Mazda 3 Skyactiv-X X20 2020 review | Chasing Cars
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 14 มิ.ย. 2024
- Subscribe: bit.ly/3fnfVTQ | Visit Chasing Cars: bit.ly/2DpFZQP
Tom reviews the new 2020 Mazda 3 Skyactiv-X Hatch and provides an expert opinion.
What is the Mazda 3 Skyactiv-X? How does it work? Is it worth the big extra spend? Mazda have decided to produce a gasoline or petrol engine that integrates many components of diesel combustion, including compression ignition. The promise is that the Mazda 3 X20 will deliver diesel-like economy. So, does it? We reveal how much fuel the Skyactiv-X really saves. In today’s video, Tom reviews the 2020 Mazda 3 Astina X20 in Soul Red Crystal over black.
What do you think of this version of the Mazda 3? Do you prefer an ordinary petrol? Should Mazda bring the Mazda 3 2.5 turbo to Australia? Are you fascinated by the Skyactiv-X? Let me know your thoughts below. Would you consider it? Is it too small? Comment below!
It helps us a bunch if you subscribe and hit the notification bell below the video! That way, you won’t miss one of our full length Australian video car reviews.
Video review of the Mazda 3 Hatchback with Skyactiv-X engine.
Time stamps:
0:00 - Introduction
1:18 - How does Skyactiv-X work?
4:20 - Mazda 3 interior and cabin tech
6:40 - Back seat space
7:49 - Rear end, boot and cargo room
9:09 - Driving the Mazda 3 Skyactiv-X
12:24 - Real-world fuel economy
17:38 - Verdict and conclusion - ยานยนต์และพาหนะ
Having read positive and negative posts here, all I can say is I am more than happy with my Mazda3 Skyactiv X auto saloon/sedan.
I suppose it all depends on what you're looking for in a car. Previous car to this was a new Focus STline diesel. Had it for 6 months and was nothing but trouble, especially the sync 3 system which failed more days than it worked and just refused to accept any updates my Ford dealer tried to install. It had to go. Went for the new 3, dealer demonstrator, which I've had for 8 months now. Here in the UK, comparing the two vehicles with the specs each had, the are approximately the same price. Where Ford spend the money is anyone's guess as the interiors are poles apart. The Mazda is far nicer to sit in and a nicer car to drive. The Ford just feels cheap inside.
Getting around 45mpg on a 40 mile run each day, better than the diesel Ford and around the same as I was getting from my Seat Leon FR 1.4.
They all drive differently. The Leon was sportier but actually, when you're driving the same roads daily, in commuting traffic, twisty 'b' roads, 'a' roads and dual carriageways, the Mazda for me is the winner. Plenty of comfort, quick enough when needed and good enough on fuel economy.
It was great to hear you mention putting the car in manual and using the paddles. I've had lots of fun driving it like this, even upsetting a number of quicker cars from the lights in the process. Yes, it's not as slick as the DSG box in the Leon but it'll do for me.
I'm a firm believer that you need to adapt and change your driving style to suit the car you're in, in order to get the best out of it. I wouldn't drive a Maclaren in the same way as I'd drive a Rolls and vice versa (if I ever got the chance).
Anyway, really enjoyed the review. Cheers.
Your Focus ST Line was the current gen? I'm deciding between the Focus, i30 and Corolla and I like how the Focus has more power and no guinea-pig transmission - and some say it's the most fun to drive. (I would get the Mazda if the 2.5L was a few thousand cheaper and I could disable cylinder deactivation.)
@@gammawaving
Yes gammawaving the ST Line X I had was the new gen. As for it being more fun to drive, I suppose that all depends on the roads you'll be driving it on. For me, on the roads I drive daily, the Mazda is equally as much fun as the Focus and more comfortable. Hope that helps a little.
@@robertchattin-smith4321 Thanks, the things that appeal to me about the the Focus (petrol 1.5L turbo here in Australia) are the higher power/torque, standard auto transmission, practical size, and looks (I prefer the Trend). But I don't like the cylinder deactivation or the reported slow paddle shifting.
The Mazda ticks all my boxes and I can't completely rule it out, but in Australia it's significantly more expensive than my other options and the 2.5L has cylinder deactivation. Also some people talk about build quality issues.
The Skyactiv-X would be just fast enough for me but the 2.0 G engine would be just too slow.
@@gammawaving. No probs buddy. Here's a little more info for you from my experience with both. The Focus auto box was smooth but I found because it was an 8 speed box, it never really settled on a gear and was easily wrong footed until you were at a constant speed. I'm guessing the 7 speed they're fitting to the fuller bloodied ST will be better, however I never found an issue with shifting with the paddles, not lightning fast but not slow either.
As for the Mazda, all I can say is so far (8 months of ownership), I've not come across any issues regarding build quality or any issues at all actually. Inside, it's so much nicer than the Focus. For me, it's just a much nicer place to sit.
Wish here in the UK we were going to get the 2.5L Mazda3.
Have fun choosing.
@@robertchattin-smith4321 Cheers I will:) That's interesting info about the 8-speed and the paddles on the Focus.
I hope the Skyactiv-X 2.0 proves reliable. I think I'd prefer it even to the G 2.5, because in the X the peak torque comes in lower and there's no cylinder deactivation (I assume).
This engineering achievement goes beyond practicality. Mazda has the balls to innovate despite their modest size. They have created a strong fan base around the world. If I was in a position, I’d continue supporting them by getting a new model every couple of years. Instead, I’m holding on onto a 2016 Cx5 sport that we’ve had no issues with.
Toyota got Mazda's back. so, money should be no issue for them nowadays
Hey mate, once again a very enjoyable and thorough review. Interesting your comment about the improved auto gearbox, my 2015 CX3 has at sometime a very unpleasant auto gearbox. It doesn't always take off as it should and is not always smooth 😱. Keep up the good reviews.
Very good review Tom. Here in the U.K I have a CX30 with the Syactiv-X engine. It's a superb piece of engineering and a marvel to drive. It's a top of the range version which in the U.K. markets as a GT Sport-Tech automatic in AWD. A terrific car indeed. It's just a wonderful place to be. The drive is superb. Like you mentioned yourself, people do not buy this car for the fuel saving. It's about much more than that, like drivability and luxury.
Very much enjoying these videos lately, keep it up
Glad to hear it, and we will!
Wow, Mazda is just so remarkable. I feel like 90s fun is back with Mazda
Tom, another top class review, well done. Your conclusion matches others I have seen and in my opinion, this model seems too complex and doesn’t really deliver the bang for the investment. I would wait for the petrol turbo engine. But Mazda are absolutely on top of the design and execution of their interiors and body/ chassis - like you say, a Japanese Alfa ??
I wish that Mazda had future plans in place to partner up with Honda instead of Toyota. I really like Mazda's approach towards making the torque available at lower revs like a smaller turbo powered engine as in the VW models. I also really like the interior but I agree with Tom about the ride being too firm. Honda make their own engines and these Mazda engines are really innovative, just imagine what Honda and Mazda engineers could achieve together! I bet their combined efforts would produce really desirable cars! (think Honda investment capabilities)
Hi Tom. I've owned the 6 speed manual sedan version of this car in machine grey for a few months here in Scotland. I love driving it. It works great at speed and gives much better fuel economy around town than my previous Focus. I thought the hatchback too difficult to see out the back and I prefer the saloon body.
Very informative review you gave. In fact I just noticed there is a yellow hook on the inside engine cover so thanks for that.
Hi mate. How do you like the gearbox and clutch feel in your car?
@@michaelliu4773 hi Michael. I love the clutch and gears. So smooth. I had an auto Focus before so it's great to be changing my own gears again. It does seem to want me to change up very quickly.
@@garykerr5597 great. here in Australia skyactiv x is very expensive because it is only available on the top-spec "Astina", which cost around 42k AUD. But if it offers a smooth driving experience I will be happy to pay.
what fuel economy have you been averaging?
@@rxs87 just under 40mpg on average. Considering that most of my driving is around town, I'm happy with that. If I go onto the motorway it rises to 50mpg.
Good review. Would you choose this or the top of the line i30?
Fantastic, detailed review as always! I've got myself an old 2012 mazda 2 with 119k KM on it but still got me 11KM / Liter with a 90 RON gasoline for a city driving with average speed around 25 KM / H. Greetings from Indonesia Tom!
11km/li is AWFUL fuel consumption for a Mazda2. I have a Mazda2D, 2016, and I average 4.4li/100km or 22.7km/li and I have a heavy right foot.
Great review guys 🤙 so nice having decent local reviews
Jut about to take delivery of a new Mazda 3 here in the UK my first from the Hiroshima plant. I've looked at - and test driven - all sorts including VW Golf Mk8, ID3 Audi A3, Skoda Enyaq (good) but this won my heart. Just a beautiful car beautifully engineered, outside and inside too, and the X engine is exactly right. It won't thrash a GTi but that's not the point. If you want to potter it'll do 5l/100km (50mp UKgallon) and if you want to thrash it along a B road it'll rev to 6000 and set your trousers rippling. The perfect engine for the perfect hatch for my money. Cheers for a thorough review.
Very interested in this car. Mostly because you can get it in manual! Great insight comparing it with the Golf engine.
Mazda's SPCCI uses the spark plug all the time not just above 5000 rpm. It's just that at the lower revs the spark is used to initiate compression ignition.
I like cars with more powerful engines than what this engine has to offer. Currently I have a GTI with 200 bhp, for example. I would like to see Mazda make a more powerful Skyactive-X engine and put it in a hot-hatch version of the Mazda 3.
In pretty much every other market where the Skyactiv X engine is sold, the largest alternative engine for the 3 is the 2 litre Skyactiv G. Unfortunately, in Australia, everyone wants to compare the Skyactiv X with the 2.5 litre Skyactiv G engine. Perhaps for our market, it may have been more advantageous for Mazda to release a 2.5 litre Skyactiv X engine. A more powerful, more flexible, smoother and more economical 2.5 litre may just have hit the sweet spot.
That Alfa Romeo reference really makes a lot of sense.
Great review Tom have seen other reviews here at OZ and test averages 9-10 tires every 100 ks and the harsh ride on the front end plus the high premium price really Mazda.
That consumption isn’t realistic in my experience with the car - 7L/100km in town was easily achievable. Still, that’s not exactly like a diesel hatch!
I have now driven 13000km in this car, consumption: according to bc 5.1l/100km, calculated by number of liters at the pump: 5,6l/100km. Surcharge for this engine €950,- compared to the 122hp skyactiv-G in NL (due to lower Co2 tax and engine available in every model variant). And don't forget that 1l diesel has more energy than 1l petrol.
Pretty good economy and the tax reasons means it stacks up better in the EU than here in Australia.
@@chasingcars They probably just brought the technology so quick to Europe because of taxes. New cars with engines over 2.0 get a 18% fee on them no matter what. That's why we have no 2.5 engine for the Mazda 3 in EU.
Hey Tom. What is the location of the rooftop car park with the city behind? Looks like a great place to do some night time photography
i like your honest review
Good review 👍❤️
I currently own the previous model Mazda 3 with the 2.2 litre diesel engine - consistently getting 4.13 l/100 km, maximum power output 110kW, with peak torque nicely down the rev scale (380Nm @1800 rpm). It's a quiet and refined engine (especially for a diesel), and quite sporty given the car's low mass. The new 3 is improved in some areas, in particular better insulation from road noise, but there seems no need to replace diesel with the Skyactiv X except for fashion.
God I hope they bring the turbo one here! It’s right up there on my list for next hot-ish hatch for me!
Put the turbo in the CX-30, please.
That probably be around $50k hey!?
Clever engineering although I’d like to see a comparison with a Focus on city fuel use as small turbos can be really thirsty when pushed - the 3’s uniqueness has really grown on me as an excellent hatch which I’d enjoy best as a base 2.0 manual I think as Astina trim whilst plush is $10k too dear imho
Did I see some shots in the City of Ballarat at the start of this review: Camp Street and The Town Hall to be exact
Enjoyed watching the Video 😊 Review 👍 Looks smart In Red Soul Crystal.
Hey Tom - thanks for these reviews. Did you find that the Skyactiv-X engine was significantly quieter than the 2.5L?
It came with the supercharger since Mazda 2 Miller-cycle and Eunos.
I would love to see two of them stuck together, a 4L V8. The engine is down on power compared to modern 2L’s. By putting it in a completely different category it could shine.
this maybe the peak form of ICE and could have solved fuel issues of the 90s. But in this era, the hybrid tech of ra4 prime makes more sense on the upfront cost vs fuel cost and emissions.
I got a 2020 2.5 turbo. Grand Tour Reserve. Love that little car.
How can you have it? it's not even out yet... maybe you mean the Mazda6 or CX-5.
Andres Salazar Autos it is the CX-5 with the 2.5 Turbo
Is the updated E Skyactiv-X available in Australia ?
Sure, it doesn't have to be a jack of all trades, but that's what everyone loves about a Golf.
Looks like a mustang at the front, and Alfa at the rear and a gremlin at the side 😂 love it !
Biggest beauty cover I’ve ever seen!
Here is the thing with new tech, it usually takes a car company about 5-6 years to iron out the kinks, so though I would love to get this car when it comes out, I'm not wealthy enough to make that gamble, but I will be watching with great interest.
Extra cost of this engine, would take many years to pay off, for less power and torque than the 2.5
I can't see the point myself.
exactly
Needs the more expensive fuel.
@@Al-vb6js yep and honest reviews and not sponsored to say every car is fantastic lol
Just pointing out that we gave this car a full and independent assessment. The reason somebody would buy clearly isn’t fuel savings (as I said), but because of the superior drivability thanks to more rapid torque production. But really if you want a Mazda 3, the G25 Evolve model is the one to buy. Thanks
@@chasingcars Agreed, had the Evolve hatch now for 12 months, good car.
I love the thought of Mazda's new tech but I'm not really seeing it delivering too many benefits so far - particularly, given the price premium.
One complication with the question of fuel efficiency and performance is the mild hybrid system which didn't really get a mention in the video. To some extent the electric motor is going to add to the torque available and is going to reduce fuel usage.
In the video, Tom mentioned the turbo on the small turbo engine as a possible weak point in terms of reliability, however this Mazda engine is fitted with supercharger which, although different tech, is still a pump forcing air into the engine and a possible reliability issue.
The mild-hybrid is only 24V regenerativ system... they would rock the fuel efficiency if they put a real 48V system for low torque in the low range.
The supercharger is low pressure it's only used to control the air pressure going to the engine bc of high compression ratio of the X engine.
It's pointless in Australia because (a) you have the 2.5 with the same power and balance shafts for less money and (b) emissions aren't much of a focus. In Europe it makes a lot more sense as the alternative is a slow 120bhp 2.0, and the SkyActiv-X has lower fuel consumption and emissions, therefore lower tax, despite its more than 50% extra power.
Great review Tom, Was one of Chasing cars first 100 Subscribers and Still loving it, Up There in my Favorite channels along side of AutoTopNL and Doug DeMuro ;) . Really for all the development and tech it's a pretty good price point if you want to compare it to it's German counterparts.
Must buy
this is a test platform for better things to come. An inline 6 version of this for a RWD high end sedan or SUV
Another great review not convinced this tech is worth it Corolla I have on loan (not hybrid) is pretty close to those figures around town
One thing I cannot find out; does the Skyactiv-x run better on premium fuel? By using pre-ignition I would imagine a low RON value would assist, who knows?
Higer octane number can help... bc these is a high compression engine
Just goto 9:04 and keep the video paused for forever. That's what I did.
I will get mine after few months in manual and revvv out that beautiful NA.
All these “fuel saving” promises always end up the same, you need to drive 10s of times around the earth to break even with the upfront cost. Just get a normal engine, and if you want save on fuel then get a smaller engine
I kind of agree. But without trying, innovation is not achieved. Basically this is an early adapters car. Will it continue? Maybe not. Could innovations be carried over to other concepts? Probably. Here's to innovation.
newc geoman yeah, I think the plan for this is to sell enough numbers so that the cost will trickle down into other models and trim levels.
Would be nice if few years down the road we can have skyactiv x engine as the standard...
The timing for selling this "skyactive-X" couldn't be more wrong, because when regular unleaded price drop to $1 per litre who on earth will pay $45,000 for a small car to save fuel but can't save money at all?!
At least here in Switzerland, I can't really find a nice Sedan with ~180HP for anything more than 10% cheaper than the Mazda 3? Additionally, saving fuel is not about saving money, it's about being more ecological
@@MrNacknime I'm not going to argue, get what makes you happy. but if you want to help the planet best things is to not buy a new car.
Can you do a pov drive of this car ?
I'm actually not seeing many positive reviews for this revolutionary engine. The promised fuel savings don't seem to be there. I'm just wondering if the supercharger that this new engine needs is negating any significant fuel savings?
I could have sworn there is a supercharger as part of the skyactiv x engine. Not to mention the mild hybrid system.
Sounds like a very complicated setup
There’s a little supercharger involved to achieve the very high air to fuel ratio - but it isn’t intended to help performance. Mentioned mild hybrid - 24 volt only here. Makes for smooth start stop though.
Gorgeous car.
I think the engine is fascinating! However, I am not the targeted buyer for this version. I am much more interested in how this same technology will play it in a larger displacement engine. For example, if they had used the 2.5 liter engine that is standard in the car ( in the USA, that is), it would be a more revealing comparison, as to what this new technology really brings to the table. I care more about the sporting characteristics. If the Skyactive X version of the 2.5 liter increased the torque somewhere in the high 200 ft.lbs., and had meaningful high rev character and usability as well, that would transform this vehicle’s performance personality. I presume it would also have the very immediate and linear throttle response of a naturally aspirated engine also, giving it a drivability edge over turbo engines that experience throttle lag and variable throttle response.
Even more exciting is the new inline six cylinder engine Mazda is developing with Toyota, initially for the rear wheel drive/ all wheel drive Mazda 6. This allows for an authentic up market move for Mazda. A longitudinal, rear drive, inline six power train , finally gives them the platform to compete as a higher end marque. If that new engine, also employs the Skyactive X technology with a 3.0 or 3.5 liter displacement, you have the potential for a really exciting and sports sedan. A car like that could possibly go against the BMW 3 and 4 series, Mercedes C Class, Audi A4 and S4, and offer a unique naturally aspirated feel, against turbo vehicles. Enthusiasts tend to prefer the immediate response and linear throttle of naturally aspirated engines. If you don’t give up low end torque and have better high revving capabilities, as well as similar overall power, I think it is a big winner for Mazda. Assuming they can make it handle well, which is one of their typical strengths, it is a car I would buy.
Well, in some countries in Europe, you cannot have 2.5l engine. So Skyactiv-X is basically the only choice.
Certainly makes it easier if the 2.5L engine (in either NA or turbo guises) is not available.
With my Naturallly aspirated 2017 Toyota Corolla Prestige 1.6 I average around 4.5L/100km on the Highway. Around town I average the acclaimed 6.6L/100km
Dude can you tell me which has more premium interior between Audi A3 sedan (8V ) and BMW X1. I asked you on last video but for some reason you have not replied. If you can help it will be great ! More specifically the dashboard!
A3!
Ive watched a few tests on the car and most of them concluded that its more ecomical than any current equivalent engine. About 10% better in fuel economy than the VW and Ford engine. Mine is using between 7 and 8 litres when I run it hard in the city and about 6 when Im not pedal to the metal off the traffic light. About 4 litres when crusing on the highway. 6 to 7 when Im thrashing it to abut 200kph for extended periods (Yes I live in germany)
Wich fuel do you use? 95,98,100?
@@mariot.5178 95 E10 as it says on my fuel filler cap
You're a great reviewer mate!
I have the Mazda 3 2020 sky active x. Admittedly the fuel economy in the first 8000km was pretty poor. However, it’s now at 15k and I’ve been sitting at 4.5l on the highway and 5.5 in the city. I reckon test them once they re fully broken in
Is it a manual? How many km on the odo meter now? Have you had any problems with the car?
ang sarap talagang pag mazdan 👍
Great looking hatch but I'm curious to see how these motors will hold up long term... Must be a much more expensive motor to produce.
And repair
I doubt its expensive since its not complicated technology. Just high compression and two injector pulses per power stroke.
I think the only thing considerably more complicated would be the software and the electronics needed to synchronize the combustion.
Is the new Turbo AWD coming to Au?
At this stage no. Mazda cites difficultly in packaging RHD components with the turbo engine in the Mazda 3's smallish engine bay.
@@chasingcars Makes economic sense considering it's only me and one other guy that would buy it anyway. The curse for driving on the wrong side. Thanks Tom.
it's easy to forget it's winter in Australia.
Would much rather than 1.5 3cyl EcoBoost in the Focus which has 240 Nm from just 1750rpm all the way to 5000rpm.
So Mazda threw heaps of R&D $$ to put this technology in their cars, only for it to be on par in some aspects with other small turbo engines? The only benefit I see if fuel efficiency, but the extra initial cost will cover your fuel for a while..
Not to mention the 3 will receive a turbocharged engine in the near future anyway? It doesn't make a lot of sense why they've gone with this route.
We also don't know how reliable the X engine is anyway.. It could take a year or two to iron out the flaws.
Great review as always CC team. Keep it up!
I assume the X doesn't have cylinder deactivation (which would just compound the complexity to Rubik's Cube levels)?
I don't believe it does. The cylinder deactivation in the SkyActiv-G 2 litre fitted to the CX-5 (165PS) is quite noticeable when it cuts in, especially at 50mph in 6th when there is a vibration through the whole car.
@@rogercantwell3622 I ended up getting a 2021 Ford Focus. The cylinder deactivation is not noticeable at all for me and turns off in Sport mode anyway. It can also be disabled just by unplugging the CD solenoid plug on the engine (but it brings up a Check Engine warning light).
However - some people with the same model of Focus as me (but maybe earlier than 2021) have the same vibration problem as you. Maybe someone has worked out on the Mazdas how to disable it by now (by software or hardware).
I test drove the 2.5L 3 sedan in auto form on country roads and it was the ride and steering that put me off. The ride was firm and choppy but didn't feel like it gave great body control. The steering felt especially disconnected and the lane warning stuff was losing its head on narrow windy country roads. Very disappointed given it looks great and has a nice interior. Also the mid-range stereo is nothing special either.
It was the lack of steering feel and the sense of disconnection (like the computers were processing inputs before allowing them) that disappointed me most.
Tom loves this car
Well.... personally, I love this car in G25 Evolve sedan manual form. Sub-$30k!
@@chasingcars In my opinion, that's the best buy out of the range. Problem is, though, too many here in Australia prefer the automatic. Great car, though. But I'll stick with MY 2017 MX-5 RF GT.
How much is this going to be to repair out of warranty if something goes wrong?
Totally untested tech so the answer is totally unknown... at least there’s a five year warranty
@@chasingcars mileage be up b4 the years...
So it's not a new rotary engine? Somehow I thought that's what Skyactiv-X was all about.
We really need the turbo
Agreed.
فن ياباني 👍😎
omg a beautiful to next to a beautiful car.
There is a difference between economy and efficiency, that nobody seems to understand.
The Skyactiv X is equaly to more efficient than the Skyactiv D. If it would get the same economy as the D, the efficiency would have to be much higher than the D.
Just for comparison the consumption from NEDC with MT and FWD:
Engine/ CO2 in g/ km/ city/ highway in l/ 100 km -> thermal energy c/ h in kWh/ 100 km
1l Diesel equals to 9,9 kWh of thermal energy.
1l Gas equals to 8,5 kWh of thermal energy.
X/ 103/ 5,1/ 4,2 -> 43,35/ 35,7
D/ 109/ 4,7/ 3,8 -> 46,53/ 37,62
G/ 116/ 6,2/ 4,5 -> 52,7/ 38,25
So as you can see, the Skyactiv X is more efficient than the Sykactiv D. It is not necessary, to achieve the same economy.
For comparision the Golf 8 city/ highway
110 kW 1.5 TSI: 6,3 l/ 4 l -> 53,55 kWh/ 34 kWh
110 kW 2.0 TDI: 4,4 l/ 3,4 l -> 43,56 kWh/ 33,66 kWh
As you can see, the "fancy" TSI with all its tech doesn't really get near the diesels efficiency, especially in the city.
This hightech turbocharged gas engine compared to the TDI is as efficient, as the Skyactiv G compared to the D, but nowhere close to the X compared to the D.
Mazda needs to upgrade the X to the 1,5 and 2,5 displacements and offer them in the Mazda 3. That woul be about 99 kW with 168 Nm from 1,5 l and 165 kW and 280 Nm from 2,5 l.
Tom, for anyone having the slightest interest in cars, watching your review is so educational. This engine may be the engine of the future, if there can be further improvements to fuel consumption and low-end torque. Turbo engines though fun to drive, are less reliable over the life of the vehicle. As you said, the reliability/durability of this SkyactiveX engine however remains to be tested, over time. Great 👍 review, as always.
No way is this an engine for the future. Its a brain explosion that will be dead and buried in a few years, and forgotten soon after. Someone in Mazda forgot ELECTRIC
It’s not naturally aspirated, it uses forced induction via a supercharger.
X20 Astina is a successor to twin-turbo diesel XD Astina but instead as a MPS turbo.
Toyota corolla hybrid is a lot cheaper then this frankestein engine thing
Very true.
It may depend on your country and exact choice. As far as i see, i can't relate the assumption to the reality.
It all became clear to me when Tom lifted the engine cover?
Lifting the engine cover is always a decent start.
@@chasingcars it's spaghetti. I wonder if the fuel saving is worth the environmental damage of engines that will never be repaired (only swapped out). But I do love the engineering, good to see Mazda pushing new boundaries.
so, there is no revolution. it is just a different way, as you said. for a short time ownership, i don't see a one reason to buy this particular engine.
Him: “224 NewtonMeters of torque”
My walnut sized American brain: static
For the Brits that watch can you use MPG please?
@@351tgv Sorry if I hit a nerve mate, you might need help. Thanks for your comments and keep safe.
@@351tgv I don't think you are stupid, just a little unkind mate.
@@351tgv Probably a good argument from an Aussie mate. But when did you capitulate and stop the MPG?
Hoave you stopped recording in miles aswell?
Traitors or what :) ?
@@351tgv Was your insult so good you decided to say it twice mate. Keep safe.
@@chips1889 Australia has used the metric system since the early 1970s. I was born in 1951 and can still work in both imperial and metric measurements (although the imperial is a bit rusty now) but anyone born after about the mid 1960s would not have a clue about imperial measurements. A recent trip to the USA was a real blast from the past for me. I continually underestimated driving times between places, confusing miles with kilometres.
I loved my mazda protoge. I bought the Mazda 3. Gas milage much much worse than Mazda claims. I am lucky if I ever get 30mph on the highway-if I conserve. It gears are slow to change if you need to give it gas--it is a big lag. Just be careful if you buy this. Just don't believe the gas mileage--it is much lower than mazda claims(for me at least) .
Raise you volume
I own a 2014 Mazda3 XD Astina, with the 2.2l diesel, making 129kW and 420Nm at 2000rpm. To say I'm disappointed with the Skyactive-X is an understatement.
You guys are complaining about the requirements to break even on this sort of initial investment but if we don't buy in then the tech can't progress further, and they can't get cheaper or better.
Another benefit is getting people to commit to this sort of break even point out in the future is people keeping cars on the road longer, and keeping them themselves longer is good for the environment on top of the fuel savings. It's a lifestyle choice for sure but it's not pointless.
I'm sad this won't sell in the US. Both theoretically and literally since they won't bringing them here. We don't get cool shit because we don't like cool shit (fuck me)
I see your point of course - if people don’t buy it won’t get cheaper. But at the same time, we have to be advocates for the consumer, and point out value for money issues where we see them.
The engineering is cool but not worth the extra 3k over the standard 2.5L engine in the Astina. Kind of scratching my as to what they have achieved from their investment.
It's new, it's advanced. It should become more affordable as the make more of them, since it is now a limited production for now, it will of course be more expensive. At least it gives similar performance to the small turbo engines (under 1.5) without the turbo lag, for me the biggest issue with the micro turbo engines is Turbo lag, but then, I am really used to a bit 2.5 Mazda3 which leaves all those mini engines in the dust at take off.
Lower CO2 emissions than most competitors, especially in that engine power range. My company car is not allowed to emit more than 130 grams CO2 per km due to the company policy. The active X does well below that. Most of the competition can only offer a lower powered 3 cylinder turbo engine in order to stay within the emission range. So that could be Mazda's selling point.
I don’t really see the point of this car, the fact that it’s placed between the 2.0 litres and 2.5 is confusing people who buy this segment either looks for efficiency and reliability or reliability plus performance..
go full hybrid or a turbo charged manual.
When compared to the Golf while the power output might be similar but the dual clutch in the Golf makes the driving experience more superior
For this price , I would get a RAV4 hybrid instead
Definitely not worth $45K......
$45K wow, might as well get a Hyundai i30 N
Everyone focusing on just fuel economy is missing the point. Mazda 3 is much funner to drive than the top Corolla, has the best interior quality of the segment, and yea it does make the best petrol only fuel economy at that. Go test drive them all to understand.
Not at 45k...
ultimately too expensive, it has the power of a 1.5 turbo Civic but produces peak torque higher in the rev range, cheaper turbo motors also have good economy when driven gently. I agree it’s decent but you’re paying a premium for it
The United States says MAZDA name the best. Some countries say mazdaDER or mOzda or maaazda
@LEOMC3602 noooo you're kidding right? They have accents?!
Anyone remember when Mazda made a pick up truck?
One of my neighbours has this. Haven't noticed it elsewhere, in fact before I looked the badge I thought it was a Mitsubishi.
Spaghetti junction under the hood
Yeah! 😂
The timing for selling this "skyactive-X" couldn't be more wrong, because when regular unleaded price drop to $1 per litre who on earth will pay $45,000 for a small car to save fuel but can't save money at all?!
Most possibly petrol will be going up and up due to increasing green taxes that will be imposed in order to promote electrical vehicles.
Financially this is a poor choice. 2.5 litre motor will run on e10 this one cannot so fuel cost is the same but this model is $3k more.
The only thing sky high is a repair bill for that engine.
And lower emissions
I like Mazda’s and have owned four of them. However this seems to be a marketing exercise more than anything else. The gains are inconsequential compared to a 2.5 Astina for a hefty price increase. Detailed analysis on John Cadogans channel seems to prove this. Like so many youtubers I fear you are going down the track of not wanting to offend any manufacturer. Nobody ever seems to criticise new cars at all any more. They can’t all be so good can they?
My section on real-world fuel economy made clear that the promise of diesel figures has not been achieved. I also made clear - I hope - there’s not really a value argument here. I give you the facts and numbers, and you can make your own decision. I’d also add our video subtitle - “is it really worth 45k” - immediately calls attention to the value question, rather than dodging it and going with something like “high tech”!
45K drive away? Mazda has gone mad. You'd pick up a GTI, Golf R or Audi A3 for that money. Mid range Mazda 3 makes sense, that is simply ridiculous.
ive gone and ordered the mid range Kamil, in soul red crystal and it still looks and drives fantastic. i get it in october and cant wait and it still looks luxurious
Or a high spec triton or mid spec hilux and they can get away with costing that much for their capability... its amazing how much small 2wd cars cost now, or just mazda’s for that matter
Mazda is aiming too high and that might just backfire itself. Good products yes but setting the high price yet the power performance and economy is not really that impressive to its turbo rivals. Mazda seems missing the point here. What are they thinking?
It's worth 25k not 45k.