Our 2011 Mazda 2 has proven to be entertaining to drive in a small car sort of way, even though the suspension itself is fairly standard, as we'll soon see.
The key to Zoom Zoom is how the inevitable tradeoffs are managed? Is ride more important? Noise? Steering? That hard to define fun-to-drive element? In Mazda's case the answer skews toward the fun end of the meter.
The way they do it is with suspension and tire tuning, through conscious choices made with regard to spring rates, damper settings, bushing hardness and the internal construction of the tires that support it all.
Much of this is invisible in a suspension walkaround, but we'll have a look anyway.
I would be shocked -- shocked, I tell you -- if I found anything other than MacPherson strut suspension in the front wheel wells.
As you can see I am not shocked.
As you'd expect from a budget-priced car, the Mazda 2's MacPherson strut setup is pretty uncomplicated and straighforward, with no special sauce.
The lower control arm (white) is made of a single piece of stamped steel.
The front subframe to which it attaches (yellow) is an abbreviated example of the species, in that it does not continue forward and encircle the entire engine bay. And no, I did not remove any plastic covers to take these shots.
There's no money for aluminum here; the knuckle is made of cast steel -- the precise alloy is hard to know without seeing the drawings, though.
The rear-acting steering (green) is no surprise. Looking at it closer gives the impression that it's a full manual unit because the electric power assist unit is mounted higher up the steering column, hidden under the dash.
The front stabilizer bar (yellow) loops over the top of the steering rack to meet up with pivot bushings concealed in the shadows behind.
With no perimeter front subframe, the L-shaped lower control arm has no choice but to point aft towards the rear of the car. All in all it's a compact and lightweight layout, as befits a small car.
What? Is that aluminum? Yup. The direct-acting stabilizer bar link is made of 'lum, as dad calls it, and it looks pretty stout, too.
Single-piston sliding calipers and 10.2-inch ventilated cast-iron rotors are more than enough to slow a small car such as the Mazda 2.
Ford and Mazda were still teamed up at some level when the Fiesta and Mazda 2 projects were kicked off, as evidenced by the FoMoCo logo cast into the brake caliper.
A twist beam axle and coil spring support the ass-end of the Mazda 2 -- par for the course for cars in the diminutive B-segment.
(Is ass-end supposed to hyphenated? I suppose I should consult the Chicago Manual of Style.)
You've heard me go on about how a twist beam rear axle is essentially a big stabilizer bar with wheels on the end. The degree of twist, of roll stiffness, is largely determined by the torsional stiffness of the beam (yellow) that spans the car. So even though it looks like the Mazda 2 doesn't have a rear stabilizer bar, it kinda sorta does.
A twist beam has another benefit that small cars with ridiculously short rear overhangs take full advantage of, and that's the fact that this smallish beam that takes up very little space is THE ONLY thing that spans the car. There is no space-robbing subframe. So the fuel tank can nestle up close in front while the muffler and some evaporative emission equipment slots in behind. There's also room for a spare tire well in there somewhere, too.
Twist beam axles are notorious, though, for their habit of generating unwanted roll- and compliance-steer in corners and while executing emergency lane changes. Angling the main pivot bushings is meant to counteract this tendency. The ones on the Mazda 2 are angled as much as I've ever seen.
My, what cute little shock absorbers you have. Look, they're only slightly bigger than my thumb.
Let me guess. These simply HAVE to be monotube shocks.
*rummages through Mazda spec sheet*
Yep, I'm right. The diameter of the shock body is too small for this to be a twin-tube shock, a tube within a tube design that would have had an utterly tiny and ineffectual working piston and valve.
Monotube shocks, as the name implies, have just the one tube we can see, so the piston valve's diameter is only smaller by the wall thickness of the tube. That's still a small shock, but the Mazda 2 is a small car.
Also, the shock in this case mounts to the twist beam behind the centerline of the rear axle, when means the damper's motion ratio is greater than 1-to-1 relative to the forward-mounted pivot bushing we saw in the last shot -- another peculiarity of the twist-beam axle genre that we don't see anyplace else.
Drum brakes are a novelty these days, but no great liability when the car is as small as the Mazda 2. Engineers have long since figured out how to make them work properly with ABS and stability control. For the record these are 8 inches in diameter.
Our Mazda 2 Touring rides on P185/55R15 all-season tires and aluminum alloy wheels that are 6 inches wide. Together they weigh just 32 pounds, a bowling ball less than most other cars today.
Dan Edmunds, Director of Vehicle Testing @ 16,294 miles
noburgers says:
09:23 AM, 11/ 9/11
why not use your new lift for this task????
bc1960 says:
09:39 AM, 11/ 9/11
I say no hyphen--ass is used as an adjective modifying the noun end, and the combination isn't modifying anything else.
Seeing photos with the wheels off reminds me of one concern I have about the Mazda2, as well as several competitors. The rear wheel wells do not have plastic liners, only spray coating which doesn't seem exceptionally complete. There is an large pocket in front of each rear tire, which in wintry climes will fill with slush and freeze, and in areas where salt is used I observe this is precisely where premature rust-through is common, The Honda Fit is constructed the same way, while the Fiesta has fender liners made of some kind of synthetic weave fabric impregnated with some kind of resin.
actualsize says:
10:20 AM, 11/ 9/11
I'll use the new lift soon enough. I have a couple sets of walkaround photos that were taken and banked before our Rotary lift was installed. These, however, were taken yesterday in my driveway because, well, because the car and I were there at the same time, and the Mazda 2's year is about up. *sniff*
peartree1 says:
12:37 PM, 11/ 9/11
It's amazing how many of the components (such as the front control arms, brake calipers, etc.) look to be the exact same ones as on the Fiesta. http://blogs.insideline.com/straightline/2010/05/2011-ford-fiesta-ses-suspension-walkaround.html
Thanks for doing these!
kplacer says:
12:52 PM, 11/ 9/11
Wow, that suspension is about as lightweight as any I've ever seen. I guess in such a light car they can get away with that.
v8vader says:
01:08 PM, 11/ 9/11
torsion beam rear suspensions make me sad
miamifan1 says:
01:11 PM, 11/ 9/11
i really wish i liked this car more better. its got all the proper ingredients for the type (light, simple, light, efficient, light, cheap, light, sporty). and its very light.
don't you wish it came in a 3 door? i sure do.
clarkma5 says:
01:19 PM, 11/ 9/11
I think this really proves the benefits of small, lightweight cars...small, lightweight cars means small, lightweight components underpinning which means less unsprung weight, lower replacement costs for components (mostly...I'm sure those brakes are cheap) without sacrificing reasonable performance.
thegrocer says:
03:00 PM, 11/ 9/11
Well, the Fiesta and Mazda2 are the product of a co-developed small car platform...so they will be pretty similar...
scorchez says:
05:53 PM, 11/ 9/11
Another great suspension walkaround Dan! I can't say enough about how well planted this car feels on the road. It handles so precise.
peartree1 says:
06:00 PM, 11/ 9/11
@thegrocer:
I know they're the same platform, and I expect things to be very similar, but it's surprising to me that it seems as though many (most?) components are the EXACT same, after Mazda tried to convince us they shared few parts.
firstwagon says:
06:37 PM, 11/ 9/11
Underneath is likely where they share the most parts. The bodies are different, the interiors are different and the drivetrains are different so I would say they share few parts.
stovt001 says:
07:12 AM, 11/10/11
I've said it before: Mazda is the new Lotus. There are no exotic, elaborate tricks, just nailing the fundamentals and keeping things simple (which adds lightness).
thegrocer says:
07:30 AM, 11/10/11
Yeah, those "few parts" would be brakes, bushings, sway bar links, control arms...and, while the struts, sway bar, shocks, springs, and torsion beam interchange, the turning and valving is different between the Ford and Mazda...so they count as different parts even though they look the same.
actualsize says:
08:15 AM, 11/10/11
If you look at the Fiesta walkaround you'll see that Ford went with twin-tube rear shocks -- that's why they're fatter and have that odd necked-down piece near the bottom. Monotubes as seen in the Mazda 2 develop damping force quicker over small amounts of movement and are far better at shedding internally-generated heat. They're also more expensive, but they are the sportier choice.
The front struts differ beyond mere valving, too. There's that extra welded-on tab for that mass damper on in the Mazda case, and there's every chance that they are built by a different suppliers on account of the two cars being built in different plants on different continents.
Control arms and the main beam could also differ in terms of their bushing stiffness and up-close appearance, too.
Once such parts are being made by different suppliers close to their respective car's final assembly plants, the door is kicked wide open for structural and detail dimensional hardware tweaks to suit the whims of Mazda and Ford development engineers. It can go beyond mere tuning.
Bottom line: While it is quite possible that the suspension pieces are close enough in a gross dimensional sense to be interchangeable, it's also possible that they have diverged enough that they are not. Even if all the bits do interchange, I can pretty much guarantee that neither car would feel right after the swap.
juan_mx says:
08:35 AM, 11/10/11
Good job, as always, but with a few exceptions (rear shocks, drive axle vibration damper), there is nothing new compared to the Fiesta.
I bet there are more differences between the 2009 and 2011 Jettas.
actualsize says:
10:11 AM, 11/10/11
@juan_mx: We'll find out soon enough. We're also working on new vs old 911s. *spoiler*
juan_mx says:
09:34 PM, 11/10/11
Thanks Dan.
icemilkcoffee says:
02:33 PM, 11/14/11
If you're looking for the magic dust, the heim jointed anti-roll bar links is where it's at.
The lack of rubber boots mean that these components could start to get loose and noisy within 40k miles.
The other issue I see is that the angled rear bushings is no good for lowering. You'll have binding if you try to lower this car.
luismx5 says:
03:53 PM, 11/15/11
When are we seeing a Fiat 500 suspension walk-around?
mitchg1 says:
04:00 AM, 12/23/11
No rear stabilizer...? Well, great handling anyway... Just rented the base model Mazda2 (manual 5 gear) for 2 weeks of spirited driving thru the mountain roads of Gran Canaria. This 1.4L engine car had the smaller (14") wheels and some cheaper Yoko tires on, hence not optimal for sporty handling.
Net: Nimble, but stable, it handles switchbacks and tight turns w/ the enthusiasm of much better cars (home i drive Subaru). Surprisingly quiet for its price. OK mileage, between 3.5 and 5 L/100Km. It simply set my reference for the handling of this class. Mitch
2011mazda2 says:
12:28 PM, 01/18/12
I bought last year a 2011 Mazda 2, and every winter time when i drive it when its cold a hear squeeking noises especially in the back. I was wondering anyone else has expericence this problem. the first time i heard it i thought that the car was breaking, its the first time that i have this expericence with a car, Thinking that its a new car, i'm not happy at all. I took to the dealer and they sprayed some spray in the back suspenion back no luck, they after told me that its because the weather is to cold, i refuse to believe that. Hope someone can help me
Best Regards
Gianluigi