Did Mazda give the CX-60 the wrong engine?
Mazda is perhaps the most distinctive of all the Japanese automotive brands. Smaller than the rest, but agile and with a sense of agency regarding design and engineering, the Hiroshima-based brand often gets its products spot on, but there are exceptions.
Since Mazda’s relaunch in South Africa in 2014 (when it left the custodianship of the Ford Motor Company of Southern Africa and became an independent entity in our market), it has thrived.
Mazda’s crossovers and SUVs have distinctive designs; their cabins are a touch dark, but excellently made; plus, there is a defined coherence between Mazda’s product planning and the engineering that supports it. Apart from the new BT-50, no Mazda model feels like a platform twin of anything else.
Then there are the engines. Mazda is renowned for powertrain innovation – its rotaries remain some of the most characterful engines ever utilised in road-going vehicles. And although Mazda took a while to adopt diesel tech, its compression-ignition engines have proved excellent. But the brand’s powertrain strategy contains a big paradox – one that has become obvious again with the engine in the local CX-60.
Near-perfect proportions – but what about performance?
Built on a focused rear-wheel-drive architecture, the new Mazda CX-60 represents an impressive feat of luxury car design. Then again, Mazda is one of the very few car brands that don’t have a single inelegant or unattractive passenger-car model in their product portfolio. And CX-60 is at no risk of altering that status. It blends tidy proportions with restrained detailing and looks purposeful without being pastiche.
Japanese, Korean and Chinese brands might be powerful in the compact to mid-sized crossover market, but European brands dominate when you edge up towards the large luxury crossover/SUV segment. Therefore, the new CX-60 is a bold enterprise, especially in the South African market. Price and specification are always a challenge for product planners. Still, Mazda’s people have possibly made a very curious choice with CX-60: equipping it with a very mild engine, even if at a reasonable price.
See also: Mazda CX-60 (2023) Price & Specs
South African buyers will pay just over R700k for the entry-level CX-60 derivative and the model will be powered exclusively by a naturally-aspirated 2.5-litre 4-cylinder petrol engine. And this is the paradox of Mazda powertrain design: there is a legacy of reticence towards (non-rotary) turbocharged engines.
And it’s not a case of Mazda trying to be cheap or having lazy engineers who don’t want to integrate turbochargers…
The turbo engines we can’t have
Mazda’s argument has always been that turbocharged engines struggle to equal the volumetric efficiency of an atmospheric engine in real-world driving conditions. And anyone who has driven a small-capacity turbopetrol engine will agree: there’s no way of getting close to achieving the manufacturer’s claimed fuel consumption figure (which explains why the New European Driving Cycle fuel-efficiency testing protocol has been replaced by the Worldwide Harmonised Light Vehicle Test Procedure).
To Mazda engine designers, a turbocharger’s added complexity and cost don’t compensate for the consequence of heavier fuel consumption. The brand asserts that fuel consumption transparency is a higher principle than peak power and it has steadfastly stuck to its guns. Why? Because that’s what an atmospheric engine delivers: consistent fuel consumption, regardless of driving style.
Mazda’s engineering honesty about turbocharged engines and fuel consumption is admirable, but that doesn’t mean they don’t build some terrific forced-induction engines. As more markets have demanded turbocharged engines (turbopetrol ones, to be specific), Mazda has duly delivered.
The Hiroshima-based brand has utilised a 2.5-litre 4-cylinder turbopetrol in its Mazda3 (in the ‘States), as well as the Mazda6 and crossover models (including the CX-5) in overseas markets. It also has a new family of inline 6-cylinder turbocharged engines, which pair ideally with luxury crossovers and SUVs.
However, the very best of these new-generation turbocharged engines from Mazda remains unattainable for South African followers of the brand. At least, for now.
Is 258 Nm enough from a CX-60 engine?
Mazda’s 3.3-litre inline-6 engines won’t be available in the CX-60 when Mazda Southern Africa launches the eagerly awaited model in South Africa next month. What will be available is the 2.5-litre naturally aspirated 4-cylinder petrol engine, without its plug-in hybridisation and battery power.
The non-turbocharged 2.5-litre petrol is an engine of charming simplicity, reliability, consistent fuel consumption… and modest outputs. The CX-60’s 2.5-litre engine is rated for 143 kW and 258 Nm, but the latter number is underwhelming – especially for a vehicle that weighs just shy of 2 000 kg. Mazda’s plug-in hybrid version of the CX-60, which uses the same petrol engine, is good for 241 kW/500 Nm.
Altitude-related power dropoff will affect most potential CX-60 customers (in Gauteng, the loss is about 16.8%) and, because the Mazda’s a roomy 5-seater luxury vehicle, it’s reasonable to expect it will often be fully loaded. The heavier a car is, the more apparent its power-to-weight shortcomings become.
History repeats with the 2.5-litre engine
Mazda has done this before: deliver a distinctive design statement crossover, with excellent trim and equipment levels – but an underwhelming engine – to South African buyers. Remember the CX-7?
In the late 2000s and early 2010s, the CX-7 was one of the most distinctive Japanese large crossovers you could buy in South Africa (the unfortunately styled Subaru Tribeca notwithstanding). But it was powered by a 2.5-litre atmospheric engine, despite a 2.3-litre turbopetrol and 2.2-litre turbodiesel powerplants being available in other markets. With the CX-60, it appears much of the same again.
Engine power matters with large crossovers and luxury SUVs. These vehicles are regularly used on longer journeys, travelling to weekend getaway venues. Or routing from Gauteng to the coast. South African highways and B-roads are competitive driving environments, where overtaking performance is not a question of vanity, but safety.
It is a pity that the Mazda CX-60 is not being marketed with its full spectrum of available engines, capable of delivering potent overtaking acceleration for local customers.
What determined Mazda’s engine choice for the CX-60?
But why is Mazda only offering its least powerful engine for the SA-market specification CX-60s? A contributing issue could be fuel quality. South African petrol and diesel quality can be wildly inconsistent throughout the nation: some of it is excellent, but most of it isn’t.
SkyActiv fuel-purity requirements from Mazda’s headquarters in Japan could have scuppered the ambition to add those 3.3-litre inline-6 engines to the CX-60’s South African model range. But fuel quality is always a weak variable for product planning justifications in South Africa… because German brands market similar-capacity engines locally, with arguably similar sophistication. Surely Mazda’s 3.3-litre turbodiesels aren’t more fuel sensitive than a BMW X5 xDrive30d’s 3.0-litre inline-6, for example?
The more truthful reason for the CX-60’s underwhelming powertrain specification is price alignment. The pair of CX-60 derivatives are positioned at R739 800 for the rear-wheel-drive 2.5 Dynamic and R844 500 for an all-wheel-drive 2.5 Individual. Those prices are very competitive.
There’s a probability that Mazda’s wonderful 3.3-litre 6-cylinder engines would have edged pricing beyond R900 000, and too close to R1-million. And that would have positioned CX-60 against rivals such as Hyundai’s Sante Fe and Kia’s Sorento, which are powered by more torquey turbodiesel engines.
Related content:
Is Isuzu’s 6-cylinder turbodiesel hiding in plain view?
Why you don’t need a double-cab 4×4 with low range
What bakkie might Stellantis build in SA?
Green hydrogen could save South Africa’s car industry
