2014 Mazda 3

**aRTie** · August 26th, 2015 04:16 PM

Originally Posted by Yatta

One issue with the MZR engine is its subpar fuel consumption coupled with its relatively low power vis-a-vis the heavy 2nd-gen Mz2 body. Maybe coupling it with the lighter Sky-Activ body will be able to get decent FC figures.

Skyactiv chasis only account to 3 - 5% better fuel economy, and that is 1st Gen vs 3rd Gen. 2nd Gen vs 3rd gen would be lower

source:
http://altairenlighten.com/wp-conten...ightweight.pdf

also, 2nd Gen Skyactiv (12:1 compression ratio) is already rated at 40 mpg Highway in US, just 1 mpg shy of 3rd gen, that is even without the Skyactiv body and transmission
major contributing factor for fuel economy is still the engine

anyway, fuel economy of MZR is not that bad imho. My wife owns one (2nd Gen) and she is consistently getting above 9km/l on pure city
that is why i honestly think that 3rd Gen MZR Maxx is still a very good value proposition. I'd get that in a heartbeat over another subcompact at roughly the same price, say Vios 1.5G

**travajante** · August 26th, 2015 04:23 PM

Originally Posted by aRTie

Skyactiv chasis only account to 3 - 5% better fuel economy, and that is 1st Gen vs 3rd Gen. 2nd Gen vs 3rd gen would be lower

source:
http://altairenlighten.com/wp-conten...ightweight.pdf

also, 2nd Gen Skyactiv (12:1 compression ratio) is already rated at 40 mpg Highway in US, just 1 mpg shy of 3rd gen, that is even without the Skyactiv body and transmission
major contributing factor for fuel economy is still the engine

anyway, fuel economy of MZR is not that bad imho. My wife owns one (2nd Gen) and she is consistently getting above 9km/l on pure city
that is why i honestly think that 3rd Gen MZR Maxx is still a very good value proposition. I'd get that in a heartbeat over another subcompact at roughly the same price, say Vios 1.5G

If only the total SkyActiv experience were just about FC....
Hi compression on regular fuel 1.5sky dyno'd * 99whp, something the 1.6MZR couldn't even come close to even w/ nitro racing, I bet. And that sky tranny is the best out there. Worth paying 100k more for or not....remains subjective.

**Yatta** · August 26th, 2015 04:32 PM

Originally Posted by aRTie

Skyactiv chasis only account to 3 - 5% better fuel economy, and that is 1st Gen vs 3rd Gen. 2nd Gen vs 3rd gen would be lower

source:
http://http://altairenlighten.com/wp...ightweight.pdf

also, 2nd Gen Skyactiv (12:1 compression ratio) is already rated at 40 mpg Highway in US, just 1 mpg shy of 3rd gen, that is even without the Skyactiv body and transmission
major contributing factor for fuel economy is still the engine

anyway, fuel economy of MZR is not that bad imho. My wife owns one (2nd Gen) and she is consistently getting above 9km/l on pure city
that is why i honestly think that 3rd Gen MZR Maxx is still a very good value proposition. I'd get that in a heartbeat over another subcompact at roughly the same price, say Vios 1.5G

Then there would not be any improvement in FC figures. I would cough up the extra P70k for the Sky-Activ 1.5.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Originally Posted by aRTie

Skyactiv chasis only account to 3 - 5% better fuel economy, and that is 1st Gen vs 3rd Gen. 2nd Gen vs 3rd gen would be lower

source:
http://http://altairenlighten.com/wp...ightweight.pdf

also, 2nd Gen Skyactiv (12:1 compression ratio) is already rated at 40 mpg Highway in US, just 1 mpg shy of 3rd gen, that is even without the Skyactiv body and transmission
major contributing factor for fuel economy is still the engine

anyway, fuel economy of MZR is not that bad imho. My wife owns one (2nd Gen) and she is consistently getting above 9km/l on pure city
that is why i honestly think that 3rd Gen MZR Maxx is still a very good value proposition. I'd get that in a heartbeat over another subcompact at roughly the same price, say Vios 1.5G

Then there would not be any improvement in FC figures. I would cough up the extra P70k for the Sky-Activ 1.5.

**travajante** · August 26th, 2015 04:45 PM

aRTie sir, test driving all 3 variants might help you decide best. Numbers may not tell you everything....

**JohnM** · August 26th, 2015 05:21 PM

Well for the extra 70k you also get:

- a better HU
- reverse sensors
- 16" mags
- fogs
- the coveted Skyactiv badge

**aRTie** · August 26th, 2015 05:23 PM

Originally Posted by travajante

aRTie sir, test driving all 3 variants might help you decide best. Numbers may not tell you everything....

oh, i might be misunderstood here.

I'm not saying that the 1.6l mzr maxx is at par with the skyactiv variants. If you can easily shell out 965k and up, you should definitely get the new ones. That's a no brainer. Why would we even try to compare technologies 10 years apart. But for some, 70k to 100k doesn't come that easily.

What i'm trying to say is for someone who is somewhat on the edge of their budget, say they have max of ~870k to spare, someone who is looking for subcompact since it is all they can afford, looking to purchase a Vios 1.5G or City VX, i think the 1.6 mzr maxx is still a good alternative.

Yes, you don't get the skyactiv engine but you still get other Mazda 3 goodness that comes with it, such as best in class handling, kodo styling (if that matters), yojin 3, etc.

by the way sir Trav, we already have a 2nd gen 3 1.6 MZR, I don't plan on getting another one with the same engine :D
it would be CX-3 (in case it reaches our shores) or 2.0 sky 3 for me by next year

my biggest dilemma though is that i love the aluminum metallic color and we already have it in our 2nd gen,
would be silly if we have 2 gen of mazda 3 with exactly the same color, don't you think?

**travajante** · August 26th, 2015 07:10 PM

Originally Posted by aRTie

oh, i might be misunderstood here.

I'm not saying that the 1.6l mzr maxx is at par with the skyactiv variants. If you can easily shell out 965k and up, you should definitely get the new ones. That's a no brainer. Why would we even try to compare technologies 10 years apart. But for some, 70k to 100k doesn't come that easily.

What i'm trying to say is for someone who is somewhat on the edge of their budget, say they have max of ~870k to spare, someone who is looking for subcompact since it is all they can afford, looking to purchase a Vios 1.5G or City VX, i think the 1.6 mzr maxx is still a good alternative.

Yes, you don't get the skyactiv engine but you still get other Mazda 3 goodness that comes with it, such as best in class handling, kodo styling (if that matters), yojin 3, etc.

by the way sir Trav, we already have a 2nd gen 3 1.6 MZR, I don't plan on getting another one with the same engine :D
it would be CX-3 (in case it reaches our shores) or 2.0 sky 3 for me by next year

my biggest dilemma though is that i love the aluminum metallic color and we already have it in our 2nd gen,
would be silly if we have 2 gen of mazda 3 with exactly the same color, don't you think?

Gotcha, aRTie sir.

...Oh, don't ask what I think....I'm colorblind & silver is the only color I see.It's the only 1 that seems clean even when filthy.:D

**vinrem** · August 26th, 2015 08:02 PM

My first choice was also silver, but I need to wait for at least 2-3 weeks for it to arrive and at that time, I was very very eager and excited to drive the M3, there were 2 color options available during that time, soul red and pearl white, my wife liked the pearl white kaya we bought the pearl white.

**kirito** · August 26th, 2015 09:00 PM

Here's Mr. Steven Tan's take on the Mazda 3 Maxx, he posted this in the m3 skyactiv ph fb group: "There are business reasons for bringing in the M3 with the 1.6L MZR engine. We had the same debate internally, and at the end, the customer is the reason. I drove both the 1.6L MZR and 1.5L Skyactiv in Miyoshi Proving ground back to back endlessly last year before we made the decision. NVH, launch feel and handling are very similar between those 2 cars.In a blind test -- which is impossible of course -- very few would be able to tell the difference. Company fleet buyers are the main customer description -- they would normally benchmark compact cars of 1.6L engine. The 1.6L engine is an older generation Mazda engine, but it's not down on power vs the 1.5L Skyactiv, even if it's not a as fuel efficient. It does have the same Skyactiv chassis and suspension engineering, has the same high made-in-hiroshima quality and craftmanship. The engines of the competitive cars are not newer than the MZR, it's just that the Skyactiv is so ahead of the rest, that's all. Hopefully this helps explain the rationale for the Mazda3 1.6L."

**travajante** · August 26th, 2015 09:11 PM

Originally Posted by kirito

Here's Mr. Steven Tan's take on the Mazda 3 Maxx, he posted this in the m3 skyactiv ph fb group: "There are business reasons for bringing in the M3 with the 1.6L MZR engine. We had the same debate internally, and at the end, the customer is the reason. I drove both the 1.6L MZR and 1.5L Skyactiv in Miyoshi Proving ground back to back endlessly last year before we made the decision. NVH, launch feel and handling are very similar between those 2 cars.In a blind test -- which is impossible of course -- very few would be able to tell the difference. Company fleet buyers are the main customer description -- they would normally benchmark compact cars of 1.6L engine. The 1.6L engine is an older generation Mazda engine, but it's not down on power vs the 1.5L Skyactiv, even if it's not a as fuel efficient. It does have the same Skyactiv chassis and suspension engineering, has the same high made-in-hiroshima quality and craftmanship. The engines of the competitive cars are not newer than the MZR, it's just that the Skyactiv is so ahead of the rest, that's all. Hopefully this helps explain the rationale for the Mazda3 1.6L."

Not only am I stricken w/ OCD, weird eccentricities & mild autism....I just now realized I've gone so dense!

Kirito brah, can you explain that again in plain English??? Hahaha. Thanks!!!!:D