Topic: Next-gen Mazda CX-9 may get turbo four-cylinder power

[Autos_Editor]

Australian report suggests future Mazda turbo engine
Read More...

[Fobroader]

Didn't they already try this and fail with the CX-5??

[OliverD]

Didn't they already try this and fail with the CX-5??

You mean CX-7.

[Fobroader]

Didn't they already try this and fail with the CX-5??

You mean CX-7.

Yup....that one.

[pcsp]

The CX-7 of course had the 2.3 turbo from the start. It was one of the turbos from the mid 2000's that allowed people to see that high output 4 cylinder turbo engines bring virtually nothing to the table in terms of fuel economy, noise, or smoothness. Putting one in a CX-9, that weighs closer to 5,000 lbs. than 4,000, would be a mistake. Of course, decisions like this are often driven by bean counters in their attempts to improve the faux fuel economy ratings.

[Noto]

The current tenuous link between Ford and Mazda might allow for some kind of technology exchange between the two brands, but Mazda’s recent focus on its own SkyActiv tech might mean it’ll want to continue to go it alone.

...you mean 3%?  Hardly a link at all.  I very much doubt that the CX-9 will get a Ford-sourced engine.

I think it far more likely that the CX-9 will get a "skyactiv-ed" version of the old 2.3T used in the CX-7/MazdaSpeed models.  If power back then was 244hp/258lb-ft, it's conceivable that, with a twin-scroll turbocharger, it could reach the current (Ford-sourced) 3.7L V6's power ratings (263hp/249lb-ft) while, 'at times', beating its fuel economy ratings.

I know Mazda's R&D budget is relatively small, but that doesn't mean they can't make their own turbocharged engine.

[OliverD]

The current tenuous link between Ford and Mazda might allow for some kind of technology exchange between the two brands, but Mazda’s recent focus on its own SkyActiv tech might mean it’ll want to continue to go it alone.

...you mean 3%?  Hardly a link at all.  I very much doubt that the CX-9 will get a Ford-sourced engine.

I think it far more likely that the CX-9 will get a "skyactiv-ed" version of the old 2.3T used in the CX-7/MazdaSpeed models.  If power back then was 244hp/258lb-ft, it's conceivable that, with a twin-scroll turbocharger, it could reach the current (Ford-sourced) 3.7L V6's power ratings (263hp/249lb-ft) while, 'at times', beating its fuel economy ratings.

I know Mazda's R&D budget is relatively small, but that doesn't mean they can't make their own turbocharged engine.

I think it's more likely that Mazda will offer a turbocharged version of the current SkyActiv 2.5.

[Noto]

The current tenuous link between Ford and Mazda might allow for some kind of technology exchange between the two brands, but Mazda’s recent focus on its own SkyActiv tech might mean it’ll want to continue to go it alone.

...you mean 3%?  Hardly a link at all.  I very much doubt that the CX-9 will get a Ford-sourced engine.

I think it far more likely that the CX-9 will get a "skyactiv-ed" version of the old 2.3T used in the CX-7/MazdaSpeed models.  If power back then was 244hp/258lb-ft, it's conceivable that, with a twin-scroll turbocharger, it could reach the current (Ford-sourced) 3.7L V6's power ratings (263hp/249lb-ft) while, 'at times', beating its fuel economy ratings.

I know Mazda's R&D budget is relatively small, but that doesn't mean they can't make their own turbocharged engine.

I think it's more likely that Mazda will offer a turbocharged version of the current SkyActiv 2.5.

...or that, but I'd assume that'd be more expensive and use more fuel than their current 2.3T being skyactiv-ed.

[RoadRageous]

One,
what exactly do you mean by "failure" regarding the CX-7 ? I recall most reviews being positive, especially for driving dynamics. It was costly at the beginning because of the turbo, the AWD, and the high Yen.

Two,
When developing the Mazdaspeed6 Mazda decided to spend the R&D dollars on their own engine instead of using a Ford engine, so there's a good possibility that they will decide to Turbo the SkyActive ( a crucial engine for them, long term ).

[Northernridge]

Hmmm, a large CUV from Mazda. Aren't they struggling to sell the small ones, which are selling like hot cakes from everyone else?

[Solstice2006]

Hmmm, a large CUV from Mazda. Aren't they struggling to sell the small ones, which are selling like hot cakes from everyone else?

Not sure what you mean?  The CX-5 is a huge seller.  You can't expect little Mazda to outsell much bigger companies, with many more dealers, and volume.  But looking at the numbers, the rate of increase is great.  They are outselling the Forester in Canada...

As for the CX-9, I would only be interested in it if it had a V6.  The current gen is good, and I don't mind long in the tooth.  But it was never as a capable as some as the others... Like the Pilot, Highlander, GM twins all tow 5000lbs.  Didn't like the packaging, to get leather you needed AWD for example.   

[initial_D]

The current tenuous link between Ford and Mazda might allow for some kind of technology exchange between the two brands, but Mazda’s recent focus on its own SkyActiv tech might mean it’ll want to continue to go it alone.

...you mean 3%?  Hardly a link at all.  I very much doubt that the CX-9 will get a Ford-sourced engine.

I think it far more likely that the CX-9 will get a "skyactiv-ed" version of the old 2.3T used in the CX-7/MazdaSpeed models.  If power back then was 244hp/258lb-ft, it's conceivable that, with a twin-scroll turbocharger, it could reach the current (Ford-sourced) 3.7L V6's power ratings (263hp/249lb-ft) while, 'at times', beating its fuel economy ratings.

I know Mazda's R&D budget is relatively small, but that doesn't mean they can't make their own turbocharged engine.

I think it's more likely that Mazda will offer a turbocharged version of the current SkyActiv 2.5.

Mazda needs a turbo 2.5 to put in future Mazdaspeed cars.

Putting a Turbo I4 in the CX-9 is in away, bring back a larger and heavier CX-7, imo. Still think a V6 is a better fit in a large SUV.

[Noto]

Mazda needs a turbo 2.5 to put in future Mazdaspeed cars.

Why does Mazda "need" a 2.5T instead of a 2.3T?

If Ford can make a 2.3T with 310hp, why can't Mazda do something in that realm?

Subaru has a 2.5T and it's now, except for the STi, obsolete and discontinued (in the Forester and Legacy).  Why does the specific displacement matter?

Volvo is using exclusively 2.0Ts, so are they going to fail because it's not a 2.5T?  I simply don't understand why you think that Mazda NEEDS a 2.5 instead of a 2.3 when they already have that which to work off of.

IIRC, Mazda has stated that the 4-2-1 header on the Skyactiv 2.0L and 2.5L would be problematic with turbocharging.  I would think the 2.3 block would be a better starting point to reduce friction, etc.

[OliverD]

Mazda needs a turbo 2.5 to put in future Mazdaspeed cars.

Why does Mazda "need" a 2.5T instead of a 2.3T?

If Ford can make a 2.3T with 310hp, why can't Mazda do something in that realm?

Subaru has a 2.5T and it's now, except for the STi, obsolete and discontinued (in the Forester and Legacy).  Why does the specific displacement matter?

Volvo is using exclusively 2.0Ts, so are they going to fail because it's not a 2.5T?  I simply don't understand why you think that Mazda NEEDS a 2.5 instead of a 2.3 when they already have that which to work off of.

IIRC, Mazda has stated that the 4-2-1 header on the Skyactiv 2.0L and 2.5L would be problematic with turbocharging.  I would think the 2.3 block would be a better starting point to reduce friction, etc.

I think you're concentrating on the wrong part of his post.

[Noto]

Mazda needs a turbo 2.5 to put in future Mazdaspeed cars.

Why does Mazda "need" a 2.5T instead of a 2.3T?

If Ford can make a 2.3T with 310hp, why can't Mazda do something in that realm?

Subaru has a 2.5T and it's now, except for the STi, obsolete and discontinued (in the Forester and Legacy).  Why does the specific displacement matter?

Volvo is using exclusively 2.0Ts, so are they going to fail because it's not a 2.5T?  I simply don't understand why you think that Mazda NEEDS a 2.5 instead of a 2.3 when they already have that which to work off of.

IIRC, Mazda has stated that the 4-2-1 header on the Skyactiv 2.0L and 2.5L would be problematic with turbocharging.  I would think the 2.3 block would be a better starting point to reduce friction, etc.

I think you're concentrating on the wrong part of his post.

That's what lawyers do

[mixmanmash]

Mazda needs a turbo 2.5 to put in future Mazdaspeed cars.

Why does Mazda "need" a 2.5T instead of a 2.3T?

If Ford can make a 2.3T with 310hp, why can't Mazda do something in that realm?

Subaru has a 2.5T and it's now, except for the STi, obsolete and discontinued (in the Forester and Legacy).  Why does the specific displacement matter?

Volvo is using exclusively 2.0Ts, so are they going to fail because it's not a 2.5T?  I simply don't understand why you think that Mazda NEEDS a 2.5 instead of a 2.3 when they already have that which to work off of.

IIRC, Mazda has stated that the 4-2-1 header on the Skyactiv 2.0L and 2.5L would be problematic with turbocharging.  I would think the 2.3 block would be a better starting point to reduce friction, etc.

The problem with the 4-2-1 header for turbocharging applications is by the time the hot exhaust gets to the turbo, it would have cooled off / lost energy.  What they would have to do is use a twin scroll turbo and do a setup that allows two cylinders to feed each scroll and those two cylinders to be selected based on firing order (I.e. 1 and 2 for one scroll, 3 and 4 for the other if the order is 1-3-2-4).

I think they could easily make a Slyactiv 2.5 turbo.  Drop the compression from 13:1 to a still high 11:1, make the block closed deck for added strength, stronger internals (pistons), etc.  Essentially, this is what Nissan did for the GTR (take a VQ, close the deck and call it a VR engine).  There are a lot of similarities between the VQ and VR.

[Noto]

The problem with the 4-2-1 header for turbocharging applications is by the time the hot exhaust gets to the turbo, it would have cooled off / lost energy.  What they would have to do is use a twin scroll turbo and do a setup that allows two cylinders to feed each scroll and those two cylinders to be selected based on firing order (I.e. 1 and 2 for one scroll, 3 and 4 for the other if the order is 1-3-2-4).

I think they could easily make a Slyactiv 2.5 turbo.  Drop the compression from 13:1 to a still high 11:1, make the block closed deck for added strength, stronger internals (pistons), etc.  Essentially, this is what Nissan did for the GTR (take a VQ, close the deck and call it a VR engine).  There are a lot of similarities between the VQ and VR.

I vote for mmm to be Mazda's next chief of engineering!  Now make them do it.

[quadzilla]

Only if Mazda had a diesel with 300+ lbs of tq to put in it.

[Noto]

Only if Mazda had a diesel with 300+ lbs of tq to put in it.

Fancy that...they do.

...they just can't seem to get over North American emissions regulations without a DEF system (adding cost and complexity)

[mixmanmash]

Only if Mazda had a diesel with 300+ lbs of tq to put in it.

Fancy that...they do.

...they just can't seem to get over North American emissions regulations without a DEF system (adding cost and complexity)

Some of it also has to do with drivability of the diesel for our market.  They want to make sure it has better oomph in real numbers for our market to justify it as an upgrade.  They could easily do this - just scale up the design to a 2.5L.