2009 Mazda 6: Sold

*Lighting, not gauges.

Mazda is a great company with many products I would buy if I were your regular consumer... handling, braking, feature content, design... all phenominal.

The only thing lacking in Mazda is power, with the exception of the Mazdaspeed 3. If the MX-5 and RX-8 offered more power, then they can be legit sports cars. If they had more power in their CUV's, they would get more buyers.

The new Mazda6 isn't lacking in power in either trim, nor is the 10' Mazda3 2.5L, or even the 2.0L. The CX-7 could be better with some of the nannys removed to smooth out the engine power, but the CX-9 has good power. The Mazda5 and 2010 CX-7 2.5L will be/is lacking in power but there isn't much you can do there and the people buying them really don't care about max power. The RX-8 and MX-5 could use more power but that's not their main goal. They will have more power though, at least the RX-8 for sure.

Mazda has a knack. Their materials are probably mid pack, but the design is done so well that I love the interiors in most if not all their models.

Just make sure that your door doesn't accidentally open while you're admiring the interior lighting, mmkay?

huyracing wrote: "The only thing lacking in Mazda is power, with the exception of the Mazdaspeed 3."

Mazda is lacking power? 78% of Mazda's line-up is available with over 200 hp. The only vehicle you found acceptable power-wise was the Mazdaspeed3, and it doesn't make the most power in Mazda's line-up.

CX-9: 273 hp / 270 lb-ft
Mazda6 s: 272 hp / 269 lb-ft
Mazdaspeed3: 263 hp / 280 lb-ft
CX-7: 244 hp / 258 lb-ft
Tribute s: 240 hp / 223 lb-ft
RX-8: 232 hp / 159 lb-ft
B4000: 207 hp / 238 lb-ft
MX-5: 166 hp / 140 lb-ft
Mazda3 s: 156 hp / 150 lb-ft
Mazda5: 153 hp / 148 lb-ft

MX-5 and RX-8 not legit sports cars? When the road gets twisty, those two cars will outrun many so-called legit sports cars that have a whole lot more power. Muscle cars they are not. Sports cars they definitely are.

Ya Electroluminescent gauges and other interior mood lighting are only on GT trims on all Mazda vehicles.

I don't know why they do that. I wouldn't get any non-GT Mazda because of this.
I guess this is Mazda's way of saying the GT trim is the luxury trim, like an ES350 to a Camry.

jstandefer-

I'm the first one to defend mazda to anyone. I think they're the poor man's BMW in terms of handling. I worked for Mazda for a couple years, and I think the RX-8 handles as good as anything out there.

That said, lets face facts. RX-8= 238/149 370Z= 332/270 350Z= 306/268.

Now granted, the RX-8 will handle circles around the Z cars, but that doesn't quite make up for it's 100lb/ft disadvantage in torque.

Imagine if Mazda boosted the hp by 50 and the torque by 75 in all their cars. That was his point, not that they're not sporty cars, but that they don't compete very well with the cars that are their direct competitors.

But here is another fact:

RX-8 = 232 / 159
S2000 = 237 / 162

I don't disagree about the RX-8's power. It would be awesome to see more power or less weight. A turbocharger can really skyrocket the torque, but it also makes the engine a ticking time bomb. That should be rectified by the new 16X rotary that should appear sometime next year. Larger displacement, better cooling, all-aluminum. In the meantime, I really want to see the RX-8's engine under the hood of the Miata! RX-8 minus 600+ pounds equals one awesome roadster.

But still, if you're not drag racing, the RX-8 is a blast to drive!

They are very attractively done, but I'm not find of the deep hooded tunnel look. It's difficult to get a 100% view of all the gauges at once without cutting something off.

I just have to say, what? In all of them? Why? They're not seriously behind the Curve, the FWD Mazda6 with 340FT-LBS of torque would be a little unnecessary and hard to achieve with the 3.7L don't you think? The Z can't even make that kind of torque. Same goes for the 2.5L, 75 extra FT-lbs? Why and how do you plan to make that power while keeping or improving fuel economy, and driveability? Costs would go through the roof.

WALL-E is staring at me!

I prefer the orange of my Altima.

"Imagine if Mazda boosted the hp by 50 and the torque by 75 in all their cars. That was his point, not that they're not sporty cars, but that they don't compete very well with the cars that are their direct competitors."

Wait a minute, after cx7lover's post, I re-read fadetoblackii's post. Not competitive? All of them? The only one that isn't really competitive is the RX-8 and perhaps the Miata if you're comparing it to the S2000 or Solstice GXP, both of which are in an entirely different price range. OK, so the soon-to-be-discontinued B4000 is pretty underpowered too. But otherwise, most of the models are near the top of their class power-wise.

First off, you guys need to learn about power to weight ratio. So what if the Mazdaspeed 3 doesn't make the most power of the bunch, it most certianly will out-accelerate the CX-9 because of the power to weight advantage. And why is that enough power? Because it is a FWD car...

And you want to compare the S2000 to the RX-8? Not even in the same league, buddy! Even though the power figures are similar, the S2000 is capable of high 13 second 1/4 mile times. The RX-8 is a mid-high 14 second car. That there is a HUGE difference...

It doesn't matter how good these cars handle because when you are that slow, you're getting passed up. Even the S2000 can't fend off a 350Z anymore, let alone the 370Z. The Miata's and RX-8's do great in autoX, but beyond that they are outclassed.

My dad was shopping for a CUV and he was sold on the CX-9 until he drove it and complained how slow it was... this is my dad, an old man with no speed aspirations whatsoever!

I'm sorry, but the truth hurts. Mazda can easily shove that motor from the MS3 into the MX-5 or RX-8 and it'd be far more competitive... heck, even the Renesis in MX-5 would be nice. Tradition is great but progress is better.

Very nice-looking gauge cluster.

Gotta second the love for RX-8. I really hope the new 16x rotary will improve reliability/fuel economy and torque. Obviously, gearheads love the idea of the rotary, but it has been the weak link of an otherwise stellar sports car.

Hey, you said power, not power-to-weight ratios. Power-to-weight is whole different ball game, which is something that really drags down the base-engined Solstice and Sky, but somehow they are better than a Miata because they make a handful more horsepower.

And I used the S2000's numbers because another poster was using the Z's horsepower and torque numbers to back up the RX-8 is not a sports car theory.

I'm sorry your dad thought the CX-9 was too slow. Is there another three-row CUV in the same price range that your dad would find adequate? Was this the first-year 3.5L that he drove (the 3.7L didn't appear until the second year of production). The CX-9 is pretty darn quick for its class.

I watched an RX-8 at Laguna Seca last year run in the lead for most of the race (spun out in the corkscrew during the last lap, came in second) against seriously more powerful cars. Once it's up to speed, it can hold its own. It's that initial low-rpm acceleration that really hurts it.

Hi Ed,
Great, great post! I don't know about you, but what separates this car from others in my mind is the interior lighting.

It's a real difference maker!

huyracing,
Wow your dad is expecting miracles from a 3-row vehicle. The only large SUVs faster than a CX-9 (citing a single source to be comparable, CR) have V8 engines.

CX-9 3.7L: 0-60 = 8.0, 1/4 = 16.4

Sequoia 5.7L, 7.1, 15.6
Land Cruiser 5.7L, 7.3, 15.7
Armada 5.6L, 7.2, 15.8
GL 4.6L, 7.4, 15.7
Aspen 5.7L, 7.4, 15.7
XC90 4.4L: 7.6, 15.9
Escalade 6.2L: 7.5, 16

Uh, that's it. Your dad wants an Escalade or XC90 then. I would recommend the XC90 since it's interior is so cozy, and the leather is to die for.
The CX-9 is pretty darn fast for a big fat butt.

And I was talking about VS the Mazdaspeed3.

Personally I don't think the blue and orange go well together, the color combination makes me dizzy.

Again you guys missed the mark... the last thing a regular joe would care about is 1/4 mile numbers. You really think a senior citizen is out drag racing his SUV? Its all about torque, you narrow minded Mazda humpers... I can't believe you're actually this stupid, so you must be just in desperation mode trying to find something to say...

and only .5 sec slower? you realize how big a difference that actually is?! you are out of touch with reality if you think that is a small margin. modern automatics accelerate faster as well and you are comparing a V6 to a I4. Congrats, your big displacement V6 is only .5 seconds slower than an I4.

and yes they could put a 2.3L in there, those are just excuses... Mazda claimed the firewall would need modification and is not worth it in a small production vehicle like a Mazdaspeed. Excuses excuses... just like how they wanted the RX-8 to have that sort of engine for smoothness and refinement. BS! They definitely are aware that they missed the mark, they just wont admit it.

as for the base Solstice/ Sky being better than the MX5, its because they are tuned better at the limit. the MX5 wasn't exactly the best representation of the car anyways, even the father of the MX5 said so. the new one is supposed to have revised suspension tuning that sorts out that weird behavior at the limit.

Nice try guys, but your denial does no one any good. If you like Mazda so much, then you would want them to become better... not stay where they're at. You really think they are making cars to their full potential? I don't.

They look great, but I'm not a fan of the tunnels. they just make gauge visibility more difficult. At least they don't start at 6 o'clock like the Mazda3. I know it is performance car nod, but it just isn't usable in a road car. Still, Mazda is one of my favorite manufacturers. My next car may very well be a Mazdaspeed3, MX-5, or RX-8.

"Ya Electroluminescent gauges and other interior mood lighting are only on GT trims on all Mazda vehicles."

Wrong, at least in the USA. EL gauges are standard on all trims of the Mazda3 s, and Touring as well as Grand Touring trims of the Mazda6 i and s.

"Personally I don't think the blue and orange go well together, the color combination makes me dizzy."

Good thing thing they're not actually blue and orange, then.

the color scheme makes my eyes go @_@ just by looking at the above pic.

iirc, blue is also the color that makes your eyes tired really easily (something about shorter wavelength/higher energy).

That blue lighting looks like it could get tiring after awhile. Nissan does it better in the post right before this one. Simple white black lighting. BMW's traditional red on black is also very good. But unfortunately BMW will probably F that up too like they have done everything else.

bc1960,
Oh hey they did improve it.

EL Gauges are now on:
Mazda 6 Touring, GT
2010 Mazda3s 2.5L.

Generic plastic sheet gauges on:
Mazda6 Sport
2010 Mazda3i 2.0L.

It's better than before.
You cannot get EL gauges on any 2.0-liter 2010 Mazda3. Only the big 2.5-liter sport engine gets it.
http://www.mazdausamedia.com/files/2010%20MAZDA3%20SPEC%20DECK%202010%205%20(For%20Download%2012-1-08).pdf

What are they thinking, that fuel misers are cheap on luxury too?

It is cool, I must admit. Would these lights not get tiring at night?

Actually it's like 70lbs lighter than I quoted, but it's still a more powerful engine. That's not even my point, they make average or above average power in all Mazda's. The RX-8 might be lacking in the torque department but it's not sporting a V6, and speed is not it's main goal. It's not sub 8 second slow.

Apologies to everyone for mis-stating my case. I meant the RX-8 and the MX-5 when I was suggesting that they don't compete well, not the rest of the lineup. Personally, I think the 3 and the 6 are some of the best looking and handling cars in their class. I'm actually in the process of buying an '04 6i M/T right now...

I actually think the blue ring around the edges is a bit much. too much of a good thing. They seem to going for a Honda/Acura effect here. When I was in the car what I noticed was the gauge cluster and actual gauges are pretty small for such a large car. You really have to look at the speedo closely to see how fast you are going because everything is so bunched up.

these gauges are too much. the blue seems like it would be very distracting/annoying on my road trips from denver to baltimore.

i really think the last gen mazda6 was a good thing... all it needed was the new 3.7 liter and AWD :( i think for a while you could even get the V6 with a manual transmission on the last gen :( :( shame on mazda... tisk tisk tisk

C&D noted the same complaints about the over the top styling of the gauges. I dont often agree with Honda and Driver but this is an exception.

I agree with allthingshonda, et al, in wondering whether blue gauges will cause eyestrain at night. IIRC, red is the color that preserves your night vision, which is why BMW and others use red gauge lighting.

Having said that, I do think that the blue lighting here and in VW's definitely LOOKS cool!

IMO, the gauges in your long term Altima were better. Simple crisp white markings with added style from the orange rings.

The blue halos aren't that bad in real life. I think the camera shot exaggerates them a bit. I like the gauges and I like the gauges in my 3 as well. C&D doesn't know there is a switch on the gauge cluster to adjust the intensity of the lights (seperate from the dash mounted dimmer)

dougtheeng:

Yes, CX7lover is forced to resort to personal attacks (childish name-calling, really) rather than substantive remarks any chance he gets. Don't upset him by making rational and supported criticisms of any Mazda product or you'll suffer his wrath! Oh my!

I like the red lighting on my 2003 Mazda6. It lent a sporty refinement to the interior without being cheesy...there was enough cheese due to the faux metallic touches on the center console.

foxtrot685:

I agree. I have driven the new 6 and like the old generation more. It may not be as quiet or have as powerful a V6, but it handled much better and the workmanship has been impressive over the years. I have had both the front and rear ends replaced because of being hit from behind and from having a tire slam into the front on the freeway. Can you believe that it is still free of any rattles on the inside? Why can't Ford do the same on their own models? The 6 was, after all, built at a Ford plant. My wife's Mustang is noisy as can be.

The final nail in the coffin for the new 6, for me anyway, is the sacrifice of the sporty handling and taut suspension so that the car can compete better with others in its class...a real shame.

blobster,
I think Ford was working on the Taurus. Damn the Taurus is hot. Its interior is about the same size as the Mazda6, whereas the Fusion is a half class smaller.
Saw the Taurus at the autoshow in person and it's damn hot. Best midsized sedan out there.

blobster

You still upset? GEEZ get over it. You agree with huyracing? Then you don't know what you're talking about either. The all Mazda's except for the Mazdaspeed3 are slow and they all need at least an extra 50 FT-LBS of torque and 50HP to be competitive.
Insert constant eyerolling

Here ^^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^^

The 6 WAS a design failure, get over it, it's not coming back.

"Its all about torque, you narrow minded Mazda humpers... I can't believe you're actually this stupid, so you must be just in desperation mode trying to find something to say..."

You are a moron. The RX8 makes 238 hp with 149lb-ft torque with a displacement of 1.3 litres. Name me any other normally aspirated car that can make anywhere near the same power with the same displacments. And can any of non existent engines rev up to 9000rpm?

"Can you believe that it is still free of any rattles on the inside? Why can't Ford do the same on their own models? The 6 was, after all, built at a Ford plant. My wife's Mustang is noisy as can be."

fusion and 6 share a platform. Mustang is totally different and is on a much older platform. I would assume a Fusion would be as rattle free as your 6. Based on its quality rankings it seems Ford can make a hihg quality vehicle just like Mazda.

Why is cx7lover still allowed to post here? Wouldn't this type of behavior get him banned in most car forums? He sounds like a 12 year old.

i have an '04 MZ6i. the all-red gauges, radio, etc gets pretty boring. i think they should allow you to change colors (at least a couple of choices). i thought some Scion or something else out there has that option?

btw, i don't understand all this stupid arguing about power and torque (unless you people, or huyracing's "old man" dad often gets on the track, in which case i rest my case). why?

my little 4-banger is MUCH MUCH slower than the CX9, let alone the RX8, MX5 ... yet, i outrun 90+% of the cars on the street 90+% of the time (acceleration, highway speed, turns, whatever). i don't see a need for more power/torque. it's HOW YOU DRIVE the dang thing.

it's like people who buy Hummers and other big SUVs that claim how they need the off-road ability, passenger/ cargo capacity, etc -- the VAST majority of these sad people RARELY do anything more than commute in slow traffic as the lone driver with no useful cargo. bragging rights or showing off are fine (why you like a car obviously is none of my business), but don't make it seem like those numbers/features make a difference in real life. that's just irritating.

Well excuse me for not reacting to blatant ignorance with such class and elegance you all require, it's not like that was my first response out of the gate anyway. It's good to see SOME people understanding that the Mazda's are not totally lacking in power as that was never it main goal in the RX-8, same with the MX-5. You want power? They're other options.

it's*

I do like the 2010 Taurus, at least how it looks. Have not seen one close up. It also seems to have lots of nice gadgets from what I have read.

1487:

Right, the Fusion, Milan, and MKZ share the Mazda6 platform, so I would assume they are quieter than the Mustangs and Explorers I've sat in. My point was that the fit and finish of the interior is impressive and since Ford put the thing together, it is evidence that they can make a quiet car. Many buyers have a perception that they can't or won't. I know the Mustang's interior has more hard plastic than the Mazda6 and the base models were similarly priced back when I bought my 6.

CX7LOVER...I never responded to huyracing so I don't know what you are rambling about. You really need to learn to read more carefully.

blobster

You said he has "rational". Where do you see him as being rational? If anything he is totally the opposite. Rational is saying all Mazda's need 25% more power to be competitive. You know, Mazda's are way behind in power. Especially the CX-9, slowest in class!

"Don't upset him by making rational and supported criticisms of any Mazda product or you'll suffer his wrath! Oh my!"

"rather than substantive remarks any chance he gets"

In case you didn't notice, the comments toward Huyracing are 115% warranted.