Mazda 3 i-ACTIV AWD diagonal test
- Thread starter buster
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
You are talking about Haldex system. That is VW basically, and yes it can be found in Audi, and proved to be very good. Not sure why would Mazda system be better nor it is.
I am talking about Torsen differential in Audi, which Audi is known for. And that is different world compared to Mazda.
Does Audi even have a Torsen diff anymore? The S line might be, and the r8? The gen 5 Haldex is what's in most Audi products, and it's like a slower Mazda system. Hydraulics < Electromagnetic.
Longitudinal engines: Torsen (2.0ltr manuals have decoupling capability, still Torsen).
Transvers: Haldex.
Remember that video (since apparently Mazda made videos are fine)? Haldex proved much more capable in Tiguan.
As I said, it is good AWD, but nothing more.
Originally Posted by edyvw
You are talking about Haldex system. That is VW basically, and yes it can be found in Audi, and proved to be very good. Not sure why would Mazda system be better nor it is.
I am talking about Torsen differential in Audi, which Audi is known for. And that is different world compared to Mazda.
Does Audi even have a Torsen diff anymore? The S line might be, and the r8? The gen 5 Haldex is what's in most Audi products, and it's like a slower Mazda system. Hydraulics < Electromagnetic.
Longitudinal engines: Torsen (2.0ltr manuals have decoupling capability, still Torsen).
Transvers: Haldex.
Remember that video (since apparently Mazda made videos are fine)? Haldex proved much more capable in Tiguan.
As I said, it is good AWD, but nothing more.
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
You are talking about Haldex system. That is VW basically, and yes it can be found in Audi, and proved to be very good. Not sure why would Mazda system be better nor it is.
I am talking about Torsen differential in Audi, which Audi is known for. And that is different world compared to Mazda.
Does Audi even have a Torsen diff anymore? The S line might be, and the r8? The gen 5 Haldex is what's in most Audi products, and it's like a slower Mazda system. Hydraulics < Electromagnetic.
Longitudinal engines: Torsen (2.0ltr manuals have decoupling capability, still Torsen).
Transvers: Haldex.
Remember that video (since apparently Mazda made videos are fine)? Haldex proved much more capable in Tiguan.
As I said, it is good AWD, but nothing more.
A lot of how well the Vw and Audi do, is due to tuning. Also, some awd does better in snow, or sand, or mud, or whatever based on what I've seen. That said, we are discussing mechanics, not tune and biasing protocols. Mechanically, the mazda slaughters the audi Haldex gen 5. Might the Haldex gen 5 in the tiguan be better tuned for some things (say, more rapid or less rapid build up of torque transfer vs slip %?) Maybe. Probably a grab bag, that. Kindof like how the BRZ and FRS handle differently even though same chassis. Mechanically though, the Haldex is 1980s technology at best. (See Porsche, PSK, circa 1980, for a baller version of what the Haldex coulda been)
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
You are talking about Haldex system. That is VW basically, and yes it can be found in Audi, and proved to be very good. Not sure why would Mazda system be better nor it is.
I am talking about Torsen differential in Audi, which Audi is known for. And that is different world compared to Mazda.
Does Audi even have a Torsen diff anymore? The S line might be, and the r8? The gen 5 Haldex is what's in most Audi products, and it's like a slower Mazda system. Hydraulics < Electromagnetic.
Longitudinal engines: Torsen (2.0ltr manuals have decoupling capability, still Torsen).
Transvers: Haldex.
Remember that video (since apparently Mazda made videos are fine)? Haldex proved much more capable in Tiguan.
As I said, it is good AWD, but nothing more.
A lot of how well the Vw and Audi do, is due to tuning. Also, some awd does better in snow, or sand, or mud, or whatever based on what I've seen. That said, we are discussing mechanics, not tune and biasing protocols. Mechanically, the mazda slaughters the audi Haldex gen 5. Might the Haldex gen 5 in the tiguan be better tuned for some things (say, more rapid or less rapid build up of torque transfer vs slip %?) Maybe. Probably a grab bag, that. Kindof like how the BRZ and FRS handle differently even though same chassis. Mechanically though, the Haldex is 1980s technology at best. (See Porsche, PSK, circa 1980, for a baller version of what the Haldex coulda been)
Last edited:
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
You are talking about Haldex system. That is VW basically, and yes it can be found in Audi, and proved to be very good. Not sure why would Mazda system be better nor it is.
I am talking about Torsen differential in Audi, which Audi is known for. And that is different world compared to Mazda.
Does Audi even have a Torsen diff anymore? The S line might be, and the r8? The gen 5 Haldex is what's in most Audi products, and it's like a slower Mazda system. Hydraulics < Electromagnetic.
Longitudinal engines: Torsen (2.0ltr manuals have decoupling capability, still Torsen).
Transvers: Haldex.
Remember that video (since apparently Mazda made videos are fine)? Haldex proved much more capable in Tiguan.
As I said, it is good AWD, but nothing more.
A lot of how well the Vw and Audi do, is due to tuning. Also, some awd does better in snow, or sand, or mud, or whatever based on what I've seen. That said, we are discussing mechanics, not tune and biasing protocols. Mechanically, the mazda slaughters the audi Haldex gen 5. Might the Haldex gen 5 in the tiguan be better tuned for some things (say, more rapid or less rapid build up of torque transfer vs slip %?) Maybe. Probably a grab bag, that. Kindof like how the BRZ and FRS handle differently even though same chassis. Mechanically though, the Haldex is 1980s technology at best. (See Porsche, PSK, circa 1980, for a baller version of what the Haldex coulda been)
Yeah, Mazda mechanically does not slaughters Audi. Also, Haldex is tuned in certain applications (MB) for 40:60% split with 20:80 and 80:20 max. torque split.
It is in category of Toyota, Honda etc.and ot is probably better. However, leave luxury class out of this. It is out of Mazda's league.
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
You are talking about Haldex system. That is VW basically, and yes it can be found in Audi, and proved to be very good. Not sure why would Mazda system be better nor it is.
I am talking about Torsen differential in Audi, which Audi is known for. And that is different world compared to Mazda.
Does Audi even have a Torsen diff anymore? The S line might be, and the r8? The gen 5 Haldex is what's in most Audi products, and it's like a slower Mazda system. Hydraulics < Electromagnetic.
Longitudinal engines: Torsen (2.0ltr manuals have decoupling capability, still Torsen).
Transvers: Haldex.
Remember that video (since apparently Mazda made videos are fine)? Haldex proved much more capable in Tiguan.
As I said, it is good AWD, but nothing more.
A lot of how well the Vw and Audi do, is due to tuning. Also, some awd does better in snow, or sand, or mud, or whatever based on what I've seen. That said, we are discussing mechanics, not tune and biasing protocols. Mechanically, the mazda slaughters the audi Haldex gen 5. Might the Haldex gen 5 in the tiguan be better tuned for some things (say, more rapid or less rapid build up of torque transfer vs slip %?) Maybe. Probably a grab bag, that. Kindof like how the BRZ and FRS handle differently even though same chassis. Mechanically though, the Haldex is 1980s technology at best. (See Porsche, PSK, circa 1980, for a baller version of what the Haldex coulda been)
Yeah, Mazda mechanically does not slaughters Audi. Also, Haldex is tuned in certain applications (MB) for 40:60% split with 20:80 and 80:20 max. torque split.
It is in category of Toyota, Honda etc.and ot is probably better. However, leave luxury class out of this. It is out of Mazda's league.
Originally Posted by edyvw
Yeah, Mazda mechanically does not slaughters Audi. Also, Haldex is tuned in certain applications (MB) for 40:60% split with 20:80 and 80:20 max. torque split.
It is in category of Toyota, Honda etc.and ot is probably better. However, leave luxury class out of this. It is out of Mazda's league.
I'm curious how a Haldex would be able to push more than 50% of the torque to the rear, as 100% lock-up is a 50/50 torque split. To achieve this, you would need more than just the Haldex Gen 5 unit, but also other sub-systems. I am unaware of what other AWD components are under an Audi or MB that would allow this, which are also equipped with the Haldex unit. The Torsen units can indeed torque bias, but a clutch is a clutch, and all it can do is transfer 100% of the torque given to it, so unless the front is de-coupling, the rear is only seeing 50% of engine torque, and that, only in a 100% mechanically perfect world.
marketing speak/semantics are the only way you can get 100% or 80% or whatever torque to the rear, using only a Haldex. If the front wheels are on ice, and the rear's are on tarmac, yes, technically the torque is going to the rear...but the rear wheels are not capable of spinning faster than the front wheels, because the Haldex only locks the drivetrain. It cannot bias past full lock. There is no gearing component or decoupling of the FRONT drive, as I understand it, with Haldex.
This is an AWD dyno, and the vehicle being used is the Golf R, tuned with a HPA competition race controller, to allow the most aggressive torque transfer possible (the clutch pack is 100% locked). The turquoise line is the rear wheel power measurement. It is simply impossible to transfer more than 50% of total produced power to the rear, using a Haldex (or mazda, or any other clutch type system that won't de-couple the front drive wheels or use bias gearing) system.
![[Linked Image from hpamotorsports.com]](http://www.hpamotorsports.com/images/products/haldex_comp.jpg "[Linked Image from hpamotorsports.com]")
Yeah, Mazda mechanically does not slaughters Audi. Also, Haldex is tuned in certain applications (MB) for 40:60% split with 20:80 and 80:20 max. torque split.
It is in category of Toyota, Honda etc.and ot is probably better. However, leave luxury class out of this. It is out of Mazda's league.
I'm curious how a Haldex would be able to push more than 50% of the torque to the rear, as 100% lock-up is a 50/50 torque split. To achieve this, you would need more than just the Haldex Gen 5 unit, but also other sub-systems. I am unaware of what other AWD components are under an Audi or MB that would allow this, which are also equipped with the Haldex unit. The Torsen units can indeed torque bias, but a clutch is a clutch, and all it can do is transfer 100% of the torque given to it, so unless the front is de-coupling, the rear is only seeing 50% of engine torque, and that, only in a 100% mechanically perfect world.
marketing speak/semantics are the only way you can get 100% or 80% or whatever torque to the rear, using only a Haldex. If the front wheels are on ice, and the rear's are on tarmac, yes, technically the torque is going to the rear...but the rear wheels are not capable of spinning faster than the front wheels, because the Haldex only locks the drivetrain. It cannot bias past full lock. There is no gearing component or decoupling of the FRONT drive, as I understand it, with Haldex.
This is an AWD dyno, and the vehicle being used is the Golf R, tuned with a HPA competition race controller, to allow the most aggressive torque transfer possible (the clutch pack is 100% locked). The turquoise line is the rear wheel power measurement. It is simply impossible to transfer more than 50% of total produced power to the rear, using a Haldex (or mazda, or any other clutch type system that won't de-couple the front drive wheels or use bias gearing) system.
Last edited:
MB application in transverse engines is 40/60% split with possibility to transfer torque. Also, you chart is from 2012, which is I have on my Tiguan and works like a charm, but I am talking about newer applications, specifically GLA 45 AMG.
Torsen or MB 4Matic or xDrive are different league, not comparable to these systems.
Torsen or MB 4Matic or xDrive are different league, not comparable to these systems.
Last edited:
Originally Posted by edyvw
MB application in transverse engines is 40/60% split with possibility to transfer torque. Also, you chart is from 2012, which is I have on my Tiguan and works like a charm, but I am talking about newer applications, specifically GLA 45 AMG.
Torsen or MB 4Matic or xDrive are different league, not comparable to these systems.
I agree a torsen is not a Haldex. Id have to look up BMW and MB, but from our past discussions can tell you that mechanically, a non torsen audi is not the hotness.
MB application in transverse engines is 40/60% split with possibility to transfer torque. Also, you chart is from 2012, which is I have on my Tiguan and works like a charm, but I am talking about newer applications, specifically GLA 45 AMG.
Torsen or MB 4Matic or xDrive are different league, not comparable to these systems.
I agree a torsen is not a Haldex. Id have to look up BMW and MB, but from our past discussions can tell you that mechanically, a non torsen audi is not the hotness.
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
MB application in transverse engines is 40/60% split with possibility to transfer torque. Also, you chart is from 2012, which is I have on my Tiguan and works like a charm, but I am talking about newer applications, specifically GLA 45 AMG.
Torsen or MB 4Matic or xDrive are different league, not comparable to these systems.
I agree a torsen is not a Haldex. Id have to look up BMW and MB, but from our past discussions can tell you that mechanically, a non torsen audi is not the hotness.
LOL, Mazda sure is hotness.
Originally Posted by edyvw
MB application in transverse engines is 40/60% split with possibility to transfer torque. Also, you chart is from 2012, which is I have on my Tiguan and works like a charm, but I am talking about newer applications, specifically GLA 45 AMG.
Torsen or MB 4Matic or xDrive are different league, not comparable to these systems.
I agree a torsen is not a Haldex. Id have to look up BMW and MB, but from our past discussions can tell you that mechanically, a non torsen audi is not the hotness.
LOL, Mazda sure is hotness.
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
MB application in transverse engines is 40/60% split with possibility to transfer torque. Also, you chart is from 2012, which is I have on my Tiguan and works like a charm, but I am talking about newer applications, specifically GLA 45 AMG.
Torsen or MB 4Matic or xDrive are different league, not comparable to these systems.
I agree a torsen is not a Haldex. Id have to look up BMW and MB, but from our past discussions can tell you that mechanically, a non torsen audi is not the hotness.
LOL, Mazda sure is hotness.
Seems to be. They've outdone a lot of others in many ways for far less cash. Their DI engines dont have carbon issues like Audi/vW (no need to walnut blast or even concern yourself with the valves), no turbo lag at all, AWD system that has one of the fastest reaction times out there and works at any vehicle speed and so forth.
Obviously I'm a fan, as I bought one. Until you get into the M, AMG, or SLine SUVs, I dont think anything out there matches the cx5 in many ways. The mazda 3, I just am not a fan of the looks of and they really need something beyond the 2.5NA engine for it. It's being outclassed by Honda's 2.0T, and others.
This thread is about the awd though, and I dont think anything out there is competing with the current awd systems from Mazda other than Subaru, in the sub-$45-50k range. Toyota's RAV4 Prime may be a new story though, I'm keeping an eye on that one!
I also believe mazda has upped their awd game since 2015. My current cx5 gets up my driveway in a manner that has caused the driveway to wear far slower/need less resurfacing than the 2015 did. This lends to my point about tuning, as nothing mechanical has changed except the bearings in the diff. Tune of engagement is a huge deal.
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
MB application in transverse engines is 40/60% split with possibility to transfer torque. Also, you chart is from 2012, which is I have on my Tiguan and works like a charm, but I am talking about newer applications, specifically GLA 45 AMG.
Torsen or MB 4Matic or xDrive are different league, not comparable to these systems.
I agree a torsen is not a Haldex. Id have to look up BMW and MB, but from our past discussions can tell you that mechanically, a non torsen audi is not the hotness.
LOL, Mazda sure is hotness.
Seems to be. They've outdone a lot of others in many ways for far less cash. Their DI engines dont have carbon issues like Audi/vW (no need to walnut blast or even concern yourself with the valves), no turbo lag at all, AWD system that has one of the fastest reaction times out there and works at any vehicle speed and so forth.
Obviously I'm a fan, as I bought one. Until you get into the M, AMG, or SLine SUVs, I dont think anything out there matches the cx5 in many ways. The mazda 3, I just am not a fan of the looks of and they really need something beyond the 2.5NA engine for it. It's being outclassed by Honda's 2.0T, and others.
This thread is about the awd though, and I dont think anything out there is competing with the current awd systems from Mazda other than Subaru, in the sub-$45-50k range. Toyota's RAV4 Prime may be a new story though, I'm keeping an eye on that one!
I also believe mazda has upped their awd game since 2015. My current cx5 gets up my driveway in a manner that has caused the driveway to wear far slower/need less resurfacing than the 2015 did. This lends to my point about tuning, as nothing mechanical has changed except the bearings in the diff. Tune of engagement is a huge deal.
Last edited:
Here is another video with Dave Coleman and Javier Mota in which they have a good discussion about the iActiv AWD that Mazda has developed. This is three years old but still pertinent.
https://youtu.be/Vq6FmQiGyJE
https://youtu.be/Vq6FmQiGyJE
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
MB application in transverse engines is 40/60% split with possibility to transfer torque. Also, you chart is from 2012, which is I have on my Tiguan and works like a charm, but I am talking about newer applications, specifically GLA 45 AMG.
Torsen or MB 4Matic or xDrive are different league, not comparable to these systems.
I agree a torsen is not a Haldex. Id have to look up BMW and MB, but from our past discussions can tell you that mechanically, a non torsen audi is not the hotness.
LOL, Mazda sure is hotness.
Seems to be. They've outdone a lot of others in many ways for far less cash. Their DI engines dont have carbon issues like Audi/vW (no need to walnut blast or even concern yourself with the valves), no turbo lag at all, AWD system that has one of the fastest reaction times out there and works at any vehicle speed and so forth.
Obviously I'm a fan, as I bought one. Until you get into the M, AMG, or SLine SUVs, I dont think anything out there matches the cx5 in many ways. The mazda 3, I just am not a fan of the looks of and they really need something beyond the 2.5NA engine for it. It's being outclassed by Honda's 2.0T, and others.
This thread is about the awd though, and I dont think anything out there is competing with the current awd systems from Mazda other than Subaru, in the sub-$45-50k range. Toyota's RAV4 Prime may be a new story though, I'm keeping an eye on that one!
I also believe mazda has upped their awd game since 2015. My current cx5 gets up my driveway in a manner that has caused the driveway to wear far slower/need less resurfacing than the 2015 did. This lends to my point about tuning, as nothing mechanical has changed except the bearings in the diff. Tune of engagement is a huge deal.
They did. I admit it is better than Toyota RAV4, Honda CR-V or Nissan Rogue.
Other than that, you bought one thing, but suffer from serious case of "wishful" thinking. ANd yes, it does have turbo lag, and no there is nothing special with that engine.
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
MB application in transverse engines is 40/60% split with possibility to transfer torque. Also, you chart is from 2012, which is I have on my Tiguan and works like a charm, but I am talking about newer applications, specifically GLA 45 AMG.
Torsen or MB 4Matic or xDrive are different league, not comparable to these systems.
I agree a torsen is not a Haldex. Id have to look up BMW and MB, but from our past discussions can tell you that mechanically, a non torsen audi is not the hotness.
LOL, Mazda sure is hotness.
Seems to be. They've outdone a lot of others in many ways for far less cash. Their DI engines dont have carbon issues like Audi/vW (no need to walnut blast or even concern yourself with the valves), no turbo lag at all, AWD system that has one of the fastest reaction times out there and works at any vehicle speed and so forth.
Obviously I'm a fan, as I bought one. Until you get into the M, AMG, or SLine SUVs, I dont think anything out there matches the cx5 in many ways. The mazda 3, I just am not a fan of the looks of and they really need something beyond the 2.5NA engine for it. It's being outclassed by Honda's 2.0T, and others.
This thread is about the awd though, and I dont think anything out there is competing with the current awd systems from Mazda other than Subaru, in the sub-$45-50k range. Toyota's RAV4 Prime may be a new story though, I'm keeping an eye on that one!
I also believe mazda has upped their awd game since 2015. My current cx5 gets up my driveway in a manner that has caused the driveway to wear far slower/need less resurfacing than the 2015 did. This lends to my point about tuning, as nothing mechanical has changed except the bearings in the diff. Tune of engagement is a huge deal.
They did. I admit it is better than Toyota RAV4, Honda CR-V or Nissan Rogue.
Other than that, you bought one thing, but suffer from serious case of "wishful" thinking. ANd yes, it does have turbo lag, and no there is nothing special with that engine.
This is how that works in reality:
Originally Posted by edyvw
They did. I admit it is better than Toyota RAV4, Honda CR-V or Nissan Rogue.
Other than that, you bought one thing, but suffer from serious case of "wishful" thinking. ANd yes, it does have turbo lag, and no there is nothing special with that engine.
I mean, I guess TECHNICALLY it might have turbo lag? I can't perceive it though, as it has less "lag" than NA motors of similar size. It won Ward's top 10 accolades because it's an awesome design that is reliable/durable/low maintenance (no need for the VW/Audi, and others walnut treatment every 40K miles). As far as wishful thinking, frankly, the thing out performs my expectations of it in pretty much every way (mpg, speed, handling).
Again though, we are discussing the AWD systems and mechanics, which...again, the Mazda has impressed me with. Everyone else buys ZF or B&W, or whatever. Mazda actually made their own. And it's better.
They did. I admit it is better than Toyota RAV4, Honda CR-V or Nissan Rogue.
Other than that, you bought one thing, but suffer from serious case of "wishful" thinking. ANd yes, it does have turbo lag, and no there is nothing special with that engine.
I mean, I guess TECHNICALLY it might have turbo lag? I can't perceive it though, as it has less "lag" than NA motors of similar size. It won Ward's top 10 accolades because it's an awesome design that is reliable/durable/low maintenance (no need for the VW/Audi, and others walnut treatment every 40K miles). As far as wishful thinking, frankly, the thing out performs my expectations of it in pretty much every way (mpg, speed, handling).
Again though, we are discussing the AWD systems and mechanics, which...again, the Mazda has impressed me with. Everyone else buys ZF or B&W, or whatever. Mazda actually made their own. And it's better.
Last edited:
Originally Posted by edyvw
This is how that works in reality:
Mazda driver was very timid, as the video states. You're also not going to get an honest comparison with so many "run to run" factors that change. That's like you finding that one video of me in my LS1 car giving a mustang GT the hit and taking FOREVER to pass it and then saying "See, the mustang GT is almost as fast..." when the very next run was a clean hit, and I left it by busses.
This is how that works in reality:
Mazda driver was very timid, as the video states. You're also not going to get an honest comparison with so many "run to run" factors that change. That's like you finding that one video of me in my LS1 car giving a mustang GT the hit and taking FOREVER to pass it and then saying "See, the mustang GT is almost as fast..." when the very next run was a clean hit, and I left it by busses.
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
This is how that works in reality:
Mazda driver was very timid, as the video states. You're also not going to get an honest comparison with so many "run to run" factors that change. That's like you finding that one video of me in my LS1 car giving a mustang GT the hit and taking FOREVER to pass it and then saying "See, the mustang GT is almost as fast..." when the very next run was a clean hit, and I left it by busses.
But, but, but 200 operations in millisecond (or whatever)?
Originally Posted by edyvw
This is how that works in reality:
Mazda driver was very timid, as the video states. You're also not going to get an honest comparison with so many "run to run" factors that change. That's like you finding that one video of me in my LS1 car giving a mustang GT the hit and taking FOREVER to pass it and then saying "See, the mustang GT is almost as fast..." when the very next run was a clean hit, and I left it by busses.
But, but, but 200 operations in millisecond (or whatever)?
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
They did. I admit it is better than Toyota RAV4, Honda CR-V or Nissan Rogue.
Other than that, you bought one thing, but suffer from serious case of "wishful" thinking. ANd yes, it does have turbo lag, and no there is nothing special with that engine.
I mean, I guess TECHNICALLY it might have turbo lag? I can't perceive it though, as it has less "lag" than NA motors of similar size. It won Ward's top 10 accolades because it's an awesome design that is reliable/durable/low maintenance (no need for the VW/Audi, and others walnut treatment every 40K miles). As far as wishful thinking, frankly, the thing out performs my expectations of it in pretty much every way (mpg, speed, handling).
Again though, we are discussing the AWD systems and mechanics, which...again, the Mazda has impressed me with. Everyone else buys ZF or B&W, or whatever. Mazda actually made their own. And it's better.
Yes, it took 15 years for Mazda to catch up. Do you have actually any idea what you talking about?
Originally Posted by edyvw
They did. I admit it is better than Toyota RAV4, Honda CR-V or Nissan Rogue.
Other than that, you bought one thing, but suffer from serious case of "wishful" thinking. ANd yes, it does have turbo lag, and no there is nothing special with that engine.
I mean, I guess TECHNICALLY it might have turbo lag? I can't perceive it though, as it has less "lag" than NA motors of similar size. It won Ward's top 10 accolades because it's an awesome design that is reliable/durable/low maintenance (no need for the VW/Audi, and others walnut treatment every 40K miles). As far as wishful thinking, frankly, the thing out performs my expectations of it in pretty much every way (mpg, speed, handling).
Again though, we are discussing the AWD systems and mechanics, which...again, the Mazda has impressed me with. Everyone else buys ZF or B&W, or whatever. Mazda actually made their own. And it's better.
Yes, it took 15 years for Mazda to catch up. Do you have actually any idea what you talking about?
Last edited:
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
This is how that works in reality:
Mazda driver was very timid, as the video states. You're also not going to get an honest comparison with so many "run to run" factors that change. That's like you finding that one video of me in my LS1 car giving a mustang GT the hit and taking FOREVER to pass it and then saying "See, the mustang GT is almost as fast..." when the very next run was a clean hit, and I left it by busses.
But, but, but 200 operations in millisecond (or whatever)?
Yes, it what's it tuned for? That's what I was getting at. I think Mazda tuned it for pavement and ice/snow. Mechanically its superior all around, but the torque biasing and how aggressive and so forth, will vary how it does in various environments, if that makes sense? It uses very detailed wheel slip algorithms to arrive at optimal performance, but optimal on ice and snow or pavement may not correlate to optimal in mud or on sand.
Look at it this way...most of the SUVs in that video have the same end result: 100% lockup. So why do they do differently? Suspension...computer algorithms...driver...etc.
VW has tuned their awd superbly, I agree. It doesnt make the mechanical aspect impressive though. It's still using hydraulics.
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
This is how that works in reality:
Mazda driver was very timid, as the video states. You're also not going to get an honest comparison with so many "run to run" factors that change. That's like you finding that one video of me in my LS1 car giving a mustang GT the hit and taking FOREVER to pass it and then saying "See, the mustang GT is almost as fast..." when the very next run was a clean hit, and I left it by busses.
But, but, but 200 operations in millisecond (or whatever)?
Yes, it what's it tuned for? That's what I was getting at. I think Mazda tuned it for pavement and ice/snow. Mechanically its superior all around, but the torque biasing and how aggressive and so forth, will vary how it does in various environments, if that makes sense? It uses very detailed wheel slip algorithms to arrive at optimal performance, but optimal on ice and snow or pavement may not correlate to optimal in mud or on sand.
Look at it this way...most of the SUVs in that video have the same end result: 100% lockup. So why do they do differently? Suspension...computer algorithms...driver...etc.
VW has tuned their awd superbly, I agree. It doesnt make the mechanical aspect impressive though. It's still using hydraulics.
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
They did. I admit it is better than Toyota RAV4, Honda CR-V or Nissan Rogue.
Other than that, you bought one thing, but suffer from serious case of "wishful" thinking. ANd yes, it does have turbo lag, and no there is nothing special with that engine.
I mean, I guess TECHNICALLY it might have turbo lag? I can't perceive it though, as it has less "lag" than NA motors of similar size. It won Ward's top 10 accolades because it's an awesome design that is reliable/durable/low maintenance (no need for the VW/Audi, and others walnut treatment every 40K miles). As far as wishful thinking, frankly, the thing out performs my expectations of it in pretty much every way (mpg, speed, handling).
Again though, we are discussing the AWD systems and mechanics, which...again, the Mazda has impressed me with. Everyone else buys ZF or B&W, or whatever. Mazda actually made their own. And it's better.
Yes, it took 15 years for Mazda to catch up. Do you have actually any idea what you talking about?
Yea, it's a DI engine without carbon issues on the intake valves.
Took mazda 15 years to catch up...also consider that Ford had their hands in the soup for most of that. Mazda now makes their own driveline from pulley to rear diff. And not only that, but its class leading, winning Wards awards, and is genuinely innovative and proven very reliable. That impresses the [censored] outta me, especially when big companies like VAG are buying other systems instead of building their own.
*I am not really a mazda fan as much as I am a fan of the current cx5 and accompanying skyactiv technology. Dont expect me to take up for many of their past failures. I'm not married to a company or a fanboy of any one company in automotive stuff. I just have a general hatred for FCA and a general appreciation for American V8 engines and Japanese build quality. In general.
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
They did. I admit it is better than Toyota RAV4, Honda CR-V or Nissan Rogue.
Other than that, you bought one thing, but suffer from serious case of "wishful" thinking. ANd yes, it does have turbo lag, and no there is nothing special with that engine.
I mean, I guess TECHNICALLY it might have turbo lag? I can't perceive it though, as it has less "lag" than NA motors of similar size. It won Ward's top 10 accolades because it's an awesome design that is reliable/durable/low maintenance (no need for the VW/Audi, and others walnut treatment every 40K miles). As far as wishful thinking, frankly, the thing out performs my expectations of it in pretty much every way (mpg, speed, handling).
Again though, we are discussing the AWD systems and mechanics, which...again, the Mazda has impressed me with. Everyone else buys ZF or B&W, or whatever. Mazda actually made their own. And it's better.
Yes, it took 15 years for Mazda to catch up. Do you have actually any idea what you talking about?
Yea, it's a DI engine without carbon issues on the intake valves.
Took mazda 15 years to catch up...also consider that Ford had their hands in the soup for most of that. Mazda now makes their own driveline from pulley to rear diff. And not only that, but its class leading, winning Wards awards, and is genuinely innovative and proven very reliable. That impresses the [censored] outta me, especially when big companies like VAG are buying other systems instead of building their own.
*I am not really a mazda fan as much as I am a fan of the current cx5 and accompanying skyactiv technology. Dont expect me to take up for many of their past failures. I'm not married to a company or a fanboy of any one company in automotive stuff. I just have a general hatred for FCA and a general appreciation for American V8 engines and Japanese build quality. In general.
Last edited:
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
They did. I admit it is better than Toyota RAV4, Honda CR-V or Nissan Rogue.
Other than that, you bought one thing, but suffer from serious case of "wishful" thinking. ANd yes, it does have turbo lag, and no there is nothing special with that engine.
I mean, I guess TECHNICALLY it might have turbo lag? I can't perceive it though, as it has less "lag" than NA motors of similar size. It won Ward's top 10 accolades because it's an awesome design that is reliable/durable/low maintenance (no need for the VW/Audi, and others walnut treatment every 40K miles). As far as wishful thinking, frankly, the thing out performs my expectations of it in pretty much every way (mpg, speed, handling).
Again though, we are discussing the AWD systems and mechanics, which...again, the Mazda has impressed me with. Everyone else buys ZF or B&W, or whatever. Mazda actually made their own. And it's better.
Yes, it took 15 years for Mazda to catch up. Do you have actually any idea what you talking about?
Yea, it's a DI engine without carbon issues on the intake valves.
Took mazda 15 years to catch up...also consider that Ford had their hands in the soup for most of that. Mazda now makes their own driveline from pulley to rear diff. And not only that, but its class leading, winning Wards awards, and is genuinely innovative and proven very reliable. That impresses the [censored] outta me, especially when big companies like VAG are buying other systems instead of building their own.
*I am not really a mazda fan as much as I am a fan of the current cx5 and accompanying skyactiv technology. Dont expect me to take up for many of their past failures. I'm not married to a company or a fanboy of any one company in automotive stuff. I just have a general hatred for FCA and a general appreciation for American V8 engines and Japanese build quality. In general.
You still have no idea what you talking about. Which VW needs 40k blasting?
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
They did. I admit it is better than Toyota RAV4, Honda CR-V or Nissan Rogue.
Other than that, you bought one thing, but suffer from serious case of "wishful" thinking. ANd yes, it does have turbo lag, and no there is nothing special with that engine.
I mean, I guess TECHNICALLY it might have turbo lag? I can't perceive it though, as it has less "lag" than NA motors of similar size. It won Ward's top 10 accolades because it's an awesome design that is reliable/durable/low maintenance (no need for the VW/Audi, and others walnut treatment every 40K miles). As far as wishful thinking, frankly, the thing out performs my expectations of it in pretty much every way (mpg, speed, handling).
Again though, we are discussing the AWD systems and mechanics, which...again, the Mazda has impressed me with. Everyone else buys ZF or B&W, or whatever. Mazda actually made their own. And it's better.
Yes, it took 15 years for Mazda to catch up. Do you have actually any idea what you talking about?
Yea, it's a DI engine without carbon issues on the intake valves.
Took mazda 15 years to catch up...also consider that Ford had their hands in the soup for most of that. Mazda now makes their own driveline from pulley to rear diff. And not only that, but its class leading, winning Wards awards, and is genuinely innovative and proven very reliable. That impresses the [censored] outta me, especially when big companies like VAG are buying other systems instead of building their own.
*I am not really a mazda fan as much as I am a fan of the current cx5 and accompanying skyactiv technology. Dont expect me to take up for many of their past failures. I'm not married to a company or a fanboy of any one company in automotive stuff. I just have a general hatred for FCA and a general appreciation for American V8 engines and Japanese build quality. In general.
You still have no idea what you talking about. Which VW needs 40k blasting?
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
This is how that works in reality:
Mazda driver was very timid, as the video states. You're also not going to get an honest comparison with so many "run to run" factors that change. That's like you finding that one video of me in my LS1 car giving a mustang GT the hit and taking FOREVER to pass it and then saying "See, the mustang GT is almost as fast..." when the very next run was a clean hit, and I left it by busses.
But, but, but 200 operations in millisecond (or whatever)?
Yes, it what's it tuned for? That's what I was getting at. I think Mazda tuned it for pavement and ice/snow. Mechanically its superior all around, but the torque biasing and how aggressive and so forth, will vary how it does in various environments, if that makes sense? It uses very detailed wheel slip algorithms to arrive at optimal performance, but optimal on ice and snow or pavement may not correlate to optimal in mud or on sand.
Look at it this way...most of the SUVs in that video have the same end result: 100% lockup. So why do they do differently? Suspension...computer algorithms...driver...etc.
VW has tuned their awd superbly, I agree. It doesnt make the mechanical aspect impressive though. It's still using hydraulics.
So?
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
This is how that works in reality:
Mazda driver was very timid, as the video states. You're also not going to get an honest comparison with so many "run to run" factors that change. That's like you finding that one video of me in my LS1 car giving a mustang GT the hit and taking FOREVER to pass it and then saying "See, the mustang GT is almost as fast..." when the very next run was a clean hit, and I left it by busses.
But, but, but 200 operations in millisecond (or whatever)?
Yes, it what's it tuned for? That's what I was getting at. I think Mazda tuned it for pavement and ice/snow. Mechanically its superior all around, but the torque biasing and how aggressive and so forth, will vary how it does in various environments, if that makes sense? It uses very detailed wheel slip algorithms to arrive at optimal performance, but optimal on ice and snow or pavement may not correlate to optimal in mud or on sand.
Look at it this way...most of the SUVs in that video have the same end result: 100% lockup. So why do they do differently? Suspension...computer algorithms...driver...etc.
VW has tuned their awd superbly, I agree. It doesnt make the mechanical aspect impressive though. It's still using hydraulics.
So?
- Status
