US Diesel's big splash introduction

40 would be great but taking 10 seconds to hit 60 not so much I'll take 30+ with great torque at basement revs
 
Where does the 10secs to 60 come from?

184ps diesel pulling 1820kg in the UK is 9.5 sec to 60mph. With 445nm passing should be easy, diesels excel with in gear performance.
Do the US have any bhp figures yet for the diesel they will get?
 
It comes from everyone saying because it doesn't get @40 (like the Equinox that does offer great hwy mpg but is slow as hell) it can't compete. Not to say mediocre fe won't hurt it but i think it can approach the 10% they targeted..depending on price
 
If the torque figure I quote before for your version is about right then that's the figure of our previous model which did 0-62mph in 9.08 seconds
 
If the torque figure I quote before for your version is about right then that's the figure of our previous model which did 0-62mph in 9.08 seconds

Subscribed, and/but waiting for news. As a TDI owner, I've never thought it was about a 0-60, somewhat the MPG, but more the improved daily drivability from the very wide torque (at high altitude).
 
Subscribed, and/but waiting for news. As a TDI owner, I've never thought it was about a 0-60, somewhat the MPB, instead more the improved daily drivability from the torque (given, at high altitude).

True but seems the focus on 0-60 is increasing regardless of type (petrol[gas]/diesel)
 
Subscribed, and/but waiting for news. As a TDI owner, I've never thought it was about a 0-60, somewhat the MPG, but more the improved daily drivability from the very wide torque (at high altitude).

It is all about 30-50 and 50-70mph times, but as 0-60 figures are being mentioned...
 
Mazda 3 has to be the most poorly thought out Mazda in the entire lineup including all cars we never get CX4 and CX8. Its lightweight but the 2.5 seems better in my CX5 the way its tuned. MPG is barely better or same than a Mazda6 (which is bad with the 2.5). Rear seat is practically useless unless you are small. Its sad that even Europeans with their twisties are not liking the 3. It has the worst quality interior now that CX3 trumps it as well. I really wanted to like it - but my CX5 is more rev happy and eager to drop the hammer than the 3 I drove.
Of all Mazda's I would say Gen 1 CX5 with 2.5 has the best setup wrt to driving and low end torque.

Sorry to say I disagree (I better given we've bought two 3's in the last year...lol).

Our MPG is just fine, the engine (2.5) goes quite well, the interior is basically on par with other Mazda offerings (albeit without the next gen sound isolation available elsewhere) and yes, the rear seat is 'smallish'...it's a compact car.

Same power, more aerodynamic, better handling, available with a manual and more fuel efficient than a CX5. CX5 has a bit more space and AWD though.

And the car still sells in pretty high numbers (for Mazda). But car sales in general are dropping (CUVs!) and it's also at EOL with a replacement due shortly and is older than a lot of the competition. That's not much of a recipe for record sales and I'd say it's pretty impressive how well it still fares given those things.

I'm excited to see what the next gen 3 looks like, whether it will have available AWD (the one major thing I miss) and if they'll eventually release a 2.5L version of the 'X' motor in it.

I'd also love Mazda to give me an 'upsize' option for an AWD hatch/wagon/CUV with a manual...
 
Not sure how newsworthy this is but figgered I throw it here- the '19 9er is live on mazdausa and AA/ACP are on the menu looks like Touring and above. Not the '19 I was hoping for but its something. BTW- wtf can I still build the 2017 3 and CX-5??
 
Last edited:
Not sure how newsworthy this is but figgered I throw it here- the '19 9er is live on mazdausa and AA/ACP are on the menu looks like Touring and above. Not the '19 I was hoping for but its something. BTW- wtf can I still build the 2017 3 and CX-5??

Nice. See an oil burner?
 
Purely for interest, just a few images of our latest incarnation taken today at a dealer.

The Adblue filler neck;

IMG_4895.jpg


This is standard to the US but until now a 800 (approx $1100) option for us - radar cruise is at last standard;

IMG_4896.jpg


Very nice 19* wheels;

IMG_4897.jpg


Tell tale signs of an Adblue tank. The single tail pipe and blanking plug to the left;

IMG_4898.jpg


The aluminium inlet to the variable nozzle twin turbo pack;

IMG_4899.jpg
 
Purely for interest, just a few images of our latest incarnation taken today at a dealer.

The Adblue filler neck;

IMG_4895.jpg


This is standard to the US but until now a 800 (approx $1100) option for us - radar cruise is at last standard;

IMG_4896.jpg


Very nice 19* wheels;

IMG_4897.jpg


Tell tale signs of an Adblue tank. The single tail pipe and blanking plug to the left;

IMG_4898.jpg


The aluminium inlet to the variable nozzle twin turbo pack;

IMG_4899.jpg

No front camera for 360 view monitor under MRCC Mazda badge.....
 
Yes link works. Silly that it's still an option on top spec model

Aye well, they*ve included MRCC so I guess paying for the extravagance of the 360 camera is kind of acceptable. I would have paid it for the ALH - one of the best features of my car.
 
By the way, that car in the photos looks black but its actually deep crystal blue. Just look at the colours in the flakes when the sun shines on it.

IMG_4900.jpg
 
Back