Mazda 3 hybrid review: Does Mazda's SkyActiv-X hybrid technology work? Paul finds out!

[@boldbeam4534]

Once you hit or get close to 10k kilometres you start seeing a massive improvement in fuel economy. With cruise control on I'm getting 930+ kilometres on a tank whereas when it was much newer it would do about 680. These are highway numbers as I'm on the road alot. This is how I've also noticed the marked improvement in fuel economy on the car as well

[@JSmith73]

Interesting; my Subaru Outback 2.5L CVT from 2011 got stronger after the first year or two as well - still going well after 10 years in fact! Have made sure to run it at 100% throttle when warmed up at onramps and such, with some regularity. Looking for a new 2nd car soon..

[@mharro88]

It's pretty crap for a mild hybrid

[@FurkanSavas]

@boldbeam4534 Do you use 95 or 98?

[@jonfklein]

In SPCCI mode the Skyactiv-X engine will operate with an air/fuel ratio as high as 37:1, which is incredibly high. SPCCI is the future of all internal combustion engines in my opinion.

[@djhrjeiwhri]

Yeah, but not with the combine of 6 ratios at

[@stijn2644]

it's a bit weird he says the fuel economy is 9.1l/100km, while in the article they say it does 5.8l/100km over a 1.5 hour journey and 7.8l when they fully loaded it with camera equipment and some idle time. but the rest of the review is really enjoyable to watch.

[@wrakowic]

He also says it should be 5.5L for X and 6.5L for G, but at the end he says the technology actually works? So which is it? The contradiction is confusing.

[@TheDude50447]

I got no clue what they did to the car in order to get over 9l/100km. I own this car and Im at just over 6 litres while regularly cruising at about 200 kph on the highway.

[@tonyt8271]

@@TheDude50447 wtf cruising at 200 km/ph????? Well of course it's going to be 6L/100km if you mostly do highway... if you add urban driving, that's going to easily tbe 9L/100km

[@TheDude50447]

@@tonyt8271 been doing about 1000 km of pure city driving. Last day the average consumption went up to 5.9 from 5.8. Also if I don't thrash it on the autobahn but set the speed to about 110 kph I get 4.7 litres per 100 km. The 200 kph part really eats into the fuel consumption.

[@TheDude50447]

@@tonyt8271 Autobahn btw. 200 kph is perfectly legal.

[@MrKagyal]

I own this car and 9.1 liter is unrealistic. Even when I drove it brandnew I had at max 7.5 liter. Now I am getting in summer constantly around 5.4 l (computer is showing 5 liter). Manual and FWD.

[@Marco81.]

MrKagyal I drive my X with 6-6,5 Liters ! Over 9 Liters ??? LOL 😂😂😂

[@Staff7A]

I never trust test drivers fuel economy!

[@pascalcooper2897]

Thanks for telling the truth!

[@FeelFree3]

May be the test driver ain't easy on throttle!

[@112deeps]

If car going uphill the fuel economy will be worse even with good driving style.

[@e.g.5806]

LIke I've mentioned in previous videos, nobody gives a better auto review than Australian Seth MacFarlane! Nice work!

[@CarExpertAus]

😅 thanks!

[@hell1972]

Spot on...

[@jbosch3362]

Agree. Greetings from the Netherlands

[@Noname-iz9uo]

Omg you are right!

[@desainishu]

You are 100% right about Seth MacFarlane comparison. I never noticed it before but now I can't unsee it..😀😀😀😀

[@jgc4703]

Cant believe this channel has less than 100k subs. His reviews are awesome!

[@MysteriousMarsupial]

Note to Mazda - Don't do down the Honda and Toyota styling road and you will be fine

[@crinacIe]

Can't both Honda and Toyota change their design language already?

[@waynehobbs5175]

Too late.

[@jonfklein]

Ya, I don't like the 'swooshy' look of Toyotas and Hondas these days. I like a cleaner look with fewer creases in the body panels. Although the rear quarter panel of the Mazda 3 hatchback could use one crease. I find it too flat.

[@Matt-vq8jz]

Loved the shorter soft touch measurements! That was perfect.

[@d.k.1394]

agreed

[@MrSunnyBhoy]

beautiful looking car, really love the designs and colours, I think its the best looking hatchback out there.

[@marcell1968]

I drive this car now for 13000km and the bc indicates a value of 5.1 l/100km. If i calculate the real consumption at the pump i get 5.6l/100km.

[@mongini1]

aggreed on that. i had it for only 1 day, but i was at 5.9 on screen (cause i kicked it twice)

[@charles8557]

How come real consumption at pump is always different to car's computer? Happens to me too, so weird

[@TheKalkalash]

@@charles8557 Maybe the car computer doesn't take into account idling and starts? So it only measures fuel flow during driving?

[@markusdahmann4107]

I own a Hatch manual FWD. Several remarks here: Launch from standstill was poor - far too low in revs when taking off. 4000/min is far better than low 2000 and results in around 0,5 s less. This is NOT a turbo, so why drive like one?? Break-In is slow, engine frees up at around 5000 kms. Demo car was quite young. If driven without respect to the technology, consumption may be around 8 L/100 km even with rude driving and high revs in the gears. With lots of engine-breaking (due to high compression engine decelerates quite astonishing), less throttle on acceleration and slightly higher revs in the gears (up to around 3000/min at max) one is "in the flow" with traffic and receives in town around 6 L/100 km, on the motorway with max speed of up to 140 km/h 5,5ish and on the open (back) road as low as 4ish figures. A tankful lasts me at least 850 kms, most of the time the range reaches and exceeds 900 kms.

[@69memnon69]

Think it’s a very hard sell over the 2.5. If they released a 2.5 skyactivx it would be a different proposition. In terms of fuel economy, I suspect it’s related to the low mileage on your test unit. My last two Mazda 3’s improved substantially after I put some mileage on them. Currently average in the 6’s on the highway with my 2.5 skyactiv-g. It’s not great for short trips around the neighbourhood, where the engine barely gets a chance to warm up. Noticed a big drop in fuel economy with the new covid way of life. I just don’t feel that the current fuel price justifies it from a fuel economy point of view. I’d buy it for the toque characteristics, if the capacity was increased. At this point the prospect of a 2.5 turbo is more appealing. That being said, the existing 2.5 is more than ample for most people. Prior to my last two Mazda 3 Astina’s, I was a golf guy. With the latest updates to the interior, I won’t go back to VW. Mazda has them beat when it comes to reliability, I don’t feel like I’m losing out in terms of perceived quality and the features i expect aren’t optional extras.

[@jonfklein]

I'd like to see a more powerful Skyactiv-X engine. I think it would be appealing to enthusiasts who want more power. So I like the idea of a 2.5l version. I currently drive a MK6 GTI. I like the design and the power, but reliability has been an issue (burns oil, rough idle, a/c leaks). I might upgrade to a MK7 at some point but I agree that the MK8 is out of the question due to the changes to the dashboard. All the controls are now inside a screen! Forget it!

[@飞过海的肠旺面]

For Sweden. With 18 SEK/L of gasoline. Mazda sell dropped significantly.

[@piobu5357]

I don't really see such high fuel economy numbers in my 2019 Mazda 3 sedan (skyactive-x 2.0 manual), unless the engine is cold (first 2-3km), and I'm stuck in stop/start traffic, though even then it doesn't go beyond 8,5. Usually i see around 7-8l/100km in the city, and around 6l/100km outside of it. The best I got was I think 5,7l/100km, but I wasn't really trying - drive slowly, stay below 1500 RPM and you'd be in the 5l-zone most of the time outside of city. Sedan is better when it comes to visibility and rear headspace (i like the looks better, too), and I've got a wireless charger in the central console, so it just probably isn't available in your market. Oddly enough sunroof wasn't available in EU even as an option, when i was buying it, I've even checked configurators on Mazda's site in various EU countries. This is the first time I'm seeing rear air vents on the Mazda 3 BP, though - must be new for 2021? I personally really like how driver oriented the dash design is, too - The infotainment screen is right in my line of sight, along with the HUD display, so i rarely need to look away from the road, and the swivel wheel is the best, and safest, way of operating infotainment, anyway - only thing that sucks is entering navigation directions through it, but there are voice commands, too. It's nice to see real buttons for infotainment shortcuts, and real tactile controls for climate control - you hide those in touchscreen menus, and I'm out (though sadly MX-30 seems to have adopted touchscreen hvac controls). All in all this was the best compact sedan I've found in this price range when it comes to a decent looks/comfort/tech ratio, and performance is more than enough for daily driving.

[@paulh4691]

We have the Skyactive X 2.5Litre (G25) evolve and it has rear air vents although the base model does not. Maybe they only do it for the oz market or something. Sits on about 7.2/100 with about 70 percent country kms. Agreed the wheel control is good once you get used to it, but sadly the voice recognition is dismal. Maybe the Aussie accent is too much for it or something?? And it does not work with the Navigation system at all for some reason. My Ford Ranger's voice command system is FAR better, as is its navigation system. Other than that, and the not so great stereo sound, its a great car. Not sure why people buy the hatch as the Sedan looks a lot more fancy and has decent room in the back seats and a huge cargo space.

[@Crosshead1]

All BP series Mazda3s (except the base model) since release in May 2019 have rear AC vents. It’s curious that other markets don’t seem to have them when it’s clearly possible to incorporate them.

[@Crosshead1]

Paul H I have a BN Series SP25GT Hatch and will probably update to the X20 Astina later this year. I’ll buy the hatch every time because I prefer the large opening for bulky objects. Yes, the sedan boot is larger but I find the small opening far too restrictive. Re. rear seat space, the sedan and hatch have identical measurements except the hatch has slightly more headroom. The smaller rear door windows of the hatch do, I admit, make the rear space seem smaller, but it’s just an illusion. Btw, and it’s a personal opinion, I find the BP Hatch more attractive than the sedan. Each to his/her own I guess.

[@piobu5357]

@@Crosshead1 I own a fully-specced one, and i don't have rear air-vents. I just checked Carwow's, and Doug Demuro's reviews and there are no rear air-vents in their cars, either. This review points out the same - 'And the backseat lacks visible air vents and power ports' -www.cars.com/articles/2019-mazda3-10-things-we-like-and-7-not-so-much-405429/ I honestly have never seen rear air vents on a Mazda 3 BP, and I've watched/read a ton about this car before buying it.

[@piobu5357]

@@Bear-wj1mc huh. That must be the weirdest region-locked thing on a car I've ever seen

[@gerrycollins2335]

Its a pity that Mazda dropped the excellent 2.2 diesel from the previous generation car. Just due to public perception I suppose, because it was as clean as any petrol engine, far more frugal on fuel, amazingly quiet and smooth compared with VAG diesels, and had bags of torque from 1500 rpm (which the SkyActive-X doesn't emulate).

[@ln5747]

Unreliable.

[@AccordionJoe1]

Mazda is making the best, most efficient vehicles for the money of all the auto manufacturers. For example, my 2016 CX-5 has gotten an average of 30 mpg and I live in the mountains. My previous car, a Honda CR-X, got 24 mpg. Both cars are compact SUVs.

[@Crosshead1]

It’d be good to see a full back-to-back comparison with both a SkyactivG 2.00 and 2.5 litre. I don’t think most people understand the point of the SkyactivX engine in Australia and much of the blame for that must lie with Mazda. It’s probably more of an issue here in Australia where the SkyactivG is available in both 2.0 and 2.5 litre capacity. Is the SkyactivX a better performing 2.00 litre with similar economy or a more fuel efficient 2.5 with similar performance? Personally, I think Mazda Australia would have been smarter to introduce the 2.5 Turbo about to be released in the US.

[@CarExpertAus]

Good point, we will see what we can do.

[@Bmontepeque11]

Oh, when you see it like that "A 2.0L engine that performs like a 2.5L engine" the SkyActiv-X makes a lot of sense! I saw this video thinking "at that point I would just take the normal 2.5L engine 🤔" but you're right!

[@hanse81]

Seen a few reviews and read some too and none of them have been close to 9 litres pr 100 km. how you managed this is beyond me.

[@waszkreslem9306]

Uphill and adding acceleration

[@jacekkaminski5698]

The interior with red leather looks best in this segment incl. audi, bmw, mercedes. Hands down.

[@CarExpertAus]

Interesting!

[@buchajo]

The interior is amazing. I went with black. Definitely upscale looking.....

[@jacekkaminski5698]

@@buchajo Enjoy it. Paul, the reviewer, was sceptical about the price around 42K AUD. Well, this car, with those specs, is well above 50K AUD in Europe. In my location 57K !! In a sense, you saved a lot of money.

[@wrakowic]

@@jacekkaminski5698 In my country the top spec SkyactivX auto costs 82k AUD... so it is extremely cheap in Australia.

[@jacekkaminski5698]

@@wrakowic If your monthly wages are around 10K, you're good, otherwise pack up your stuff and run my friend, run !! Not sure about general cost of living in Land Down Under, but cars are cheap, on par with the US. Lucky Ozzies...

[@Grvmps]

Nice interior, although the way the dash line cuts into the corner of the display annoys me. In regards to the SkyActiv-X it is disappointing with the fuel economy but not surprising as I have read other reports saying the same thing. Maybe it still needs a couple more years to mature? The same goes with the pricing of Mazdas these days, if they want to be seen as premium it is going to take a few more years and bit more effort before people will believe that and the sales reflect it.

[@peace4myheart]

My favorite Aussie is reviewing cars for days!!!

[@armanmaaba600]

The reason why you can't feel the horsepower push it's because of the seat design. It makes you very comfortable just like you accelerate together with the car.

[@jovayencolina5405]

Is that what they call "jinba ittai"

[@nurnberg1561]

I have a white Mazda 3 Skyactiv X with a manual transmission and I've never had such a high consumption, and I don't drive it very slowly. And center armrest is not loose. Where is this model produced? Mexico?

[@benturton3358]

Good review mate. That rear window is a nightmare, especially for kids. My parents have the previous generation and both my boys get carsick in the back. Enjoyed watching. Cheers

[@benturton3358]

The door window that is.

[@buchajo]

Gotta use the BSM system and adjust your mirrors properly. Be driver aware. You’ll be just fine.....

[@davidschultz6346]

I drive a BN SP 25 and love it, it's so good I could not part with it for a Skyactiv X. Are you listening, Mazda?

[@keepower]

Wow.. $41k Aussie, I guess it will be more than $50k Kiwi. The price is going to kill this thing.

[@dhwang101]

I gotta do that shake the center console cover trick when test driving Mazda 😂 it will be very useful in negotiation

[@martintaper7997]

When I first heard "sky active eggs" I thought it was something to do with flying chickens.

[@nuclearfishin1185]

Might as well be......doesn't seem to be of any benefit whatsoever!!😆😆😆

[@larjkok1184]

That barely qualifies as a joke. That is utterly woeful. It might pass if you’re 80.

[@martintaper7997]

@@larjkok1184 Yes, I understand many people don't have a sense of humour, so my sympathies to you, Oggy. Since when did humour have to be sophisticated and intellectual?

Yeah and when I heard our Ozzie visitors say "Heaps Ok" I thought he had a hip problem!

[@martintaper7997]

@ Why would you think that - they clearly said their hips were fine! ;)

[@DiHandley]

Having to use 95RON fuel pretty much negates any savings from fuel economy.

[@d.k.1394]

agree

[@ryanhuang6838]

Man they really got caught with their pants down. World's shifting to electric and meanwhile for the past decade Mazda's still pouring millions into internal combustion tech while other brands are shifting to hybrid tech to tide them over. If you care about fuel economy why would you ever settle for a top of the range Mazda 3 that costs much more than its competitors, has much worse fuel economy, and requires premium fuel?

[@d.k.1394]

Agree

[@Dongzzzzzz]

Might as well go for the 2.5l which can consume regular

[@d.k.1394]

@@Dongzzzzzz yes

[@letsseeif]

That cloaked Batman look comes at a price. Mazda clearly aspires to fill the brand void between Premium and Ordinary.

[@buchajo]

Get a lower trim and save thousands.....

[@CupiDany]

Everyone is ragging on the fact that because you need to use premium fuel, that the fuel economy savings are irrelevant. While this is somewhat true, Mazda developed the skyactiv X primarily to reduce emissions and not to reduce fuel cost for the consumer.

[@piobu5357]

When i was buying mine i had to ask people at Mazda if i can even use premium fuel in the skyactive-x engine, since in all the info i found on the internet, various spec-sheets and the manual itself, it said it drives on '95' (which is the normal gas in our country, as opposed to the '98' premium). So i don't think this particular engine needs to drive on premium?

[@GwnSerchan]

The automatic is not good for the skyactiv engine, my dad has the manual in the cx30 and he gets around 5.6/5.8L per 100km

[@kevinW826]

Deathlypuncake I can get that with my automatic skyactiv. Did that on a run from Toronto to Cleveland.

[@nickroberts119]

7 mins in and I've subscribed. Fantastic review so far, very in depth and flows well. Hope to get one of these as my next car in 2 years when my current contract is up, fingers crossed I time it right for the facelift. Back to it...

[@nickroberts119]

Hang on is that.. 25mpg? Damn..

[@ENTJ47]

BRING SKYACTIVE X to US. GAS PRICES ARE HORRIBLE

[@worrywart1311]

It would have been helpful to have compared, on-screen, the power and torque figures for the 2 litre G and X engines and the 2.5G.

[@stargeyser1]

You keep on comparing it to corolla? Which is better? In your opinion?

[@Lead_Foot]

It's not really naturally aspirated, there's a supercharger.

[@TheStigHCE09]

The supercharger is not there to increase power, it's there to make this entire system work by leaning out the air/fuel mix even more.

[@CarExpertAus]

That's technically true - the purpose of the supercharger here is for the lean air/fuel mixture as opposed to a performance benefit. It achieves almost double the air/fuel mixture of a regular petrol engine and the supercharger is there to aid in feeding in more air. I go into more detail on how this works in our written review here: www.carexpert.com.au/car-reviews/2020-mazda-3-skyactiv-x-hybrid-review

[@elgoogssie3969]

it's a mild hybrid. Do not compare it to "ordinary" one nor plug-in hybrid systems. This one have small battery and small electric engine which only helps to make the care move at the start.

[@constantinegiotopoulos3033]

People just don't get how a mild hybrid differs from a hybrid and they start making irrelevant comments.

[@davidmcc6666]

If this is 42k, how much will the turbo cost? Thanks, mate.

[@CarExpertAus]

A lot I'm thinking! They haven't confirmed it's coming to Australia yet either, which is a real shame.

[@sadmanh0]

could you do a comparison of mileage of this against the 2.5ltr? I have the 2ltr skyactive-G and 9l/100km is very easy to hit and on highway/countryside driving I usually average ~7l/100km

[@piobu5357]

I'm getting usually ~5.7-6.5l/100 on back roads, and 7-8.5l/100 in the city, and I'm not really trying to get the best economy - you could certainly go lower. My drive to work is ~2.5km, the engine is still a bit cold when i get there, and that's when I'm getting 8-8.5l/100km, so i guess that's the worst case scenario (along with heavy start-stop traffic). It's a 2019 Mazda 3 Sedan FWD Manual with 8,5k km on it.

[@sadmanh0]

@@piobu5357 does yours have the mild hybrid thing? I got the hatch so I guess the mileage is slightly worse for me, but I always try to save a bit by coasting on the way to red lights

[@piobu5357]

​@@sadmanh0 Yes, all 2.0 Skyactiv-X's got it, but the mild hybrid is used more to power up all the tech inside, and help with smoother engine start when the start-stop feature is active. It boosts the economy slightly since the engine doesn't need to power all the gizmos onboard, but it's not a real hybrid, where an electric engine works together with the gasoline one to get better economy, and more combined power/instant torque. kzbin.info/www/bejne/rZ-2f4Sjjaybr6c So, all-in-all, I think that the claimed 5,5l/100km is very achievable with the 2.0 skyactiv-x engine, not sure why the results here were so bad - maybe it was a new engine with low mileage? maybe they were hooning around? They took an average economy (not the result you get displayed at the end of every ride), and didn't reset the previous stats? idk

[@sadmanh0]

@@piobu5357 ahh you have the skyactive-x engine, no wonder you're getting so much better mileage; yeah not sure why theirs is so bad.

[@karkybibek]

Hi paul mate, u said it competes with corolla hybrid, can u do comparisons these two please. Finally mazda got hybrid. I have watched ur corolla review but comparing side by side.

[@adastra6684]

No wireless CarPlay is disappointing on any top spec car in 2020. It can’t cost that much to include it or is there a reliability issue with it?

[@aphiwehlophe8928]

Great review as always keep up the great work👌

[@morishogo144]

If you really want to know about a car then go to the Mazda dealer or any other car brand you are interested in. Then visit a site that you can trust like ADAC.de Then take it for a drive, then ask about the car your friend that have it. Then go again to test drive and take your measurements and test it by yourself. And then you'll see how much misinformation KZbin reviews have. Then decide. KZbin reviews are usually totally wrong! due to negligence, due to poor information, due to paid advertisements and due to personal reasons.

[@Marvonibeats]

Can this car run without the m battery

[@nkosicollier4984]

Loving the exterior design. Its beautiful. The donut is a let down for me, I always prefer a full sized spare wheel. Great thorough review ✌🏾😎✌🏾

[@Yorkman7]

The first really honest review of this car that I have read. I like Mazda’s but this seems to be much less than the hype would have us believe. Fuel economy improvement not that great, uses 95 and costs $3000 more.

[@martintaper7997]

The dash fuel consumption figure was on an "average" setting so it may reflect the car not being driven in a normal mode (idling in a yard and such) unless it was reset at the beginning of the test? If it was reset, something must be very wrong with the car, or Mazda has made a very expensive mistake!

[@adamgarth9046]

Martin Taper I hear you. But I’m sure Paul and the team are smart enough to verify the way they are gathering fuel economy data to not make that mistake. Furthermore, I’d hope their methodology is the same from car to car which makes for a good comparison to the Corolla Hybrid which achieved ~5.5L/100km.

[@martintaper7997]

@@adamgarth9046 True, but anyone can "oops".

[@Markuden]

There are 2 things going on here. Mazda says the X is more fuel efficient than the G. Turns out they perform about the same BUT the X is a 177hp and the G is (I believe) 128hp. So yeah it is more effecient per bhp. I alsl believe this car is brand new and a lot of people point ouot that their skyactive-X started to perform beter after 10k miles or something. Also I hear from some owners that the X really performs on the highway when you drive a constant speed. People say 5,5 is really obtainable for the X. But hey, thats just the information I gathered about this engine and what the owners have to say.

[@martintaper7997]

@@Markuden But it's less efficient "in this test" than the 2.5 litre engine which has a higher output and is much cheaper. I hope you are right and the test and its circumstances gave an inflated figure.

[@TheAddictioneer]

9.1L/100km is ouch. There must be something off. Reckon the reason is the car was being driven in a hilly road

[@piobu5357]

I've never seen it go as high in my 2019Mazda 3 with 2.0 skyactive-X, even in the city. I get ~7-8 in the city, and ~6l outside of it (and I'm not really trying to drive economically)

[@Sixteen0Four]

Exactly. I have the standard 2.0 and get an average of 5.8 - 6.0 l/100km every single time I'm at the gas station.

[@TheAddictioneer]

I still believe in skyActiv X despite the underwhelming reception. Heard rumors about skyActiv X straight six cylinders engine design and development. If they're true, my next sport car will definitely be Mazda 😁

[@piobu5357]

@@TheAddictioneer I've just checked a few random reviews of the mazda 3/cx-30 with the skyactive-x engine and none got worse economy than 40 mpg(it's supposedly better with a manual), so the result they got in this review seems to be an anomaly. Daily driving that car I honestly don't know how they achieved above 9l/100km... It's an interesting engine, for sure, you can drive in 6th gear at 50km/h at 1000RPM, you've got enough torque, and it doesn't jutter, or is unresponsive, at all - The gearing and ECU is definitely set more with economy in mind, so the results here are all the more mind-boggling. Then again most reviews seems to suggest you should avoid the automatic.

[@attomicchicken]

No touchscreen, no wireless android auto / carplay, no wireless charging. Wtf are they doing?

[@sepas65]

That 360 camera system needs to come to the US

[@blakesotsky3142]

Does this come in a hybrid, in a sedan. If so, does anyone know if it is good? Looking into purchasing from Mazda because they're very well know.

[@jeffruebens8355]

For road noise, try the Pirelli Scorpion Verde tires.

[@billyxu2266]

does android auto takes up the whole screen on the new mazda infortainment screen? i would love to upgrade to this new model though.

[@adastra6684]

I like the close ups on the durometer

[@constantinegiotopoulos3033]

I think the indicated consumption is a joke. The indicated boot space is also incorrect. Other than that, good review. I think Mazda has gotten a few important details wrong that will prevent this model from success. Hey have compromised the rear windows for no reason. If anything they have made the c-pillar bulky and hard to watch. For a family car that children occupy the rear seats, poor window visibility is the best recipe to get puke on them. The boot is smaller than the last gen. 48v would enable more options. Finally, the X variant of the engine needed an additional (and cheaper) version, somewhere in the area of 120-140bhp that would better demonstrate the fuel-saving ability of the technology and would provide a lower entry-point price. They can still get it right in a face-lift version but I don't think they will-typical Japanese uncompromising mentality. Most probably Mazda will fail with this one, pull out from this category and focus on SUVs like Citroën and others did.

[@andikahaikal]

Think wait for further iterations of that ‘x’ tech cuz deff more refinement/improvements 2 come.

[@awesomemike-4411]

Great review as always. I have only one complain, the boot size is per spec 361 litres across all drive trains, how did you measure 295 litres?

[@brian_mwaura]

361 litres is without a spare wheel, like in most European countries. If with a spare wheel (donut) boot space is 295l.

[@PurplePoulpe]

This engine really shines at low output, at motorway speeds, just like a diesel would. Usual hybrids are rubbish on motorways, a proper Skyactiv X hybrid with good EV range would be the perfect combination. Btw, you can't judge fuel consumption if you're doing acceleration tests, it has to be realistic driving (and preferably not with a lead footed moron at the wheel)

[@tm92489]

Fantastic review but dude, stop doing that shaking of central console box to check the build quality .. you know what I mean 🤪

[@d.k.1394]

i loved the insides.......all that red!!!!!!

[@jrstudio07]

So the Mazda M Hybrid is BS? It doesn't actually drive the car like Toyota until some speed/rpm?

[@adityavats289]

Hey paul can please review Mazda CX-8 Asaki review. I am in market for 7 seater car and tossing between cx8 asaki or Skoda Kodiaq Sportline. which one you prefer ? 🤔

[@Staff7A]

Lovely vehicle. Take this before a Hybrid Corolla any day!

[@richieduck67]

Great review Paul can't see the tech and benefits are worth it for the $$$ and potential repair bills. I have a new Corolla on loan normal petrol and it easily get's down to low to mid 6's around town

[@sergeysedelnikov3015]

the car is new, only 24km milage, it is ok to consume more fuel, let it run for 1000km at least and the fuel consumption will me as designed.

[@jamesgand828]

Why is this not available in North America?

[@rxs87]

Looking at getting a used on of these, and have read watched basically all the reviews out there and 9.1l/100km is probably the highest ive seen a reviewer get with most averaging 6-7.5ish l/100km. Perhaps a longer-term review could have given the car the benefit of the doubt for fuel economy. Good review otherwise.

[@michaelliu4773]

Hi Paul, thanks for the review. Just one thing to comment: I don't think you can do fuel consumption just by looking at the screen in front of you, as a car reviewer. You gotta do a proper fuel consumption test. Everything else is quite good though.

[@CarExpertAus]

We used to do that, but the fuel gauges are pretty accurate. If we do a comparison test we always brim the tank, but it’s much of a muchness in most modern cars.

[@michaelliu4773]

@@CarExpertAus I know its fairly accurate. But before reading the fuel gauges, I think its better to make sure it is all coming from normal driving, ex. No idling when filming.

[@constantinegiotopoulos3033]

@@CarExpertAus other reviewers have demonstrated that the computers are not totally accurate and at the end of the day, measuring the consumption by topping up is the only 100% definitive way to get an accurate result.

[@nickholvoet5463]

Only 295L? Peugeot 308 hatchback has 412L and my Peugeot 208 has 309L

[@SuNnYSoU]

40K+？？？132KW？？？8.9L/100km？？？0-100，9sec？？？ Small the bacķ sit space ？？？295 boot space ？？？ Good luck Mazda 3

[@pantch12345]

I thought Mazda 3 X20 powers by 2L supercharges engine?

[@electricdiesel1993]

X20 Astina deserves an AWD option to become a supercharged sport hatch.

[@bradleybprentice1497]

It does not live up to all of the hype. The 2.5L Turbo will be the one to buy.

[@djhrjeiwhri]

Mazda need 8-10speed to optimized fuel consumption of this engine tech.

[@Roadrunnerz45]

quite poor visibility especially blind spots, large area between rear window and back window.

[@rahdirsv]

Curious to know how you are shooting these videos with Melbourne lockdowns ... :-)

[@jeeves6490]

With a camera.

[@kcc40something]

From what you have described, it is definitely not a goer for the money that Mazda is asking for it.

[@newzealandtravelswithernie5301]

At what rpm that the max torque 224Nm kicks in? thanks

[@awiranggayudha2063]

Not sure about the hatchback styling. I think I prefer the sedan version.

[@electricdiesel1993]

A two door streamline fastback than a notchback sedan or a three door hatchback pretend coupe.

[@kurts9085]

I still dont understand the point of this engine from Mazda. I own a BN SP25 Astina and won't be upgrading. This is slower, seems to use the same amount of fuel and frankly no offers any obvious benefit over the existing G25 engine...

[@vladimirpetrovic1322]

Did he say "unpleasant noise like in a diesel"? 😮

[@CarMojo]

imho, skyactiv-x is overcomplicated. i wouldn't call it revolutionary (and I'd never buy it, toyota hybrid/phev would be my choice). good on paper to satisfy CO2 beaurocrats, not really delivering upon expectations in real life. i'd rather welcome if car makers start thinking about utilizing freevalve tech from koenigsegg. we can have efficient carbon-neutral ICEs as an extra option to BEVs and HydrogenVs in the future.

[@sadmanh0]

compared to Hybrids is really simple and not revolutionary as you said yourself, I'd much better trust the long term reliability and maintenance cost of a slightly tweaked NA engine than all the battery crap hybrids have to deal with.

[@CarMojo]

​@@sadmanh0 battery crap hybrid priuses are doing over 1mil kms without any problem e.g. as Vienna taxis 😉 calling skyactiv-x a slightly tweaked NA engine must be a joke 👍 those "minor tweaks" are: added particle filter because of egr to protect supercharger with electromagnetic clutch (supercharger is there not because of power but to make the engine run), mild-hybrid system (this isn't battery crap hybrid, but some kind of really good hybrid? - you must be kidding 😁), spcci with in-cylinder sensors, a bit more special/expensive spark plugs, and really complicated timing software.

[@sadmanh0]

@@user-vk4vd7vr5t there's still an engine, and the batteries last around 10yrs before needing replacement.

[@sadmanh0]

@@user-vk4vd7vr5t but they only have one power train, not two which are being combined with a whole new component; that's 3 things to go wrong and two of which are relatively new. Compare that to skyactive-x which is only a modified NA engine.

[@CarMojo]

@@sadmanh0 yeah, NA engine with a supercharger 👏 😀. do you know what oxymoron is? 🤔

[@lukelawrence6007]

This engine is very complicated

[@grievousbodilyharm3294]

Not at all, quite simple mechanically minded people understand fine

[@Mogsy28uk]

almost a great step forward in engine tech, still missing a turbo......🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️ CX-5 badly needs this engine instead of the old NA 2.0L G version.

[@terryhsiao1745]

has a supercharger

[@Mogsy28uk]

@@terryhsiao1745 it has a tiny Rootes-type SC, doesn't affect performance/power, more for the compression/airflow system to burn fuel better......so still needs a forced induction upgrade 👌

[@Chil3no90]

Paul your a LEGEND! Love what you’ve done with the durometer section!! 👍🏽🤙🏽 quick and easy 😎

[@a.e.w.384]

one word -- gimmicky. As a 2020 mx5 owner, I really really hope mazda does not try this on their future mx5 designs. They really need to get serious with electric propulsion. An electric mx5 would sell like mad all over the world. Range wouldn't have to be all that either, 150 mile real-world range would be all it would take for the roadster to be worth it.

[@andyclift7467]

how many batteries in the CX 30

[@craigsommerville2300]

Why do you quote $USD prices? Do you have good viewership there?

[@Dan4096]

I thought this engine is a 2.0L supercharged?

[@electricdiesel1993]

X20 Astina is the one of a kind sport hatch instead of the MPS hot hatch and successor of Astina twin-turbo diesel. Eventually Skyactiv X have superseded supercharged Miller cycle for Mazda 2 and Eunos and Roots supercharger for the diesel 626.

[@paulh4691]

Was expecting good fuel economy _ cant say I think much of that! We get an average 7. 2l/100k with our G25.

[@milaman06]

thats terrible

[@jasoncee666]

@@milaman06 no doubt the intake valves are fully gunked up with carbon due to no port injection, etc, etc. Naughty Mazda!

[@johndoe-wh6td]

Were you guys on stage 4 lockdown? Anyway great review as usual, stay well.

[@general236]

boot space is not 295l but 358l.

[@cmpillred277]

My 271 hp I30N is averaging 8 litres per 100km so that figure of 9.1 Litres per 100km for the 177hp Mazda X is a bit of a surprise, have to say with all the hype about it was expecting it to be a lot better than that.

[@ritual64]

I own a 2018 Mazda 3 Astina 2.5 and I regularly get 7.6 litres per 100... 9.1 either you're a bad driver or the engine/fuel system is stuffed. I think the mild hybrid system is nothing but bullcrap. If I wanted a hybrid I think I'd want a real hybrid so I'd buy a Toyota or a Hyundai. Sorry Mazda you missed the mark with this system.

[@andrewthaboss6643]

WTH you guys get a 360 camera?

[@kelvpoon]

But the Mazda 3 is a better car than the corolla tho

[@simoncouch1523]

A great review

[@briansteele2723]

In metallic red it looks like a car that alfa romeo wish they had designed. Might tempt me away from my Golf too

[@TheRealVranesh]

Wait for the turbo

[@terryhsiao1745]

Would love to know what's the actual MPG when driven conservatively

[@garyvandesande2677]

Terry i get over 50mpg easily on my 23 mile commute in UK. Get the manual it is a much better proposition with a slick short shift and better economy.

[@terryhsiao1745]

@@garyvandesande2677 here in the US/Canada. We don't have this yet...hopefully we will see it. Love my nd2 mx-5 and love the beautiful exterior of the 3

[@d.k.1394]

i have a 3 yr old mazda 3 sp25 (2.5 litre engine). it averages 10.8 litres per 100km rubbish fuel economy.

[@lkj17]

My heavy cx5 2.2D is 9.5L diesel

[@taeyeonkim6984]

@@lkj17 My RAV 4 hybrid averages 5.6L on petrol. I thought you said that RAV 4 is not a good car compared to CX 5... at least there is something obviously better than the CX 5 DIESEL 😂

[@lkj17]

@@taeyeonkim6984 FYI Rav 4 Petrol standard is around 9.5L on flat roads, my city is pretty hilly, so even a diesel compression-ignition engine will be around 9-10L that is superb. Rav 4 chassis is way too soft and hard to control on the highway. NExt time try drive 100KM/h and do a sudden turn, your car body will rollover. But CX-5 is fine/ easy task. this is an important feature to avoid a real accident on roads. And an old MAada 3 saved my life in a similar situation before that a Uve crossed the line that i avoided at around 80KN/m.

[@gandyhyoga6942]

Absolutely loved it before trying it, absolutely disappointed after trying it. you can't feel the 180hp at all, you can't feel the benefits of the "diesel" at low rpm..yes when you go around 4/5k the car is pretty fast, but if you always have to drive so high in rpms, the consumptions can't be that low.

[@michlep258]

yeah it’s so frustrating because i really loved the car but i just wish it had a bit more performance