Mazda developing new Skyactiv-X / Skyactiv-D inline 6

ssun30

Expert
Messages
3,326
Reactions
7,418
Mazda needs another crossover or even two between CX-5 and CX-9. For some reason US doesn't receive the 2-row large size CX-8 sold in Asia even though that product would make a ton of sense.

For sure future Mazda crossovers will use this longitudinal platform. That includes CX-8/9. They still need a 4.8m CX-"6"/"7" to properly fill the midsize segment (CX-8 is 4.9m).

The purpose of longitudinal rwd is NOT to compete with Germans. It's forced by the Inline-6 layout.
 

Levi

Expert
Messages
2,707
Reactions
3,134
Mazda needs another crossover or even two between CX-5 and CX-9. For some reason US doesn't receive the 2-row large size CX-8 sold in Asia even though that product would make a ton of sense.

For sure future Mazda crossovers will use this longitudinal platform. That includes CX-8/9. They still need a 4.8m CX-"6"/"7" to properly fill the midsize segment (CX-8 is 4.9m).

The purpose of longitudinal rwd is NOT to compete with Germans. It's forced by the Inline-6 layout.
Volvo had I6 and even V8 with transverse layout. If they stopped, the main reason is downsizing, no bigger engine than 2l I4.
 

Sulu

Admirer
Messages
990
Reactions
1,259
I do not see any need for an established automaker to invest in a new inline 6-cylinder at this time, especially a small, low-resource automaker that can barely meet emissions requirements as it is, not when petroleum fuel-fired internal combustion engines will be banned starting in a decade.

The only automakers that I believe *need* to invest in I6 engines are those with legacy I6 engines powering larger, sportier cars -- the European sport-luxury brands and sports car brands -- and those are increasingly being powered by high-output 4-cylinder engines. Sales have proven that there is only a small market for larger sport-luxury cars and the German brands own that market; all other luxury brands trying to sell mid-sized and larger sport-luxury cars are getting out of that market.

So the only reason for an automaker to invest in a new I6 engine is to prove that it too can play with the big boys. I call that a Hail Mary pass, a desperate move by an automaker to move into a market segment where there is no demand, and so, little chance of success. I believe that Mazda's RWD I6 powertrain and platform is the wrong move.
 

ssun30

Expert
Messages
3,326
Reactions
7,418
Volvo had I6 and even V8 with transverse layout. If they stopped, the main reason is downsizing, no bigger engine than 2l I4.
I know someone is going to bring up the Volvo I6s. And there are good reasons why other manufacturers don't do it. There's no point arguing with me, you see from the pictures the powertrain is clearly in a longitudinal layout. Engineers tend to follow the path of least resistance: they always want to make the solution easier, and in this case Mazda chose the easier route.

Volvo is different, they insisted on a transverse platform because that suits their safety image: having all that engine in front provides more buffering and transverse FWD platforms are inherently more stable than longitudinal RWD. When the short I6s were designed (early 2000s), ESP systems of the day aren't nearly as sophisticated as today's and RWD cars from that era are actually dangerous to drive in wet and icy conditions. RWD cars only became really safe to drive in the later part of 2000s.

V8 in transverse layout is incredibly stupid because of all the extra weight making the car terrible to drive.

So the only reason for an automaker to invest in a new I6 engine is to prove that it too can play with the big boys. I call that a Hail Mary pass, a desperate move by an automaker to move into a market segment where there is no demand, and so, little chance of success. I believe that Mazda's RWD I6 powertrain and platform is the wrong move.
I6 vs. V6 decision has nothing to do with 'playing with the big boys'. If a manufacturer wants to get into the high performance market, they would actually want a V6, because V6 allows a lot more displacement and thus more power in a much smaller package.

The reason Mazda went for I6 is for simplicity. I6 is just easier and cheaper to make. Mazda never intended to compete with high performance German cars because Skyactiv-X was never designed for that purpose. I scoff at all the journalists dreaming about some powerful Mazda coupe with 400hp I6. Skyactiv-X from the very beginning is all about efficiency, efficiency, efficiency.

The reason why people relate I6 to 'performance' is because of the wonderful JDM and BMW I6s. But if you look at the most successful modern performance six cylinder engines they tend to be V6: Nissan VR38, Ford EcoBoost 3.5, and Mercedes M276. BMW stayed with I6 because of their full modular lineup strategy which saves cost.
 
Last edited:

Levi

Expert
Messages
2,707
Reactions
3,134
It makes more sense to have bigger cars with bigger engines, because they will be the last to become BEVs, even if they started first for cost reasons.
 

mediumhot

Follower
Messages
456
Reactions
606
Mercedes has completely switched to inline for their sixers. In turbo era it's cheaper to upgrade your four banger to six than to develop or adapt more complex V6 for turbo application. Mazda's new inline is evolution of their I4 Turbo program.
 

Sulu

Admirer
Messages
990
Reactions
1,259
The fallout from dieselgate (and upcoming, even tighter Euro 7 emissions regulations) continues.

Mazda is pulling its diesel engine option from sale in Canada and the USA. I am guessing that the poor performance of the 2.2-litre SkyActiv-D diesel is the reason (only offering 168 horsepower (125 kilowatts) and 290 pound-feet (393 Newton-meters) of torque, and could only return 27 mpg city and 30 mpg highway, 28 mpg combined in the CX-5).



In related news, Hyundai has announced that it has stopped development of new diesel engines, although current diesels will continue to be updated.
 

maiaramdan

Expert
Messages
1,806
Reactions
1,416
The mankind failure continue
I still have a ZERO faith in EV and still WON'T EVER BUY IT
 

Sulu

Admirer
Messages
990
Reactions
1,259
Let's hope that this is not another answer to a question nobody (in North America) asked.

The author of this article below is critical of Mazda’s current plans to move further upmarket by introducing I6 engines in a RWD platform. I must say that I agree with him.

According to this article, Mazda is set to introduce new, large crossovers to replace the CX-5 and CX-8 (the slightly smaller, East Asian equivalent to North America’s CX-9), but because the CX-5 and current CX-8 are still popular (but how popular, really, is the CX-9 here?), the current and new models will be sold side-by-side. That is a mistake, I believe; the cheaper (FWD-based) models will cannibalize the sales of the larger, more-expensive RWD-based models.

Buyers of crossovers (especially mass-market brand shoppers in North America) are looking for passenger and cargo space (which FWD-based models optimize), not for performance; only BMW and Mercedes-Benz shoppers are looking for performance crossovers. I believe that RWD-based Mazda crossovers will not sell as well as their FWD-based models.

There is a reason why almost all crossovers sold are FWD-based rather than being RWD-based. Space-efficient, FWD-based crossovers are what sells.

The article also says that because costs of the RWD-based models are getting high, Mazda is asking its suppliers to cut costs (in other words, reduce real quality of the components). That is a big mistake, in my opinion.

If Mazda wants to be taken seriously as an up-market brand, it needs to be perceived as a high-quality automaker. Nothing is worse than a premium brand-wannabe will poor-quality materials and components. That will see worse than a mass-market brand seen to have low-quality materials.

Mazda may need to find a market niche, like Subaru has done, to survive. The rotary engine – even if only in a plug-in hybrid – may be that niche. But I doubt that moving further upmarket, with RWD performance architectures, is that niche. Just ask Volkswagen and its attempt to move upmarket with the Phaeton.
 

Levi

Expert
Messages
2,707
Reactions
3,134
CUVs are not bought with rational arguments but with emotional reactions. Most will not tell the difference between FWD and RWD especially when they are some kind AWD versions.
 

maiaramdan

Expert
Messages
1,806
Reactions
1,416
@Sulu , Agree on space point but not in the efficiency one as both are nearly efficient nowadays

Honestly I feel happy to see a mainstream Mazda & Ford have it that way in a sea of FF CUVs

Another point is that the already FF CX9 & CX5 not sold in a lot of quantity already because of the space but still braised for sporty driving

So I don't think the FR CX9 & CX5 can be hurt by the FF variants, I even thinking in Mazda we can see the opposite as I believe the FF will get hurt very much and maybe won't return after couple of generations at max.
 

maiaramdan

Expert
Messages
1,806
Reactions
1,416
I found this on my Instagram

And I thought I need to share it
4552
In short translation

That Mazda will adopt the TNGA-e to some of its vehicles

And in return Toyota will adopt the new Mazda longitudinal to at least 3 cars

Next Generation IS
Next generation 4 door coupe
Toyota model

The sketch is by BestCar Japan
----------------------------

So if this is true

Next generation IS
A midsize 4 door coupe " which maybe the direct successor to the GS or maybe the GS return"
A Toyota model " return of Mark or it's direct successor"

So from that we know that Toyota didn't want to kill the FR it's just the TNGA-N is catastrophic and TNGA-L is way heavy for mid and small vehicles adoption
 
Last edited:

Levi

Expert
Messages
2,707
Reactions
3,134
rwd toyota? best news. i always liked "premium" cars with "mainstream" badges like vw phaeton and touareg.
 

ssun30

Expert
Messages
3,326
Reactions
7,418
I just checked their pricing in US. $35k for a fully loaded CX-30/3? Do they really think they can charge BBAL price? The CX-5 is their bread and butter and they want to switch to a much more expensive platform and powertrain?

People either want a cheeseburger or steak dinner not steak in two pieces of bread.

Also Mazda needs to swallow their pride and just adopt THS-II already. It's a 'free' gift from Toyota and works everywhere. Better than paying environment fines and (eventually) banned from EU/China.

Skyactiv-X has proven to be a flop. In China they invested a few hundred millions in the production line and they sold a few hundred Skyactiv-X a year. That's the worst return on investment I've seen.
 

Sulu

Admirer
Messages
990
Reactions
1,259
Since Ford left, Mazda has been forced to find its own way in the world, even as new powertrain and new platform development get ever more expensive. Mazda believes that the way to go is to move upmarket, where profit margins are greater than for mass-market brands. But it does not seem to be working, according to that analysis I posted earlier and my personal observation (admittedly anecdotal); Mazda vehicles do not seem to be selling (can shoppers get used to seeing high, BBAL-priced Mazdas?). And I don't quite understand how Mazda, which only makes and sells smaller vehicles, is not able to meet European emissions regulations.

Mazda seems to be too proud to accept help from a big brother like Toyota. Toyota has offered (for free) use of its Hybrid system. But Mazda still insists on going its own way, which now involves developing (very likely with Toyota's help), a line of larger, heavier (and less fuel efficient) vehicles with an I6 engine that can only find limited use (in longitudinal RWD-based platforms), whereas a V6 engine could be shared in transverse FWD and longitudinal RWD platforms.

Enthusiasts and car mags are happy with this but enthusiasts do not buy enough vehicles to keep a brand alive. If I may mention that other Lexus discussion board, there are a number of vocal members there who claim that they *would* buy Mazda vehicles but obviously, not enough are *actually* buying Mazda vehicles.

Mazda may yet prove that the late Sergio Marchionne was right, that the only way for automotive brands to stay alive is to consolidate or cooperate with other brands. Honda is cooperating with GM on EVs and autonomous vehicles. Ford and VW are cooperating on EVs and light trucks. Toyota is offering to cooperate with the small Japanese automakers.
 

ssun30

Expert
Messages
3,326
Reactions
7,418
Internally there is a faction in Mazda that strongly opposes electrification in any form. Mazda is quite different from other car makers in that they tend to be very obsessive about things they believe in (i.e. run by 'enthusiasts'). You can tell this by the MX-30 when almost every major car maker has abandoned the EREV approach. It's not economically viable and the only reason they do it is to keep the rotary program alive. Mazda is the polar opposite of Toyota: they make many decisions based on belief instead of rationality.

Until 2016 Mazda still believed Skyactiv-X could beat the carbon footprint of BEV and HVs (they made a lot of presentations ). Problem is, they were comparing a hypothetical Mazda 3 Skyactiv-X to gen3 Prius and gen1 Leaf.

Mazda basically squandered half a decade on unsuccessful powertrain development after the initial success of Skyactiv-G.

Skyactiv-X: over budget and delayed. Didn't meet the original thermal efficiency target (45% instead of 46.5%). Shipped as unfinished product (NVH issue not addressed). No true hybrid integration. Set up a 500 million line in China but sold a few hundred a year. Not a success in EU either due to fuel consumption, emissions and high price.

Skyactiv-D: overbudget due to very complicated 2-in-1 turbocharger. Failed to deliver promised emissions reduction (had to detune considerably to meet EPA standard). Released with poor timing (Dieselgate).

Skyactiv-G turbo: at least this is a good engine. But was limited in application (CX-9). Mazda should have offered it in almost every mainstream product (like it does now) in 2017 and should have developed smaller variants (1.5T and 2.0T).
 
Last edited:

Gecko

Administrator
Messages
4,721
Reactions
11,283
It is really important that we stop talking about "RWD" and "Mazda" in the same context. I pointed this out a few pages ago, and many have continued to run with the idea of "RWD Mazda." Please go back and read Mazda's Q4 press release about the I6 and their new AWD architecture that will accommodate it.

There has been absolutely ZERO official mention of a RWD Mazda platform, much less supplied by Toyota.

“Powertrain: I6 engine (Gasoline/Diesel/X)/ AWD” While it was expected that a petrol and diesel engine would be spun from the new inline six engine range, some speculation remained as to the role SkyActiv-X spark-controlled compression ignition would play, we now know both regular petrol and SPCCI versions will be made available. At no point does Mazda reference rear-wheel drive, suggesting the new Large range may be all-wheel drive only.
 

Sulu

Admirer
Messages
990
Reactions
1,259
I believe that we are splitting hairs here. Regardless of how Mazda decides to label its new platform, either RWD or AWD, it seems certain that this platform is being designed for its new inline-6 engines. The use of an I6 engine implies a longitudinal architecture with a driveshaft from the aft-end of the longitudinal transmission to the rear axle. Whether or not there is also a transfer case or that new longitudinal transmission happens to be a transaxle (like Subaru or Audi) is beside the point.

The fact that Mazda has talked about moving further upmarket with a smooth I6 engine (which is very unlikely to be shoehorned into a transverse architecture) driving a RWD (or AWD) car, how they decide to label the platform is not worth arguing over.

What is worth arguing over is whether Mazda is being smart to try to move even further upmarket, even as sales are dropping, or it is merely being stubbornly independent, and how much help Mazda is receiving from big brother Toyota. Mazda is such a small company that I do not believe that it could afford to develop a whole line of brand new I6 engines, in SkyActiv-G, SkyActiv-D and SkyActiv-X flavours, a brand new longitudinal transmission, and a brand new RWD/AWD platform to support it all, without help (financially or by borrowing a platform).

I know that Mazda is the darling of the enthusiast crowd, but no car company these days can survive with only enthusiast support.