Mazda 626 V6 1999
- Thread starter ET16
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: ET16
I'm thinking of going to look at one of these locally. I remember that these have CD4E transmissions, so I plan to pay attention to shifting, etc. Any other things to keep in mind with these cars?
Strictly average cars, nothing particularly bad about them as far as I know, somewhat heavy and underpowered in the generation after yours, nothing competitive with other midsize sedans is why is was eventually dropped?
Also I could be wrong, but I had it stuck in my head that certain parts from the Taurus/Sable were on it, mechanically. Correct me if I am wrong.
I'm thinking of going to look at one of these locally. I remember that these have CD4E transmissions, so I plan to pay attention to shifting, etc. Any other things to keep in mind with these cars?
Strictly average cars, nothing particularly bad about them as far as I know, somewhat heavy and underpowered in the generation after yours, nothing competitive with other midsize sedans is why is was eventually dropped?
Also I could be wrong, but I had it stuck in my head that certain parts from the Taurus/Sable were on it, mechanically. Correct me if I am wrong.
I had one for a minute, it was worst car I ever had. I got it on the cheap due to a head gasket problem...or worse. Of course I knew I was in for trouble getting it straightened out but I quickly discovered that it was just a bad product.
It was built during the early Ford/Mazda collaboration and it was obvious that they didn't play well together.
I see quite a few on the road though that seem to be doing fine so, YRMV.
Definitely look for transmission issues. Youll be hard pressed to find a used replacement since so many have been replaced.
Lots of EGR issues...lots of coolant issues.
Poke around here... http://mazda626.net/ ...there were some helpful folks when I was struggling.
It was built during the early Ford/Mazda collaboration and it was obvious that they didn't play well together.
I see quite a few on the road though that seem to be doing fine so, YRMV.
Definitely look for transmission issues. Youll be hard pressed to find a used replacement since so many have been replaced.
Lots of EGR issues...lots of coolant issues.
Poke around here... http://mazda626.net/ ...there were some helpful folks when I was struggling.
The CD4E is the real weak spot in these. Really hamstrung an otherwise decent car
The KL V6 is a real gem of a small V6. It's a Mazda engine. Easily confused for the Duratec 25 in the Contour/X-Type/Cougar. Completely different engine than the Duratec. Suzuki liked it so much that they copied it.
As far as the power?
Countless Probe GT owners seem pleased with it. You can definitely tell the differnce if you drive a FWD Cougar and Probe GT back to back. The Duratec wins on paper but the Probe feels quicker, faster, and more responsive.
The car itself is more of a compact than a midsize. Like the Contour and 1st gen Altima, it's current model Civic sized in back.
That's about the time that they switched from a distributor to Ford EDIS coil packs. Mixed blessing.
Mazda used open cel foam instead of a proper cabin air filter. If neglected, at some point the foam will disintegrate and broadcast itself out of the oscillating dash vents all over the occupants of the vehicle.
The KL V6 is a real gem of a small V6. It's a Mazda engine. Easily confused for the Duratec 25 in the Contour/X-Type/Cougar. Completely different engine than the Duratec. Suzuki liked it so much that they copied it.
As far as the power?
The car itself is more of a compact than a midsize. Like the Contour and 1st gen Altima, it's current model Civic sized in back.
That's about the time that they switched from a distributor to Ford EDIS coil packs. Mixed blessing.
Mazda used open cel foam instead of a proper cabin air filter. If neglected, at some point the foam will disintegrate and broadcast itself out of the oscillating dash vents all over the occupants of the vehicle.
The V6 does not have the Ford/ZF CD4E, that was only used on the 2.0 4cyl after 1994. V6 uses the Mazda GF4A-EL. I'd suggest changing the fluid in this and using something modern like Maxlife ATF. The GF4A-EL was a transmission design slightly ahead of the then current ATF spec DIII/M, they're fully electronic and will appreciate quality modern fluid.
The power on the V6 is just fine, above anything displacing 2.5L at the time. Some people must be thinking of the 4cyl, which had the CD4E and was an average engine.
They pull pull smoothly right off idle, and consistently all the way up to 7800rpm (factory rev limiter) in gear, in neutral the limiter is set to 6500/6800. It's a very smooth runner too. The 99+ had the Irvine, CA refresh design on it, which I'm not much of a fan of but WE.
Changes to the KL 2.5L for the 99+ MY include a new intake manifold, 'maintenance free' solid lash adjusters instead of hydraulic ones (makes for a lighter, more stable valvetrain without the chance of HLA collapse). They also went with a lighter cast crank, instead of the heavy expensive forged one, which IMO was way overkill for an NA street engine.
The 2.5L KL never had head gasket issues unlike the 4cyl, it always used MLS gaskets and was/still is one of the best alloyed, cast, machined engines around. I suggest anyone to google pictures of "KLZE engine block". If you have an eye for quality, you'll immediately see exactly what I mean. People don't realise this, but Mazda is an expert foundry and machine house- one of the best in the industry. Yeah, I said it. Their robotics and manufacturing practices have 'inspired' others, including Ford. AutoAlliance in detroit was originally a Mazda machine shop (MMUC), and Ford was let into it, not the other way around. 99+ 626 went with a Ford ECU and EDIS/coil pack (money saving OEM deal), replacing the Denso 64 control system. This means you can reprogram it using aftermarket systems designed for Fords, if you were ever so inclined) It also uses a MAF instead of the 'cork' style volume air flow meter' which increased performance.
Any more questions, feel free to ask!
The power on the V6 is just fine, above anything displacing 2.5L at the time. Some people must be thinking of the 4cyl, which had the CD4E and was an average engine.
They pull pull smoothly right off idle, and consistently all the way up to 7800rpm (factory rev limiter) in gear, in neutral the limiter is set to 6500/6800. It's a very smooth runner too. The 99+ had the Irvine, CA refresh design on it, which I'm not much of a fan of but WE.
Changes to the KL 2.5L for the 99+ MY include a new intake manifold, 'maintenance free' solid lash adjusters instead of hydraulic ones (makes for a lighter, more stable valvetrain without the chance of HLA collapse). They also went with a lighter cast crank, instead of the heavy expensive forged one, which IMO was way overkill for an NA street engine.
The 2.5L KL never had head gasket issues unlike the 4cyl, it always used MLS gaskets and was/still is one of the best alloyed, cast, machined engines around. I suggest anyone to google pictures of "KLZE engine block". If you have an eye for quality, you'll immediately see exactly what I mean. People don't realise this, but Mazda is an expert foundry and machine house- one of the best in the industry. Yeah, I said it. Their robotics and manufacturing practices have 'inspired' others, including Ford. AutoAlliance in detroit was originally a Mazda machine shop (MMUC), and Ford was let into it, not the other way around. 99+ 626 went with a Ford ECU and EDIS/coil pack (money saving OEM deal), replacing the Denso 64 control system. This means you can reprogram it using aftermarket systems designed for Fords, if you were ever so inclined) It also uses a MAF instead of the 'cork' style volume air flow meter' which increased performance.
Any more questions, feel free to ask!
I've owned two of them, a 2000 LX (sold) and a 2000 ES. Both were V-6, I averaged 25MPG running Premium fuel (recommended not required) I would suggest an LX if that is what you have looked at. There are extra electronics on the ES model that I needed to replace along the way such as speed sensors around 100K. It is also an expensive car to have the timing belt service done (800-1000) depending on shop. Both cars had EGR issues but it is a carbon buildup issue which cost about 100.00 to correct. If you want to know anything else feel free to PM me. Transmissions were not a problem for me, but I serviced them every 30,000 miles.
I have had my 2000 2.5 since new. Very little trouble with it at 130,000. Changed transmission fluid a good 3 or 4 times now..currently filled with Maxlife. Have replaced a fuel pump a few years back and the rear calipers/rotors last year. Replaced the axles a few years ago cuz the boots tore.
Currently needs valve cover gaskets, a timing belt change, front wheel bearings, and a minor exhaust repair in the resonator pipe but other than that it has been a solid car. Most of the repairs have been wear items or related to salt (calipers).
Currently needs valve cover gaskets, a timing belt change, front wheel bearings, and a minor exhaust repair in the resonator pipe but other than that it has been a solid car. Most of the repairs have been wear items or related to salt (calipers).
- Status
Similar threads
