[MaRaNtZ]

In italy, the only option at this time is 1.6 and 2.0 gasoline mazda engine.
Do anyone around there in europe have opinions on the 1.6 engine ?
It seem imho the more equilibrate from the point of view of economy and mass/hp ratio.
I briefly tried a mazda3 with 1.6 for few km and i had very good feeling about it, but would like to share experiences as well before deciding to buy.

Regards,

 

[Kazbaeden]

I haven't heard much on the 1.6, as most users on this forum don't live in areas that have them. What are the specs?

 

[dinu01]

MARANTZ: Welcome to the forum! See: http://groups.msn.com/BrunoLuong/testdrive.msnw for a full report on the 1.6L engine.

KAZ: Please see Bruno's site for the 1.6L specs.

 

[Kazbaeden]

Okay, the specs were given as:

105 PS
77 kw (103.3 hp for anyone who cares)
6000 RPM

But what's unit is a PS and what does it refer to?

 

[dinu01]

PS: Ponies/HP.

Also, be aware that torque is measued a bit differently in Europe than in NA, giving slightly higher #s - they also use high octane gas that helps in that regard too (and costs $$$).

 

[dugrant153]

The reviews I read about the 1.6 was that, despite having smaller displacement, it's still a pretty sprite engine.

 

[Kazbaeden]

Yeah, they use Newton-meters to measure torque instead of foot-pounds. It's just a matter of conversion.

 

[alexl]

We also only have the 1.6 Mazda 3 in Singapore. I suppose it is this way else it will be in direct competition with the local Mazda 6 which comes with 2.0 & 2.3.....

I have read a lot of good comment on the Mz3 with 2.0 & 2.3 engine but very few (in fact only 1 article) on Mz3 with 1.6 engine.... Would like to hear more of it if there are more of such owners out there......

M views on the 1.6 engine is that it is probably good with the standard version which comes with a set of 15" 195/65 wheels. But i really wonder how hard the 1.6 engine is going to work with the sport version that comes with 17" 205/45 set of wheels.

For the same engine type and more weight on the wheels, the sport version may not get any sportier other than it's looks...... thought if there is a 1.8 version would be more suitable for sports....

 

[bluong1]

I didn't know you can get 17" wheels with 1.6L. In Europe 1.6L comes with either 15" and 16".

1.6L is not very torquy but smooth like silk and willing to rev. I wouldn't worry if you drive the 5sp. On the AT it might be different story.

 

[alexl]

Yes, it is not factory but the local agent assemble the 17". We do have the 16" on Luxury version (beige colour interior & leather instead of black + digital aircon but still on 1.6 engine).

I think they do not intend to carry the 5sp here since the 4AT comes with Activematrix which in a way may fulfill most manual enthusiastics...?

 

[bluong1]

Humm, sorry, I can't tell you how the 1.6L behaves with the activematic. Mazda gives 1.4s slower on 0-100 km/h compared to the MT counter part.

Activematrix which in a way may fulfill most manual enthusiastics...?

Humm, not going into the heel-and-toe nirvana, to me manual transmission is not only about decision on when to shiff. It's about

- minimum lag
- controling exactly the torque through the clutch
- not spending extra power in the torque converter
- having gears that are more closely spaced.

 

[MaRaNtZ]

Here in italy, we dislike AT for small engines, at the point that i think AT for 1.6L will be even difficult to order, even if it officially exist.

The impression i had is that the sport feeling for 1.6L is achieved almost enterily by using a very close ratio gear, you can see yourself furiously shifting to 5th gear in few meters, and have the engine revvs at around 4000 rpm while breaking 130 Km/h.

It's cool that specs claims less than 11 sec into 0-100Km/h, but my main concern is about fuel compsuntion. An engine so much willing to rev high, would surely become an insane fuel burner.
Anyone have direct experience of fuel mileage for 1.6L ?
I'm going to buy that, mainly because it's way so much unexpensive in italy due to crazy taxation (in italy is more than proportional with engine displacement and HP)

 

[[email protected]]

Greetings from Europe, Finland.

Our motor-options for Mz 3 are also 1.6 and 2.0 L motors and in the future there will be also 1.3 L !!! motor available to Mz 3.

Our auto magazines has tested Mz 3 whith 1.6 litre motors and fuel consumption is quite similar as other same size motors/cars... around 7 litres/100km.

PS. Here in Finland cost fuel about 1.1 euro/litre whitch is about 1.38 US dollars/litre which is about 5,22 US$/gallon. Do you think does fuel consumption matters? :lol:

 

[McNum]

1.6L is not very torquy but smooth like silk and willing to rev. I wouldn't worry if you drive the 5sp. On the AT it might be different story.

I agree to that. I tried the 1.6 litre engine before trying the 2.0, and I was very impressed. It actually feels more refined than the 2 litre and revs beautiful with a nice fresh enginesound. I only bought the 2.0 because of the xenons and the fact that im used to a GTI

 

[cronus]

1.6L with AT

I live in Turkey and have a 1.6L with AT..

My car has DSC system, when I close it manually, it really lives well even in auto mode, I like it so much...Manual mode is an art also...

 

[dinu01]

I like hearing stories from the 1.4 + 1.6 owners. Wish I could see how much difference there is b/s the 1.6 + 2.0

 

[walsh]

I have a 1.6l with Manual Transmission here in El Salvador C.A-

I Visited the US last month and Test Drove the 2.0 & 2.3 Engines.
I have to say that 1.6 Outperforms 2.0, I guess the 2.0 being heavier doesn´t make a real difference ....

Now the 2.3 is a whole other issue, that toy its better than 1.6l.

MPG its about 32 with the MZR1.6 Engine. Not that Great.
I guess it´s not that economical compared to 2.0 since that one makes about 28-29 with a bigger engine.

I have no choice down here but the 1.6l but if you asked 2.3 is the way to go, on top of that , all the mods are for 2.3 Only.


By the way the 1.6 Owners what is this for ?

Its behind the radiator on the bottom.

My 2 Cents ;

 

[McNum]

The 1.6 is NOT faster than the 2.0

 

[a_big_david]

my 1.6L rides with an 18" wheel..... the slow engine paired with a huge wheel really shows a lot of difference..... the cars performance when it comes to acceleration is really bad though not that bad cause my car is used to running at 160-170 kph on highway at a constant speed here in the Philippines taking on the skyway and the highway everyday so i guess the engine is a bit loosened up so its a bit faster than the usual....

 

[Igor3]

[quote author=MaRaNtZ link=topic=1253.msg19886#msg19886 date=1073585007]
In italy, the only option at this time is 1.6 and 2.0 gasoline mazda engine.
Do anyone around there in europe have opinions on the 1.6 engine ?
It seem imho the more equilibrate from the point of view of economy and mass/hp ratio.
I briefly tried a mazda3 with 1.6 for few km and i had very good feeling about it, but would like to share experiences as well before deciding to buy.

Regards,
[/quote]
I have a 1.6l engine. The engine runs very smooth, even smoother than 2.0, but it lacks HP in comparison with 2.0. I would always take 1.6 rather than 2.0 because 1.6 is Mazda motor(it is 1.5l engine from 323 model equiped with more eletronic and VVT technology) and 2.0 is built mostly by Ford and is made on a Duratec engine block.

Very quiet and durable engine but if you wish to do any mods on it, forget it. Take 2.0 instead.

I hade 195/65 r15 tires, than switched to 205/55 r16 and now, finally i have 205/50 r17 which are all stock dimensions. I can't feel the lack of performance by switching on 17" although the car is harder but it sticks the road better in comparison to 15".
I hope I helped a little bit. If you have any further questions p.m. me or post it here.