Great PDF on Mazda Skyactiv

Status
Not open for further replies.
Thanks for sharing this. It's very interesting. You can see just how much they strive for a perfect package. Too bad they didn't find the Diesel engine suited enough for the American market.
 
Yup, SkyActiv is not just the engine and the tranny, it's the whole concept that starts with something as small as welds optimization to reduce weight.
Just goes to show how much it takes and what kind of attention to detail and resources go into engineering today's vehicles.
 
Originally Posted By: KrisZ
Yup, SkyActiv is not just the engine and the tranny, it's the whole concept that starts with something as small as welds optimization to reduce weight.
Just goes to show how much it takes and what kind of attention to detail and resources go into engineering today's vehicles.


a huge part of it is the manufacturing process, too. they make a lot of optimizations to reduce manufacturing requirements/costs.
 
I like Mazdas, but "Skyactive" is just a marketing slogan. It's Mazda's version of Toyota's "Star Safety System" or Ford's "Ecoboost" engines. Mazdas aren't really any lighter, more fuel efficient, or less expensive than comparable competitor's models. It's not like other companies don't prioritize weight reduction and manufacturing efficiency, they're all trying to make a buck.

jeff
 
Those are low hanging fruit technologies that works well, but more expensive in per unit cost. Mazda made the decision to use more expensive parts to reduce R&D overhead for its relatively small company and volume size, which is great for consumer.
 
Originally Posted By: greenjp
I like Mazdas, but "Skyactive" is just a marketing slogan. It's Mazda's version of Toyota's "Star Safety System" or Ford's "Ecoboost" engines. Mazdas aren't really any lighter, more fuel efficient, or less expensive than comparable competitor's models. It's not like other companies don't prioritize weight reduction and manufacturing efficiency, they're all trying to make a buck.

jeff
The consumers are so easy to fool. Marketing works wonders.
 
I've always liked Mazdas, my dad had an old truck back when I was a kid. That thing ran forever! I actually learned to drive a manual transmission on that thing. Up and down the gravel road for hours!

What I don't like about them (at least the bigger SUVs) is that their crash test ratings aren't as good as the other guys. That's something that is very important to me with a wife and 3 kiddos. Something that 15 years ago, I wouldn't have even cared about. It's funny how things change.

We actually looked at the CX-9 a little bit because I had one as a rental car once and really liked the way it drove.
 
Last edited:
When they make cars that don't rust out their trunk lids within 3 years, I'll consider them.

Or maybe Mazda need to market themselves as the car brand that builds in 'continuous weight reduction'?

Sky-view-Active trunks for the 'fuggetaboutit's' stored inside
grin.gif
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: KGMtech
When they make cars that don't rust out their trunk lids within 3 years, I'll consider them.


You come up with that through actual experience, or are you just spewing off what you read someone said on the internet?

Can you show me pictures of a 2013 CX-5 with rust on it?

BC.
 
Originally Posted By: greenjp
I like Mazdas, but "Skyactive" is just a marketing slogan. It's Mazda's version of Toyota's "Star Safety System" or Ford's "Ecoboost" engines. Mazdas aren't really any lighter, more fuel efficient, or less expensive than comparable competitor's models. It's not like other companies don't prioritize weight reduction and manufacturing efficiency, they're all trying to make a buck.

jeff


So much fail in one post. I'd explain it to you but it is clear from your post you have no real interest in this subject.

But just to throw it out there, skyactiv has nothing to do with other manufacturers. They aren't saying they are lighter or better than others. The skyactiv indicates which mazda vehicles have been redesigned using the skyactiv philosophy. They are lighter and more efficient than other MAZDAS.
 
Please do. I'd love to have my "fail" explained to me. I read the pdf btw. It's all interesting stuff, as KrisZ says it highlights the attention to detail that goes into automobile design. My quibble is with the suggestion that there's something special or unique about this. A stylized badge on the back of the car is by definition marketing. That's fine, everybody does it, but to suggest that Mazda's version of continuous product improvement is different from anyone else's is just kool-aide guzzling.

As for the appropriate comparison, well of course they're going to compare their new, improved models to their old models. That's how they can say they improved efficiency by X% and reduced weight by Y%. Every test drive article about a new model says something like "torsional rigidity is improved by 22% over the outgoing model".

The comparisons wouldn't look so favorable if they made them against competitors' contemporary models. "Well we Skyactive'd the heck out of the new 3 but somehow Honda managed to make the new Civic just as affordable, lightweight, and efficient without any specially-branded design process."

Here's a slightly modified (all caps are my changes) paragraph from a new vehicle launch press release:
"The CAR's efficiency is rooted in a new, FANCY EFFICIENT ENGINE and a leaner architecture, which contributes to a nearly 250-pound (113 kg) weight reduction on MOST trims over previous models. Stop/start technology bolsters efficiency in stop-and-go traffic, helping the CAR offer an EPA-estimated 30 mpg in city driving – a 7-percent increase over previous models."

Two questions:
- can you guess the make and model?
- Does that honestly sound any different from the topics covered in the Skyactive training material in the OP?

I really do like Mazda, I admire their commitment to manual transmissions and focus on the driving experience as opposed to say Toyota. If I was in the market right now the 3 and 6 would be among the cars I'd consider.

jeff
 
Your disdain for Mazda is apparent. I'm not sure if they hired your wife away from you or what but whatever they did, it obviously left a dent on you.

Mazda didn't claim to be special. All this was, was a simple outline of the extent of the skyactiv corporate change. What it doesn't cover is how the skyactiv philosophy changed their manufacturing ways. Toyota and honda decide how they want to make a car and then adjust the factory to get it done. That isn't how Mazda works. Part of the skyactiv change was designing everything with the production in mind because they don't have the resources the big boys do. So they consider production when they are designing their engines (for example) such that they can produce all their engines on the same line without any modification to the production line. For the engines, that goes into the block design. They want to design a block that they can continue to evolve the engine without having to change manufacturing. It is a much more forward thinking/engineering. It gets much more detailed than that when you get into the finer assembly details. They are engineering around manufacturing/production more than around the car. The other guys do some engineering around manufacturing as that can't be avoided but they tend to design the car first, then engineer manufacturing which is the opposite of where mazda's skyactiv took them.

Nobody is saying Mazda is better than anyone else but they are different. You should at least be capable of acknowledging that.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: greenjp
Please do. I'd love to have my "fail" explained to me. I read the pdf btw. It's all interesting stuff, as KrisZ says it highlights the attention to detail that goes into automobile design. My quibble is with the suggestion that there's something special or unique about this. A stylized badge on the back of the car is by definition marketing. That's fine, everybody does it, but to suggest that Mazda's version of continuous product improvement is different from anyone else's is just kool-aide guzzling.

As for the appropriate comparison, well of course they're going to compare their new, improved models to their old models. That's how they can say they improved efficiency by X% and reduced weight by Y%. Every test drive article about a new model says something like "torsional rigidity is improved by 22% over the outgoing model".

The comparisons wouldn't look so favorable if they made them against competitors' contemporary models. "Well we Skyactive'd the heck out of the new 3 but somehow Honda managed to make the new Civic just as affordable, lightweight, and efficient without any specially-branded design process."

Here's a slightly modified (all caps are my changes) paragraph from a new vehicle launch press release:
"The CAR's efficiency is rooted in a new, FANCY EFFICIENT ENGINE and a leaner architecture, which contributes to a nearly 250-pound (113 kg) weight reduction on MOST trims over previous models. Stop/start technology bolsters efficiency in stop-and-go traffic, helping the CAR offer an EPA-estimated 30 mpg in city driving – a 7-percent increase over previous models."

Two questions:
- can you guess the make and model?
- Does that honestly sound any different from the topics covered in the Skyactive training material in the OP?

I really do like Mazda, I admire their commitment to manual transmissions and focus on the driving experience as opposed to say Toyota. If I was in the market right now the 3 and 6 would be among the cars I'd consider.

jeff


That's a pretty good summary. Call it whatever you want, but every automaker out there does it. They have to in order to survive.
Mazda had to perhaps take a more drastic approach than the others as they separated from Ford and were left with little resources, but their Skyactiv thing is just a marketing name given to represent a change, just like Ecoboost, Earthdreams etc.

IMO, but the Skyactiv name must be one of the poorest out there. Perhaps in Japanese it is more meaningful, but the English translation is simply silly. The only saving grace is that Mazda's implementation of it is extremely good.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: badtlc
Your disdain for Mazda is apparent. I'm not sure if they hired your wife away from you or what but whatever they did, it obviously left a dent on you.

Now you're just making stuff up. Did you not read the parts where I said I liked Mazda (twice), that I admire them, and that I'd consider buying one? Nothing says disdain like giving a company $25,000 of your hard-earned money! I love it when I'm surprised in the rental lot with a 3 instead of a Corolla or Focus or something.

Originally Posted By: badtlc
Mazda didn't claim to be special.

Correct. Some of you guys are though.

Originally Posted By: badtlc
All this was, was a simple outline of the extent of the skyactiv corporate change... What it doesn't cover is how the skyactiv philosophy changed their manufacturing ways...That isn't how Mazda works... Part of the skyactiv change was designing everything with the production in mind... ...It is a much more forward thinking/engineering. It gets much more detailed than that when you get into the finer assembly details...The other guys do some engineering around manufacturing as that can't be avoided but they tend to design the car first, then engineer manufacturing which is the opposite of where mazda's skyactiv took them....

Sure. I'd like to introduce you to someone...
koolaid.jpg


Originally Posted By: badtlc
Nobody is saying Mazda is better than anyone else but they are different. You should at least be capable of acknowledging that.

Every company is different from every other company, but I think you are greatly overestimating the differences here and are mistaken that Mazda's differences make them truly unique somehow. Their cars aren't really much different from say Honda's when you get down to it.


Originally Posted By: KrisZ
... but their Skyactiv thing is just a marketing name given to represent a change, just like Ecoboost, Earthdreams etc.

IMO, but the Skyactiv name must be one of the poorest out there. Perhaps in Japanese it is more meaningful, but the English translation is simply silly. The only saving grace is that Mazda's implementation of it is extremely good.

I can't stand "Ecoboost" - every manufacturer makes turbo engines, many for far longer than Ford. Saab used to brand their turbo engines as "Ecopower", so Ford's moniker isn't even original. Saab just kept it hidden under the hood, on the engine cover instead of as a shiny emblem on the back of the car.

Honda's "Earth Dreams" has got to be the worst branding out there. I don't even know what that's supposed to mean, just like Skyactive. Both came straight from the marketing departments.

jeff
 
Originally Posted By: Schmoe
Boy, that 14:1 gas compression ratio scares me.....

It's 13:1 in the US. The exhaust design allows for this with "regular" gas.

So far I'm loving my 2016 CX-5. I didn't buy it for the marketing, but rather the reliability of current Mazda's and the fact that it's just fun to drive.

I rented a GMC Terrain for a day and it was like driving a tank. Not a fun car at all.

I do like that Mazda is stepping up on proven tech rather than going into unproven ground. I think their reliability is boosted by this.
 
Originally Posted By: Schmoe
Boy, that 14:1 gas compression ratio scares me.....


Yeah, but, with VVT they can easily bleed off pressure by leaving the intake valve open past BDC. This would reduce effective compression ratio. They can do that, or pull timing, or run pig rich, to control detonation; but with DI & a "great" chamber design I'm not sure how much of is required.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atkinson_cycle
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top