Mazda 6 Engine = Mazda 3 2.0 engine?

[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.