Mazda is offering too many engines on the 2012 Mazda 3, and if you haven't read up on the Skyactiv technologies, you're liable to make the wrong choice.
Our long-termer's brand-new, 155-hp, direct-injected, 2.0-liter Skyactiv-G four-cylinder engine is stuffed in-between the old 148-hp, 2.0-liter MZR engine and the 167-hp, 2.5-liter engine (which is a bored/stroked version of the 2.0 MZR motor).
Neither of these older engines is as efficient as the new Skyactiv-G engine, but several of you have written here that you'd still go for the 2.5-liter for its extra torque (166 lb-ft vs. a 148-lb-ft rating on the new engine). And to that I say, well, you really need to experience the new transmissions that come with the 2.0 Skyactiv-G engine before you make up your mind. Low-end grunt is nice and all, but I'll trade that for the new six-speed automatic's super-smooth upshifts and very quick, rev-matched downshifts any day of the week.
Regrettably, I can't be at every Mazda dealership to tell you what to do. And the automaker is taking a far more subtle approach of letting customers know that there's something special about i Touring and i Grand Touring models with the Skyactiv drivetrains. To start, these models all have blue halos on their gauges; other Mazda 3s have gray rings.
There's another blue ring in each headlight assembly. Since our i Grand Touring model has the Technology package, said headlights are bi-xenons.
Finally, the Skyactiv models have this badge on the lower right side of the their hatch or trunk lid. This area is blank, of course, on sedans with the base MZR engine, while s Touring and s Grand Touring models have the usual 2.5 badge. Now, of course, one of my new commuting games is to tally up all the Skyactiv-badged 3s I see. So far, I've seen very few.
These details are too subtle, I think, and I'm not sure most buyers will notice them.
Erin Riches, Senior Editor @ 3,854 miles
tjpark01 says:
12:00 PM, 01/13/12
Ultimately it's up to the consumer to figure it out. Most people aren't car people, so they look at price and peak HP #'s or size of engine to make their purchasing decisions. If you're gonna spend this much money on something it's worth a little research, which is where you guys fit it.
bonzjr says:
12:14 PM, 01/13/12
No stick with the Skyactiv and FEATURES (sunroof, Bose, Xenons, power seat -- which I hate but I need it to be able to tilt the front up for thigh support in the 3 otherwise it's lacking, and so on)?
Then no sale.
The 2.5 blows. It would have been a decent motor in 1999. It's not now. It's NVH characteristics and inefficient nature leave a lot to be desired although it is torquey (and spare me the arguements "for" it -- we have one in the Mazda6 in the garage so I'm familiar with it). The trade off for a little more down low torque for a lot of MPGs isn't worth it to me in a car the size of the 3. 155-bhp is plenty even if you have to work it a bit to get it.
And I don't care how good the automatic is. It's missing a clutch and a double-H. 'Nuff said.
half_ton says:
12:16 PM, 01/13/12
That gauge cluster/instrumentation pod gives me flashbacks of my old 97 Pontiac Gran Am GT.
stovt001 says:
12:17 PM, 01/13/12
I hope you're not right on this, because anyone who drove a car with the old drivetrain should know just about any change had to be an improvement. I'd hate to see people potentially turned off from an otherwise brilliant brand because of the old, bad engines and transmissions.
As I'll be needing a car with more seats than the Miata as of July 30th and will eventually need something a bit better for long distances and all weather when I'm finally shipped, I've been considering a used Mazda3 as a stopgap until I can save up a bit of money and take advantage of the military discounts that are sometimes offered. Sadly I can probably only afford something with the old engine.
blackadder5639 says:
12:36 PM, 01/13/12
Well, I would say it the salespeople should play a major role in informing potential customers about their choices....
......but then, my experience is somewhat different. On a recent visit, the salesman did his absolute best to discourage me from getting the Skyactiv; he pointed me to a 2.5L instead. It was a 2011 they were eager to sell. "We have a $3000 discount on that one, and you also get 0% financing......the Skyactiv moves the same as this, but offers better gas mileage.....the Skyactiv is new, so it's more expensive." Had I been desperate for a car, I would have bought the 2.5L......and regretted later!
Mazda's dealerships aren't helping Skyactiv's cause at all!
bonjzr, really? The 2.5L was smooth, silent and the automatic shifted nicely! There's nothing wrong with it, except for the sub-standard fuel economy. But to say it's 1999 technology? Give me a break.
I guess I understand Mazda for offering the old 2.0: price. It would be compact-car suicide to get rid of the old 2.0, as the Skyactiv models start at close to $20k.
But I don't get why they're still offering the 2.5 in it's current form. Yeah, it's torquey, but it's couldn't they have played with the gearing to get 32 mpg hwy? IMO, they should either improve the fuel economy or just get rid of it........getting rid of it is probably the better choice.
throwback says:
12:48 PM, 01/13/12
I'm guessing they don't have the new engine line running full tilt so why advertise.
haunty says:
01:23 PM, 01/13/12
Yeah I think it's the consumer's responsibility to research. It is a bit foolish to not research on such a large purchase. But I think what some customers will notice is the window sticker with the big 39mpg number.
Where I live, I don't think I have seen a 2012 Mazda3 yet, let alone one with a Skyactiv badge, heh.
06scooby says:
01:30 PM, 01/13/12
Well if they look at the window stickers and care even a bit bout the fuel mileage even the dumbest consumer will notice the higher numbers on the sticker for the skyactiv versions than the others.
skyggge says:
02:29 PM, 01/13/12
I went to the dealer for an oil change, and almost the entire lot and showroom was covered in SkyActiv models.
woochifer says:
03:23 PM, 01/13/12
Didn't you see me waving at you on the 405?
Actually, I've had my Skyactiv Mazda3 for just over a week, and so far I have only seen one other Skyactiv model on the road. Of course, bear in mind that the Skyactiv models only started arriving in numbers back in November, so I would not expect to see a lot of them on the road just yet.
As others have pointed out, anyone who knows about the Skyactiv models only needs to look for the big MPG ratings on the sticker to figure out which version is which. My understanding is that the majority of Mazda3 production is now the Skyactiv versions. And that's what I see arriving at dealer lots. I can hardly find any of the 2.5L MZR 3s models anymore, and supposedly the ones on dealer lots right now were made before the Skyactiv models went into full production.
I suspect that the 2.0L MZR engine will be gone by next year, and it would not surprise me to see the 2.5L MZR no longer offered with the Mazda3 as well. Compared to the Skyactiv models, the MZR drivetrain is noticeably less refined and you obviously pay a big penalty on the fuel mileage. 2012 seems like a transitional year, with the CX-5 arriving soon, and Mazda deploying its Skyactiv vision across more of its lineup. The Skyactiv 3 felt like a first baby step, but a big one because the drivetrain was immediately made available in Mazda's most popular model.
woochifer says:
03:46 PM, 01/13/12
@blackadder5639
Sounds to me like the dealer's trying to clear out some inventory. The demand is for the Skyactiv models. Before they arrived in larger numbers just over a month ago, dealers were not budging much on the price for the Skyactiv, but offering up very generous deals on the 2.5L models. I've even seen some big discounts on the Mazdaspeed3.
I wound up getting about $1,200 off MSRP on mine (plus a $500 owner loyalty incentive). My other quote was $800 off on a Grand Touring Skyactiv 3 (supposedly, it's harder to get a big discount on the GT models, because there are a lot fewer of them to go around).
The 2.0/2.5L MZR drivetrain actually dates back even further than 1999. The transmission design goes back to the 80s. I thought it was okay, until I compared it to the Skyactiv tranny. There's just no comparison, the Skyactiv AT is smooth in auto mode and brilliant on the rev matched downshifts in manual mode. The 2.5L MZR engine has more torque, but it less refined and not as even in the power delivery.
explorerx4 says:
06:03 PM, 01/13/12
I had a Ford 2.3, which is in the same family as these engines(?)
It was pretty good and got great highway mileage,
Best tank was 494 miles on 12.5 gallons.
jstandefer says:
09:17 AM, 01/14/12
I have a fully loaded Grand Touring 2.5L hatchback with a manual transmission. You absolutely cannot get that configuration with the Skyactiv model. So why am I an idiot for preferring the 2.5 model?
It would be nice if Mazda offered the same exact configuration with a choice of powertrain. But that's not the case. There are more differences between 2.5 and Skyactiv models besides the powertrain:
-2.5 offers manual transmission on all trims
-2.5 has larger brakes
-2.5 has larger fuel tank
-2.5 has fog lights
-2.5 has turn signals integrated in side mirrors
-2.5 has side sill extensions
-2.5 has LED taillights
-2.5 has dual exhaust outlets
-2.5 has 17" wheels
-2.5 has dual zone automatic climate control
-2.5 has proximity entry and push-button start
-2.5 has more heavily bolstered seats
So the choice isn't as easy for consumers as it should be. Consumers looking at the Mazda3 most likely have sportiness and image as bigger driving factors than others. The 2.5 looks and feels sportier and flashier.
But here's something that is quite annoying... The Skyactiv fuel mileage is impressive. Why did Mazda have to shrink the fuel tank?
bradyholt says:
09:33 AM, 01/14/12
I wouldn't worry about people not noticing it on new Mazda3 cars -- it's hard to miss the fuel economy numbers on the window sticker. Used, though, unwary buyers may be sold SkyActiv mileage on a glut of off-rental base i Sport models.
bodyblue says:
11:07 AM, 01/14/12
Am I missing the temp gauge? If this was anything but a loved Mazda it would have been trashed,.....a drivers car without a temp gauge. Is it digital somewhere? Why not get rid of the-useless-in-an-automatic-car tach and put in some more useful info?
jstandefer says:
11:28 AM, 01/14/12
bodyblue: Nope, you're not missing the temp gauge because one doesn't exist, analog or digital. Even the Mazdaspeed lacks one. I was annoyed by it at first, but modern temp gauges aren't any more useful than the idiot light that's replaced them. I still want one.
Sadly, the automotive world has shifted. Do you want a small, RWD sports coupe? Look to Toyota. Do you want a car that prioritizes fuel economy and forces you into an automatic transmission? Look to Mazda. Do you want bland, warmed over vehicles that thrive on what the badge used to mean? Look to Honda.
bodyblue says:
03:28 PM, 01/14/12
Thanks JS...I was not sure. I really think they should get rid of the useless tach and put an oil pressure, amp and temp gauges.
pezzy669 says:
09:42 PM, 01/14/12
I actually don't really find too many negative qualities of the MZR 2.5 in my 2010 3 Grand Touring. I find it quite smooth for a big 4 cylinder, power delivery is quite good once you get to ~2750-3000 RPM and it is not uncommon to exceed EPA estimates with the MZR lineup. I personally see 32-33 MPG on a pure highway long distance run when I stick to speed limit + 5 - my manual trans 2.5 is rated at 29 MPG hwy.
If something happened to my car and I had to replace it i would get another 2.5. Like pointed out by a previous posters a Skyactiv i Grand Touring is definitely not the same as a 2.5 s Grand Touring. Mazda really mucked up the equipment levels and they really need to get back to offering an automatic or manual on every trim.
jlh3 says:
01:14 PM, 01/16/12
I wonder if Mazda shrank the fuel tank for the same reason Chevy did with the Eco Cruze? It allows it to be tested less aggresively for fuel mileage and thereby producing higher numbers?
eldaino2 says:
05:18 PM, 01/24/12
@jstandefer:
-2.5 offers manual transmission on all trims: but if you are going for fuel economy, the a/t is going to be your best bet anyway. for people who dont care to shift, a bigger complaint should be: why didnt the 2.5 get a 6speed auto?
-2.5 has larger brakes: application matters more here. in instrumented testing, i'm sure tires and the 17's made a bigger difference than the brake size.
-2.5 has larger fuel tank: so? thats not really and advantage: you'll be filling up more often regardless because of the pitiful mpg. and it'll cost you more too.
-2.5 has fog lights: true. i'll give you this one.
-2.5 has turn signals integrated in side mirrors: i personally enjoy cars that have this, dont see why mazda had to skimp out.
-2.5 has side sill extensions: optional on the skyactive though right?
-2.5 has LED taillights: they dont stand out all that much of all the led tailight equipped cars out there.
-2.5 has dual exhaust outlets: mmmm...so? for 167hp? people gave the 200hp gti crap for this...oh yeah the gti..the car that weighs about 250lbs more than a mazda3gt, has almost 40 more hp and tq and gets 33mpg on the highway. ouch.
-2.5 has 17" wheels: i hate this too...but ultimately, its more expensive tires.
-2.5 has dual zone automatic climate control: 3 knobs anyday
-2.5 has proximity entry and push-button start: a creature feature no doubt, but again, no dealbreaker. more of a 'oooooo look how his car starts' type thing to wow friends.
-2.5 has more heavily bolstered seats: really? cause not even the mazdaspeed3 that edmunds had in the long term fleet had seats that looked any more bolstered than the ones in this 3...i hardly think its reasonable for them to make an exception for the gt.
it may be a 'grand touring' but there is still an 'i' in there....you gotta pay for that new tech somehow.
i would like to know if there is an actual interior difference between the two.