Full C&D report on Mazda6/Accord/midsize comparo

Status
Not open for further replies.
The DISI Turbo 2.3s weren't without their problems. I'll give you that.

You forgot to mention that you will probably annihilate the OE rear diff mounts on a Mazdaspeed 6 if you redline and side-step the clutch. Also the "smoking turbo" (fix for smoking turbo is to run 5W40 synthetic)
You got Audi A4 Quattro performance....and Audi like problems for about $10,000 less

The regular 2.3/2.5 seems to be plenty reliable whether in a Mazda3, Mazda6, Ford Ranger, Focus, Fusion, Escape...etc...
 
Thanks for this, I'm aware of them all, been involved in the troubleshooting since day one. Did you see that site before?

Originally Posted By: zloveraz

Mazda 3 and Mazda 6 Engine Failures

The Mazda 3 has three versions of four cylinder engines, two of which are shared with the Mazda 6 and displace 2.3L. Most (but not all) of APA's complaints concern the 2.3L 4 cylinder engines. We have received a small number of reports on the 2L engine, which is much more widely sold.

The 2.3L turbo engine is rare on the Mazda3 (likely less than 2% of production) and also shared with the CX-7, in which it equips all vehicles to 2009 and most in 2010. It has had several issues with the timing chain assembly, and turbo failures. Mazda has extended the warranty to cover repairs and made an internal change to the recommended oil (synthetic oil no longer recommended). Here is the list of warranty extensions:

2007-2009 CX-7 and 2007-2008 Mazdaspeed 3: oil consumption and smoke coming out of the tailpipe. PCV valve and routing changes, turbo repair covered if it has been damaged. 7 years/140,000 km.


The Hitachi-Warner turbo on these engines use a labyrith seal. It relies on a certain viscosity of the oil to uphold the 'seal' and certain pressure characteristics. People that used 5w30 "resource conserving" oils (a very different animal than the 5w30 that Mazda intended IMO that's available internationally) and installed a popular turbo intake tube had these issues. The oil would break down inside the turbo center and leak past the labyrinth seal into the turbine housing, where it burned in the exhaust. When combined with the aftermarket turbo intake pipe, caused changes in pressures which made the problem worse.
Two solutions: use a better oil, change the turbo with the revised seals. Some people with the intake pipes had the problem go away when reverted to the stock tube.

Quote:

2007-2010 CX-7: noisy engine, more noticeable on starting. Warranty on the turbo and timing chain extended to 7 years or 140,000 km.


Stretching of the timing chain due to infrequent/neglected oil changes and/or improper viscosity used (5w20). This happened more on the CX-7 due to owners not realizing that this was a turbo engine that needed regular oil changes, not a 2.0 EFI engine that could get away with 20K on factory fill. Most of the timing chain failure engines had sludge as noted by technicians. Like the turbo seal problem, this too is virtually non-existent internationally.

Quote:

Non turbo 2.3L engine on Mazda 3 and 6: 2004-2007

The engine may begin to burn oil seemingly all of a sudden at 80,000 to 100,000 km. The consumer would likely be unaware of the condition unless they check the oil regularly. If the oil drops below 2 litres in the crankcase, intermittent oil starvation begins to occur, typically first at the location of the number 1 connecting rod -- by this time internal damage is severe. If the consumer does not stop driving the vehicle, the rod can fail completely and pierces a whole in the side of the block.

The cause appears to be gradual overheating of the engine, due to 1) an internal defect in the catalytic converter that can plug up over time OR 2) the catalytic convertor plugs up over time from burned oil in the exhaust stream. There may be other causes.


"whole" in the side of the block- who's writing this stuff?
lol.gif

Never seen cat cons plugging, or a random surge of oil burning relating specifically to the L-engines and I work on them regularly.
Quote:

Failures appear more common with the manual transmission, perhaps because crankcase ventilation or some other factor is more affected by the overrun that accompanies gear changes. Used engines are in chronically short supply and expensive. In Montreal some recyclers have stopped selling the engines because they're too troublesome. APA has sourced rebuilt engines for about $3,500 in Montreal (plus installation). APA has recorded about 35 written complaints from consumers and confirmed a high rate of failures with rebuilders. We have not written Mazda directly about this issue, but could do so given the number of complaints.

APA can obtain a below retail price to replace the engine in Montreal, and likely a bit of break at our recommended engine specialist in Toronto. Either shop would be competent to report on the engine damage.


35 complaints. $3500? engine unavailable? Yards not selling them? Your recommended engine specialist? LOL Gooby pls. I'll install one for $1500 labour in.

Anyone in the Toronto area needs a new Mazda 2.3L? Holler!
 
Originally Posted By: jrustles
Thanks for this, I'm aware of them all, been involved in the troubleshooting since day one. Did you see that site before?

Originally Posted By: zloveraz

Mazda 3 and Mazda 6 Engine Failures

The Mazda 3 has three versions of four cylinder engines, two of which are shared with the Mazda 6 and displace 2.3L. Most (but not all) of APA's complaints concern the 2.3L 4 cylinder engines. We have received a small number of reports on the 2L engine, which is much more widely sold.

The 2.3L turbo engine is rare on the Mazda3 (likely less than 2% of production) and also shared with the CX-7, in which it equips all vehicles to 2009 and most in 2010. It has had several issues with the timing chain assembly, and turbo failures. Mazda has extended the warranty to cover repairs and made an internal change to the recommended oil (synthetic oil no longer recommended). Here is the list of warranty extensions:

2007-2009 CX-7 and 2007-2008 Mazdaspeed 3: oil consumption and smoke coming out of the tailpipe. PCV valve and routing changes, turbo repair covered if it has been damaged. 7 years/140,000 km.


The Hitachi-Warner turbo on these engines use a labyrith seal. It relies on a certain viscosity of the oil to uphold the 'seal' and certain pressure characteristics. People that used 5w30 "resource conserving" oils (a very different animal than the 5w30 that Mazda intended IMO that's available internationally) and installed a popular turbo intake tube had these issues. The oil would break down inside the turbo center and leak past the labyrinth seal into the turbine housing, where it burned in the exhaust. When combined with the aftermarket turbo intake pipe, caused changes in pressures which made the problem worse.
Two solutions: use a better oil, change the turbo with the revised seals. Some people with the intake pipes had the problem go away when reverted to the stock tube.

Quote:

2007-2010 CX-7: noisy engine, more noticeable on starting. Warranty on the turbo and timing chain extended to 7 years or 140,000 km.


Stretching of the timing chain due to infrequent/neglected oil changes and/or improper viscosity used (5w20). This happened more on the CX-7 due to owners not realizing that this was a turbo engine that needed regular oil changes, not a 2.0 EFI engine that could get away with 20K on factory fill. Most of the timing chain failure engines had sludge as noted by technicians. Like the turbo seal problem, this too is virtually non-existent internationally.

Quote:

Non turbo 2.3L engine on Mazda 3 and 6: 2004-2007

The engine may begin to burn oil seemingly all of a sudden at 80,000 to 100,000 km. The consumer would likely be unaware of the condition unless they check the oil regularly. If the oil drops below 2 litres in the crankcase, intermittent oil starvation begins to occur, typically first at the location of the number 1 connecting rod -- by this time internal damage is severe. If the consumer does not stop driving the vehicle, the rod can fail completely and pierces a whole in the side of the block.

The cause appears to be gradual overheating of the engine, due to 1) an internal defect in the catalytic converter that can plug up over time OR 2) the catalytic convertor plugs up over time from burned oil in the exhaust stream. There may be other causes.


"whole" in the side of the block- who's writing this stuff?
lol.gif

Never seen cat cons plugging, or a random surge of oil burning relating specifically to the L-engines and I work on them regularly.
Quote:

Failures appear more common with the manual transmission, perhaps because crankcase ventilation or some other factor is more affected by the overrun that accompanies gear changes. Used engines are in chronically short supply and expensive. In Montreal some recyclers have stopped selling the engines because they're too troublesome. APA has sourced rebuilt engines for about $3,500 in Montreal (plus installation). APA has recorded about 35 written complaints from consumers and confirmed a high rate of failures with rebuilders. We have not written Mazda directly about this issue, but could do so given the number of complaints.

APA can obtain a below retail price to replace the engine in Montreal, and likely a bit of break at our recommended engine specialist in Toronto. Either shop would be competent to report on the engine damage.


35 complaints. $3500? engine unavailable? Yards not selling them? Your recommended engine specialist? LOL Gooby pls. I'll install one for $1500 labour in.

Anyone in the Toronto area needs a new Mazda 2.3L? Holler!


Originally Posted By: jrustles
Originally Posted By: zloveraz
Not trying to be negative but has Mazda solved all of their blown engine woes from a few years ago?


I'm dying to know what you are even referring to

Thanks for this, I'm aware of them all, been involved in the troubleshooting since day one. Did you see that site before?


Yes I did see that site before and many others when I was researching Mazda last year, which is why I asked the question in the first place.

Amazing turn around from "I'm dying to know what you are even referring to" versus your "expert" rebuttal on the issues regarding the engines listed that supposedly didn't exist before. Talk about selective amnesia.
crackmeup2.gif


I'm glad Mazda is back on-track literally...

P.S. - do you work for Mazda Canada?
 
Mazda was never off track. Engines blow when you don't keep oil in it. That holds for every car maker.
 
Originally Posted By: zloveraz

Amazing turn around from "I'm dying to know what you are even referring to" to your "expert" rebuttal on the issues regarding the engines listed that supposedly didn't exist before. Talk about selective amnesia.
crackmeup2.gif


I'm glad Mazda is back on-track literally...

P.S. - do you work for Mazda Canada?


I don't work for Mazda, but really wish I did. (anyone from Mazda reading this?!)
grin.gif


And what's this? What turnaround, I have a solid amount of experience with the engine series, so I know them in and out. What experience can offer, over say just stumbling upon websites while searching for a car-- is perspective.
smile.gif
I thought you were talking about actual design problems like headgaskets, head warping, sludge prone designs, rods snapping for no reason; not blocked cats, oil viscosity breakdown and ensuing chain stretching.

Either way, I HAD to ask because those problems are not very common- particularly the timing chain issue which IN MY EXPERIENCE correlates to improper oil/OCI- on the turbo engines. Why doesn't the NA 2.3L suffer chain problems as frequently? The valvetrains are nearly identical. Oh, right because a turbo engine will break down an inappropriate oil quickly, and if not changed in time will damage it. Duh. Things like that is why I had to ask.
About my "expert rebuttal" on the underlying reasons they occurred? I was there to troubleshoot them AS THEY HAPPENED, particularly the turbo oil seal issue.

Here's something funny that I think you will enjoy, just google "nissan vq oil burning timing chain tensioner". Do it
smile.gif
Wait, no. First just type in "nissan vq" and see what's suggested.
You're not going to do it.
So I will
smile.gif

2q17z9j.jpg


isn't that ironic??!
So kind sir, I ask of you:
"has Nissan solved all of their blown engine woes from [currently]?"
43.gif
nyuk nyuk



PS_ if anyone here has personal experience with popped Mazda 2.3's chime in
I'd love to know, otherwise it looks like I'm making excuses!
 
Originally Posted By: jrustles
Originally Posted By: zloveraz

Amazing turn around from "I'm dying to know what you are even referring to" to your "expert" rebuttal on the issues regarding the engines listed that supposedly didn't exist before. Talk about selective amnesia.
crackmeup2.gif


I'm glad Mazda is back on-track literally...

P.S. - do you work for Mazda Canada?


I don't work for Mazda, but really wish I did. (anyone from Mazda reading this?!)
grin.gif


And what's this? What turnaround, I have a solid amount of experience with the engine series, so I know them in and out. What experience can offer, over say just stumbling upon websites while searching for a car-- is perspective.
smile.gif
I thought you were talking about actual design problems like headgaskets, head warping, sludge prone designs, rods snapping for no reason; not blocked cats, oil viscosity breakdown and ensuing chain stretching.

Either way, I HAD to ask because those problems are not very common- particularly the timing chain issue which IN MY EXPERIENCE correlates to improper oil/OCI- on the turbo engines. Why doesn't the NA 2.3L suffer chain problems as frequently? The valvetrains are nearly identical. Oh, right because a turbo engine will break down an inappropriate oil quickly, and if not changed in time will damage it. Duh. Things like that is why I had to ask.
About my "expert rebuttal" on the underlying reasons they occurred? I was there to troubleshoot them AS THEY HAPPENED, particularly the turbo oil seal issue.

Here's something funny that I think you will enjoy, just google "nissan vq oil burning timing chain tensioner". Do it
smile.gif
Wait, no. First just type in "nissan vq" and see what's suggested.
You're not going to do it.
So I will
smile.gif

2q17z9j.jpg


isn't that ironic??!
So kind sir, I ask of you:
"has Nissan solved all of their blown engine woes from [currently]?"
43.gif
nyuk nyuk

PS_ if anyone here has personal experience with popped Mazda 2.3's chime in
I'd love to know, otherwise it looks like I'm making excuses!

Originally Posted By: zloveraz
Originally Posted By: 97tbird
^ Good info, and certainly useful, in certain situations
- but none of that applies to the 2014 Mazda 6 or any of the Japanese SkyActive engines. One of the main reasons we went for the current 6 was that...: Mazda Japan developed the engine and all the mechanics from scratch.



I never said it applied to the 2014 Mazda, etc... I asked if they had resolved there blown engine woes from the past...

Again not trying to be a meanie here but just because Mazda Japan engineered the new SkyActiv technology doesn't automatically make them impervious to mistakes or engineering design flaws. I think it's too early to tell if this new unproven technology will be reliable, only time and miles will begin to tell that story.

Believe me I love Nissan however those pesky Japanese engineers have had there fair bit engineering disasters, i.e cats that get sucked into the engine, oil consumption across multiple models, AT transmissions failing at 70K, etc, etc...


See what I already wrote about Nissan, Nissan as all manufacturers have their bad days.. Big difference here I'm not picking on Mazda I was just asking if the blown engine problems were resolved. I don't deny issues with Nissan or elect to stick my head in the sand.

Little late to play nah nah...
 
Originally Posted By: zloveraz

See what I already wrote about Nissan, Nissan as all manufacturers have their bad days.. Big difference here I'm not picking on Mazda I was just asking if the blown engine problems were resolved. I don't deny issues with Nissan or elect to stick my head in the sand.

Little late to play nah nah...


Trololol now who's on the defensive! Oh sure it's all "we all have our bad days" now.
lol.gif
Riiight.

PS - Smoking turbos and timing chain noise still are not 'blown engines'. Maybe next time, try not to ask troll questions.
 
Let's get back on topic and discuss how awesome the ALL NEW CURRENT Japanese Mazda 6 is, (which is what's discussed in the C&D article) compared to others in class, and the results of the C & D article.
wink.gif


Would be better to start a separate thread to discuss PAST Mazda/Ford whatever problems in depth.
 
To be honest, the full skyactiv CX-5 has a bit over a year under it's belt and I haven't heard of any major problems. NickR never had any issues with his CX-5 and I believe we have a poster here that works for a Mazda dealership that said CX-5's had very few warranty claims.

The new Mazda 6 is not that different from CX-5, so some good track record is out there regarding the new engines and transmissions.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: buster
I think Honda has slipped over the years. They don't even offer a turbo motor and they don't make a sports car. Pretty lame. Disappointed in what they've done over the last few years. Great cars in terms of build quality and efficiency/reliability.

I don't completely disagree but I think you're missing a key point here. Not offering a turbo is HARDLY a bad thing. Their mileage claims are almost never realized, they're not very refined (other than German offerings), and you have lag to deal with. Even though they appear behind, Honda is actually ahead of the curve with the V6 Accord, RDX, and MDX. They're getting great fuel efficiency out of their latest V6s and they offer smooth, potent power delivery. If you read reviews, particularly of the V6 Accord many testers express gratitude Honda stuck with a smooth powerful V6 that gets good mileage as opposed to buzzy, laggy, and thirsy DI turbo 4's showing up everywhere else.
 
None of these mid-sizers is a "no-compromises" car; each of them offers a compromise that will be "right" to some people, and that others won't find palatable. None of them are any better or worse than their peers...some are simply better suited to some people than other choices might be. It's like saying that Rocky Road is better than Chocolate, or that Blue is better than Red.

Each has a different appeal to different people. Americans are some of the most fortunate in the world in terms of the choice in vehicles we have here.
 
Originally Posted By: gofast182
Originally Posted By: buster
I think Honda has slipped over the years. They don't even offer a turbo motor and they don't make a sports car. Pretty lame. Disappointed in what they've done over the last few years. Great cars in terms of build quality and efficiency/reliability.

I don't completely disagree but I think you're missing a key point here. Not offering a turbo is HARDLY a bad thing. Their mileage claims are almost never realized, they're not very refined (other than German offerings), and you have lag to deal with. Even though they appear behind, Honda is actually ahead of the curve with the V6 Accord, RDX, and MDX. They're getting great fuel efficiency out of their latest V6s and they offer smooth, potent power delivery. If you read reviews, particularly of the V6 Accord many testers express gratitude Honda stuck with a smooth powerful V6 that gets good mileage as opposed to buzzy, laggy, and thirsy DI turbo 4's showing up everywhere else.


Agree about the V6 thing in a midsize.
Test drive a V6 Altima or Accord and its obvious its got effortless power. Because it hardly has to work they crank out decent MPG figures too. I got really decent MPG in my 2002 Maxima, but when I wanted to pass, it had power in spades as well.
 
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
None of these mid-sizers is a "no-compromises" car; each of them offers a compromise that will be "right" to some people, and that others won't find palatable. None of them are any better or worse than their peers...some are simply better suited to some people than other choices might be. It's like saying that Rocky Road is better than Chocolate, or that Blue is better than Red.

I don't think you can say they are equal, but I agree that they are all pretty good.
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
Each has a different appeal to different people. Americans are some of the most fortunate in the world in terms of the choice in vehicles we have here.

I actually think we get the nearly the worst selection in the developed world... Almost no diesels, fewer manual transmissions every year, not many of the smaller european brands are available. Lots of N.A. only vehicles that are larger but less refined/cheaper, Sienna, Camry, Accord, Corolla.
 
Originally Posted By: SLCraig
Originally Posted By: gofast182
Originally Posted By: buster
I think Honda has slipped over the years. They don't even offer a turbo motor and they don't make a sports car. Pretty lame. Disappointed in what they've done over the last few years. Great cars in terms of build quality and efficiency/reliability.

I don't completely disagree but I think you're missing a key point here. Not offering a turbo is HARDLY a bad thing. Their mileage claims are almost never realized, they're not very refined (other than German offerings), and you have lag to deal with. Even though they appear behind, Honda is actually ahead of the curve with the V6 Accord, RDX, and MDX. They're getting great fuel efficiency out of their latest V6s and they offer smooth, potent power delivery. If you read reviews, particularly of the V6 Accord many testers express gratitude Honda stuck with a smooth powerful V6 that gets good mileage as opposed to buzzy, laggy, and thirsy DI turbo 4's showing up everywhere else.


Agree about the V6 thing in a midsize.
Test drive a V6 Altima or Accord and its obvious its got effortless power. Because it hardly has to work they crank out decent MPG figures too. I got really decent MPG in my 2002 Maxima, but when I wanted to pass, it had power in spades as well.



This is something many of us agree with. While 4 cylinders can easily deliver big power it does so with a coarseness that is not appealing to some of us.

Plus I have always found IMO that a slightly larger engine doesn't always come with a mileage penalty as it sometimes has a much easier (longer, too) life...
 
Originally Posted By: IndyIan
I don't think you can say they are equal, but I agree that they are all pretty good.


I never said they are equal; they certainly aren't. I said that their relative "goodness" can only be judged by the buyer for himself (or herself). If you look at a lot of the C&D metrics, they're very personal. Driver comfort, styling, ergonomics, etc. Same with the chassis and vehicle performance. The Honda and Mazda were about as identical as two cars can be in handling, slalom, roadholding, etc. But the Mazda will feel different from the Honda. Some people will like the way the Mazda feels and some people will like the way the Honda feels.

Neither is better or worse than the other. They're two different ways to effectively get the same results in the end (the same performance). Some will like it one way, some will like it the other way.

Originally Posted By: IndyIan
I actually think we get the nearly the worst selection in the developed world.


I'll yield to that. I was talking about the "rest of the world" in general, and there are a lot of parts of the world where you might have the choice between a rusted Yugo or a broken Lada. In the grand scheme of things, we got it pretty durn good here.
wink.gif
 
^ what he said

A lot of people want a comfy, floaty couch powered by a V-6 engine. For them, the Mazda is not ideal. But for someone who makes it a game to keep the speedo reading the biggest number possible through every corner it's a bit better, or maybe at least good enough to make you feel okay about driving a sedan and not an MX-5.
 
Developed is relative. The Eastern part of China is very different and much more developed than the rest of China.... you get cars like this:

geely-panda-china-1-458x3421.jpg


the Geely Gleagle Panda!

Gleagle?

Gleagle.

I don't know what they drive in South Africa. They make Mercedes Benzes there
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom