility as far as I was concerned.
It's no ball of fire, but seems perfectly acceptable to me. I have a pretty light right foot, but motorway driving at around 60 mph in sixth gear gives me a reasonable poke if I want to overtake, so torque doesn't feel that bad.
What I like about it is its near silence, unless you rev it hard, and its smoothness. In fact, the whole car is great to drive. As for economy, I have managed in excess of 40 mpg (brim-to-brim measurement) in mixed driving this winter, even during the cold spells of December and February. (And even though SWMBO insists on using the heating for her seat.) Now the weather is milder I'm getting 42 - 43.
Edited by FP on 12/03/2018 at 10:31
|
It's no ball of fire, but seems perfectly acceptable to me. I have a pretty light right foot, but motorway driving at around 60 mph in sixth gear gives me a reasonable poke if I want to overtake, so torque doesn't feel that bad.
The Superb (like the Leon before it) accelerates exceptionally well from 60 mph even in 6th. Drop it to 5th and it really flies but on a motorway this is never necessary.
As for economy, I have managed in excess of 40 mpg (brim-to-brim measurement) in mixed driving this winter, even during the cold spells of December and February. (And even though SWMBO insists on using the heating for her seat.) Now the weather is milder I'm getting 42 - 43.
On a holiday trip we have seen about 51 mpg from the Superb. That is not driving with economy in mind, we drive to get there ASAP but keeping to the speed limits. Its 430 miles door to door and normally takes about 7 hours driving time, an average speed of just over 60 mph. In comparrison on exactly the same trip a 2 litre Mondeo TDCi would barely do 50 mpg but the Ceed CRDi would do about 56 mpg. Strange as it may appear the Leon would "only" do 50 mpg which I think shows that the cylinder shut off on the bigger/heavier Superb really does work on motorways.
Using the Superb on urban trips of no more than 8 miles in winter it averages about 40 mpg, that is still way better than the Mondeo TDCi which used to do about 35 mpg in that usage.
What I like about it is its near silence,
Your comment abour "near silence" is interesting since every report I have read about the CX5 has commented on the high levels road and wind noise. That was another reason I wanted to try one, if it had been noisy that alone would ahve ruled it out. After the Focus we don't want another noisy car to do a 430 mile drive in.
|
|
"...every report I have read about the CX5 has commented on the high levels road and wind noise. That was another reason I wanted to try one, if it had been noisy that alone would ahve ruled it out. After the Focus we don't want another noisy car to do a 430 mile drive in."
I read a review whose headline said the petrol engine was noisy. That was misleading - when I read the text it said it was noisy "when revved". You'd expect that. But otherwise it's quiet. Some wind noise, but not a lot.
I don't find the road noise thet noticeable; the tyres supplied are Toyos. If you pay more you can get tyres with a lower noise rating, but when I replaced a couple last summer I didn't think it was worth the extra money.
I thought my Mk 2 Focus was a bit noisy when I bought it, but when I changed the tyres to Michelin Energy the road noise dropped markedly. That was certainly worth doing.
Edited by FP on 12/03/2018 at 13:20
|
|
Re. Noisy,
Dont know about the CX5 but Mazda improved the 6 model cars 2015 onwards, called Gen 3. Different door seals, I believe and possible wind vane reflectors underneath? maybe other improvements.
The latest from end 2017 have improved again with thicker glass and not sure but perhaps thicker steel? Trying to beat the Germans according to one magazine lol.
Edited by nailit on 12/03/2018 at 13:55
|
Re. Noisy,
Dont know about the CX5 but Mazda improved the 6 model cars 2015 onwards, called Gen 3. Different door seals, I believe and possible wind vane reflectors underneath? maybe other improvements.
The 6 I drove was mid 2016. At the time I had the Leon and the 6 left me disapointed in every area except space. I found it noisy (especially so when revving it to get decent performance), hard riding (it was on the bigger wheels) and the performance was very subdued (this was the 145 model) The 165 was way more expensive and came with lots of "sports" type extras, that is why I considered the CX5 165 petrol. But I could not see how the extra power would really help, the torque was exactly the same figure peaking at the same high rpm, the extra 20 PS was probably only beneficail over 4500 rpm and then the engine got plain noisy.
Sorry but its VAG TSi for me every time. I was tempted to try the Ford 1.5 Ecoboost but no local dealer had one on the fleet.
|
|
I recall reading somewhere in a mag, journo's remark on the exhaust note, and he quoted something about Mazda had tuned/designed it and he couldn't understand why on such a car (mazda 6 petrol) IIRC. So yes if you rev it you do hear a "nice" exhaust note, hmm ok if I were 30 years younger. But having said that I wouldn't say it's a noisy car. But the passat is quieter!
|
|
Mazda 6 has never won any group test, and cannot be compared to the CX-5 that has won most if not all group tests.
It also won its group for best towcar in 2015.
Cx-5 has got quieter progressively with the 2017 being even more insulated, but all thats done has reduced performance and MPG, and increased it's weight.
I'm not a Vag fan myself having only an Audi A4 quattro 1.8T avant, i found it boring to drive, but good to look at.
Edited by xtrailman on 12/03/2018 at 19:46
|
|
They've all had their mess ups in recent years but, in general terms, if you want a reliable car and in particular if you're buying used I'd still say Japanese is best.
With one exception. Mazda.
I'm sorry but they have had far too many design cock ups in recent years to put them in the same bracket as Toyota (who themselves are by no means perfect). Disasterous diesels, rusting models, calamitous rotary engines.....all combined with some appalling customer service and denial of issues.
Just look back 10 years on this very forum and find the hundreds of posts on terribly treated owners of the original Mazda 6. It's all there in black and white.
There is a very good reason the average 8 year old Mazda is worth about £2.50.
I think that's somewhat unfair:
No-one's saying they are as reliable as Toyotas or Hondas, but in other respects they beat them hands-down - handling (especially), styling, price. I can source a Mazda3 with the same level of performance and spec as an equivalent Honda Civic for about 15% less on list price alone, and more like 30% less when discounts are factored in (or if you go through a broker).
I understand the 'risk' if you're in the market for a diesel, but with a petrol-engined car - no way would I pay THAT MUCH more for a car that was not that much reliable or long lasting, especially when the higher price of servicing and parts at Honda dealerships is factored in. As regards a Toyota 'equivalent' - there is none - the Auris isn't what you'd call by any stretch of the imagination a 'drivers car' and is about as dull as dishwater inside (it looks like they've stayed in the 1990s) and out.
As regards the rotary engines - yes, they have their problems, but I've seen on SO MANY occasions owners coming to my local dealership with big problems caused by them running these cars as short-trip commuting and shopping cars, with only the occasional longer journey at the weekend. Its been a WELL KNOWN FACT for years that cars with these engines hate such a life and were never designed as such. In my view, I wouldn't be surprised that more than the odd one or two were sold by main dealers who lied to customers about this 'flaw' in their design, but they are really a sports car that can act as an everyday car IF the circumstances are right. Unfortunately few punters did their homework (5 mins only needed) and thus I have little sympathy for them when they come crying about their car's problems.
As regards rust, its been a problem on certain cars (MX-5s old than 7 years), but more on older cars. Its well-documented that the Mazda3 & 6 mk1s have some issues with rust around the wheel arches, but on the early examples - my 3 was built in Oct 2005 and has only a few very minor spots and none elsewhere (touch wood never failing an MOT), and I see many local examples of 3s and 6s of this age in similar condition.
No such problems exist with the mk2s (none reported in the good and bad section) and seemingly only a few for the Mazda3 mk3, mainly early production models in the US - nothing of late to write home about. Very little evidence of problems in other models, especially those designed around the mid 2000s.
Most of Mazda's reliability and quality issues now concern the diesel engines only - can you remember the last time someone actually complained here about such problems on a petrol engined Mazda? And no, I'm not talking about skidpan and his aversion to the performance characteristics of their normally-aspirated engines - that's just a personal preference (perfectly entitled to as well). I have already stated where Mazda could go to change their fortunes as regards diesel engines, though I suspect their new X series petrol engines may (if they prove reliable and useful, performance and mpg wise) convince them to dump diesels for petrols and petrol hybrids (coming soon too) except for their pickup trucks, a bit like Toyota are doing. problem solved, or least they can source their diesels from Honda as previously stated, if the 1.5 and 2.2's design flaws cannot be quickly resolved.
Where I DO also agree (and have made points to that effect) is of (in my opinion) Mazda UK's often indifference to problems of customers that were not caused by them but design flaws (not the RX-8) and had been looked after only at main dealers. I would say that from speaking to other customers and freinds who own Mazdas, they do seem to have improved over the years on this score, but admitedly still have some way to go to match that of Honda and Toyota/Lexus.
Similarly, as stated before, the quality of their dealerships seems to vary a lot, and this would be a good area they could easily improve their standing by forcing through improvements and sometimes removing franchises when things are bad and don't improve. My own local dealership is also a Honda franchise, so its more likely I'll get a good level of customer service given the link to that make - one of the reasons why I get my car looked after there than in another local one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
