Spot on review in my eyes. I own both a base model CX8 and a touring active diesel CX5. The feel like 2 different cars given they’re very similar. You cannot beat value for money in the base CX8, a great car at a great price. The petrol engine is fine if you’re not in a hurry and the front wheel drive is rarely an issue, saying that my CX5 is much more of a drivers car with the punchy diesel giving it much more oomf than the sluggish 2.5 petrol. The interior of the CX8 is more comfortable for me with a lower seating position and higher sitting and softer to touch centre console which you can comfortably rest your leg on where as the hard plastic of the cx5 is less comfortable and the console sits lower and seat sits higher which doesn’t feel as good to me. The sweet spot is the mid spec or even base spec diesel CX8 (if it’s still available in 2023) would I buy another one? In a heart beat. Try and get a 7 seater at $44k these days….
This engine is unique in the car industry and the difference is what makes it a peach of a diesel. The uniqueness is down to its history. History leading up to this engine...... (and all things Skyactiv) Ford used to have a heavy investment in Mazda. They had a heavy hand on the company and it led Mazda (and Volvo) using too many parts from what many called "The Ford parts bin". But post GFC (2008), Ford saw the writing on the wall financiallyand decided to go lean with a program called "One Ford". This program saved Ford as a company, and also meant they didn't eventually need US government bailouts like GM and others. But part of Ford getting lean was to sell their stakes in both Mazda and Volvo. The Swedish brand of course got snapped up by Chinese interests and has changed massively. But in Hiroshima, Mazda was left to fend for itself. Skyactiv (~2010) With Ford selling its stake effectively back to Japanese hands, Mazda was in a bad financial state. But the CEO decided that it was time for a complete rebirth. Cleansheet - nothing the same, everything out. (~2011) Mazda decided that everything had to change. All parts were in the bin and everything not only had to be a rethink, but it gave Mazda a chance to get back to Japanese engineering roots. This meant, instead of just designing new engines, transmissions, chassis they had to do it in a way that was different. To find the engineering edge that other companies had not seen. First of all, a sweet one. They joined up with Sumitomo Metal Industries and tried to think about new way to forge ultra-high tensile steel. Using the Samurai sword for inspiration, what came out of the venture was the automotive industries strongest (albeit extremely expensive) steel. The world record held for a long time, and it's this UHSS (ultra high tensile steel) that has been used more in newer models, that has led to for example, Mazda holding the only 99% and 98% scores in EuroNCAP frontal collision scores (until the scoring method was restarted in 2020). And also why in recent major overhaul to make side impact more difficult in the US based IIHS crash testing, Mazda was the only brand to score a "good" in the first few runs of the new test. Getting back to the peach of a diesel though..... Many university studies were done into completely different compression ratios. The "what if" was, what would occur of compression ratios were reduced. Of course diesel has extremely high compression ratios because diesel uses self combustion to ignite the fuel in the cylinder rather than spark plugs. This leads to two things - very heavy, strong engine blocks and an engine that sounds agricultural (aka tractor sound). No car maker considered doing it. But when clean sheeting, Mazda thought.... why not. The industry uses anywhere between 18:1 and 16:1. Mazda decided to go into the uncharted territory of 14:1. The results were impressive. Firstly, by changing to 14:1 the sound was about 1/2 between lets say a VW Tiguan petrol and Tiguan diesel (16:1) - this immediately caused the diesel to lose its agricultural sound. It sounds like a diesel, but nothing like 16:1 diesels which are common among all other manufacturers. Secondly, the reason for the lower compression in the first place was a reduction in NOX and CO2. The drawback though was serious.... cold weather starts were very hard (potentially a reason other car makers didn't go this route). But any astute reviewer of the Mazda diesel will not how it overcomes this. On startup, the exhaust is recirculated into the cylinder, warming up the engine. It's damn noisy when it does this, and takes longer to warm up..... but with patience the engine warms and the warm up noise subsides, leaving a much quieter engine. As many would note, Mazda did the same rethink with their petrol engines as well, running the detunes Aussie non turbos at a ridiculous 13:1 compression ratio (Europe does 14:1, identical to the petrol). And the Skyactiv-X engine is the start of another engine other car makers have attempted to do and failed; a compression petrol (for decades this has been nicknamed the "holy grail" of engines). But that's sort of expected from a car company that has always done unique engine tech such as being the only car maker to really sell (in the past) Miller cycle and rotaries. Giving a go at something is what they're used to doing. --- From my view (currently in Japan), there is obviously a change in car brands here. Nissan is reinventing itself (thanks to Renault). But one thing that is obvious is that Toyota and Honda really pitch themselves to the lower common denominator here in Japan. Bright, cheap dealers selling as many low cost cars as they can (not necessarily the vibe in Japan). However Mazda dealers have received make overs that will eventually be seen in Australia where the dealers are very upmarket. It's about selling a more enthusiast vehicle with higher end interiors. And it's embarrassed Toyota. In recent reviews of CX-60 versus the pinnacle of Toyota, the Crown (a vehicle that is barely shy of Lexus), the reviewers have rubbished Toyota only because of the way Mazda outdoes them. Let's hope it continues. But really wish Mazda had gone the route of using a different brand name to distinguish their standard cars (like this CX-8) with their higher end (CX-60/90 etc).
I would never touch a mazda diesel again after buying our brand new cx5 gt with tech pack back in 2012. Oil rise issues, 4 oil changed within 2 months of ownership and Mazdas fix was to replace the dipstick with a higher marked full mark to disguise the oil rise problem due to diesel mixing with the oil. Needless to say years later engine replacements and rebuilds were known across the board. Well done mazda.
I feel like the diesel is just the better option because if you're buying this it's to fill it with people or carry loads and a non-turbo 4 cylinder just isn't really enough for something like that
Diesel in city driving, you will be clogging up the dpf, and need to drive long trip to burn it off, which is ironic dpf save the planet, dpf unclogg drive more not save planet
If Mazda want to be premium they need to up the paint job with a thicker coat and better clear coat. And a touchscreen at least while stationary. Make the stupid iStop default to off not on, or at least put the off button directly below the start button as some makes do. This is off my list though because I don’t want the diesel yet the petrol engine is a bit gutless in the CX-5 so it’s obviously not appropriate in this heavier vehicle. Why on earth is the turbo petrol not in this one.
Weird they don't have the petrol turbo or a hybrid in it. Both engine options are awful for such a big car, sorry. No go. They got everything right except the thing that gives you propulsion LOL.
Guessing it was to protect CX9 sales. As that vehicle exits, maybe the turbo 2.5 may come to the CX8? I have the base 2.5, it's perfectly fine most of the time, just the occasional need to rev it hard, otherwise it bubbles along nicely.
@@indeepeterhopwood8106 a turbo is not fitted just for racing ya knob, its used to boost power in small piss ant engines. some of us actually like power especially in modern days where every car is badly underpowered.
@@mrz1281 absolute horseshit. Modern cars are not underpowered. We used to drive around in the 80s with engines that made a whole 38kW. Early petrol Hiluxes wouldn’t even hold 100ks into a headwind from new. And nobody died. Nobody “needs” that extra power from a turbo. You want it because your ego tells you that. And i for one am not interested in paying extra for it when i buy the car and again later when it needs replacing. Knob.
