What if this happend to the MS3
- Thread starter BayAreaMS3
- Start date
Nliiitend1
Member
You're missing the point...
They'd have to change to a different drive layout to do what you're suggesting, whereas with the Impreza->WRX->STI and the Altima->Altima SE-R they used the same drive layout (AWD and FWD, repspectively).
They'd have to change to a different drive layout to do what you're suggesting, whereas with the Impreza->WRX->STI and the Altima->Altima SE-R they used the same drive layout (AWD and FWD, repspectively).
happy and angry
Member
God, for hundreds of reasons. You can fantasize all you want, but cars need to be made in the real world. With real world concerns. And real world limitations. And real world compromises made to bring products to market.
Right now is not a good time for excessive research and R&D when they already have a winning formula with this car. You can't just slap a new tranny and a rear end on a vehicle and say "TADA, RELIABLE AWD SYSTEM!" You need to find room for the rear drive shaft, retest the vehicle handling and readjust suspension, rework the ECU and the additional electronics you'll need to manage power in an AWD setup, and a whole laundry list of other things. And the costs will be passed on to us, the consumer.
Can they do it? Yes. Will they? Right now why bother other than to feed some childish fantasy on a message board? The current car is winning awards and magazine comparisons, forcing other automakers to respond to its presence in the marketplace, and most importantly, selling well. If they price themselves out of the market segment they are winning right now, they may not have a winning formula anymore. It's not worth the risk right now, and frankly I don't know that it ever would be. Incremental improvement in successful vehicles is how branding and identity are established for a vehicle, which is why 30 years after they were introduced the Civic and the Corolla still sell well and have a reputation for fuel economy and reliability and quality. Mazda taking steps to try and do the same with the Mazda3 is an intelligent thing to do. The Mazdaspeed3 is no different. We'll see a moonroof option, a bit of added weight (unfortunately), a small 5 HP increase which probably means a slightly fatter torque curve and a small improvement in power dropoff up around 6000rpm, some suspension and brake work (maybe). Another step down the right path.
Plus, competing with the STI and Evo market segment is not something a company without the same WRC pedigree like Mazda really wants to do right now. You throw the same half-assed AWD setup the Mazdaspeed6 had in the Mazdaspeed3 then line it up against two of the most technologically advanced AWD vehicles on the market with the sort of reputation those vehicles have and you will get killed. Or you pay out the ass to develop a new, good AWD system and push vehicle costs through the roof. Neither idea is smart, neither idea is likely.
If for some reason Mazda does do that, it won't be any time soon given how everyone is bleeding money and showing sales decreases. Maybe in a few years if markets bounce back we'll see a Mazdaspeed3 GTX, who knows? Anyone worried about it happening now or even any time soon is crazy.
true.
a. The resale value is still strong because the cars are brand freakin new. And really it's not that good. KBB resale is around 15k last time I looked, that's pretty bad imo.
b. Cars depreciate yes. But a mazdaspeed protege still has a good resale value because they only made them for a half a year, same with the miata, etc. Excuse me for not wanting the streets flooded with ms3s like it is stis and evos.
I don't know what the hell your talking about with awd. Yes it's not awd, so what?
Nliiitend1
Member
Ya but that was also front wheel drive.
Seriously though if AWD is your fantasy you should have brought a different car from the start.
The chances of a car transferring its driveline to different wheels in a current car are slim to none.
If the car was changing its platform to a newer C1 or something completely different then there is a greater chance.
AWD cannot be an afterthought, it must be designed into the car from the start.
Last edited:
Nliiitend1
Member
Mazda 6 FWD -> mazdaspeed 6 AWD so whats the problem? Or atleast make another AWD Speed6! Id settle for RWD too
You're forgetting that Ford already had their own version of the Mazda 6 (the Fusion) with an existing AWD system...
Besides, the AWD system in the MS6 sucks balls compared to the systems in the Subarus and EVOs.
WHaaaat? I was under the impression that it worked very well. Only AWD when you need it, then disengaged when not needed. What's better than that? AWD launches + no AWD powertrain loss once up to speed = best of both worlds, yeah?
I thought the fusion shared with the mercury milan not with the 6, and aint the AWD on the fusion new? I didnt know it was offered when the Mazdaspeed6 was done..
Man the threads about this are really annoying.
The only way this would ever happen is if the AWD system was shared across a few vehicles. Meaning that we would have to wait for the Focus RS to come over AND be AWD. Also having the C30 be awd (over here) and the S40 would help.
The only way this would ever happen is if the AWD system was shared across a few vehicles. Meaning that we would have to wait for the Focus RS to come over AND be AWD. Also having the C30 be awd (over here) and the S40 would help.
Last edited:
Nliiitend1
Member
The 1st gen Fusion/Milan/MKZ (Zephyr) do a lot of parts/platform sharing with the Mazda 6 (incidentally, the 2nd gen cars shar even MORE parts/dimensions).
The 1st gen Fusion/Milan/MKZ (Zephyr) use a slightly stretched Mazda 6 platform as their base. They've had an AWD option since 2007 model year, and it is the same basic system that the MS6 uses. I was wrong about it being available before the MS6, but you can be sure Ford/Mazda had plans to use that AWD system in more than just the MS6 when the MS6 was released, which was my point.
That being said, there is an AWD Volvo S40 that uses the C1 platform, but it is ALSO a crappy system that is primarily FWD until slippage is detected (and torque then becomes split up to 50/50) just like the system in the MS6/Fusion/Milan/MKZ.
The point is, they've got plenty of good reasons for NOT making the MS3 AWD, and I for one am happier to have FWD than to have a crappy pseudo-AWD system that adds a bunch of weight that I don't need 99% of the time.
Nliiitend1
Member
Because the development cost is going to be spread over way more units being sold than if Mazda were to make a limited-run range-topping specialty car. Also, adding AWD to a RWD platform generally presents less engineering problems than adding AWD to an existing FWD platform (not to mention the fact that the G was designed from the get-go with the plan to offer AWD and RWD versions).
Nliiitend1
Member
Crappy front-bias, that's what's wrong with that. A rear-bias or 50/50 full-time system will likely outperform a front-bias system every time. Also, even thought you don't have powertrain losses due to rearward torque when only the front wheels are being driven doesn't mean
you're not wasting energy due to the unneeded rotation/drag of of unpowered drivetrain parts....plus there's the added weight of the system that further saps efficiency without adding any benefit (when it's not getting power, that is).
I'm not saying it's worthless. I'm just saying that I wouldn't likely buy a performance car that utilized that type of system. It's more suited to RAV4s, CR-Vs, and the type of cars that IJACs drive, IMO.
