ProtegeMaster

Hey guys!

This isn't meant to be a rip on Mazda by any means, but I'm interested in, for now, being the devil's advocate and getting others' input regarding the capabilities and overall technology of current Mazda engines (or at least that of the FS-DE, which I'm familiar with).

Anyway, from my experience I'm contending that Toyota, Honda, and Nissan make better engines than Mazda does. In this instance I'm not takling about longevity or reliability, as I believe Mazda engines are equally as reliable in that sense. What I'm talking about is efficiency and quiet operation. Evidence supporting my thoughts:

The new Toyota Corolla has a 130 HP engine, just like the FS-DE. The difference is it's only a 1.8 litre engine, and it gets 40 mpg. So the deal is the FS-DE is larger, produces the same horsepower (although admittedly more torque, 135 vs. the Toyota's 125 ft. lbs), but gets 10 mpg less and is noisier, especially when you start it up from a cold state. The Toyota is also a ULEV rated vehicle. And on top of that, the Corolla is a faster car according to the latest road test conducted by Consumer Reports. I think the Toyota engine wins here, and is just plain better.

Honda: The 2002 Civic EX has a 1.7 litre engine that produces 127 HP; just 3 less than our Protege engines. And that comes from an engine smaller than the FS-DE. The Honda is quieter, litre for litre more powerful, AND it's also ULEV rated. It also gets better fuel economy than Mazda; nearly 10 mpg more. The FS-DE does win in torque. Then there's the 2 litre engines in the SI Civics: Same size, but they pump out 160 HP and 132 ft. lbs. of torque. And that engine gets the same fuel economy of the FS-DE. Honda clearly makes a better engine here. It's not even close.

Comparing size classes, the engine that comes standard in the Nissan Sentra is smaller than the FS-DE (1.8 litre), yet it puts out only 3 less HP than our Proteges; 126 horsepower. It also produces 129 ft. lb of torque, only 1 less than our FS-DE's. All this from an engine that's smaller than Mazda's. Oh yeah, and the Nissan engine gets better fuel economy, too. Nissan wins.

I won't even mention Dodge or GM-- They don't build any engines that compete. They've always specialized in making engines that are noisy, inefficient, and unreliable.

So, in conclusion, I think Mazda engines are inferior to the other major Japanese manufacturers. Mazda engines offer less power despite being physically larger, they're noisier, and they don't provide as good fuel economy. Their technology is simply not as good, for now. I'm waiting for the new MZR engines, though, which I'm hopeful will help Mazda at least meet, and hopefully surpass, the engines built by Toyota, Honda, and Nissan. If Mazda doesn't do something, I feel it will only continue to trail the superior technology of other manufacturers.

What do you guys think?

Traveler

I'm with you to a point. Some of the engines that you're comparing the 2.0L to use variable valve technology though. The Honda makes its power much higher in the RPM scale due to this. Also, 1.7 and 1.8L engines SHOULD get better fuel mileage than a larger motor. I'm somewhat disappointed with our meager fuel economy though. 31 MPG Hwy is just not good enough. Should be closer to 38. I've got an '86 Mazda 626 with the 2.0L for that year that has 241,000 miles on it and still gets 33 MPG Hwy. That thing is a total die hard. uses about one quart of oil between changes and runs fantastic.

As far as longevity, Mazda and Toyota are the ones to beat. They've got Honda beat a mile. Yes, the Honda engines run well. Yes, they get good mileage. But go late on an oil change at your own peril. Mazdas and Toyotas go forever without nearly as much maintenance.

I wish that Mazda made some higher specific output motors. They just aren't competitive with other Japanese manufacturers in that regard. That's why there are so many people on this site and others trying to get another 20-30 HP out of their cars. Most people don't want a rocket ship, just something that has a higher big grin factor.

Handling wise Mazda is right up there though. I've driven a lot of compacts modded and not and this is the first car I've been willing to buy new. The build quality kicks *** on just about everything else we looked at and the car is so solid you could use it to set other cars on. Mazda has gotten the message (somewhat) by building the MP3 replacement Mazdaspeed, but the dealers will price the crud out of it because it will be a limited edition. They need to build a version of the Protege that is the equal or better of the Si in power and handling. All anyone is asking is for Mazda to step up to the horsepower plate, add variable valve technology like everyone else, and give us another 35-40 out of the 2.0L Toyota is getting 180 out of the Celica, Mazda take note.

boostedmp5

True, But my FS-DE is now a FS-ZE and my P5 looks way better then all of wich you have mentioned put together. I cant wait to smoke a new Si. Anyday now.You do have a point though.

mito7878

Its all in the compression ratio and this is why some smaller engines make soo much power but still get great milage. This is also where reliability comes in to play. A motor with higher compression will have more power but wont be as reliable. Take the Toyota Matrix vs Protege 5. Toyota has 11.5:1 compression vs mazdas 9.1:1. The matrix is a 1.8 liter and pumps out 180hp and the P5 is a 2.0 liter and only has 130 hp. The P5 is a ULEV car by the way. If you want comparable numbers you have to be willing to sacrafice certain things like reliability or performance. If you want your car to perform like hondas, nissans and toyotas then have a machine shop shave your head to give you 11.5:1 compression ratio and you will probably have 200 plus horsepower but now it wont bereliable like the Matrix or s2000 even.

mito7878

Dude we think alike!!! You got me by 30 sec.

mito7878

Also a good poing is that you can drop a turbo into the P5 with out major modification to fuel, engine or tranny and run 5lbs - 7lbs of boost and get over 200 hp. Try that on the matrix and I bet youll have more rods in your hands then you really want to have.

mito7878

In Orlando where it seems to never stop raining!!!!

ProtegeMaster

Regarding what you said about handling, Traveler, I totally agree. That seems to be a common statement by many of us on the forum here, as well as neary everywhere else: Our Pro's handle with fantastic agility, but they're just a bit underpowered. If it was only for another 20-30 HP, these cars would really kick ***.

Although I wouldn't pretend to be an autocrosser or anything, that's one of the things I noticed right away about my ES-- It's the best handling car I've ever owned, and is especially impressive coming from what's generally classified as an entry-level "economy" car. It's totally true: If only we had that extra horsepower, we'd outhandle, and outspeed, nearly every other car in the small car class.

On a better note, I think, for the most part, Mazda is listening to their customers-- It's really rare to make changes to a car in the middle of its production run, but Mazda decided to do that by adding turn signal side markers, changing the steering wheel (to a three spoke vs. the 4 I have in my '01), changing the cruise control to a button vs. "turn signal" type of controller, improving the cup holders, etc.. I'd bet they also realize that their engines are falling behind the crowd, that's why they developed the MZE series. With more horsepower, efficiency, and quietness, hopefully things will change soon.

And, hmm, that's also a great point: Higher compression and the associated reliability of an engine. That being said, Toyotas are world renowned for their reliability, as are Hondas and Nissans. I think you're probably right, it DOES make a difference, but I'd theorize only in the sense that the FS-DE would do, say, 300,000 miles with normal maintence while the Toyota/Honda/Nissan would do 250,000 or something. Conjecture, but I think the other Japanese makes are still very, very reliable despite higher compression ratios...

Makaveli

Well our engines get better torque number then some of the engines that you mentioned, and our horsepower output is more flat along the rpm range. I wish we got a bit better gas mileage though, but coming from an American car, I'm more then happy. I guess I save a lot of gas by not braking when going into corners and maintaining a higher speed hehe

nightowl

didn't somebody say here that the mazda FS and BP series engines were originaly designed as small truck engines?

Huey

Pretty much in total agreement with all that has been stated, & trust me, it eats away at me every time I step on the gas in my car. Granted, our engines are fairly low tech, with no variable anything, ie, cam timing, cam lift, intake runners, etc & that's what makes it such a bargain. I absolutely refuse to drive my friend's RSX-S anymore, same size, similar fuel economy, 70 more hp & 7 lb/ft more torque. I'm just hoping I can make up for that deficit with the $10000 cdn I saved going with the P5. One nice thing about a not so tuned NA engine is that it's more boost friendly. Our compression could probably support fairly moderate boost levels as long as the fuel system can keep up & it's tuned properly whereas all the high hp, high tech, NA engines would not take too well to being force fed. Mazda has never been known for good engines with the exception of the rotaries & even that is open for debate. If our engines respond as well as the miata engines do to forced induction, than I'll quit my bitchin'. Let's face it guys, our FS-DE ain't going to touch any other import engine of equal or even lower displacement. As far as high compression engines having less reliability, I have not noticed that to be the case in my experience. The Celica & Matrix's 2ZZ-GE has proven to be just as reliable as their Corolla engines with the exception of some goofballs who don't know how to shift a 6-spd & end up slamming into the wrong gear & overrevving it. The Honda B18C5 is practically legendary & is just as bombproof. Nobody's playing devil's advocate here, just facing the facts

chdesign

Also remember our motors and ECU's in the US are very VERY mildly tuned. Honda, Toyota, Nissan they all have some sort of variable timing. Honda with its VTEC switches cam profiles to alor more agressive cam profile.....have you ever heard the VTEC kick in on a B18C5???? its sick. Toyota has VVTi and I can't remember Nissans alphabet soup but it can be found on alot of cars as early as the first S14 silvias.....we have none of this and crappy tunign from the factory. The FS-DE is capable of alot more than what people think with the right tuning. Yeah you see all these Honda guys pushing WILD numbers NA but you have to remember they are runnign two differnt cam profiles and they have custom programmed ECU's at their fingertips. I will have a motor in my car soon that i'm building with the J-Spec cams regroudn by crower, new springs, Mazdaspeed pistons, balanced and blueprinted and P&P along with a SDS stand alone ECU. I should be pushing some fairly good numbers out of it. But lets get real people the FS-ZE or FS-DE has never made it to the ranks of the B18C5 B16A2, SR20DET, RB26DETT, 2JZ, 1JZ, 2ZZ, and the list goes on and on....a couple mazda motors are in there the BP from the miata, the 20BT from the J-Spec RX-7 and Cosmos and even the FE3 among ralliest. When comparing engines though you have to compare apples to apples. THe protege isn't the most HP or torque 4 banger out there but it will out handle anything in its class. add a few more HP and upgrade the suspension and you are ready to kill anything on a real race. Straight lines are for domestics let the good ole boys handle that. Mazdas are for teh twistys and as far as I can remember they always have been.

Fez

Ok. Here's apples to apples.

My friend has an 01 Nissan Sentra SE (SR20DE)
They only made this car for 1 year since the 2.0L in it is too low-tech for Nissan to use anymore. This car is almost exactly the same as my 2.0L Mazda Protege ES. Sure, it doesn't look quite as good, and it probably is a bit less stiff. But it's still got 16inch alloys, 4whl disc brakes, similar dimensions, everything. It also cost almost exactly the same amount of money (Mine was actually a bit more expensive, but that was because of a few options). (Oh yeah, the Sentra SE also came with LSD standard)

The SE makes 145 hp with NO variable valve timing and it's naturally aspirated. Don't get me wrong, I LOVE my Protege, but the engine really is it's weakest point. I don't find it to be too loud, but it should really make at least 10 more HP STOCK. (The nissan also makes 1 more lb/ft).

The Nissan engine has been around a few years longer, so I guess they've had time to get it right, but it made 140 hp way back on the original SE-R.

Sure our engine is better for turboing, but the car doesn't come with a turbo, and the VAST majority of people do NOT install turbo kits because they are EXPENSIVE, they void your warranty, and they reduce the reliability of your car (more parts = more things that can break).

I wish there were a cheap and easy way of getting a few more mpg out of the Mazda 2.0. Unfortunately, mediocre engines really seem to be holding Mazda back as far as sales are concerned.

Every other current sport compact has an aluminum block, EXCEPT for the Protege. There's no reason to use iron blocks anymore.

Traveler

If you look closely at the way our engines are built, they offer a lot of things that some of the others don't. A steel block with closed deck, decent head bolt pattern for good clamping, a fairly strong crank, a decent (although not optimized) cylinder head, the list goes on. The problem is, these things are tuned to run on pond water. The timing is WAY retarded for decent power, the fuel is perfect until you step on it and then it goes way rich and we have a computer that makes the Gestapo look good. The building blocks are there for some serious forced induction power with only a piston and rod upgrade. I've seen dynoes from stock block engines well over 400 HP.

There are at least 4 companies that I know of that are making turbo kits and are (so far) having no problems with 8 psi on a stock bottom end with no extra engine management other than a little fuel control. With a decent stand alone we could probably milk 14-15 psi and push 300HP at the crank properly tuned. Port the head and gain more.

Yeah, it's too bad that Mazda doesn't build them that way but at least the foundation is there for people to work with. The Honda is just about done because the specific output is so high. The only thing you can do is open up the intake and exhaust before you have to tear it down, lower the compression, strengthen the block and spend a jillion dollars.

ProtegeMaster

That's a point I should have noted in my original post, Fez! Well said! Anyway, here's further support for my Mazda engine deficiencies claim:

1991 Nissan Sentra SE-R Specifications:

Type: SR20DE - 4-in-line, Aluminum block/head
Displacement: 122 cu. in. (1998 cc)
Bore x Stroke: 3.39 x 3.39 in. (86 x 86 mm)
Compression Ratio: 9.5:1
Engine Control System: Nissan ECCS w/ port fuel injection
Emissions Controls: 3-way catalytic converter, EGR, feedback fuel-air mixture ratio control
Valve gear: chain driven double overhead cam, 4 valves per cylinder, hydraulic lifters
Redline: 7500 rpm
SAE net power: 140 bhp@6400rpm
SAE net torque: 132 lbs-ft@4800rpm

Let's keep in mind that this is a 1991 era engine! So, in comparing, the FS-DE, in the year 2001, 130 vs. the SR20DE's 140 horsepower. The Nissan engine offers superior power and only slightly less torque, redlines at 7500 RPM, and it does it without any form of variable valve timing. Again, it seems to me that Mazda is getting it's *** kicked, and that's coming from an engine design at least 10 years older than what they're currently offering in the 3rd Gen. Protege... In friggin' 2001+! Oh yeah, and the SR20DE is directly related to the GA16DE engine that I had in my old '91 Nissan Sentra XE-- Both of those engines were (and continue to be) extremely reliable. A friend of mine's parents bought my old Nissan, and I understand she's still going strong.

I'm not meaning to complain, but I'm starting to wonder what the hell they've been doing in their engine design department all these years over at Mazda. Looks to me like, up until a year, maybe two years ago at most, they haven't been doing anything. Meanwhile, the other three major Japanese auto makers have been working to make better engines, and they've been doing it going on 10 years over Mazda. Anyway, just an observation...

Based on preliminary data though, it again is encouraging that Mazda has finally gotten with the program in designing the MZR's. We'll just have to wait for the US/Canada release to see how it stacks up against the other Japanese manufacturers, who are already ahead of Mazda in making variable timing engines more of a standard feature instead of a premium. Either way you look at it, Mazda is still behind on things, unfortunately.

I should also say again that despite other areas of lesser capabilities, Mazda's engines are still extremely reliable and well made in that sense. Personally, I think that's an admirable characteristic. Also on a better note, I think Mazda is very aware that they're behind on things-- That's why they've made such an effort to hype up the Mazda6 and the new engines it will sport, with all the talk about "raising the bar on the mid-size class". It would be cool to come from behind and emerge as the leader, I think, after seemingly trailing for so long!