By on April 28, 2015

2014-mazda3-main

Fans of the Mazdaspeed3 may soon rejoice, as speculation points to a new version of the high-performance hatch debuting in Frankfurt this September.

The new Mazdaspeed3 – Mazda3 MPS in Australia – will turn up as a concept before quickly entering production, Motoring.com.au reports. Power is expected to come from a 2.5-liter turbo-four unit capable of 295 horsepower – which will also motivate the new CX-9 set to make its world debut later this year in Los Angeles — with AWD as a possible feature.

For those waiting for the next Mazdaspeed6, the publication’s sources point to 2017 as the earliest the high-performance sedan would arrive; the aforementioned turbo-four and AWD system would also find its way here.

Meanwhile, Mazda has plans to have four crossovers in the lineup with the addition of a reborn midsize CX-7 and its third-row seating, taking its place alongside the subcompact CX-3, compact CX-5 and fullsize CX-9. The CX-7 would debut after the new CX-9.

[Photo credit: Mazda]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

51 Comments on “New Mazdaspeed3 Speculated For Frankfurt Debut...”


  • avatar
    Chocolatedeath

    so let me get this straight, CX 7 will have 3 rows of seats which means it will grow to the point of at least Ford Edge size and according to this report CX 9 must be growing to Buick Enclave size.

    • 0 avatar
      Atenza

      I’m not sure how big the Edge is, but the CX-7 looks like it’s going to be a three-row CX-5, so a bit more like a crossover version of the Mazda5. The CX-9’s Enclave-sized already.

      • 0 avatar
        Chocolatedeath

        I own a CX9 and bought my mom an Enclave around the same time. It is classified as we large CUV but to be honest its not Enclave size. Its about three inches in width smaller than the Enclave, 3 inches shorter in height, 5 inches shorter in wheelbase. Third row hip room is about 5 inches and overall capacity is smaller as well.
        If they can get closer to this without gaining any weight then I can see a CX7 with third row. Right now IMO the CX5 second row is one of the smallest in the segment, so its going to have grow alot in order to make a CX7 viable.

        • 0 avatar
          Atenza

          I’d be surprised if it ends up in the US. The idea always struck me as much more Europe/Japan oriented, where smaller three-row vehicles are less uncommon.

    • 0 avatar

      This is true. The old CX-7 wasn’t quite compact, but it was a dedicated 5-seater, in the same way as the Toyota Venza, Nissan Murano and indeed the Ford Edge…although it is in fact the larger CX-9 that’s related to the old Edge and MKX.

      What I’m guessing is that the CX-7 will grow to be the size of the Mitsubishi Outlander and Dodge Journey: basically a two-row vehicle with emergency third-row seating for dwarfs and amputees. Meanwhile, the CX-9, which was never really full-sized to begin with, will probably stretch to the length of other full-sized crossovers like the Highlander, Pilot and Pathfinder, but probably not to the minivan-like footprint and shape of the GM Lambdas.

      • 0 avatar
        Chocolatedeath

        @Kyree. If the CX9 does in fact have the interior packaging of the Nissan or new Honda then and combine that with some weight loss such as in the Pilot then I say job well done. I want a Flex as my next vehicle but if done right I will get another CX9.
        I am afraid of the CVT in the Pathfinder even though I have driven and love the car. I am not a fan of Honda and by default might not consider it, however that could change. I buy not just for quality and functionality but also a little individualism which the Honda does not provide.

        • 0 avatar
          zamoti

          Having owned a CX-9, I will say that the interior dimensions weren’t at all bad for passengers. I have been in the 3rd row for a few long journeys and I never really had a complaint about being uncomfortable (but then again, I’m not very tall). Compared to similar cars that I x-shopped, the CX-9 probably had the best 3rd row. Pilot had a single folding row, Mazda was split, XC90 was tiny, etc. Storage behind the 3rd row was a joke however. Roof box is mandatory for trips.
          I also can say that the Duratec 35 that pulled it around was adequate at best and never felt all that happy about it’s lot in life. It seems far-fetched that a 2.5 turbo could lug all that lard around without being harsh and noisy. I don’t doubt that they’ll make it happen but Mazda didn’t move a lot of CX-9s when they were competitive (in theory) with the rest; shrink the engine and now you have a low-volume brand pushing a 4-cyl 7 seater with few contemporaries.
          So Mazda wants to sell fewer cars than they do now? I am a Mazda fan at heart, but I just don’t know about this idea. I sold mine a few weeks ago because of durability issues (transfer case died, factory remote start freaked out whole car, odd suspension noises that were incurable and of course a rusty tailgate). Hopefully they’ll clean up their act on this one.

          • 0 avatar
            Chocolatedeath

            Just have to ask about were you live to have rust. I live in FL and havent seen that problem. My only mechanical issue with my CX9 bought new in 2008 as the front dif went out. I got that fixed last year and it has been fine every since.
            I like the overall size myself however I do wish the MPGs were alittle better and it was slightly larger.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            Do ANY cars rust in FL as long as they’re parked above water?

            Areas with salt on the roads have always had rusty Mazdas.

          • 0 avatar
            zamoti

            Pennsylvania/Ohio got me a rusty 07 that was otherwise well cared for and lived in a well-ventilated garage.

          • 0 avatar
            Chocolatedeath

            @Corey DL
            I have seen some rust buckets here in NE FL where I live. I personally live on Little Marsh Island with lots of salt water. My Charmglow grill rusted out twice in three years just from the rain and air so I dont know if it affects cars the same way.

          • 0 avatar
            Chocolatedeath

            @Corey DL
            I have seen some rust buckets here in NE FL where I live. I personally live on Little Marsh Island with lots of salt water. My Charmglow grill rusted out twice in three years just from the rain and air so I dont know if it affects cars the same way.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            That island looks lovely, lots of nice houses (I love Google Spy, I mean Maps).

            I think grilles fare a little worse since they’re always outside, made of poor metal, and don’t have clear coat or get washed.

      • 0 avatar
        TrailerTrash

        I wish the third row would be an option.
        Keeping the added size and NOT the seat would allow for the real cargo space needed. This is the reason I hate these seats. They get hardly get used but the space they take is always.

      • 0 avatar
        CoreyDL

        I was always put off by the interior of the CX7, and IMO the CX9 was in that very weird size space that you’re talking about. And it never looked mainstream enough for most people, even if it was a decent car with V6 as standard.

        I question a 2.5 powering something which is Pilot sized though.

        • 0 avatar
          TrailerTrash

          2.5 or the 2.7 Ford turbo…what difference. The Ford engine getting raves for how it performs. Perhaps other parts of the total F150 are not complete, but the engine seems fine.
          It should be large enough for a CX9 if done well.

        • 0 avatar
          bball40dtw

          The Explorer had a 2.0T option. It was horrible. Even Ford decided that it was ridiculous. The 2.3T is replacing it. It has a performance advantage over the 3.5L Duratec.

          • 0 avatar
            NoGoYo

            240 horsepower in a 4700 pound vehicle? Of course it was horrible!

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            Good grief it’s so heavy! Why’s it so much heavier than the Pathfinder (which has larger engine)?

          • 0 avatar
            Chocolatedeath

            Its closer to 4550. The Pathfinder weighs about 100lbs less equipped the same. This platform is 8 years old and counting. They will make it lighter.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            I guess that’s a little better, until you consider how the Pathfinder holds more people.

            For my money, I don’t see why more people don’t choose the Pilot.

          • 0 avatar
            Chocolatedeath

            COrey DL
            I am sure that once they SKyyactive the hell out of it the weight will come off. Hopefully by 300-500lbs.
            I am a Mazda fan and dont apologize for it so I defend them alot..lol From my readings the past current Mazda 6 uses about 70 percent HS steel, which is significantly more than the past 6 that the CX9 is based. I believe it was around 50 percent.
            Even though I dont like Honda overall I have to give them credit. I read somewhere awhile back that the current Accord is more like 82-85 percent HS steel and that this helps the new Pilot lose 300lbs while growing in size and performance.
            During the next redo for the CX9 I guess it should be about 70-75 percent HS steel.

            My guess is who ever reaches 95 percent HS steel in their cars first will have the first mid size non hybrid- non diesel car to reach 40 plus MPG.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            NoYoGo-

            Suprisingly, the 2.0T is very nice in the Edge. Besides the Focus ST, I think that’s its best application. Somehow, someway, I usually get better MPG out of a 2.0T equipped Edge than Escape. Last time I had an Edge 2.0T, I got 26+ MPG over a week of use.

          • 0 avatar
            319583076

            A lot of steel components are designed for stiffness and deflections under load instead of strength. The relevant material property is the modulus of elasticity and the relevant section property is usually either the cross-sectional area or the moment of inertia. For members designed for stiffness or deflection, the steel strength is irrelevant. All common steels have nearly the same elastic modulus, so these parts cannot be made smaller or lighter. A comparable section made from a less-dense metal such as aluminum will be only about 1/3 as stiff as the steel member.

            The bottom line is, there is a limit to the amount of achievable weight reduction due to high strength steel components. As an outsider looking in, my opinion is that we’re probably close to that limit.

  • avatar
    Chocolatedeath

    with that 4 cylinder engine the cx-9 will have to lose at least 500 pounds for that to work

    • 0 avatar
      carlisimo

      That’s probably why Mazda is working on a 2.5L turbo. The Mazdaspeed3 will only exist because of the CX-9.

      • 0 avatar
        redav

        Exactly correct. There is no Speed3 today because Mazda doesn’t have an engine for it. The CX-9 needed a new engine for its next generation, and to disperse the development costs, they’ll make a Speed3 and possibly put it in the 6 as an upgrade engine (especially if they never get the diesel to meet US regulations).

        As for AWD, the CX-5 has it and there’s an AWD Axela in Japan. So they already have pieces for it. But I don’t know if those AWD systems are the same (the Axela AWD is only for a small engine) or if they can handle the new engine’s torque.

        The current CX-9 is a pig. If the next one stays the same size, I hope they cut 400 lbs out of it. (Mazda’s goal is to drop each model 100 kg with each new revision.) They could make it a bit larger to make room for a CX-7 below. If they did that, they need to keep the weight from going up. The current CX-9 has the 3.7L from the prior gen 6, which is the same as the Mustang V6. It only has ~275 hp, so a turbo with ~300 hp and presumably more torque should work, but I still think they need to keep the weight down.

        As for a potential CX-7, what engine would they put in it? Their 2.5L is fine for the CX-5, but it shouldn’t go into anything larger. I guess they’d have to use this turbo-4 in it, too.

        • 0 avatar
          Chocolatedeath

          I agree with you. Not only a new engine but they have got to invest in a new trans as well. The six that the have in everything now is good but to remain competitive they are going to have to do atleast a 8 to 10 speed to get the most MPGs out of it.
          The CX9 does need to lose at least 400lbs and I say 500lbs. Skyyactive or whatever they want to call it can work but its going cost them. The new Pilot is significantly larger now and lost 300lbs. To me styling wish and with the increase in size and MPG they have thrown down the gauntlet. I dont like Hondas overall but when its time to get a new car I have to consider the new Pilot.

          • 0 avatar
            redav

            Last I heard, they do not plan to chase the transmission escalation. They’ve said that since their engines have a broad torque band, they don’t need more than 6 gears.

            They may change their mind if they find that buyers pick other brands based on checkboxes on spec sheets.

  • avatar
    mshenzi

    That configuration of Mazdaspeed 3: no rotary, but still Hmmm! Could be on my shopping list in a few years.

  • avatar
    sportyaccordy

    Should be a blast. If it gets decent has mileage Mazda may have forced my hand

    • 0 avatar
      EAF

      LSPI, VVT pulleys, Bent rods, HPFP; just some of the issues that plagued the previous MS3. Granted, this 2.5 is probably a revised engine?

      I would stick to a sporty Accord to be honest.

      • 0 avatar
        kvndoom

        No kidding… I went from a Speed3 to a V6 Accord coupe, and OMFG was that a revelation.

        Just ask Steve Lang about the CX7… I don’t care for turbo 4’s in general, but I’d never in a million years get another one by Mazda.

      • 0 avatar
        319583076

        I put about 20,000 trouble-free miles onto my 09 MS3 before I sold it. The current owner regularly tracks it and competes in autocross and hasn’t had any problems, either.

        The second gen MS3 was hideously ugly, but the new one looks fantastic. I could be tempted to give up my MX5 if the MS3 is “right”. All three of my Mazdas have been great cars.

        • 0 avatar
          Dieselkopf

          319, I agree with you. I have a 2009 MS3 with almost 86k miles on it. I bought it with 18k a few years back and haven’t had the least bit of engine related problems. The suspension is not my favorite, but not much you can do about the basic design of that without spending a lot of time and money. Motor and transmission are good and strong. I read all the horror stories on the forums, too. Haven’t seen much of it. I’ve had one motor mount let go, but that may have been weakened in a crash. The transmission and rear motor mounts are still original.
          And I don’t drive like grandma. I drive it the way it was meant to be driven. I just don’t drag race it. Occasional quick launches, but nothing crazy.

        • 0 avatar
          kvndoom

          I think it just didn’t take well to engine mods. Lot of those guys modded it all to hell. Most I ever did was an intake, and even that came off after the dealership threated to void my warranty (with all these T4’s replacing V6’s in the near future, I foresee a flood of warranty conflicts).

          But I did have the idle smoking problem, bone stock. Unfortunately the TSB only covered up to 2008 models, and mine was a 2009. But its build date was June 2008. Grrrr. Oh well, stupid me for buying a car that sat on the lot for a year. :P

          I still was ticked at a lot of the bean-counting that went into it. The suspension was shot at under 40k miles… rode like a skateboard, and passengers complained all the time. The rattles were horrific. I think my fiancée would leave me if I ever got another Mazda because she’ll never forget all my b1tching when I had that car.

          • 0 avatar
            zamoti

            I wanted a MazdaSpeed3 and 6, the zoom-zoom-boom tales did put me off however. Smoky turbos and a short lifespan on them didn’t do well for reputation even if it was a reasonably small subset of the population that suffered these issues.
            Being a forum junkie, I read a lot about early success with turning up the wick on MazdaSpeed products, but then also saw a lot of people having to do an absurd amount of work to keep up on them. It seems that it was popular for a while and then everyone went back to Subarus after they got tired of pounding a square peg into a round hole. Simply, agreed, I don’t think they took to tuning very well or the aftermarket wasn’t well developed in order to support the effort.

          • 0 avatar
            319583076

            The 2.3 DISI turbo was really small and didn’t produce a lot of boost. The upside to the small turbo was that the power came on quickly at lower RPMs, the downside being that it “ran out of breath” before engine redline.

            From a production standpoint, this permits Mazda to offer the turbo without a ton of specialized or upgraded engine and cooling components because the performance ceiling is relatively low and constrained by the small turbo.

            If you understand this, you understand that “turning up the wick” is a bad idea because the gains are incremental against the costs in maintenance and loss of reliability.

            Some guys just gotta bolt stuff on and bark about their Cobb Accessport tuner or whatever. Modifying FI engines is not something most trained mechanics can do well, let alone shadetrees and internet amateurs. The results of these poorly planned and executed mods are exactly what one would expect.

      • 0 avatar
        sportyaccordy

        I think the new 2.5T will be all new and based on the new Skyactiv 2.5. The last one probably won’t make it just based on fuel economy and emissions. I was looking at one to replace my Z until I realized it has about the same fuel economy. No thanks

        If this can do ~25MPG or so combined I may have to jump if the GTI isn’t a better value. Hopefully it can get to 60 in the high 4s and will have a reliable engine.

  • avatar
    Jimal

    Interesting. I had a previous generation MS3 and I loved it. Traded it for a more family orientated car for the wife, a move I still regret. I also have a huge soft spot for Mazda. I hope both the MS3 and MS6 happen.

  • avatar
    kvndoom

    Zoom, Zoom, BOOM! Time for another engine!

  • avatar
    thegamper

    I owned a 2006 Mazdaspeed6 which I put 95k miles on before I sold. I have a lot of fond memories of that car and I would be awfully tempted to buy another. Lets face it, the crop of AWD 6MT family sedans is extremely small. It almost gets my sale by default as there is really not other options. (I generally don’t consider German cars as an option for high mileage ownership out of warranty).

    I will say this about the Speed6, they came out with a reflash shortly after I bought it to make it run on 91 octane vs 93 and I sincerely believe it really messed up what was perfect. Power delivery was never as consistent as it was when I drove off the dealer lot. In the 90K miles range I had carbon buildup issues with the turbo and at some point I blew something out on the rear diff. Both problems were covered under an extended warranty which I purchased for about $1500 but not without great hassle. In all, not too bad considering I put a beating on the car on a daily basis going through 5 sets of tires in the time I owned it. It is almost criminal how much fun that car was to drive.

  • avatar
    FreedMike

    I drove a 3 over the weekend and even with the 2.0 engine, this thing is an absolute hoot to drive.

    I’m not going to even think about driving the MS3…it might cause me to go WAY over budget.

  • avatar
    CoreyDL

    I saw a new 3 5-door go past my house a couple weeks ago, in this red color. Oh man was that thing sharp. It looked very sporty, and very solid. I’d say the looks are now up there with the GTI at least.

    • 0 avatar
      kvndoom

      Kodo is the shiz. No matter what the cars might lack, they look sharp as all get out.

    • 0 avatar
      sportyaccordy

      Yea, thats the idea. It’s pretty smart. The 2.0 alone definitely has enough power to get out of its own way on the street. And it’s got an interior that doesn’t feel like a commuter penalty box. Truthfully the MS3 is good but if my 1.8L Civic is any indication I would bet a 2.0 with upgraded suspension and tires would be more than enough.

      • 0 avatar
        EAF

        That’s right, I forgot to add blown turbos, PCV issues and weak lower engine mounts.

        I do however think MS3’s are still less problematic than the WRX or GTI.

        You will all flame me, but the most reliable and ro-bust turbo 4-banger to date is Mitsu’s 4G63. (Yes, that’s even after factoring in 7-bolt crankwalk).

  • avatar
    redav

    Never believe any rumor coming out of Australia.

  • avatar
    DrGastro997

    MS3 for us here??? Yes please!


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • geozinger: Fnck. I’ve lost lots of cars to the tinworm. I had a 97 Cavalier that I ran up to 265000 miles. The...
  • jh26036: Who is paying $55k for a CTR? Plenty are going before the $35k sticker.
  • JimZ: Since that’s not going to happen, why should I waste any time on your nonsensical what-if?
  • JimZ: Funny, Jim Hackett said basically the same thing yesterday and people were flinging crap left and right.
  • JimZ: That and the fact that they could run on gasoline, which was considered a useless waste product back in the...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributors

  • Timothy Cain, Canada
  • Matthew Guy, Canada
  • Ronnie Schreiber, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States
  • Mark Baruth, United States
  • Moderators

  • Adam Tonge, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States