I stand corrected on the supercharger part. Didn't read that wiki carefully enough.
Are you saying SkyActiv is supercharged too?
Are you saying SkyActiv is supercharged too?
A look inside the Mazda Skyactiv engine
- Thread starter badtlc
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
I stand corrected on the supercharger part. Didn't read that wiki carefully enough.
Are you saying SkyActiv is supercharged too?
No it is N/A currently.
I stand corrected on the supercharger part. Didn't read that wiki carefully enough.
Are you saying SkyActiv is supercharged too?
No it is N/A currently.
Originally Posted By: DBMaster
I am guessing it's not that hard to do and that the PCV valve lasts a really long time. I used to pull the one from my old Honda every 30,000 miles and usually just sprayed some carb cleaner through it. Using synthetic oil kept it really clean.Thank you for the info, BD.
Really sad that they hid it so well!
But like many mfgrs mazda has figured out that the PCV will last a LONG time in most applications. I own several trucks that do not even use a pcv valve, just a fixed orifice design.
I'll bet that they baffled the outlet very well to recover more of the oil vapors before they make it to the intake manifold.
I am guessing it's not that hard to do and that the PCV valve lasts a really long time. I used to pull the one from my old Honda every 30,000 miles and usually just sprayed some carb cleaner through it. Using synthetic oil kept it really clean.Thank you for the info, BD.
Really sad that they hid it so well!
But like many mfgrs mazda has figured out that the PCV will last a LONG time in most applications. I own several trucks that do not even use a pcv valve, just a fixed orifice design.
I'll bet that they baffled the outlet very well to recover more of the oil vapors before they make it to the intake manifold.
I did read it. I guess I'll have to be convinced over time. Though, my days of keeping a car for over 300,000 miles may be in the past. Regardless of how clean the inside of the engine stays there are plenty of other things that will wear out. Sooner or later it gets tiring to have to replace all that stuff.
Interesting that Mazda wants you to use 5W30 in Mexico and the rest of the world in the 2.0 SkyActive, 5W20 -if- 5W30 is not available.
From the 2013 CX5 Owners Manual:
U.S.A. and CANADA
0W-20 full synthetic recommended:
Mazda Genuine Oil is used in your Mazda
vehicle and is the recommended 0W-20
lubricant. Mazda Genuine 0W-20 Oil is
required to achieve optimum fuel
economy.
Recommended viscosity: SAE 0W-20
(Mexico)
Use SAE 5W-30 engine oil. If SAE 5W-
30 engine oil is not available, use SAE
5W-20 engine oil.
The quality designation SM, or ILSAC
must be on the label.
Except U.S.A. and CANADA
Use SAE 5W-30 engine oil.
Oil container labels provide important
information.
A chief contribution this type of oil makes
to fuel economy is reducing the amount of
fuel necessary to overcome engine
friction.
From the 2013 CX5 Owners Manual:
U.S.A. and CANADA
0W-20 full synthetic recommended:
Mazda Genuine Oil is used in your Mazda
vehicle and is the recommended 0W-20
lubricant. Mazda Genuine 0W-20 Oil is
required to achieve optimum fuel
economy.
Recommended viscosity: SAE 0W-20
(Mexico)
Use SAE 5W-30 engine oil. If SAE 5W-
30 engine oil is not available, use SAE
5W-20 engine oil.
The quality designation SM, or ILSAC
must be on the label.
Except U.S.A. and CANADA
Use SAE 5W-30 engine oil.
Oil container labels provide important
information.
A chief contribution this type of oil makes
to fuel economy is reducing the amount of
fuel necessary to overcome engine
friction.
Perhaps 0W-20 is not readily available - or too expensive for the car owners - in Mexico. Also, they do not have CAFE requirements there. I have a tech bulletin from Mazda Japan stating the same thing as above. I'm sticking with 0W-20 and not losing a bit of sleep over it.
Originally Posted By: DBMaster
Perhaps 0W-20 is not readily available - or too expensive for the car owners - in Mexico. Also, they do not have CAFE requirements there. I have a tech bulletin from Mazda Japan stating the same thing as above. I'm sticking with 0W-20 and not losing a bit of sleep over it.
Mexican sold vehicles don't have the same emission controls as north American sold vehicles if that makes any difference.
Perhaps 0W-20 is not readily available - or too expensive for the car owners - in Mexico. Also, they do not have CAFE requirements there. I have a tech bulletin from Mazda Japan stating the same thing as above. I'm sticking with 0W-20 and not losing a bit of sleep over it.
Mexican sold vehicles don't have the same emission controls as north American sold vehicles if that makes any difference.
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Originally Posted By: DBMaster
Perhaps 0W-20 is not readily available - or too expensive for the car owners - in Mexico. Also, they do not have CAFE requirements there. I have a tech bulletin from Mazda Japan stating the same thing as above. I'm sticking with 0W-20 and not losing a bit of sleep over it.
Mexican sold vehicles don't have the same emission controls as north American sold vehicles if that makes any difference.
This is very true. On vehicles that are sold in Mexico as well as the US will have fuel listings for leaded fuel and listings for airbag delete panels.
Originally Posted By: DBMaster
Perhaps 0W-20 is not readily available - or too expensive for the car owners - in Mexico. Also, they do not have CAFE requirements there. I have a tech bulletin from Mazda Japan stating the same thing as above. I'm sticking with 0W-20 and not losing a bit of sleep over it.
Mexican sold vehicles don't have the same emission controls as north American sold vehicles if that makes any difference.
This is very true. On vehicles that are sold in Mexico as well as the US will have fuel listings for leaded fuel and listings for airbag delete panels.
Originally Posted By: Miller88
I test drove a few CX-5s with the SkyActiv engine, and rode along with a test drive on a 3 with SkyActiv.
They seemed to ping a lot. I guess that's what happens when you run such high compression on 87?
We just bought new 2014 CX-5 w 2.5 Skyactiv, and a new Mazda 3 w 2 Skyactiv. Very pleased with both, and no detonation whatsoever. Excellent fuel economy.
I test drove a few CX-5s with the SkyActiv engine, and rode along with a test drive on a 3 with SkyActiv.
They seemed to ping a lot. I guess that's what happens when you run such high compression on 87?
We just bought new 2014 CX-5 w 2.5 Skyactiv, and a new Mazda 3 w 2 Skyactiv. Very pleased with both, and no detonation whatsoever. Excellent fuel economy.
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
I think the solid lifters/valves is a good example of how Honda sticks with something that is tried and true even if it might appear that using the hydraulic valves is better.
When a hydraulic valve fails you MUST replace it. Period. When a solid valve falls out of spec it can fairly easily be adjusted back into spec and in the long run be cheaper and more efficient for the owner. I like that kind of thinking.
That's malarkey.
1. The hydraulic lifter has been around since the 1930's. It isn't any "newer" than people using overhead camshafts.
2. There are more than enough engines running around with stuck/noisy HLA's that if you HAD to replace them when they went south, these engines would have failed. But they have not. Usual cause for a plugged/collapsed HLA is varnish anyway...
3. When a solid tappet valvetrain goes out of spec on the exhaust valve, it can be of the "too tight" variety and if not fixed, can cause valve and seat failure. This is not an issue on an HLA equipped engine.
4. Cheaper to the owner? The valves on a Crown Vic, Grand Marquis, F-150, F-250, F-350, Expedition, Explorer, Mustang....etc NEVER need to be adjusted. How many examples of these engines are there out there with OBSCENE mileage that even a Honda owner would be jealous of? How many times do you think the HLA's have been replaced in those engines? Want to gamble at probably NEVER? How many times do you think the valve covers have been off? Exactly. ONE valve adjustment done by an independent or dealer on a Honda will cost more than what your average Modular owner will ever spend on valvetrain maintenance over the life of their vehicle, which will likely be absolutely nothing.
Now on your points about DI, I think you are spot-on
I just bought a new Mazda CX-5 w 2.5 Skyactiv. I test drove a Honda CRV, and liked it. That being said, the seats did not support my legs, had a five speed, and had a solid lifter cam. I don't like solid lifters in my cars, or in my motorcycles. I don't like wrenching anymore, I just like driving. I vote for hydraulics!
Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
I think the solid lifters/valves is a good example of how Honda sticks with something that is tried and true even if it might appear that using the hydraulic valves is better.
When a hydraulic valve fails you MUST replace it. Period. When a solid valve falls out of spec it can fairly easily be adjusted back into spec and in the long run be cheaper and more efficient for the owner. I like that kind of thinking.
That's malarkey.
1. The hydraulic lifter has been around since the 1930's. It isn't any "newer" than people using overhead camshafts.
2. There are more than enough engines running around with stuck/noisy HLA's that if you HAD to replace them when they went south, these engines would have failed. But they have not. Usual cause for a plugged/collapsed HLA is varnish anyway...
3. When a solid tappet valvetrain goes out of spec on the exhaust valve, it can be of the "too tight" variety and if not fixed, can cause valve and seat failure. This is not an issue on an HLA equipped engine.
4. Cheaper to the owner? The valves on a Crown Vic, Grand Marquis, F-150, F-250, F-350, Expedition, Explorer, Mustang....etc NEVER need to be adjusted. How many examples of these engines are there out there with OBSCENE mileage that even a Honda owner would be jealous of? How many times do you think the HLA's have been replaced in those engines? Want to gamble at probably NEVER? How many times do you think the valve covers have been off? Exactly. ONE valve adjustment done by an independent or dealer on a Honda will cost more than what your average Modular owner will ever spend on valvetrain maintenance over the life of their vehicle, which will likely be absolutely nothing.
Now on your points about DI, I think you are spot-on
I just bought a new Mazda CX-5 w 2.5 Skyactiv. I test drove a Honda CRV, and liked it. That being said, the seats did not support my legs, had a five speed, and had a solid lifter cam. I don't like solid lifters in my cars, or in my motorcycles. I don't like wrenching anymore, I just like driving. I vote for hydraulics!
Hey Gillsy, have you considered participating in the octane experiment? Maybe in 10K miles?
Also, since this is the skyactiv "tech" thread, I'll drop some cool articles that I just came across from the SAE.
All new flexible and efficient engine machining processes.
http://www.sae.org/mags/aei/11783
We're going to see a lot of other automakers adopt this 'scalable' system.
Diesel race engine based on stock production block running synthetic diesel fuel
http://www.sae.org/mags/aei/11750
Also, since this is the skyactiv "tech" thread, I'll drop some cool articles that I just came across from the SAE.
All new flexible and efficient engine machining processes.
http://www.sae.org/mags/aei/11783
We're going to see a lot of other automakers adopt this 'scalable' system.
Diesel race engine based on stock production block running synthetic diesel fuel
http://www.sae.org/mags/aei/11750
Thanks for sharing those links! I find it truly amazing how much Mazda can accomplish with relatively so little. Their race programs are just phenomenal.
I'm not a huge "brand" guy, but I keep finding myself wanting to buy Mazdas just to support the little guy because I like the way they engineer and do things.
I'm not a huge "brand" guy, but I keep finding myself wanting to buy Mazdas just to support the little guy because I like the way they engineer and do things.
I now have 33,500 miles on my 2015 3. So far so good. Engine warranty is only 50k though.
I've been running nothing but premium fuel. Car sees a lot of highway miles and WOT.
Unlike my previous Honda/Toyota, this car doesn't consume any noticeable amount of oil despite the new low tension rings.
I've been running nothing but premium fuel. Car sees a lot of highway miles and WOT.
Unlike my previous Honda/Toyota, this car doesn't consume any noticeable amount of oil despite the new low tension rings.
Originally Posted by NHGUY
I have to question all the tricks used to reduce friction...no piston skirts,narrow main and rod bearings,narrow rings.....I'm thinking this engine is going to burn oil and knock something fierce once the miles pile on.
Just an update. I traded my 2015 CX5 in on a 2019 CX5 turbo a couple of months ago. It had 106K miles on it. It consumed maybe 1/4 quart every 7500mi, and never had any engine issues. I ran whatever cheap crap 87 octane I wanted in it (which is finally what got me to trade it in, as it took out the fuel-pump and FPR at 106K miles, and the dealer trade was a great offer, considering such. They both conked out 5 minutes after refueling one afternoon.)
I have to question all the tricks used to reduce friction...no piston skirts,narrow main and rod bearings,narrow rings.....I'm thinking this engine is going to burn oil and knock something fierce once the miles pile on.
Just an update. I traded my 2015 CX5 in on a 2019 CX5 turbo a couple of months ago. It had 106K miles on it. It consumed maybe 1/4 quart every 7500mi, and never had any engine issues. I ran whatever cheap crap 87 octane I wanted in it (which is finally what got me to trade it in, as it took out the fuel-pump and FPR at 106K miles, and the dealer trade was a great offer, considering such. They both conked out 5 minutes after refueling one afternoon.)
Last edited:
I've never heard of fuel pump failure due to cheap gas.
Originally Posted by circuitsmith
I've never heard of fuel pump failure due to cheap gas.
I don't know what it was, but the HPFP and FP regulator both took a dump 5 minutes after re-fueling. Maybe the re-fueling is a red herring, but it was what it was. Mainly I posted to say the engine was fine for all 106K miles, as was the transmission.
I've never heard of fuel pump failure due to cheap gas.
I don't know what it was, but the HPFP and FP regulator both took a dump 5 minutes after re-fueling. Maybe the re-fueling is a red herring, but it was what it was. Mainly I posted to say the engine was fine for all 106K miles, as was the transmission.
I have just about 106,000 miles on my 2012 Mazda3 as well with no issues. I do not have to add oil during the OCIs. The only unscheduled item I've replaced is the belt tensioner and I just did that a week ago. One of my coworkers bought the same car in 2012 and she has over 170,000 miles on hers and hasn't had any repairs needed.
Originally Posted by Miller88
I test drove a few CX-5s with the SkyActiv engine, and rode along with a test drive on a 3 with SkyActiv.
They seemed to ping a lot. I guess that's what happens when you run such high compression on 87?
I bought a 2014 CX-5 new. I was so impressed with it that I took my wife to the dealership to get her a new 2012 Mazda 3. I no longer have the CX-5, but my wife's 3 has 104,000 miles on it, and never heard a ping out of either of them. Both ran fine on 87 octane. I think Mazda is a solid company with a lot of innovation.
I test drove a few CX-5s with the SkyActiv engine, and rode along with a test drive on a 3 with SkyActiv.
They seemed to ping a lot. I guess that's what happens when you run such high compression on 87?
I bought a 2014 CX-5 new. I was so impressed with it that I took my wife to the dealership to get her a new 2012 Mazda 3. I no longer have the CX-5, but my wife's 3 has 104,000 miles on it, and never heard a ping out of either of them. Both ran fine on 87 octane. I think Mazda is a solid company with a lot of innovation.
- Status
Similar threads
