Yes it is a headline grabber.

For those who said a Mazda 6 Wagon 2.5 TURBO did or does not exist then what is this..from Australia.


For Mazda in USA, what the heck ARE you doing, many want a WAGON yet you will not offer it, but it is good enough for Mazda Australia to import it, and Mazda Motors Europe (non Turbo).

You say you want to differentiate yourself from mainstream, but clearly you are going with the SUV crowd.

NOW the Mazda 6 has a Turbo this IS the time you should be importing a Turbo Wagon into the USA.

 

The moment the 2.5LT was available it shouldve been placed in the entire lineup of course optionally. None the less the entire line up would be more popular with more power.

 

Yeah, we need fewer Shitty Uninteresting Vehicles on the road. More wagons, please.

Seriously, I am considering "IH8 SUV" as my custom license plate just to **** all the SUV drivers off, LOL.

That said, I am not sure how well the 2.5T is selling. Usually, the take rate on the more powerful engine on mid-size Sedan is like 10%~20%. Remember that Mazda ditched the V6 6 for a while before having 2.5T as an option again.

 

In USA initial sales of the 6 Turbo Sedan in first month was over 4000 units.

Mazda ditch the 3.7l V6 as it was a Ford engine license and a gas guzzler and now with no association with Ford (apart from the last of BT-50/Ranger for another 12 months), then Ford is completely gone.

Mazda was not prepared to invest in a Skyactiv V6, IMO a huge mistake, even with the very good 2.5 T 4 cylinder.

Car brands still need a V6 for large and heaving hauling of people...a 2.5T 4 cylinder are fine for 1 or 2 people in car, load it up with 6-7 adults and luggage and it struggles.

No matter what voodoo car makers say in marketing, there is No getting around simple HPW (Horse Power to Weight) ratios.

 

Ah, gotcha.

Regarding the V6 point, you have no idea how much of a heated argument that was for a while on the Accord forum I go to. Honda had some pretty solid V6s in the Accord and yet, they ditched the 3.5 V6 for a 2.0T I4T. Even the base engine option is changed from 2.4 to 1.5T.

But heh, those driving Shitty Uninteresting Vehicles with the pathetic 1.5T or 2.5 engines are fine, I don't see how that's a problem with Sedans.

And what about turbocharged engines' low-end torque? Wouldn't that help with hauling stuff?

 

Torque is not HP

 

But torque * RPM = power, so better low-end torque = better low-end power.

Take the RX-8 for example. When you wing it out all the way to 9000 RPM, yeah, it feels pretty quick, but keep it under 3k RPM and it feels gutless. That's where a little extra low-end torque would have helped.

One of my friends did make a point that he'd only want to get something with 200+ HP because a car with less than that will overheat when trying to pull a car full of people uphill, but he doesn't have a preference with turbo or NA. So a 1.5T or 2.5 wouldn't satisfy his needs, while 2.5T and 3.5 would both have done it for him.

V6 is a dying breed in mid-size Sedan. 99% of the people will be better suited with an I4T, really, seeing how most people don't see past 3k RPM. The new Camry V6 may have 305 BHP, but I'd be shocked that 0.01% of the beige mobile driver ever uses that kind of power.

Leave the high-end power with sports cars.

 

The Mazda/Ford relationship is very strange in respect to powertrains. Ford's modern V6 architecture was originally engineering by Mazda, with certain changes made to suit their displacement and manufacturing cost targets. Same for the MZR engine and their current ECOBOOST inline4's. Ford redesigned the head but most of the block is the same and there is significant cross-compatibility between them even to this day.

It will be interesting to see where Mazda goes in the coming years. Due to their size and managing costs, We may not see much beyond the range of 4-cylinders, though there is a chance a V6 or inline-6 could be developed eventually, should they have a use-case for it. I fear that is more likely than a new rotary-powered sports car. Mazda may see the turbo'd Sky-G and the upcoming Sky-D motors as their answer to the previous need for more cylinders. A Sky-D would be a suitable small-truck engine, should Mazda decide to bring the Ranger spin-off, or their own dedicated truck to the states.

 

My lease is up on my 6 next summer (mazda typically lets you trade up 6 months before the end of the lease). It sure would be nice if a turbo AWD wagon was available...

Basically got it narrowed down to:

Signature trim Mazda 6 (new, 2.5 i4 turbo)
Used BMW 5 series (4.4L V8 twin turbo)
Used Audi A6 (supercharged 3.0L v6)

All three options will land at about the same price. However only one of these is FWD...

Having a wagon available would make the choice easy.

 

It's the 'enthusiasts' that want wagons, the general consumer thinks they're ugly. I've asked many non-enthusiast shoppers about their opinion on wagons. I would say the general American consumer is stupid. They want tall crossovers because they want to feel in command with their tall ride height and large greenhouse.

I don't blame Mazda for not having a wagon variant. Looking at the lack of success and discontinuation of MANY wagons from other manufactures (TSX, Accord, CTS-V, Magnum, etc), the Mazda 6 wagon would probably be the lowest volume selling vehicle by Mazda in the US if they do bring it here. The only wagons that sell in the USA are Subarus, and they're more like CUVs than actual wagons.

 

What SNTP said...

Catering to a tiny enthusiast niche is not a recipe for a success for a small manufacturer.

 

I saw the thread title and instantly knew it was Ash's thread.

That being said:
x1,000!
wagons are ugly, stupid, and we as americans could frankly give a **** about them. I'm sorry but we're not EU or Australia where you guys like them, we don't, plain and simple.
We want crossovers, SUV's, trucks, and big cars.
Now, we could argue all day which of those is actually a better car but that's not what drive's the average car buyer. They shop with their eyes first and (for whatever reason) wagons in America have never been something that has appealed to the masses.

So, no. Mazda is actually smart by not bringing another vehicle to the US that wouldn't sell.

 

9/10 American opinions of wagons contain at least one of the following statements:
- Looks like a hearse (funeral car)
- Looks like my grandpa's station wagon
- Ew, they're ugly
- I'm not a grandma/pa



I like wagons only because my enthusiast counterpart says so. I honestly see myself rocking a CX-5/9 over a Mazda6 wagon nowadays. You'd be surprised at how much a difference the added ride height and pushed back C pillar helps with loading in a child to the backseat. I'm sure every parent agrees, and these are the same consumers cutting checks at the dealership to manufacturers for their CUVs.

 

Yep! Now, a turbo AWD variant, that is something even regular consumers can get behind. Even if it was just the N/A motor, it is silly that they don't offer AWD given how much of this country sees snow and inclement weather.

 

The most niche enthusiast car ever:

Brown mid-size AWD 6MT V6 turbodiesel wagon in brown.

Seriously, wagons are mostly dead in the US. Nobody but us weirdos (there are DOZENS of us!) want one and there's no way Mazda could recoup even the regulator costs of certifying one here based on the tiny market share of a hundred oddball car enthusiasts.

Hell, even VW couldn't justify bringing the V6 TDi B5 Passat wagon here and they are huge and already had the wagon in the states. One guy wanted one bad enough that he sourced the parts from Europe and built it himself.

 

After living in Europe for several years, it's almost shocking how few wagon choices there are in the states. It seems like 90% of the vehicles out here are hatchbacks, most being wagons.
I'm not looking forward to buying a daily whenever I get back to the states...

 

hawk: you can have a Subaru wagon.

 

The Outback is more of a crossover now, and the Legacy isn't available as a wagon anymore. The only decent real-wheel drive wagon I see is the BMW but in the states its only a luxury brand and a steep price. They don't have the nice cheap ones like they do in Europe.

 

OMG, The Mazda 6 WAGON is not UGLY!....good grief some of you guys have blinkers on...
You called a 6 Wagon UGLY but want to buy a CX-5, yeah right, but I guess there is no consideration for taste.
US is the land of the UGLY .....those US made /designed cars of the mid 70's to 88 were stunners..

 

I think it looks good. Problem is it's front wheel drive, and not available in the US.

 

Methinks the mod doth protest too much...

 

I see some VW Sportswagen every now and then. If you are really cheap, get yourself a Volvo 850 Turbo wagon.

I don't think anyone here is saying it's ugly. They are just saying that an average consumer does for some reason.

And you think American cars are ugly? Pfff. You clearly haven't seen a Nissan Juke, Cube or the older Leaf(new ones actually look okay).

 

Being (for the most part) a practical person, I would have bought a Mazda 6 wagon instead of the sedan if it was available in North America, the added cargo space and ease of loading large items like ladders, lumber and other gear is great. I am continuously borrowing the wife's wagon when there is stuff to be done. The discussion on whether or not the wagon looks good is an endless loop but personally the sedan looks better. For all the winter conditions that I drive in it is rare that a FWD with good winter tires will not get me through, granted we don't usually get large snowfalls, more of a build up of small amounts and the main roads are well plowed.

 

I really wish I could get a "ManWagon" for US$30-something-k here. Something with at least either HP or lb.ft above 300 either in RWD or AWD with a RWD bias (i.e. Nissan/Infiniti's ATTESA E-TS Pro).

Hell, just give me a G37x/Q50 in a wagon or hatchback formfactor and I'd buy it right now.

 

outside of Subaru the only real wagons in the US are the Merc, Volvo and Buick. Personally, without the Mazda 6 wagon in the mix, the winner is the Volvo v60 or v90