Topic: Mazda Hasn't Forgotten About Diesel Mazda6, Still In Product Roadmap

[Sir Osis of Liver]

IIRC V6 take rate on the Camry was around 10%. The midsizer with the highest take rate was the Fusion at 30%, but that was the only way to get AWD. Everyone else fit somewhere in between.

[Kris78]

IIRC V6 take rate on the Camry was around 10%. The midsizer with the highest take rate was the Fusion at 30%, but that was the only way to get AWD. Everyone else fit somewhere in between.

I wonder what % of folks had an intention of purchasing the larger engine from the outset, then changed their minds? In other words, how much did the availability of a turbo 4 or V6 draw a purchaser towards a given product?

While completely an opinion, I think it is important to have uplevel engines and trims simply to pull folks towards a product.
 

[Solstice2006]

Assuming 10% is true that's still over 40,000 units.

Right so 40,000 unit on the Camry, same engine is in Avalon, Highlander, Sienna, plus Lexus vehicles.  V6 with Mazda would get less than 6000 units with the Mazda6 and CX-9 combined, for business sake, not really worth it. 

[Noto]

But there a few who feel a midsize sedan needs over 200hp... 

Yes, and statistics show that those vehicles make up <20% of sales.  I don't think Mazda's issue with selling the 6 is based on a want of power.

If anything, it's limited outward visibility, lack of reputation for reliability (not saying it's bad, but it's certainly no Camry/Accord), and pricing - the Mazda6 is almost always more expensive at the dealership.  A smaller manufacturer cannot command more for a competing product if you want to grab market share.

Hyundai/Kia were relatively cheaper and offered little luxuries like heated seats.  That drove sales.  Tens of thousands of dollars is not pocket change to the majority of consumers.

Guaranteed if Mazda chopped $4,000 off MSRP, the Mazda6 would start to sell better.  Give it better outward visibility and you'll find it selling even better.

But folks prefer the CUV craze to a mid-size sedan, and those that want a mid-size sedan want one with more space inside.  Therein lies the problem.

[Noto]

However, it would be for ME.

Gotchya.  And fair enough.  I'm a proponent for more powah.

I still don't think it's an enigma...the Mazda3 sells in droves, as does the CX-5.  Why the hate for the Mazda6?  My guess is not enough interior/cargo space differentiating it from the Mazda3 and pricing that is too steep.

...and the all-black interior likely doesn't help.

[Solstice2006]

However, it would be for ME.

Gotchya.  And fair enough.  I'm a proponent for more powah.

I still don't think it's an enigma...the Mazda3 sells in droves, as does the CX-5.  Why the hate for the Mazda6?  My guess is not enough interior/cargo space differentiating it from the Mazda3 and pricing that is too steep.

...and the all-black interior likely doesn't help.

With the luxury group, you can get sand interior.  Pricing structure for the Mazda6 is similar to the way the Mazda3 is priced, and it does ok.  I agree that it is tighter than the Accord/Camry, but that doesn't seem to bother the Americans that much?  It's more of a Canadian sales problem.  It's a tough mystery. 

[EV-Light]

Like other companies, Mazda is going after the new trends, the small cars.  The Mazda CX-3, and Mazda2.  Hopefully with better sales here.  More R&D can be put towards a V6 (my preference for a new CX-9) rather than a turbo 4.  All the other competitors are much larger and have more resources, so finding a balance is difficult.

they just hit a bump on the road....gas @0.98 cents!! 
asides from that, Mazda needs to bring more to the game...I like their cars/CUVs but the current engine line up doesn't attract me at all. Prices are on the high end as well...

[mixmanmash]

Like other companies, Mazda is going after the new trends, the small cars.  The Mazda CX-3, and Mazda2.  Hopefully with better sales here.  More R&D can be put towards a V6 (my preference for a new CX-9) rather than a turbo 4.  All the other competitors are much larger and have more resources, so finding a balance is difficult.

they just hit a bump on the road....gas @0.98 cents!! 
asides from that, Mazda needs to bring more to the game...I like their cars/CUVs but the current engine line up doesn't attract me at all. Prices are on the high end as well...

Gas is 90.9 here in Edmonton.  You can even find it in the high 80s in some places.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Okay.

To summarize, I agree, Mazda 6 sales (or lack thereof) probably aren't contingent on a more powerful engine. However, it would be for ME.

I think the poor sales of the 6 is the auto industry's great enigma. Good interior, good style, drives nice, yet no one wants one. Beats me.

I loved the exterior look, and was ok with the sand interior, except for the stupid HMI. It was noisier than most of the rest of the mid-sizers, mostly wind and road noise, and its ride was firmer than most also. On the winter traumatised streets of Regina, that's not a plus.

There was nothing shatteringly wrong with it, but I'm not sure the compelling looks would be enough to sway me in that direction. For me, in this class, it would likely come down to the Accord, Fusion (2.0L AWD), Legacy or possibly the Passat.

[ArticSteve]

I still don't think it's an enigma...the Mazda3 sells in droves, as does the CX-5.  Why the hate for the Mazda6?  My guess is not enough interior/cargo space differentiating it from the Mazda3 and pricing that is too steep.

...and the all-black interior likely doesn't help.

^^^

[Solstice2006]

Okay.

To summarize, I agree, Mazda 6 sales (or lack thereof) probably aren't contingent on a more powerful engine. However, it would be for ME.

I think the poor sales of the 6 is the auto industry's great enigma. Good interior, good style, drives nice, yet no one wants one. Beats me.

I loved the exterior look, and was ok with the sand interior, except for the stupid HMI. It was noisier than most of the rest of the mid-sizers, mostly wind and road noise, and its ride was firmer than most also. On the winter traumatised streets of Regina, that's not a plus.

There was nothing shatteringly wrong with it, but I'm not sure the compelling looks would be enough to sway me in that direction. For me, in this class, it would likely come down to the Accord, Fusion (2.0L AWD), Legacy or possibly the Passat.

I don't hear much noise.  Maybe it's because I have winter tires on (instead of OEMS), and also because I love to rev it.  I looked at the other sedans mentioned, but not the AWD Ford.  And with the GX trim, only the Accord was cheaper, by about $600.  Interest rates on everything was more. Passat was way more, the Fusion S was $1000 cheaper, but has less equipment.  Legacy was the same price, but at least you get AWD.  But leasing wasn't as good, no negotiating, and no loyalty rebate from Mazda. 

[Sir Osis of Liver]

the issue is that no engine using regular gas will come close to the performance of this diesel either in power/torque or mileage.  you need to buy a small displacement turbo petrol, all of which use premium fuel adding 20-30 cents more than regular.  with small displacement turbos, we all know mileage won't come anywhere close to this engine.

this 2.2l shines, not necessarily in the 0-100 sprint, but from the stop light 0-60. that initial push is immediate and very strong.  it's where most people would really appreciate the power. it has a really nice power band from 1000-4500. 310lb/ft of torque.

Wut? The Mazda6 diesel does 0-100kph in about 8.4 seconds. The gas version does it in roughly 7.8 seconds with the manual, add 3 or 4 tenths for the slushbox. The diesel will get better mileage on the highway, but around town it's going to be a wash at best.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

the issue is that no engine using regular gas will come close to the performance of this diesel either in power/torque or mileage.  you need to buy a small displacement turbo petrol, all of which use premium fuel adding 20-30 cents more than regular.  with small displacement turbos, we all know mileage won't come anywhere close to this engine.

this 2.2l shines, not necessarily in the 0-100 sprint, but from the stop light 0-60. that initial push is immediate and very strong.  it's where most people would really appreciate the power. it has a really nice power band from 1000-4500. 310lb/ft of torque.

Wut? The Mazda6 diesel does 0-100kph in about 8.4 seconds. The gas version does it in roughly 7.8 seconds with the manual, add 3 or 4 tenths for the slushbox. The diesel will get better mileage on the highway, but around town it's going to be a wash at best.

drive them both.  the diesel around town feels like a v6.  that's where most people feel the difference.  read what i said.

People have always told me this, I don't get it.

Horsepower is the rate of application of torque. Diesels typically have more torque, but much less hp, so they can't apply their torque as fast, so to me they feel sluggish. I don't care if a gas engine has to rev a bit higher. They're well designed for it.

A theoretical V6 Mazda6 would likely be in the low 6s to 100kph, so no, an 8.5 second diesel wouldn't feel the same at all.

[EV-Light]

Okay.

To summarize, I agree, Mazda 6 sales (or lack thereof) probably aren't contingent on a more powerful engine. However, it would be for ME.

I think the poor sales of the 6 is the auto industry's great enigma. Good interior, good style, drives nice, yet no one wants one. Beats me.

I loved the exterior look, and was ok with the sand interior, except for the stupid HMI. It was noisier than most of the rest of the mid-sizers, mostly wind and road noise, and its ride was firmer than most also. On the winter traumatised streets of Regina, that's not a plus.

There was nothing shatteringly wrong with it, but I'm not sure the compelling looks would be enough to sway me in that direction. For me, in this class, it would likely come down to the Accord, Fusion (2.0L AWD), Legacy or possibly the Passat.

I don't hear much noise.  Maybe it's because I have winter tires on (instead of OEMS), and also because I love to rev it.  I looked at the other sedans mentioned, but not the AWD Ford.  And with the GX trim, only the Accord was cheaper, by about $600.  Interest rates on everything was more. Passat was way more, the Fusion S was $1000 cheaper, but has less equipment.  Legacy was the same price, but at least you get AWD.  But leasing wasn't as good, no negotiating, and no loyalty rebate from Mazda.

The Fusion S is significantly cheaper than the Mazda 6 GX. I just went to Ford.ca and built a SE with technology and appearance pkgs for $1800 less than the GX. The Fusion is also better equipped at that price...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Noto]

The diesel will get better mileage on the highway, but around town it's going to be a wash at best.

This.  I find that the advancement of ICEs has made the diesels in current form somewhat moot unless the only driving you do is pure highway.

I'd like to see more R&D on diesels to make them the efficient powerplant that they can/should be.  There's simply been more focus on petrol for some reason.

Even Mazda's incredible 2.2D is only going to have 'some' benefits that will not likely outweigh its costs.  To sell both the 2.5G and the 2.2D side-by-side is to leech sales.  If the Mazda6 was purely sold as a 2.2D (no sky-G available), it would be a niche product that would have some real sales if sold at the same pricing as it current is at.  The problem is, for a $2-3k premium over the gas version, and similar performance, and only the possibility of 'some' fuel savings, the diesel doesn't make a ton of sense.

It could, if done right (as mentioned above), but then there's some people who say, "eww, diesel" and wouldn't even shop for one.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

The Fusion S is significantly cheaper than the Mazda 6 GX. I just went to Ford.ca and built a SE with technology and appearance pkgs for $1800 less than the GX. The Fusion is also better equipped at that price...

...and there you have it, folks, why the Fusion sells more than the Mazda6.

[EV-Light]

I have to say....I rarely see a base Fusion around. 98% of them are SE and Titanium.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Sir Osis of Liver]

In the US, the Fusion average transaction price was running around $2k more than the average transaction price of the Camry. I'm not sure how the Mazda6 figures into it. Mazda doesn't have deep pockets, so they likely aren't very subsidized.

[OliverD]

Guaranteed if Mazda chopped $4,000 off MSRP, the Mazda6 would start to sell better.  Give it better outward visibility and you'll find it selling even better.

LOL.

You can say that about every single car on the market that is under $50k.

[OliverD]

Mazda 6 sales show that they need to so SOMETHING. Just about every other competitor has a powerful engine option be it a V6 or a turbo 4.

Mazda is on track to have its highest 6 sales in the U.S. since 2007. They're going to be up about 20% over last year, which in turn was up 30% over the year before.

Granted, sales in Canada are not doing nearly as well but we're also 1/10th of the market. In the grand scheme of things the new 6 is doing very well.

[Solstice2006]

Okay.

To summarize, I agree, Mazda 6 sales (or lack thereof) probably aren't contingent on a more powerful engine. However, it would be for ME.

I think the poor sales of the 6 is the auto industry's great enigma. Good interior, good style, drives nice, yet no one wants one. Beats me.

I loved the exterior look, and was ok with the sand interior, except for the stupid HMI. It was noisier than most of the rest of the mid-sizers, mostly wind and road noise, and its ride was firmer than most also. On the winter traumatised streets of Regina, that's not a plus.

There was nothing shatteringly wrong with it, but I'm not sure the compelling looks would be enough to sway me in that direction. For me, in this class, it would likely come down to the Accord, Fusion (2.0L AWD), Legacy or possibly the Passat.

I don't hear much noise.  Maybe it's because I have winter tires on (instead of OEMS), and also because I love to rev it.  I looked at the other sedans mentioned, but not the AWD Ford.  And with the GX trim, only the Accord was cheaper, by about $600.  Interest rates on everything was more. Passat was way more, the Fusion S was $1000 cheaper, but has less equipment.  Legacy was the same price, but at least you get AWD.  But leasing wasn't as good, no negotiating, and no loyalty rebate from Mazda.

The Fusion S is significantly cheaper than the Mazda 6 GX. I just went to Ford.ca and built a SE with technology and appearance pkgs for $1800 less than the GX. The Fusion is also better equipped at that price...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The Ford Fusion S is cheaper than the GX, but has no heated seats, doesn't have 17" alloys, doesn't have touchscreen display (myford touch), not sure if it has push-start button start. And the 2.5L from Ford isn't as nice as the Mazdas, then there is the lack of manual. 

The Ford Fusion SE is not cheaper than the GX.  You have to add the heated seats in the dealer options, then the MyFord touch, with tax it's $31,696 with $500 off from the dealer.  The GX is $31,210, in automatic. The GS, is $33,130 and has blind spot monitoring, dual zone climate, intelligent keyless. 

The Fusion S is a great value, the GX is equipped and priced above the S, and below the SE.