Mazda 6 Engine = Mazda 3 2.0 engine?

[tonysg]

Ako po ay naguguluhan? Pareho ba ang makina ng Mazda 6 na 2.0 liter sa Mazda 3 2.0 liter? When I went to the Quezon Ave. dealer, sabi ng salesman ay iba daw? Does any of them have the Sequential Valve Timing? or is it only available in the 1.6 liter engine? I read some reviews from Europe and people prefer the 1.6 SVT engine because it is peppy compared to the non-SVT 2.0 engine. That is the variant that they use. I hope that the Mazda people shed some light. I went to their homepage and it suffers from a lack of technical information. Even the engine type model number for the Mazda 6 and the Mazda 3 2.0 are different. Are they trying to hide the fact that it is identically the same engine? Why don't they put the 2.4 base engine of the Tribute into the Mazda 6 to follow the footsteps of Honda CRV and the base Accord? All the surveys that I have read criticize this particular fact that the Mazda 6 chassis design can take a beating around the curves but why put a sick man to pull a sporty rickshaw? All the surveys criticize the underpowered 2.0 variant but has all praises for the turbocharged version and bigger engines. Are we experiencing another 3rd world blues? The ball is in your court, Mazda!

[glntVR]

Iba talaga ang engine niyan dalawa as far as I know. As for the tribute's engine. It's a 2.3 liter not 2.4

[caloyski5]

like what glntvr said, iba sila..

Even the engine type model number for the Mazda 6 and the Mazda 3 2.0 are different. Are they trying to hide the fact that it is identically the same engine?

ummmm..no.

heard rumors of the mazda 6 getting .3 more liters sometime soon. easy ka lang.

[Karding]

AFAIK USDM Models:

2.3liter ng Mazda3 is on the Mazda6' i model. Simply put, the top of the line engine of Mazda3 is on the base model of the Mazda6.

[orly_andico]

the mazda3 2.0 uses a non-SVT engine but actually has MORE horsepower (140+) than the 2.0 duratec-derived engine in the mazda6 (which only has 131 hp).

the US mazda6 isn't even available with a 2.0, the base model is a 2.3L and there's a 3.0L V6 if i'm not mistaken. considering na ang baba baba ng mazda6 sales locally (even though ang tagal tagal nang available ang mazda6, ito and yung rx8 ang pinaka-unang linabas locally) i really doubt if they will introduce the V6 or 2.3L variant, since introducing a new engine model will increase the maintenance costs for the dealerships.

[orly_andico]

FWIW, the 2.0L mazda3 engine has a variation of VICS/VRIS (variable resonance intake system) which debuted on the JDM FS-ZE 2.0L engine of the 626, which was later detuned and installed in the 2003 mazdaspeed protege (a.k.a. ford lynx RS). so actually the lynx RS engine with 140+ hp (pero mas mahina pa rin sa JDM FS-ZE na 170hp) is more powerful than either the mazda3 2.0 or the mazda6 2.0 engines.

[Karding]

Eto mga kapatid, para hindi malito ang tao dahil sa detuned blah blah blah etc etc

From MazdaUSA.com

http://www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/disp...cleCode=TRB#2L

The Tribute i is equipped with a retuned version of the 2.3-liter 4-cylinder power plant that propels the MAZDA6 i, and the Tribute s shares a 3.0-liter V6 with the MAZDA6 s, also retuned to provide more torque for low-end power.

Mazda engineers have taken all the knowledge they have learned about 4-cylinder engines over the decades and applied it to the new corporate MZR 2.3-liter engine. Presently this engine is the range-topper powerplant in the MAZDA3, and is also used in the MAZDA6 i and in slightly modified form in the 2005 Tribute i.

http://www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/disp...dDrivingEngine

Mazda engineers have taken all the knowledge they have learned about 4-cylinder engines over the decades and applied it to the new corporate MZR 2.3-liter engine. Presently this engine is the range-topper powerplant in the MAZDA3, and is also used in the MAZDA6 i and in slightly modified form in the 2005 Tribute i.

[niky]

The MZR engines are actually a full rebuild of the old Mazda 323/Protege powerplants. They're rebadged as Ford/Cosworth Duratec engines in various applications (including the Focus, Tribute/Escape, Caterham, etc, etc, ad nauseum...) The 3.0 in the range is a Ford powerplant.

The Mazda 626 and the Mazda MP3/Ford Lynx RS both use FS-DE 2.0 engines (130-142 hp/ 135-141 ft-lb), with different camshafts and computer boxes from the Mazda Familia Sport 20 and the Mazda 323F(the cute hatchback 323), which use the FS-ZE version with a higher redline, revised camshafts and a VTEC-like system that produces the aforementioned 170hp. But you've got to take that power figure with a grain of salt. FS-ZE equipped Proteges are NO FASTER than the MP3/Lynx RS, as they lack low end torque (133 ft-lbs at high RPM only).

Some Mazda owners who've upgraded to FSZE running gear have been very disappointed with the results.

I'd always thought that the Mazda 6 used the same powerplants as the Mazda 3. AFAIK, the difference in power is merely because it's running an older development of the MZR engine.

[orly_andico]

niky,
the FS-DE is 130hp, but the FS-E (distributor version) as seen in the 1993-97 mazda 626 and the kia sportage, is only 118hp, 127 ft-lbs (180 N-m) of torque. :P

also, VICS/VRIS is not "VTEC-a-like" it merely varies the length of the intake manifold runners to make the torque curve flatter, so it's way more low-tech than VVTi or VTEC. i wasn't aware that mababa lang torque ng FS-ZE, dream upgrade ko pa naman yun. KL-ZE nalang! hehehehehehehe... inaalokan ako ng KL-03 last year for 35k lang with computer box and tranny na.

on-topic, according to this website http://encyclopedia.laborlawtalk.com/Mazda_Z_engine

the MZR is the latest evolution of the B-series engine (actually B- then Z- then MZ-) and there are 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 2.0, and 2.3L versions of it. So it's not related to the F-series in the MP3/Lynx RS/626.

[caloyski5]

orly and niky

langya, buti kayo alam niyo yung mga yan! lol! ako wala!

[Karding]

MZR for added torque, kaya pala at 65mph the RPM is already 3000 and causes the mpg to suffer, hay buhay.

*65mph is the speed limit in US Highways but most travel at 70-75mph

kaya nasa slow lane lang ako lagi :hihihi:

[marv0083]

MZR for added torque, kaya pala at 65mph the RPM is already 3000 and causes the mpg to suffer, hay buhay.

*65mph is the speed limit in US Highways but most travel at 70-75mph

kaya nasa slow lane lang ako lagi :hihihi:

is that good or bad ?

65mph is like 104 kph??? right


ilan ba dapat ang typical ng rpm at 104 kph???

and why does it suffer from mpg

pls explain

[Karding]

marv, a typical 4-banger is only 2.5k * 65mph

This could be the reason why MZ3 has poor fuel consumption...the RPM is too high.

65mph sa US highway, pinakamabagal na yon. Usually, sumasasabay ka lang sa flow ng traffic at 80mph.

[niky]

*orly_andico... never said MZR was from the F-Series... meant the B-Series when I said it was based on the Protege engine... but then again, the last Proteges in the US didn't come with 1.6s anymore, so it's a logical assumption that I meant the F... :p

The FS-DEs VRIS (only on the 130hp version) and VICS (all versions) are not VTEC-style, true... I was talking about the FS-ZE. It's a a high-revver (for an FS engine, that is). People who've upgraded to the FS-ZE cams and box, though, have been complaining that they're not getting the dyno numbers they thought they would get. Dream ko rin yan sana sa 626 ko. ...wag muna sa Lynx, naka 100k warranty ako.

AFAIK, the poor consumption of the M3 is because of the AT, isn't it? Plus the fact that it's a relatively heavy car.

[orly_andico]

niky, dun sa FS-ZE you mean they got the FS-ZE cams and the ECU?

ang alam ko the FS-DE doesn't have VRIS/VICS pa rin.. dun sa nababasa ko sa mazda626.net, getting the intake cam alone will give you 5hp (the exhaust cams are the same between the E/DE and ZE). for the FS-E and FS-DE na wala namang VRIS manifold, using the FS-ZE computer will not give you much (except more aggressive fuel curve) kasi wala namang VRIS solenoids yung E/DE.

also halos 11:1 yung compression ratio ng ZE, yung E/DE 9:1 lang.

[Karding]

AFAIK, the poor consumption of the M3 is because of the AT, isn't it? Plus the fact that it's a relatively heavy car.

My previous WRX Wagon weighs 3165 lbs. but the RPM range isnt as high as the MZ3. And the poor fuel consumption for the WRX is due to its AWD system. Contrary to the belief that its the turbo that causes it. For example, a non-turbo Impreza 2.5RS has 21/27 while the WRX has 20/27 rating.

My wife's 2004 Sentra which weighs 2625 lbs. has the same RPM range on my previous WRX, 1993 240SX SE 2807 lbs., Honda Civic, and Acura Integra.

I still think the RPM range is higher than normal for MZ3 which weighs 2762 lbs.

I might wanna blame it to the torquey engine. Just looking at the 240SX's torque, 155hp / 160ft-lb and a rating of 21/26 on A/T. MZ3's and 240SX's torque is almost the same.

BTW, I filled the tank and the mpg went up to 28mpg with occassional A/C. I think its getting better, this is just my third tank. Hay salamat po!!! hahaha

My initial review on my MZ3 is getting longer by the day...haha

[niky]

Hmmm... baka run-in time lang, Karding... congrats ulit on your ride. :D It really isn't the torque that kills your consumption, it's just how much of it you need to use to move your car...

Orly, I think I get what you're saying about the FSZE, that the rest of the power difference is from compression and not solenoid-activated timing? Gotta look it up again. After reading on the difficulties of FS-ZE swapping, I've become resigned to the fact that turbo (FSDET) might be the only way to go.

I forgot about the FSZE complainant... what he actually did (sorry, my mistake) was swap the whole engine, with the ECU and harness. Which makes his dyno story even sadder, because he SHOULD have been making a LOT of power.

[marv0083]

My previous WRX Wagon weighs 3165 lbs. but the RPM range isnt as high as the MZ3. And the poor fuel consumption for the WRX is due to its AWD system. Contrary to the belief that its the turbo that causes it. For example, a non-turbo Impreza 2.5RS has 21/27 while the WRX has 20/27 rating.

My wife's 2004 Sentra which weighs 2625 lbs. has the same RPM range on my previous WRX, 1993 240SX SE 2807 lbs., Honda Civic, and Acura Integra.

I still think the RPM range is higher than normal for MZ3 which weighs 2762 lbs.

I might wanna blame it to the torquey engine. Just looking at the 240SX's torque, 155hp / 160ft-lb and a rating of 21/26 on A/T. MZ3's and 240SX's torque is almost the same.

BTW, I filled the tank and the mpg went up to 28mpg with occassional A/C. I think its getting better, this is just my third tank. Hay salamat po!!! hahaha

My initial review on my MZ3 is getting longer by the day...haha

diba pag higher torque mo masbetter ang fuel mileage mo ? this is for same displacement category

[mbt]

wala naman gaanong relation yung torque sa fuel mileage... if ever, it's higher torque tends to have poorer mileage, because the factors that create big torque (e.g., displacement, forced induction) also increase consumption. on the other hand, for others, low torque and low displacement nga, pero binabawi sa revs (i.e., Honda engines)... so end result is that malakas din sa gaso at those revs.

the amount of fuel that the engine drinks is directly related to displacement (big cylinder needs more fuel injected into it) or revs (squirting X ml of fuel 5000 times a minute is of course a greater total volume than X ml of fuel squirted 2000 times a minute). that's why shorter gearing kills mileage (kasi mas mataas yung revs at the same speed).

diesels are a different matter though.

[Karding]

ayon naman pala...now I think it boils down to MZ3's gear ratio. Kaya pala maglalabas na ng 5spd A/T sa 2006.