Why a Joint Toyota-Mazda RWD Platform and Inline-6 Engine Makes Sense

why a joint toyota mazda rwd platform and inline 6 engine makes sense

A Mazda inline-six cylinder engine developed for a rear wheel-drive-based platform has been industry knowledge since news broke in May. But new reporting from Best Car in Japan confirm that Toyota/Lexus and Mazda will share that rear wheel-drive platform and inline-six engine.

Mazda’s inline-six engine development will include Skyativ-X (gasoline) and Skyativ-D (diesel) variants, mounted longitudinally. Additionally, a 48-volt mild-hybrid electrical system and all-wheel-drive variants will be offered. The question is what this has to do with Toyota.

First, this would not be a new relationship between the two Japanese carmakers. They are teaming up on a plant to build Corollas and a new crossover in Huntsville, AL. Whether that new model is exclusively a Mazda, or a shared platform with Toyota, remains to be seen. There are currently no decisive indications that it will be a shared platform, but it makes one wonder.

Toyota has figured out that low-volume models are not worth the investment in design, development, and manufacturing without teaming up with another manufacturer. As evidence, we’ve seen the joint Subaru development for the 86, the BMW partnership for the “Zupra” (can I trademark that?), and — let’s not forget — the Mazda 2 and Scion/Toyota iA. Mazda also teamed up with Fiat to turn the MX-5 in to the 124 Spyder and Abarth.

The effort to duplicate other manufacturer’s vehicles into Toyotas is minor compared to the entire product development budget. The economies of scale can be shown to enable the vehicles to be built profitably, but only when sharing development costs. Selling two versions under two brand names doesn’t hurt when the second brand is one as respected as Toyota.

Thus far, Toyota has leveraged other manufacturer’s platforms and powertrains, massaging them to fit in their showrooms. This allows them to focus on their strengths and leverage the more unique platforms from others. Development costs are highest when trying to do something new or different. Essentially, if it doesn’t fit into Toyota’s New Global Architecture, they’ll seek a partnership to fill that niche.

It works for both parties, too. Exchange of technology is often part of the deal, which can help the other manufacturers improve their strength in other market segments. They’re also selling more of the cars that they are manufacturing, helping to pay off those development costs and keep their plants profitable.

Toyota may be continuing the trend and, rather than designing their own next-generation RWD platform, they’ve opted to team up with another partner to distribute the development costs. The new inline-six engine might just be part of the deal. They didn’t change the engines in the iA, 86, or Z4/Supra, as that would negate the cost sharing benefits.

The new platform could either be a Mazda6 replacement, or supplemental premium sedan. According to Best Car, the Lexus IS is slated to be moved to a TNGA platform, with V6 power. While the shared platform could replace the Lexus IS for the 2022 Model Year, it seems counter-intuitive that the car would be developed and replaced only two years later. They speculate a new coupe that sits between the RC and LC, though that also seems like a narrow gap to shoot for.

What would make sense to me is if the IS platform was stretched for another couple years by a minor model change. Then, the new platform would underpin the next IS sedan and RC coupe. If they are to actually hit the 2022 MY deployment, then early prototypes should be running around as soon as next year.

[Images: Mazda]

Comments
Join the conversation
3 of 55 comments
  • Scott25 Scott25 on Jun 23, 2019

    The most obvious use of this platform is to fill the gaping hole in the Lexus lineup between the RX and GX (the RX L Is just a half-assed stopgap). A RWD CX-9 that moves slightly upmarket could be a hit as well with non-badge snobs who just want something that feels classy and quality, but it’ll hardly make such an impact on sales to make the investment worth it.

  • Sportyaccordy Sportyaccordy on Jun 24, 2019

    Sergio was right. There are over a dozen 2.0T 4 poppers for sale. Why? The industry is so commoditized I don't know that much would be lost if they all moved to common powerplants. They are already doing this with transmissions (ZF8, ZF9, Aisin 8), AWD systems (Haldex) and other components I'm sure. And they can add their own flavor after the fact (Supra vs Z4). Personally, I hope to grab and hold on to something more unique soon. But the logical direction of the industry is obvious.

    • Anthony Magagnoli Anthony Magagnoli on Jun 24, 2019

      This is my favorite example, as well. Why are there not just a couple global 1.998 cc 4-cylinders that are then sold to the manufacturers to throw their custom tuning on? Its like they each have to invent their own wheel. And, generally, I don't want any of them.

  • 2ACL What tickles me is that the Bronco looks the business with virtually none of the black plastic cladding many less capable crossovers use.
  • IBx1 For all this time with the hellcat engine, everything they made was pathetic automatic scum save for the Challenger. A manual Durango, Grand Cherokee, Charger, 300C, et al would have been the real last gasp for driving enthusiasts. As it is, the party is long over.
  • MaintenanceCosts The sweet spot of this generation isn't made anymore: the SRT 392. The Scat Pack is more or less filling the same space but it lacks a lot of the goodies, including SRT suspension, brakes, and seats. The Hellcat is too much and isn't available with a manual anymore.
  • Arthur Dailey I am normally a fan of Exner's designs but by this time the front end on the Stutz like most of the rest of the vehicle is a laughable monstrosity of gauche. The interior finishes suit the rest of the vehicle. Corey please put this series out of its misery. This is one vehicle manufacturer best left on the scrap heap of history.
  • Art Vandelay I always thought what my Challenger really needed was a convertible top to make it heavier and make visability worse.
Next