I use lb ft...what's wrong with it? Prefer newton meters?
He didn't write lb ft, he wrote lbs.
I use lb ft...what's wrong with it? Prefer newton meters?
He didn't write lb ft, he wrote lbs.
We know what he meant though, yes?
We know what he meant though, yes?
.... you're not comparing base engines to base engines.
We're done here..
We know what he meant though, yes?
So? Isn't that the whole point? The Mazda6 offers no alternative. Furthermore, you can get a fully loaded Accord V6 for the same exact price as fully loaded Mazda6(going by MSRP). The Mazda6 is easily Mazda's worst vehicle in the lineup. 35k for a rental car lookalike that's loud, overpriced and has no power. Also are you going to answer my question on why they're selling so poorly? I'd love to know as you seem to think it's a brilliant vehicle and Mazda's marketing dept are geniuses.
LOL seriously. I'm also a member of a fitness forums I use 'lbs' a lot to describe lifts and such. Just a habit I guess but it's good to know the grammar police are out in full force on these forums.
The Mazda 3 is actually selling quite well.
Mazdas marketing department isn't the greatest, but it's certainly better thought out then your nonsense.
Mazda dropped the 3.7L from the Mazda 6 because it wasn't selling well and got terrible fuel economy. we've been over this already.
A lot of us on here like mazdas. We get it, you don't like Mazda. Why don't you just go spew your hatred on another forum? I've answered your questions, now you tell me why you're still on here.
Let me tell you something. It was down to the Mazda 6 or the Honda Accord for my dad, and he went for the Mazda purely because he didn't want the CVT in the Accord. If he was looking for a manual transmission, he would have bought the accord in a heartbeat. The Mazda gets better fuel economy in both the city and highway, and makes max torque at 3250rpm vs 3900rpm.(a concept you're still having trouble grasping) The 2.5 in the Mazda makes good torque at 3000rpm and is far peppier then the CVT in the Accord. There are LOTS of reasons why he bought it over the Honda.
If you would rather buy an Accord, then great, good for you. Yes the v6 is a more logical buy, but FWD with that sort of power is ridiculous and my dad didn't need all that extra power. I've laid all the facts out in a very logical manner for you so please, just stop CONTINUING to make yourself look like a moron.
Honda Accord, in EX-L V6 and Touring trims, does offer 6-speed automatic transmission with Sport mode for your choice if your dad really dislikes the CVT.⋯ Let me tell you something. It was down to the Mazda 6 or the Honda Accord for my dad, and he went for the Mazda purely because he didn't want the CVT in the Accord. If he was looking for a manual transmission, he would have bought the accord in a heartbeat.
No one here is talking about the Mazda3, it's a nice vehicle for what it is. The discussion here is the 6.
Again your long winded post failed to answer the question, why is the 6 selling so poorly? It's such a fantastic car according to you, and 'Mazda marketing knows what they're doing'. So again, why is it selling so poorly? That's great that your dad bought a Mazda6 over an Accord, but that's still not answering the question so let me answer it for you: It's not selling because it has a noisy cabin, is overpriced and under powered compared to the Accord and Camry. That and it's residual value is terrible compared to the Accord and Camry.
Honda Accord, in EX-L V6 and Touring trims, does offer 6-speed automatic transmission with Sport mode to choose if your dad really dislikes the CVT.
Back to the thread's subject.
HCCI in a commercial vehicle is a huge achievement for Mazda with an engine which otherwise uses gasoline and will be probably the main or only engine option in most models in the lineup. Unlike competitors, which offer efficient hybrid in a separate model, which sells far less units, Mazda will introduce fuel savings with more power to a large portion of their customers.
In addition to being fun to drive, it was the fuel-economy of the SkyActiv G which drew me to the CX-5 and this is also my main critique over the 2017, of not improving and even slight moving back on fuel economy.
With a supercharger, the SkyActiv X will probably get even better torque in low RPM, where it matters most to most drivers and will improve the drivability of the vehicle. Because it will still have a spark plug, it will probably drop in efficiency with increased load.
IMHO, the CX-5 has more than adequate power, compared to the competition, especially the base Forester and does not really need any more power. Some people will always crave more, but it is far from necessary. Most people get the 4 cylinder anyway, which is why the CR-V and RAV-4 never had / dropped their higher power alternatives.