Mazda3 SKYACTIV Review | CarAdvice

Car Advice

Mazda3 SKYACTIV Review

MAZDA MAZDA3

Pros: Sports performance, quick-shifting transmission, handling, interior quality, fuel consumption, lower price

Cons: Sat-Nav screen too small, it's not a 'full suite' Mazda3 SKYACTIV - yet

By Anthony Crawford |
FIND DEALS

Price: $20,330 to $39,490

Our Rating:  

Mazda Australia launches all-new Mazda3 with SKYACTIV technology and it’s a cracker

Mazda3 SP20 SKYACTIV: SKYACTIV-G 2.0-litre, four-cylinder with SV-T and i-stop, SKYACTIV-Drive six-speed automatic transmission, 113kW/194Nm – $27,990 (Manufacturer’s List Price)

Mazda3 SP20 SKYACTIV Luxury: $30,990 (Manufacturer’s List Price)

The buzzword around Mazda at the moment is SKYACTIV and for a couple of very good reasons. This technology can literally transform a car’s performance and fuel economy without any additional cost and it’s coming to a Mazda showroom near you this November.

Australia is the only country outside of Japan to get the first iteration of Mazda’s revolutionary new SKYACTIV technology in the form of the new Mazda3 SP20 SKYACTIV. Still don’t know what this SKYACTIV stuff is all about?

Put simply, SKYACTIV technology is about substantial efficiency gains without the slightest compromise to the car’s performance and dynamics. Those gains are achieved through more precise design and engineering of key components. If anything, performance and handling are well and truly enhanced, if our test drive in the all-new Mazda3 SP20 SKYACTIV was any measure of the potential of this technology.

Mazda Australia launched the new Mazda3 to the motoring press this week, but the focus was squarely on the SP20 SKYACTIV variant.

Under the bonnet of the new Mazda3 is Mazda’s SKYACTIV-G 2.0 engine mated to the equally new SKYACTIV-Drive automatic transmission. Collectively, these two new technologies have transformed this car into something far greater than the some of its parts. There’s more power, more torque and quicker gear changes for an altogether more exhilarating driving experience.

Earlier this year we test-drove a Mazda6 Diesel with a full suite of SKYACTIV technologies; including engine, transmission, body and Chassis. Clearly, this was not your run of the mill Mazda6 Diesel. Its performance at Sandown Raceway was extraordinary, to say the least. The SKYACTIV components (that was virtually the whole car) meant that the car weighed some 200kg less than its non-SKYACTIV sibling.

This is where it gets slightly confusing. The new Mazda3 SP20 SKYACTIV is only partly SKYACTIV; that’s the engine and transmission only, but after 300 kilometres behind the wheel, I can tell you that’s reason enough to consider this vehicle over its closest competitors in the small car segment.

Performance from the 113 kW/194Nm engine is far better than you would ever expect from a naturally aspirated 2.0-litre powertrain. High-speed overtaking on country roads is a breeze. The car pulls hard, especially mid-range, and there’s seemingly a lot more torque on tap than the 194 Nm would normally convey. This is a car that feels more like a 2.5-litre sedan than its 2.0-litre displacement and that includes a thoroughly sporty engine note to boot.

Mazda engineers have been able to raise the engine’s compression ratio to an unusually high 12.0:1, and that feature combined with the tricky SKYACTIV-Drive transmission means this car punches well above its weight in the performance department. In fact, the engineers have been able to raise the compression ratio to 14.0:1 in the ‘full’ SKYACTIV powertrain, but due to Mazda Australia’s insistence that its cars be compatible with 91 RON fuel and the fact that this engine is not using a 4-2-1 exhaust system, a slightly lower compression ratio has been adopted.

That said, Mazda3 program manager, Kenichiro Saruwatari, says his team worked hard on NVH (Noise, Vibration, Harshness) management and we can attest to the fact that overall this is a quiet engine when it comes to boom inside the cabin, and apart from the performance engine note, the cabin is relatively quiet and a nice place to be.

SKYACTIV-Drive is the other revolutionary piece of engineering on board the new Mazda3 SP20. Mazda says it has combined the best characteristics from the current suite of transmission options, which include the standard automatic, continuously variable and dual-clutch technologies to create the best all round shift feel, but without the additional costs and weight associated with more expensive dual-clutch systems.

Without boring you with a slew of technology jargon, let me just say the shifts, both up and down the six forward gear ratios, are decidedly quicker and more refined than any other standard automatic box I’ve ever used. It’s quite remarkable and that’s because this gearbox reduces transmission slip by applying near full-range lock-up during the shift process.

It’s even better when you’re using the sequential manual mode and downshifting into a corner, that’s when it seems as quick as dual-clutch box. You’ll find yourself playing with this feature time and time again on uncrowded twisty roads.

The new Mazda3 SP20 SKYACTIV gains more power and torque over the MZR 2.0 engine, but those increases are relatively small, in the order of 4.6 per cent and 6.6 per cent respectively. There are also small reductions in the overall weight of the powertrain and again, these are small but clearly add to the car’s on-road performance.

You’ve got to remember; the Mazda3 SP20 SKYACTIV is only partly SKYACTIV so the weight loss isn’t that significant. Eventually, all Mazda vehicles will be ‘full SKYACTIV’: that’s engine, gearbox, body and chassis, and you won’t have to wait long. The Mazda CX-5 compact SUV, which was revealed at this year’s Frankfurt Motor Show is exactly that, a fully loaded SKYACTIV car and it should be a game changing vehicle in the category.

It might only be a mid-life facelift but Mazda has made further improvements to the model’s handling dynamics, which when combined with the SKYACTIV engine and transmission have produced a sharper performer through the bends.

The Mazda3’s steering is very nicely weighted from the straight-ahead position to full lock, but it’s not too heavy as to make city parking a chore. There’s a good amount of feedback through the steering wheel from the Electro Hydraulic Power Steering unit.

I’m also impressed with the way this car sits on the road, especially when driving it with a degree of enthusiasm. It corners flat with little or no body roll and feels very planted on the road.

It’s the same scenario with the suspension set up on the Mazda3. I’d call the ride firm, but in no way harsh. In fact, even over some fairly ordinary surfaces the MacPherson Strut and rear multi-link suspension absorb even the harshest of roads without upsetting the balance of the car. It’s impressive.

That ‘planted’ feeling through the more twisty sections from Melbourne to Torquay in Victoria is no doubt the result of Mazda engineers further increasing the rigidity of the Mazda3’s body. It’s something you can definitely feel when attacking a series of snake-like bends.

Apart from enhanced performance and dynamics of the SP20 SKYACTIV, there’s another huge benefit to this technology: reduced fuel consumption. In this case, you’re looking at a 25.6 per cent improvement over the current MZR 2.0-litre engine.

It comes down to reducing the weight and mechanical friction of each part of the SKYACTIV-G engine in the Mazda3. That means detailed re-engineering of the shape of the pistons and connecting rods and thereby reducing the weight of these components by 127g per cylinder. It may not sound like much, but after putting an additional 300km on the clock (and that’s driving the car in a thoroughly ‘non-green’ fashion) our average fuel consumption was 6.1L/100kms and that’s with two adults and overnight luggage on board.

Also on board the Mazda3 SP20 SKYACTIV is Mazda’s idling stop system, i-stop. It’s another fuel saving mechanism similar to ‘Stop/Start’ systems employed by an increasing number of manufacturers.

It’s actually quite an unobtrusive system compared with some other adaptations. When you pull up at a set of traffic lights and come to full stop with enough pressure applied to the brake pedal, the system shuts down the engine to conserve fuel. The car automatically restarts from the very instant your foot releases pressure on the brake pedal for an altogether seamless transition in 0.35 seconds.

Design-wise Mazda has been careful to not fiddle with the existing styling too much, given the fact that in August this year, the Mazda3 model became Australia’s best selling car. The result puts it ahead of Holden’s everlasting Commodore, which has held the crown for the past 15 years.

The model gets new front and rear bumpers for a cleaner look and improved aerodynamics, as well as a new front fascia and alloy wheel designs.

It simply must be said that the Mazda3’s interior is a cut above most or all of its Japanese and Korean competitors. It’s a combination of the upmarket materials used on the dashboard and switchgear and the quality and colour of the plastics employed throughout this cabin. It’s absolutely first class.

The good news is that Mazda has reduced prices across the board of its Mazda3 model, but the standout value proposition is the SP20 SKYACTIV at $27,990. It easily represents better overall value than its Maxx Sport sibling, which offers a five-speed automatic transmission, although a manual 6-speed manual is available. Despite coming in at $1500 under the SP20, I would suggest that SKYACTIV technology alone is well worth the extra outlay, considering the performance and dynamic gains.

You’ll like the ‘Mazda blue’ engine cover on the SP20 and there’s a small SKYACTIV badge on the rear of the car for proper identification of the model variant.

Global sales of Mazda3 have already exceeded three million units. With the latest mid-life facelift highlighted by SP20 SKYACTIV, Mazda can be assured of many more sales to come.


 

Owner reviews of the MAZDA MAZDA3 Add a New Review

WE RECOMMEND YOU ALSO CONSIDER...

  • m2m

    Stunning car! Well done Mazda!

    • Roadtard

      Oddly, I think I prefer the smiley face styling. Go figure.

    • AOK

      NOVEMBER is Wrong Release Date, already released from 3rd October.

  • Raptor_Eye

    Very nice car, however i’m curious when can we expect a full Skyactiv Mazda 3?

    I’m currently hunting for something to replace my 2007 Toyota Corolla Ascent within the next year, and without doubt this current SP20 luxury would be a massive improvement already, however if the full skyactiv is only say another year away it might be worth waiting?

    • Force-15

      By a “full SKYACTIV” Mazda 3, I think they’re referring to the next generation model. It would most likely be more than a year away (a vague statement if there ever was one).

      • Matt H

        2013 is what they’re saying. should follow the Kodo design.

        A new mazda 6 can’t be too far away either. At least an update with these new engines.

        This technology for mazda is great. Until now their cars have been great in every aspect except efficiency. With most of their engines being ridiculously thirsty (CX-7/9 anyway?). It’s not earth shattering numbers, but for engines that run on 91 RON, naturally aspirated and no electric motor etc, its a very positive step forward. And for 99% of drivers/how a car is used, the associated torque and kw figures are more then enough.

        • Buzy Robot

          Matt H, I believe the nextgen Mazda6 will hit showrooms in 2013. That model will be fully SkyActiv. In the meantime, the current GH series Mazda6 will continue with the existing MZR engine and 5 speed auto. We might get updated specs for the current gen, but that’s about it for now.

          • scatman

            Look it just has a fancy new name, full skyactive, half skyactive, how bout facelift and new model
            Thr marketing department have got you sheep

    • Kris

      The next gen Mazda 3 is due in 2013.

  • Lucii Pooky

    Anthony, whats rear legroom like? I know when I sat in the MPS it was shocking!

    • http://www.caradvice.com.au Anthony Crawford

      Both Paul Maric and I thought rear leg room was excellent.

      • Lucii Pooky

        Thanks, glad to see its improved!

        • m2m

          i’d imagine it’s the same as the current model? I find it worse on models with thick bolsters on the front seats – A.k.a SP upwards.

  • macca

    just wondering, what sort of transmission is the skyactiv one – eg, is it a conventional gearbox (with torque converter) with a number of optimisation technologies, or is it a new-age dual clutch?

    • http://baji192.wordpress.com Baji

      It’s been covered time and time again. Perhaps you should go back and search for it.

      But to answer your question, its a conventional automatic (torque converter) gearbox, but with a redesigned torque converter and larger clutchpacks that lock up, up to 90% of the time compared to around 55% of a conventional auto. It is NOT a CVT. It is NOT a dual clutch. But it has the best characteristics of each.

      • JoeR_AUS

        This is not new technology as it has been around for a while. The Volvo in 1994 had lock converter in there auto. When on a trip and you approached an incline and you accelerated slightly to maintain speed the lock converter would come off and give you the extra 300rpm that could maintain your speed. Also all the Commodores since 1999 has had lock converters that engage at part throttle.

        Still it is good that the technology has tricked down to this price point.

        • Robbo

          @JoeR_AUS – I think that for those vehicles are only on ‘top gear’ which you’re right, is common. I understand this new design has the lock happening way more often, and in every gear, so almost as if it’s a manual and only ‘unlocking’ to allow smooth gear changes. I bet with your understanding though that once available you drive a demo and feel it. I’m keen anyways to see how they feel.

          I’m hoping too that there is no big service bill for the gearbox, I understand DSG box’s in performance VW for instance can be very pricey to maintain?

  • Mr Gaspo

    I would buy one if it came in a pretty colour, was zippy, had lots of storage cubbies and had a similey face. SkyActiv… What?

  • whatthe..

    So the skyactive donk is about $4500 worth on its own and saves 1.8l per 100k or about 170000km to break even.

    Hmmm…..

    • Eric

      Nope the 4.5k will get body kit, GPS, wheels, B/T…

    • Toyota Guru

      Where did you get $4500 from whatthe? The base Skyactiv has the same specs as a Maxx Sport auto, the price difference is $1500.

      • Toyota Guru

        Same features I meant.

      • whatthe..

        Base 2.0 20300
        Base Skkyactive 28000

        Take away $3500 for toys, leaves about $4500 for donk. You may argue a bit less (even 3500) , but any way you cut it, it is a lot of money.

        • m2m

          You should probably take another 2k away for Auto as well.

        • Toyota Guru

          Sigh… you’re still comparing apples to oranges, both in variant and transmission.

          • m2m

            Perhaps we should give up TG.

          • JoeR_AUS

            The base model does not get the Skyactiv engine, so you need to spend a 1/3 more to get the Skyactiv engine.

            Not everyone wants or can afford the extras/ auto.

    • http://www.caradvice.com.au Anthony Crawford

      So whatthe…, you don’t place any value on the performance gains and sports car-like handling that this new car delivers?

      • Phil

        Well you did write: “The buzzword around Mazda at the moment is SKYACTIV and for a couple of very good reasons. This technology can literally transform a car’s performance and fuel economy without any additional cost”

        The keywords there being: “without any additional cost”.

        Handling wise, the skyactiv is the only model in the 3 range to get the handling improvements?

  • minorityrace

    Is the engine direct-injected?

    • http://caradvice OSU811

      YES.!

  • scottjames_12

    It sounds like a compelling package. I’d like to see some more concrete numbers on performance (ie. acceleration figures of the SP20 vs. the Maxx Sport) and some more meaningful fuel consumption testing done. Something like testing actual fuel consumption over 1000km (not relying on the trip computer) vs. the Maxx Sport, SP25 and a competitor like a Focus Sport.

  • D

    Why wouldn’t you just buy a Focus with a 2.0 GDI petrol? It has more power (125kw vs 113kw), more torque (202nm vs 194nm), a 6sp PowerShift (dual clutch automatic) rather than a torque convertor auto, and a only a slightly high combined fuel consumption of 6.6 L/100km vs 6.1L/100km in the Mazda 3 Skyactiv?

    • scottjames_12

      It would be a hard pick – the Focus Sport with Powershift would be 2K more expensive than the SP20, but comes with bigger wheels and better stereo. The SP20 Luxury is more expensive but has Bose stereo, leather and bi-xenon headlights. Both have Sat-Nav which the Focus doesn’t have but who wants crappy integrated sat nav?

      Definitely would be worth test driving both if you were in the market.

      • http://www.chipit.com.au/ diesel chip

        agree..

        • Eric

          The Ford drives nice but the cabin far to complicated. Far to many buttons and leavers.

          Also I have heard the Ford can’t get the claimed MPG.

      • guest

        This I did and both I liked but the focus can only offer parial leather and that I won’t compromise on. I do like the rear parking sensors on the focus sport and the park assist on the Ambiente but not enough to go without leather. 

  • Toyota Guru

    Hey CA, why would you criticise the size of the satnav screen? There’s nothing wrong with the size of it, just about the same as any aftermarket unit. It’s not like you’re looking at it all the time when driving, considering it’s going to read directions aloud anyhow…

    Maybe you just need a bigger pair of glasses? :)

    • http://www.caradvice.com.au Anthony Crawford

      Not really, it’s too small to be seen clearly from the driver’s seat and front passenger seating positions, so Yes, for us, it’s too small.

      • MrDucati

        you do realize that there is a zoom button on the steering wheel so you can make the road your driving on your screen as big as you want.

  • Charles Herron

    Cop that Ford. Your new Focus suddenly looks a little 2nd rate!

    • scottjames_12

      Care to elaborate on why you think that?

      • Charles Herron

        Quicker, uses less juice, cheaper, superior handling and balance. I also cant get used to the Focus interior, its just too busy.

        • scottjames_12

          Link to the performance figures? Other reviews I read about the SP20 say the Focus has better performance. Which makes sense – the Focus has more power and torque, and a quicker shifting dual-clutch gearbox.

          Superior handling and balance? At best I would say they were line ball.

          Cheaper? It’s arguable. Equipment levels vary. In general I would agree that the Mazda is cheaper. Mazda have done that on purpose because they know they have stiff competition from the Focus.

          I hardly think this makes the Focus look 2nd rate. Both are great cars and worth of consideration.

          • Charles Herron

            Agreed, both are excellent cars – I just happen to be lucky enough to have driven both and seat of the pants tells me the 3 is quicker. Not by a great deal though.

          • Devil’s Advocate

            Just because “car A” has more power and torque than “car B” doesn’t automatically mean “car A” has superior performance. There is more to it than just peak figures and a “quicker shifting” transmission. Don’t forget there are things like gearing, torque/power curves and more importantly WEIGHT.

            I AM NOT saying this is definitely the case between the Focus GDI and the Mazda3 SP20, but considering the Mazda’s deficit of power/torque is approximatly 12kw/8nm, it wouldn’t take much extra weight at all in the Focus to drop it’s power/torque to weight ratio to similar or below that of the Mazda.

            Here are some rough numbers. The Focus 2L GDI “powershift” hatch has 125kw/202Nm/1376kg. The Mazda3 SP20 113kw/194Nm/less than 1300kg (wasn’t able to find aus spec online but I used 1300kg for the similarly equipped Max Sport auto which is supposedly heavier than the SP20). Focus 11.008kg/kw, 6.8kg/Nm. Mazda3 11.5kg/kw, 6.7kg/Nm. Using these numbers they are both pretty much lineball and much closer to each other than peak numbers suggest. It would then be mostly up to gearing, torque/power curve/characteristics and size/number of passengers/driver/luggage etc of each car!

          • scottjames_12

            Well argued, and I agree with all your points, Devil’s Advocate. Only a side by side drag with drivers that weight the same and the same kg of fuel on board would really tell us which is quicker. Truthfully like you say the performance would be so close as to not really matter, between the SP20 and the PowerShift GDI Focus.

          • Charles Herron

            Devil’s, I would estimate the weight to be much less than that, more like 1200kg. Reports suggest Mazda have saved up to 100kg using the SkyActive components. A current 3 Maxx weighs 1283kg.

          • scottjames_12

            Hey Charles, that would probably be right for the full SkyActiv, but the Japan Mazda website specs list the current Axela SkyActiv as 1320kg (if I’m reading it right!)

          • Car Fanatic

            1329 kgs, so the full Sky active should come in around 1230kgs.
            I owned a Maxx Sport last year and thought the sat nav screen could be slightly larger. I also had the plastic screen over the sat nav replaced when it was cracked. It cost 283 for the part and an hour and a half to fit as half the dash had to be removed to fit it, total cost 433.

            Mazda said it a good job it didn’t break the actual sat nav or I would have been up for more than 5k to replace it. I now have a TomTom.

          • Devil’s Advocate

            Charles, I used the Max sport AUTO which is 1308kg, the manual is 1283. I thought it was only fair to use the auto as that is what the skyactiv is and the closest in spec. I also mentioned that is is a worst case scenario.

            Also don’t forget that the Mazda3 is only skyactiv “lite” and doesn’t have all of the technology incorporated so the weight reduction is not as much as the “full” skyactiv cars will be.

          • MrDucati

            ford will overheat/fall apart earlier :) maybe at 200k cylinder one will fail like most 4 cylinder fords.. i worked with ford then moved to mazda and honestly mazda customers don’t complaint much about their cars and mazdas have alot less problems.. ford is cheap mass production.

  • Sump Plug

    The August edition of Option Japan tested an auto Axela SkyActive 2.0 (same as our 3) and did the 0-100 in 7.96 seconds!! That is seriously quick for an 4 banger auto 2ltr

    • scottjames_12

      Remember though that the SP20 here runs a different engine to the one in Japan, lower compression ratio and no 4-2-1 exhaust (because of our awesome 91 octane fuel). Australian figures would be more relevant. Why didn’t CarAdvice test this?

      • HP

        I just checked the Mazda Japan site and they use the exact same engine as the Australian version; 113kW and 194Nm with a 12.0:1 compression ratio.

        The lack of the 4-2-1 exhaust isn’t cause of our 91 octane fuel, it’s cause it wouldn’t fit in the current body of the Mazda3.

        • scottjames_12

          That’s interesting, I was basing what I said on what was written in the article above and also the information about SkyActiv on the Mazda website.

      • http://www.caradvice.com.au Anthony Crawford

        That would be because this was the launch of the SP20 SKYACTIV. We’ll review all new Mazda3 variants over the next few months

  • cba6p

    6.1L/100km IS nothing to shout about

    • Mike Ingdom

      find me another n/a 4 cylinder that does 0-100 in under 8 seconds & returns those figures then

      • scottjames_12

        Find me proof of this under 8 seconds you keep mentioning? I find it hard to believe.

        • Mike Ingdom

          Settle down here, I was referring to a post above quoting a well known Jap Auto mag. What more do you want. You find it hard to believe because you dont want to believe it? Been as though you appear to have little intellect, I’ll put it this way for you – find another car in this class that returns comparable figures for the price.

        • Mike Ingdom

          Settle down hero, I was referring to a post above quoting a well known Jap Auto mag. What more do you want. You find it hard to believe because you dont want to believe it? Been as though you appear to have little intellect, I’ll put it this way for you – find another car in this class that returns comparable figures for the price.

          • scottjames_12

            Haha. Ouch, your insults, they cut deep.

            Saying that a foreign magazine wrote something is hardly conclusive. I’m basing my scepticism on the fact that (as far as I can find on the net) the SP25 does 0-100 in 7.9 sec. So I find it hard to believe that 2L designed with fuel conservation in mind, mated to a torque converter auto, would be just as fast. Realistically I believe the SP20 would do 0-100 in high 8′s to low 9′s.

            As has already been said, the new Focus is pretty close on price, pretty close on fuel consumption, and I’d be willing to bet outdoes the Mazda on performance. It’s a pity that we don’t have the 1.6L EcoBoost (Yet!) – that really would have the Mazda’s number. 134kw, 240nm and combined 6.0L fuel consumption. And that actually does do 0-100 in 7.9 sec, with a similar curb weight. Another reason I highly doubt sub 8 sec for the SP20.

          • Mike Ingdom

            scott_nomates, link to the performance figures you speak of for the 1.6 Ecoboost? And similar curb weight??? You must be kidding, again show me where a Focus weighs 1200KG or less.

          • scottjames_12

            What are you, Mike, 12 years old?

            Let me Google that for you. Here’s a link to a review of the Focus Ecoboost 1.6 that mentions the 0-62 mph time of 7.9 seconds:

            http://goo.gl/OyvNv

            It also states the 1,333kg weight, which funnily enough is quite close to the 1,320kg of the Axela (3) SkyActiv, as stated on the Mazda Japan website. The full SkyActiv may weigh 1200kg, but it doesn’t seem to exist yet.

      • vti07

        Not many years ago, the standard 6 cyl aussie sedans ran a 0 – 100 time of around 8 – 9 seconds.

    • http://www.caradvice.com.au Anthony Crawford

      It is when we tell you that we drove the car with a good deal of enthusiasm.

  • Matt H

    How will stop-start technology effect engine wear? I’m just wondering about starter-motor wear and oil settling while the engine is off.
    Regarding the battery life i understand that the car is programed to keep running when the battery is low in order to prevent it going flat.

    • Devil’s Advocate

      Matt H, the Mazda stop/start doesn’t actually use the starter/electric motor to start it in “stop/start” mode like most other manufacturers. The Mazda system works by stopping the engine/pistons at a particular position. When it needs to start again, because of direct injection, it injects fuel directly into the required cyl, fires the plug and then uses the combustion of that fuel to push the piston down. It then continues this with the other cyls until it is running as normal again. This is why it starts in about half the time of most other systems.

      The oil settling is another thing, however in most situations the engine would already be warm and the duration would be relatively short as to have a negligible effect on wear. Oil doesn’t drop down into the sump that quickly!

      • Matt H

        Thanks for the explanation. Most engine wear occurs when the engine is cold so I guess wear will be limited with this technology.

      • Jacob

        But it does come with 2 batteries.

        I would like to know how much the batteries cost.

  • Tronic

    Still one of the uglier hatches about in my opinion. Love all the innovation. I think 6.1l/100k s for a petrol motor is extrodinary given the size of vehicle.

    This should guarantee that the “3″ will take Australia’s best selling vehicle mantle at years end.

    Will this be the first year ever that a Japanese car has been Australia’s top selling vehicle?

  • o

    The 3 is a great car and getting rid of the silver trim inside has improved it 10 fold, if the cx-5 is anything to go by the next 3 is gonna be a stunner.

  • RD

    JAPAN ATTACKS!

    • JoeR_AUS

      With respect to all the Mazda fans but this technology is not new. New for Japan and a necessity as previously getting 8.2l on a combined cycle for 2 litre auto is poor by technology standards. My wife V70 built in 2000 with a 2.4L gets those figures and the car is a lot bigger than a 3.

      • HP

        Just looked up the economy figures for a 2000 V70 and the claimed combined consumption is 7.6l/100km; the fact that your wife gets around 6.1l/100km just means that she drives it very economically.
        I’m guessing if she drove this new Mazda in the same way as she drives her V70 then she would be getting low to mid 5′s.

        You should also remember that when it was new a V70 cost about twice as much as the Mazda3 SP20 so you would expect to get a higher level of engineering in the drive-train.

        • JoeR_AUS

          I will Clarify what I wrote:

          The Neo Mazda 3 auto gets 8.2l/100km which is no better than a V70 2.4L (bigger engine and bigger car). There fore Mazda needs to do better, hence the Skyactiv engine in the $27,990 model.

          cheers

  • aball

    An impressive piece of kit, but not really worthy of the headline “Äll New”, especially when, at the start of the 16th paragraph you refer to it as a “mid-life facelift”.
    Come on CA you’re beginning to sound like a manufacturer’s press release

  • JEKYL & HYDE

    like the look,love the blue.

    12.0 compression is not a super high compression ratio now,with all the tech available.holden have 11.7 in the base omega commodore(mind you 14.0 in the jap version is)

    pity mazda deleted the headers for the aussie market,if that what i’m reading about with the 4-2-1 system deletion.

    love to see a (don’t care about the fuel consumption) real sports version like the honda vtec days…

    • Devil’s Advocate

      Jekyl, the 4-2-1 system was not deleted just for the Australian market, it is not even fitted to the Japanese versions either. It isn’t on the car because it will not fit in this chassis due to engine mount positions etc. If it did fit it would have a 13:1 compression ratio, which is supposedly what the “full skyactiv” engines destined for Australia will have.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1715760895 Charles Dean

    Nice car.. Everything is good, engine, interior and good value overall..

    It’s a clear cost for Mazda 3 this year to claim the title for the most popular car..

  • Alex

    Hi CA,

    This review seems to sing praises for the improved ride & handling. But how does it compare to the Focus and Golf?

    Also did U guys manage to time the 0-100? (I don’t care what the Japanese mag says. :D )

    Thanks.

  • I Am Always Right

    Hey Anthony between new focus and skyactiv mazda, which one handles well on twisty and windy roads. Also, what about the price for the manual version of skyactiv.

    • Adam

      There is no manual.

      • http://www.facebook.com/peter.zaharis Peter Zaharis

        Only Zool?

      • I Am Always Right

        I do not understand why people give negative rating to a legit Question?
        @ Adam http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Ax5yARR_24
        go through this video and then say there is no manual..

        Also i am again asking the same question CA which chassis is more competent between new ford focus and Mazda skyactiv for spirited driving esp on great ocean road?

        To the best of my understanding Mazda has not updated the chassis tune, only the transmission and engine. So my assumption is that new skyactiv has the same chassis tune as 2 litre one. if this is correct then which car handles better in your opinion as ford has revised its chassis to strike a balance between spirited driving and comfort.

        • Eric

          They have stiffened the chassis thus the handling is better.

          More welds, an extra brace and thicker metals in some part of the body.

    • aza

      “I Am Always Right says” “manual version of skyactiv”. Clearly you’re not always right..;). 0-100 should be the same if not slightly slower, most of the spec is the same, maybe slightly slower due to 91ron fuel and local tuning, still faster than most of the small cars (corolla, cruze, lancer and civic)

      • I Am Always Right

        where did this 0-100 thing came up…. clearly you have not read my question and also i was replying to adam’s comment that there is no manual in skyactiv… See i’m always right :D

        • aza

          My bad, you got me. the 0-100 is referring to Alex’s post, just above your post. As for handling, should be very close, Mazda’s steering having more feel. For now there’s no manual skyactiv SP20. Yeah, love to see a comparison with Focus.

          • I Am Always Right

            No worries mate.. Yeah you are spot on about these two being very close. But why CA people avoid controversial Questions when they are asked which one is better? i bet you even in case i get a reply from CA it will not be a straightforward answer but a diplomatic one. It will be something like both the cars are very good in their own sense and there is no clear winner..lol :D For Goodness Sake the question is simple:- Which chassis is better tuned for handling and i am not mixing any other querry like comfort, extra gear, BFYB etc. etc.

  • FrugalOne

    No Skyactiv on base model…..fail
    No full 100% Skyactive……..fail
    Rubbish leg room in the back..fail
    Ugly front *smile* end……..fail

    Other than that ok, with smelly diesel like economy

    Well sell well all the same, God help them when the real new 3 comes out

  • Mike Ingdom

    you clearly receive it up the tailpipe

    • I Am Always Right

      lol

  • Mark

    Can’t wait for the CX5

  • Daniel

    113kw from a 2.0ltr engine, my old 1994 JDM Honda Civic SIR EG6 N/A B16A 1.6 ltr had standard 118kw ;)

    • Drac

      Why didn’t you buy the 1997 JDM KFL ESR Honda Civic STE EF7 NWA N/A JJ77R TT88 KA 1.8 ltr WTF?

    • Devil’s Advocate

      Maybe Daniel, but you don’t have to rev this engine to over 5,500+rpm to get that performance. Plus in the “real world” of everyday “stop/start” etc driving, TORQUE is king. One thing you have to remember is that this engine produces around 36Nm (close enough to 25%) MORE torque than the Civic you are talking about. Plus in that Honda the maximum torque of 157Nm was at an extremely high 7,300rpm (power at 7,800), close enough to twice the rpm where maximum torque of this engine is available. Seriously, how often in normal driving going to work/shops etc do you spend between 6-7500 rpm??

      Those older, high performance VTEC engines did produce an impressive amount of power for their size, however you had to “spank them silly” to get to it which is not very practicle in “every-day” driving. Anything below the rpm where it switched to the other cam (anywhere around 5-6000rpm depending on engine etc) they felt like any other similar capacity 4cyl engine of the time. Great on a race track etc, but nothing special on the road in traffic and the like!

      • Devil’s Advocate

        Sorry, forgot this. ;-)

        • Da + Ni + El

          Devils Advocate: The SIR was a great car and I totally agree with you ;)

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1715760895 Charles Dean

    Does Holden have anything to say about losing the top spot for the most dominant car?

    • Phil

      Probably the offer of even bigger discounts on Commodore and yet another limited edition “equipe” (or similar)) model.

      • Devil’s Advocate

        You have read their mind Phil with their 5 year warranty/roadside assist deal on top of other reductions right now. Plus there was the “red plate” one last month. Wonder what they will do next month…
        Mazda just basically just have “M” day and the normal EOFY/model run out sales.

    • Eric

      “Did’nt see that comming”

  • Bmr

    Having <2mths ago bought a 3 diesel – which itself is cracking car IMHO – I'm getting automotive equivalent of food envy. This thing looks like a very complete package. Re the focus, looked closely at it but a) never quite warmed to the fussy design both inside and out and b) spec for spec 3 better value… Rear legroom is crap in 3 I'm told but hey that's not where I sit! Satnav for my eyes is fine. Torque of the diesel is simply addictive, having said this look forward to taking skyactiv for a spin to compare characteristics.

  • Steven

    Can’t wait for the next get CX-7!

    PS. Again the seats are designed for short people. When will manufacturers get the message that taller people drive too?

  • http://caradvice OSU811

    Welcome back the SP20 name plate!, I have a 03 SP20 man hbk as a second run around car and find it reliable, cheap on fuel and reasonably fun to drive!

  • Buzy Robot

    Thanks for the review guys. I’m just wondering if the idle stop system can be deactivated by the driver? For example, the B7 125TDI VW Passat also features this technology, but it can be deactivated by pressing a button on the gearbox console.

    • Eric

      Yes it can. There is button on the dash.

  • http://www.roberts.com.ph Roberts

    I can’t wait for this car to come out. I don’t want to hear about the new Civic anymore. Mazda will be crowned champ for this one.

  • richard

    Mazda crows about Skyactiv chassis – loose 100kg for the CX5

    Toyota slips the new Camry onto market and without fanfair it has lost 70-85kg. So, it doesn’t seem that hard to do. It’s just that MAzda wants to tell everyone :)

    Everyone also needs to realise that the MAzda 3 range was one of the least economical on the market. The majority of new MAzda 3 buyers still get the old thirsty engine/transmission combinations.

    • Devil’s Advocate

      I would rather pay a little extra for fuel to have the far superior dynamics/driving enjoyment of something like a Mazda6 than paying a little less for fuel and then battling to stop falling to sleep driving a Camry. But then again I enjoy my driving and whilst a Camry is a comfortable, quiet car that gets you from A to B with minimum fuss, I actually want to enjoy the drive and that is where Mazda have it over Toyota! The same could be said for the Corolla vs the Mazda3, even the buying public seem to agree…
      ;-)

      • MazMagic

        Having driven a Toyota previously, after 3 years I wanted to get rid of it – and eventually got a Mazda3. My car is now nearing 6 years old and I don’t want to part from it.

        Not saying that Toyotas are bad cars (far from it), but Toyota buyers are different from those from Mazda buyers. For me, I like to get from A to B with a bit of excitement and prepared to pay a tad extra for it – and fuel ecomony on the Mazda3 drastically improves if you run it on Premium Unleaded.

  • http://www.facebook.com/priusfreezone Matthew Werner

    The part SkyActiv / full SkyActiv thing is already starting to sound like HD / full HD when advertising TVs lol

  • http://NSSAN James Cortez

    Nothing special about its power output or its fuel consumption. Why bother writing this article. Better spend time writing a test on vehicles with breakthrough technology such as the twincharger Vee Dub or the new M5.

    • Devil’s Advocate

      The “twincharger” VW engine doesn’t break new ground either James, Toyota for example have had engines with both a turbo and a supercharger for many years. I would say Mazda’s version of “start/stop” technology on this car is more “breakthrough” than VW’s twincharger for example because it doesn’t use an electric motor to start the engine again unlike the majority of other stop/start systems.
      Plus as much as I like BMW and can’t wait to see reviews on the M5 etc, it doesn’t really break any new ground either…

    • Ted

      Power figures no better that Kia Cerato – SKY – @#$%^^&*

  • STP

    bring on the CX5!!!

  • Ford

    Im not sure on these systems that stop the engine at lights. Most engine wear occurs on start up as there is no oil running throughout the entire engine on start up. Is it really worth saving a SMALL amount of fuel but have a car that doesnt last as long?

  • Cars ain’t Tribal

    $31500 drive away for skyactive. Seriously? What was that about “can literally transform a car’s performance and fuel economy without any additional cost”? Clearly there’s a very large additional cost to that tech.

  • A-B with some fun

    Some modern cars when you turn the key to the first stop (without turning over the engine, just turns on electrics), would activate a pump that puts oil through the engine. This lubricates the engine so it minimises damage on the engine at cold/start ups. Does the Mazda have this function as well? That would really help with prolonging the engine of the car. Also, would this car come with a space saver or a full sized spare? Ta.

  • Adam

    I test drove one of these on the weekend and I was actually pretty disappointed, especially after reading of its ‘sporting’ credentials.

    Firstly, when you get behind the wheel it’s VERY clear this is a car designed for economy, it’s lifeless below about 4000rpm. Even the Mazda salesman admitted that the regular 2.0 feels a lot zippier at low revs.

    Then you encounter iStop, which is probably fine once you get used to it, but it will take a while because all you keep thinking is that the car has stalled whenever you stop. What’s more annoying is that it’s not seamless, when the engine starts up again you can certainly hear and feel it… with quite a jolt.

    The gearbox is very indecisive and seemed to hold gears far too long when I was applying moderate pressure to the accelerator. I am used to a CVT now so maybe I’ve just forgotten what it’s like to have an auto box, but given the rave reviews about it I was pretty let down.

    Other than that, it wasn’t all bad. The steering and handling are excellent, typical Mazda, but honestly I felt what’s the point, given how lethargic the car was to get a move on.

    If I was buying a Mazda 3 I think the Neo would get my cash, well equipped and good drive away prices.

  • Matt888

    Nice car, should keep Mazda on top for sales. The only competition would be the new Ford Focus, but, as always buyers seems to overlook the fact that the 3 is built in a Japanese factory and the Focus is not. If history is anything to go by and it usually is a good indication on the future, we can fully expect a few annoying common faults on many of the the Focus’ and next to none on the 3′s during the warranty period. Isn’t it nice when things just work ;)

  • Ted

    Just drove the SP20 ans I thought it was very sluggish. this was a demo that the sales people drive home, and it was nothing special. The sale person told me that the normal 2litre was a betetr performer, and I do agree, You may save some fuel with the SP20, but really they are boith 4 cylinders and the difference would not make a great deal of diffence – $$$.

    I think that Mazda should had given this car the full Sky treatment and not only part. I understand from what the dealer told me, this is the start of the SKY-G and the new 6’6 next years will have all the goodies. Additionally, when the new ’3′ is here in two (2) years time, the ’3′ will have the full SKY-G treatment.

    • Ted

      I meant the next ’6′ is here in Aust next year (the 6 is a mistake – typo)

  • Stacey

    I am about to purchase and this Mada 3 Skyactive with the luxury has really caught my eye.  I loved the drive I had and the only car that has come close was the focus, but sadly ford only offer partial leather and that is one of my stipulations.  I do like the park assist in the focus but I can’t compromise full leather for it.

  • Lbrinsmead

    It’s too expensive compared to the 90 TSI Golf.

  • keresley

    tested an sp20 today…bad points, unbearable road noise on rough surfaces (typical highway road around port macquarie), and no room – ie too tight which means on long journeys, a tad too uncomfortable.. plusses- very responsive and nice interior…
    looked at cruze srv-i and the cruze was better so was the new mazda 6 (should be)..

  • matt

    and weighs nearly 1.5 ton, a few reviews say they feel alittle slow :(