Well, that's disappointing. They have a decent rebate on these right now but I really don't like cylinder deactivation on a four cylinder engine. Any engine really, but especially on a four cylinder.
Mazda CX-30
- Thread starter Al
- Start date
Patman
Staff member
My Corvette shuts down 4 of the 8 cylinders at steady cruising speeds in 4th gear and above but it’s really smooth when it makes the transition and it goes back to 8 cylinders as soon as you give it more throttle. But because this is suspected to cause various issues on the Corvette, such as torque converter failure, transmission failure, torque tube failure (which I had) and lifter failure, I no longer let it go into 4 cylinder mode very often. In my Corvette (which has the paddle shift 8 speed automatic) if I keep it in paddle mode and do all of the shifting, it keeps it permanently in 8 cylinder mode. I know I’m losing 2MPG on the highway but it still gets over 35 on the highway anyway even with all 8 cylinders going (80 mph in 8th gear has the engine at only 1500 rpm, so that helps MPG a lot)
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2023
- Messages
- 1,434
The Turbo version doesn’t have cylinder deactivation for what it’s worth.
I have really never noticed it except in gas mileage bonus.
As i said, it's very subtle and hardly noticeable. It feels like a very slight (single) engine miss and only occurs when more power is called for (pulling a slight grade or when a itchy foot is planning a passing maneuver). I never feel the deactivation just the reactivation. I too wish there was a way of turning it off and feel it's not worth it on a 4 cylinder for the miniscule mpg increase. It's a technical/complicated feature that has minimal benefits in my opinion. I assume it's needed for corporate fuel economy averages and credits....nothing else. I had a 2016 CX5 with a NA 2.5 (no cylinder deactivation) and it's fuel economy was only about 1 to 1.5 mpg less than my cx30. I attribute that to the bigger and heavier cx5 not the lack of cylinder deactivation.
I have the same engine (w/o deactivation) in my Mazda6 and I’ve never gotten less than 35mpg. I would happily sacrifice a little bit of mileage for less mechanical complexity.
Unfortunately that choice requires playing the “which added mechanical component is most likely to fail?” game. I don’t like either option.
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2023
- Messages
- 1,434
I know what I went with: the one that puts a smile on my face and is easier to replace.
Like me, you're probably not planning to buy a Nissan with variable compression. I mean, what could go wrong?
I had a 2014 Mazda6 as well and was thrilled with it's gas mileage. Like you said 35mpg was common on road trips. I remember as much as 38mpg! That was a great car as well. Roomy, comfortable, big trunk, and great Mazda handling (on top of the good fuel economy). Too bad they had to dump it in favor of more SUV's.
I wondered about that, OM says it has it, but I have not heard or felt anything. I might have missed the part about the turbo not having it.
2023 Mazda CX-30 non turbo engine we had at 21k.So far good one recall brakes a year ago,did replaced key fob battery per dashboard light.It feel cramped at backseat,gas mileage upper 20' that gas tank small,odd engine noise when cold.At least not a CVT,no turbo,no start/stop feature,easy oil change,easy replacement cabin filter and air filter.
