CVT and Mazda, Engineering Explained

[BMWTurboDzl]

An interesting vid was released by EE on why Mazda is able to eschew the CVT. I'll let you guys watch the video yourself, but he speaks briefly about how Mazda avoids LSPI but using EGR rather than excess fuel to reduce combustion temps.

.

 

[Andrew1972]

Financially Mazda cannot afford the R&D to do a CVT really well so sticks to the reworking existing tech. They are a small player in market and have low customer retention/repeat buyer rate. They do however have high satisfaction rate.

 

[PimTac]

It should be noted that the cooled EGR is specific to the SkyActiv 2.5 turbo engine.

The naturally aspirated engine does not have this.

 

[PimTac]

Originally Posted by madRiver
Financially Mazda cannot afford the R&D to do a CVT really well so sticks to the reworking existing tech. They are a small player in market and have low customer retention/repeat buyer rate. They do however have high satisfaction rate.




You may be thinking of Mazda during the Ford years. Granted they are still a small player but now with the backing of Toyota they have more financial security.

 

[Cujet]

Originally Posted by madRiver
Financially Mazda cannot afford the R&D to do a CVT really well so sticks to the reworking existing tech. They are a small player in market and have low customer retention/repeat buyer rate. They do however have high satisfaction rate.



I'd guess Mazda could source a CVT from Asian or other reputable manufacturer.

 

[PimTac]

Originally Posted by Cujet



I'd guess Mazda could source a CVT from Asian or other reputable manufacturer.




It would be easy enough to get it from Aisin since they are in the same family. Mazda does just fine with their six speed though.

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted by madRiver
Financially Mazda cannot afford the R&D to do a CVT really well so sticks to the reworking existing tech. They are a small player in market and have low customer retention/repeat buyer rate. They do however have high satisfaction rate.

The CVT is much more "existing tech" than what Mazda has done with the SA and SA Turbo engines. They built and designed the entire engine/transmission combos in-house. They may be small, but they are "getting it right". For example, the 2.5T in my CX5? It is rated at a 27mpg highway. My life-time average during 10K miles is 25.8mpg. That includes all the hooning around, city driving, idling in the parkinglot, etc. that I've ever done in it. They've managed to take a 6-speed auto, without "launch control", and pull 6.2 second 0-60's out of the vehicle with 250hp, which is statistically insignificant from what Audi, MB, BMW, etc. are getting with similar horsepower and DCT's and DSG's and so forth with 7-9 gears. AND getting better mpg. If you consider what they are doing as "re working existing tech", then you consider it all that, as it's all just EV or combustion 4-cycle. Mazda is doing a lot of different and proprietary things.

 

[KrisZ]

In car industry, most innovation comes from the small players. The big guys are too afraid of the risks and do baby steps for the most part, afraid of losing market share.

As far as Mazda's financial backing, they had a giant Sumimoto Mitsu banking Corp behind their backs, but that didn't help with generating sales and sharing R&D costs, hence they partnered up with Toyota.

Both companies need each other, while Mazda needs some of the hybrid tech, Toyota is desperate to get some young buyers into their showrooms, and Mazda is popular with young customers.

 

[Elkins45]

I've been a Toyota owner my whole adult life but my last two new cars were a 2012 Mazda3 and a 2016 Mazda6. The 3 was sort of a "free trial" because I inherited a truck and traded my old one. When Bambi destroyed it I had no hesitation to go with another Mazda. In my opinion they are one of the most under-appreciated car makers in the market today. I just wish they weren't abandoning the manual transmission.

 

[edyvw]

Mazda can afford CVT. They could source CVT from Aisin, JATCO etc. or CVT from LuK, but than they would have to pay serious money since it is Audi thing (but they have Ws6 to claim they are Audi level without Audi tech, so it does not matter).
I think it is strategy that Mazda is getting it right. They are strategically offering things that are very important to drivers, and going after drivers who cannot afford AUdi, BMW etc, and will settle for Mazda. VW is out of competition (not counting Golf GTI and R, but Mazda is not going after them anyway) as VW is focusing on Toyota/Honda customers. So, Mazda is telling people who drove first gen. Tiguan, or who cannot afford Audi, BMW: hey come here, it is transverse engine etc. but it is better than RAV4 or CR-V or Camry. So, you get good bang for a buck, you are not driving TuRD, and life is just bit better.
In that strategy CVT does not fit. Also, Mazda has small cars. CAFE does not have to be offset by every single MPG, so 8 speed transmissions are maybe not necessary, and 6 speed can be retained. Mazda does not have Tundra, or Sequoia like vehicles. All their vehicles are in upper 20mpg range.

 

[mazdamonky]

I believe Mazda is not chasing after the CVT on purpose.

As a car guy who enjoys Mazda as a company because they tend to build cars for the driver, I don't terribly like most cars I have driven with a CVT. I have yet to drive a car with a CVT that made me go this is amazing. I understand they have their purposes, but something about being able to select proper gears and hearing that proper shift point gets a car guy running. Yes, I know I could have a manual, but they are sometimes difficult to find, especially on the used market.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by mazdamonky
I believe Mazda is not chasing after the CVT on purpose.

As a car guy who enjoys Mazda as a company because they tend to build cars for the driver, I don't terribly like most cars I have driven with a CVT. I have yet to drive a car with a CVT that made me go this is amazing. I understand they have their purposes, but something about being able to select proper gears and hearing that proper shift point gets a car guy running. Yes, I know I could have a manual, but they are sometimes difficult to find, especially on the used market.

That is what I am saying, they are purposely not going with CVT as they want to grab customers left behind by race who will make most boring vehicle.
VW is doing same, albeit bit different approach than Toyota and Honda as it still offers some communication with road, but if they will leave behind customers, Mazda will grab them.
I think where Mazda made mistake is not offering CX-9 in more practical format but with similar driving dynamics. I think if they offered something like Subaru Ascent size, and utility, with 2.5T and regular six speed and those driving dynamics, they would do MUCH better financially.

 

[benjy]

mazda may be smarter than the rest as the CVT is yet to be perfected as noted by the interesting vid by Mr Subaru. just like early DI only there are issues! most car buyers are NOT aware of whats what on newer cars until IT hits the fan $$$$

 

[Andrew1972]

Originally Posted by edyvw

I think where Mazda made mistake is not offering CX-9 in more practical format but with similar driving dynamics. I think if they offered something like Subaru Ascent size, and utility, with 2.5T and regular six speed and those driving dynamics, they would do MUCH better financially.


Absolutely agree the CX-9 as nice to drive is cramped for a 7 passenger.

 

[RayCJ]

As an owner of a 2018 Mazda 3 Touring Hatchback, all I can say is that I love the 6sp automatic transmission. I like all the shift points in both Sport and non-Sport modes. In fully-automatic mode, it reads my mind. It's been a year of ownership and every now and then, my phantom clutch leg tries to push the clutch. I don't have paddle shifters (only available on the grand touring model) but you can manually slap-shift with the gear selector. In both modes, shifts are clean and fast.

Mazda put a lot of thinking into this car and tried to make it both practical and fun to drive. -They succeeded!

Ray

 

[PandaBear]

Originally Posted by madRiver
Financially Mazda cannot afford the R&D to do a CVT really well so sticks to the reworking existing tech. They are a small player in market and have low customer retention/repeat buyer rate. They do however have high satisfaction rate.


This. It is not only "can they do it" but rather "will the company go bankrupt if they screw up and get a class action lawsuit".

Their other techs are fairly benign, and are more "tuning" than "ground breaking" (Skyactiv-G), so the risk of major screw up is low. This is important, and they can scale production better without putting all their egg in one basket. A few more clutches here and there, a bit more tuning for the 4-2-1 exhaust, a piston with a different shape, 4 new injectors, a chassis with more expensive metal instead of a lot of R&D money, more tuning time, etc. They won't have a massive recall from all these tuning, they just have to pay a bit more on the manufacturing variable cost, not bad really.

 

[KrisZ]

Originally Posted by PandaBear
Originally Posted by madRiver
Financially Mazda cannot afford the R&D to do a CVT really well so sticks to the reworking existing tech. They are a small player in market and have low customer retention/repeat buyer rate. They do however have high satisfaction rate.


This. It is not only "can they do it" but rather "will the company go bankrupt if they screw up and get a class action lawsuit".

Their other techs are fairly benign, and are more "tuning" than "ground breaking" (Skyactiv-G), so the risk of major screw up is low. This is important, and they can scale production better without putting all their egg in one basket. A few more clutches here and there, a bit more tuning for the 4-2-1 exhaust, a piston with a different shape, 4 new injectors, a chassis with more expensive metal instead of a lot of R&D money, more tuning time, etc. They won't have a massive recall from all these tuning, they just have to pay a bit more on the manufacturing variable cost, not bad really.


Not sure I would call their DI implementation with high compression ratio, which is still the highest I believe, benign. And the skyactiv drivetrains have a very solid track record when compared to others. Their R&D dollar obviously went further than just minor tweaks.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by madRiver
Originally Posted by edyvw

I think where Mazda made mistake is not offering CX-9 in more practical format but with similar driving dynamics. I think if they offered something like Subaru Ascent size, and utility, with 2.5T and regular six speed and those driving dynamics, they would do MUCH better financially.


Absolutely agree the CX-9 as nice to drive is cramped for a 7 passenger.

It is generally cramped. Third row is useless, as trunk for a family. I think they missed the trend. They hit with pretty much everything. It is great alternative for people who like bit sportier ride.

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by madRiver
Originally Posted by edyvw

I think where Mazda made mistake is not offering CX-9 in more practical format but with similar driving dynamics. I think if they offered something like Subaru Ascent size, and utility, with 2.5T and regular six speed and those driving dynamics, they would do MUCH better financially.


Absolutely agree the CX-9 as nice to drive is cramped for a 7 passenger.

It is generally cramped. Third row is useless, as trunk for a family. I think they missed the trend. They hit with pretty much everything. It is great alternative for people who like bit sportier ride.


I got a CX5 because I didn't need a CX9, but really, if you're buying a CX9 for a family that intends to sit in the rear row, you're really missing the boat. I think I'd probably just have them perpetually folded, had I bought a CX9

 

[Cdn17Sport6MT]

Competent engineers. DI implementation has been good as there are seeminly no stories out there of SkyActiv-G engines carboning-up the intake valves to any impactful degree inside of reasonable mileages - despite using only single-direct-injection. Just wish my 13:1 compression naturally aspirated 2.5 litre had a bit more bottom-end response. Soggy bottom end, sorry to say :| .