So my son wrangled a deal on a '94 mx6, 2.0 4 cyl auto. Other than the usual TLC that a new-to-us car gets, I call on the BITOG knowledge base for any specific quirks or maintenance issues to look out for on this engine/trans.? Thanks for the input guys.
'94 Mazda mx6, opinions? What to look for?
- Thread starter PRND3L
- Start date
- Status
AFAIK, 2.0 Mazda I-4's are bullet-proof. I wouldn't expect any engine trouble.
Any AT that old is a complete gamble - could be on it's last legs, or could go forever. It's most likely a fairly sturdy unit, that may shift slightly harsh.
Any AT that old is a complete gamble - could be on it's last legs, or could go forever. It's most likely a fairly sturdy unit, that may shift slightly harsh.
if the transmission is the same that comes with the 6 cylinder, beware. i would advise getting a tranny cooler put on it because they over heat badly. other than the tranny, and a broken half shaft, mine has been a good car. it can barely move cause the transmission is out currently but has 172k. they are fairly good cars imo
Auto trans as said. Look into a 5spd swap in the future if the auto goes on ya.
I lOVE my '93 2.0 manual MX6. Has 332k miles on the original clutch and still beats EPA MPG estimates (tougher w/ the auto I bet). I do 5k mile oil changes and it runs great still.
The distributor will likely fail if its still original. Other than that, just normal wear and tear items.
Oh and see when the last timing belt job was - they are a major PITA to DIY in my opinion. I went 80-90k miles on changes - don't believe the 60k interval when the owners manual said in California the same belt would last 90k.
I only swapped the front brake pads, never touched the rotors or rear drums - but I put mostly hwy miles on.
NGK copper plugs (v-groove) every 30k keeps it running factory fresh.
I lOVE my '93 2.0 manual MX6. Has 332k miles on the original clutch and still beats EPA MPG estimates (tougher w/ the auto I bet). I do 5k mile oil changes and it runs great still.
The distributor will likely fail if its still original. Other than that, just normal wear and tear items.
Oh and see when the last timing belt job was - they are a major PITA to DIY in my opinion. I went 80-90k miles on changes - don't believe the 60k interval when the owners manual said in California the same belt would last 90k.
I only swapped the front brake pads, never touched the rotors or rear drums - but I put mostly hwy miles on.
NGK copper plugs (v-groove) every 30k keeps it running factory fresh.
I'll second the comments - I too have a 93 2.0L 5 speed. 35 MPG isn't uncommon. Only 230k miles on mine, but it doesn't seem to want to die. The engines are great. Transmissions are known weak points, at least with the V-6s. www.mx6.com is a great resource.
In addition, probetalk.com and its archives will have even more info for 2.0L owners - probably best to search from google, though.
ABerns
to keeping another MX6 on the road for a while!
ABerns
The early Ford CD4Es are not good.
It's possible that it has already rebuilt with an improved forward clutch assembly and all the other stuff that was messed up on the early models...if so, happy motoring! If not, the flashing "HOLD" light is probably just down the road.
One has to wonder if they had used a better transmission...would former owners praise 626/MX-6/Probe now the way the CB7 Accord is praised for it's reliability
The Mazda F-engine is certainly durable enough for it.
It's possible that it has already rebuilt with an improved forward clutch assembly and all the other stuff that was messed up on the early models...if so, happy motoring! If not, the flashing "HOLD" light is probably just down the road.
One has to wonder if they had used a better transmission...would former owners praise 626/MX-6/Probe now the way the CB7 Accord is praised for it's reliability
My wife's dad had a 94 626 and the AT leaked constantly out the top of the unit from somewhere. Never failed, just leaked.
The MAF went out at about 70k. Replaced it and it ran fine after that.
The MAF went out at about 70k. Replaced it and it ran fine after that.
The ex-girlfriend has a '93, with 2.0L auto and about 130k miles that I've been maintaining for the last seven years. I enjoy driving it. Steering feel, suspension, and handling are very good. It's just starting to get some body rust. It has been reliable, and I've only changed a few things that would be typical for any car at that age, like the radiator, CV boots, most of the exhaust, and an oil pressure sending unit. The rear stabilizer bar links broke last year but I just removed it.
The rear brakes were completely seized when I met her. That may be a common problem. The transmission also shifted very harshly. It shifted so harshly it would squeal the tires going into second. The fluid had been changed at the Mazda dealer at one point, and I think they used the wrong fluid. A fluid/filter change and a few more drain-and-refills (yay for drain plugs) using Supertech DexIII fixed that. Not a great auto, but it works well enough. The rear deck was squeaky so I removed it and stuffed some foam under there.
Her best tank was 5.9L/100km (40 usmpg) on a 400 mile highway trip. The norm is about 8 (30). I've never seen more than a half-quart of oil consumption between changes. I had a bit of trouble finding a filter wrench to work with it. The filter is very small and hard to access by hand, and always empty when I remove it, no matter what brand of filter is used.
She's at 70k miles on the timing belt. I planned on changing it at 90k.
I think I did a search on her transmission one time and determined that it wasn't one of the bad ones; they came either later, earlier, or only with the V6. I can't remember any details though. Edit: I looked into the Ford CD4E mentioned above, and it was used beginning in '94. The '93 has the GF4A-EL.
The rear brakes were completely seized when I met her. That may be a common problem. The transmission also shifted very harshly. It shifted so harshly it would squeal the tires going into second. The fluid had been changed at the Mazda dealer at one point, and I think they used the wrong fluid. A fluid/filter change and a few more drain-and-refills (yay for drain plugs) using Supertech DexIII fixed that. Not a great auto, but it works well enough. The rear deck was squeaky so I removed it and stuffed some foam under there.
Her best tank was 5.9L/100km (40 usmpg) on a 400 mile highway trip. The norm is about 8 (30). I've never seen more than a half-quart of oil consumption between changes. I had a bit of trouble finding a filter wrench to work with it. The filter is very small and hard to access by hand, and always empty when I remove it, no matter what brand of filter is used.
She's at 70k miles on the timing belt. I planned on changing it at 90k.
I think I did a search on her transmission one time and determined that it wasn't one of the bad ones; they came either later, earlier, or only with the V6. I can't remember any details though. Edit: I looked into the Ford CD4E mentioned above, and it was used beginning in '94. The '93 has the GF4A-EL.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked