When it was rumors and innuendo, when it was delayed, when it was confirmed but unattainable, when it was launched, when it was actually under the hood of a vehicle we could drive on this continent, we’ve covered the story of Mazda’s diesel engine.
It’s a 2.2-liter turbocharged four-cylinder with a measly 168 horsepower but a stirring 290 lb-ft of stump-pulling torque. It resides not in the Mazda 6 for which it was originally intended but rather the highly acclaimed Mazda CX-5. It’s available only in the CX-5’s top-spec Signature trim, and only then at a $4,110 premium that drives the price up to an eye-watering $41,000. Its fuel economy gains are so minimal that the economic case for the CX-5 diesel is nonexistent.
And after one model year and just enough demand to help (in some small way) propel the CX-5 to yet another record sales year, the Mazda CX-5 diesel is missing. Truant. Unaccounted for.
Moreover, there’s no timetable for the CX-5 diesel’s return.
Furthermore, to add more layers to the engine’s bizarre history, its return may well coincide with the appearance of an all-wheel-drive, diesel-powered Mazda 6 (the market for which must surely measure in the single-digit dozens.)
It doesn’t take a deep dive to discover that Mazda’s gone strangely silent on the subject of the diesel CX-5 in model year 2020. On both sides of the 49th parallel, on both the Build and Price sections of MazdaUSA.com and Mazda.ca, the 2.2-liter is no longer displayed as an option on the Signature trim. Likewise, turn to specifications pages and the 2020 CX-5 is listed with two engine configurations: the standard 187-horsepower 2.5-liter four-cylinder and the 250-horsepower turbocharged variant. (Don’t even get us started on Skyactiv-X timelines.)
Mind you, the Skyactiv-D powerplant earns its own independent vehicle listing as a 2019 model. Cars.com lists 22 such vehicles in stock in the United States. But in the world of the 2020 CX-5, which would be just the second model year in history for the Skyactiv-D, no such vehicle exists. There’s no Coming Soon; no Sign Up For Updates; no discussion of combined fuel economy up to 29 mpg.
Although we’re now deep into the first quarter of 2020, Mazda’s brand communications senior manager Drew Cary says there is “no update yet on the diesel for the 20MY,” but Mazda did clarify that the brand “recently received certification for both CX-5 and Mazda6.” In further discussion, Cary mentioned that, “Mazda hasn’t confirmed if they will be sold in the 2020 model year.” 
Despite the apparent lack of certainty surrounding the CX-5 Skyactiv-D, Mazda confirmed that if the company does bring the diesel back to market, and if that process includes introducing it in the 6 midsize sedan, it would be the first iteration of the current-generation 6 to include all-wheel drive.
But will the small, independent, Japanese automaker even bother? Even without a diesel, the CX-5 is Mazda’s crown jewel. Through the first one-sixth of 2020, 53 percent of Mazda’s U.S. sales volume has been produced by the CX-5, sales of which jumped 14 percent, year-over-year. On the flip side, investing in the Mazda 6 midsize sedan may well be a fool’s errand. Only 21,524 6s were sold in the U.S. last year, the fourth consecutive year of decline for the 6 and a 63-percent drop since 2015.
Initial intentions to generate 10 percent of CX-5 sales volume fell by the wayside when the diesel’s official fuel economy ratings made it only slightly more efficient than the 2.5-liter CX-5, when it didn’t offer as much torque as the 2.5-liter turbo, and when Mazda paired the engine exclusively with the loftiest trim level. Incentives soared as demand failed to materialize.
If given another shot in 2020, is there any reason to believe the outcome will be different this year than it was last year? And given the fact that Mazda sales are finally on a positive trajectory, climbing 18 percent in 2020 so far thanks in large part to the addition of the new CX-30, might Mazda be wise to just forget its diesel losses?
[Images: Mazda]
Timothy Cain is a contributing analyst at The Truth About Cars and Driving.ca and the founder and former editor of GoodCarBadCar.net. Follow on Twitter @timcaincars and Instagram.
“It’s a 2.2-liter turbocharged four-cylinder with a measly 168 horsepower but a stirring 290 lb-ft of stump-pulling torque.”
a 2.2 liter GTDI engine would have as much or more torque, and a hell of a lot more horsepower. “Torque” is just an excuse for diesels being bad at hp.
Diesels might be bad at HP, but they are very good at torque, which is why people buy them. Who knew?
if you’re going to deliberately ignore half of what I said, please don’t bother replying. Parroting the same nonsense over and over is a waste of everyone’s time.
How about a polite conversation, listening to other’s opinions?
this isn’t a matter of “opinion.” it’s an is/is not.
I’m tired of people saying factually incorrect things then weaseling out and hiding behind “it’s just my opinion.”
Modern small displament turbos are not your strange uncle’s Saab turbo from the 80’s. The flat torque curves and low end grunt they generate do negate much of the traditional advantage diesels enjoyed.
There is a reason Ford sells gobs of them in pickups and even Toyota is getting on board.
Diesels are not good at torque, they are bad at revving.
As Jim states, a gas turbo engine of the same size could easily produce the same peak torque.
Mazda gas engine also don’t rev for sh*t. However, there is quite literally no torque advantage with the Mazda diesel:
2.2TD: 168hp@4000, 290ft-lbs@2000
2.5T(on 91): 250hp@5000, 310ft-lbs@2000
2.5T(on 87): 227@5000, 310ft-lbs@2000
Jim is right.As an example 2.0 Ecoboost on my Fusion is tuned to 245hp/270pf.
“excuse”
Huh. Interesting yet confusing choice of words. You do understand that torque is what makes the car move right, not HP? I cant say ive ever heard of an engine builder/designer (OEM’s included) who builds an engine primarily for HP with torque as an afterthought.
“I cant say ive ever heard of an engine builder/designer (OEM’s included) who builds an engine primarily for HP with torque as an afterthought.”
How about Honda’s high-revving S2000 engine? ‘Great hp at sky-high revs, but puny torque.
For that matter, Mazda’s 9wn rotary engines. Fine power, not much torque.
My Toyota engine 4AFE wasn’t able to move light car with MT until I revved it up to 2000 rpm.
Typically diesel HP to torque is a 1:2 ratio or 100 lbs/ft for every 50 horses. Diesels also have flatter torque curves than gas turbos.
No the typical modern gas turbo has a wide flat torque curve.
Typical HP to torque ratio is exactly RPM/5252 for any reciprocating engine, any fuel, any speed.
Why this is so poorly understood I cannot fathom.
Any engineer designing for high RPM performance is designing for HP by definition.
Comparing peak values for torque and HP without the context of the curve is meaningless.
The torque curves of the US-spec Mazda diesel and Mazda 2.5T are almost the exact same shape. If there is any definitive “shape advantage” to the Skyactiv-D then I don’t see it.
Very, very few current turbo gasoline engines lack a “flat” torque curve.
that’s because it’s the turbo which provides that torque curve, not the fuel. The Cummins X12 is just as torquey whether it’s a diesel or spark-ignition natural gas.
Speaking of “factually incorrect things”…
Cummins ISX12N – 400 hp / 1450 lb-ft torque
Cummins ISX12 – 425 hp / 1650 lb-ft torque
Cummins X12 – 500 hp / 1700 lb-ft torque
https://www.cummins.com/engines/isx12n-2018
https://www.cummins.com/engines/isx12-2017
https://www.cummins.com/engines/x12-2018?v=1556&application=Heavy-Duty%20Truck
CNG variants of diesel Class 8 engines are never well-engineered, and always have drivability issues. They’re pretty much pure compliance plays. Better to compare diesels and gassers in lighter classes.
Jon, all you’ve proven is that they offer more calibration levels for the diesel instead of one for the CNG version. So, good job I guess?
“Torque” is just an excuse for diesels being bad at hp.”
Hardly. Torque and horspower are the same thing but related by rpm. Comes right there out of the formula. So if a diesel makes little horsepower at the top end, it’s merely because it cannot rev as high as the gas engine and torque production has fallen off a cliff at higher rpm.
I have a Mazda 2.5t turbo, and it’s seen 6000 rpm on a couple of occasions in second gear before shifting up, and it sure doesn’t act like that doofus VW Budack engine. Now there’s a non-revving gasoline engine for you.
The Mazda may put out peak horse;power at only 5K rpm but it doesn’t feel “throttled” at all. It happily revs to 5K without feeling bound-up. But then I’ve only ever fed it premium gas.
The article title is misleading. The author had complained in the past that the diesel was late (correct). They did bring it to market, as they committed to do. They have obviously decided not to have it in the 2020 year. AWOL would imply that it never made it to the US. It did.
Should they have ever tried, probably not, but I don`t understand why Tim harps on this over the years.
The thing I don`t understand is why they cannot update their website – the 2020 MX-5 is out in the market but their site doesn`t list it (as of last week).
They should have had the 2020’s out in Q4 2019, not coming to the end of Q1 2020.
No AWOL would imply that it is missing after it had been present. I’m not AWOL from the army because I was never in the army. The diesel was available in the US and it is now AWOL since it didn’t return.
IIRC just 1000 MY2019 CX-5 diesels were allocated for US. Autotrader lists 112 new ones for sale nationwide, some for as low as $9K below MSRP. I wouldn’t be surprised if the Mazda6 diesel comes over in the same or lesser quantity, and then they’re done.
Mazda probably thought it wasn’t that much more to certify their 2.2 diesel for US sale, but didn’t count on it being so difficult. So several years later, sunk costs, and some pride I would imagine, here we are.
IIRC it took so long because they were initially trying like hell to do it without SCR, and found it to be impossible. Then (instead of cheating like VW) they had to design and implement the SCR system.
My local dealer had 2 or 3 diesel Signatures back in December 2019. They were about $41,000 so not many takers. They also looked like they were sitting there for a while. I just looked at their website now and they are gone.
Mazda’s NA operations are in serious crisis. These are not the actions taken by a well-managed manufacturer.
–I am not sure which manufacturer’s days in North American are most imperiled–Mazda’s or Nissan’s.
Nissan and perhaps Infiniti will continue long after the departure of Mazda from the USDM, and event that will occur sooner rather than later.
Crisis? Increased sales, product coming at the right time in the market (CX30). Sure they need to work on marketing but the product is cohesive and largely sound (3 hatch maybe excluded).
CX30 is replacing a very new CX3…which is a flop
Refreshed 3 sales tanked
6 sales in nosedive decline
CX9 sales volume are roughly 20% of its competitors
No truck
Diesel project failure
CX5 sales a fraction of other Asian competitors
New SkyActive sparkless engine MIA.
I am a Mazda fan boy- I own two right now. This does not blind me to fact that MazdaUSA is hurting.
Cx3 continues for a few more years and sales have held up – better than the Mazda 2 it replaced, and at a higher ATP.
CX5 sales continue to increase and yes their sales are lower than Toyotas, as are most brands.
Mazdas US sales are stable and consistent over many years. They are profitable, so I don’t see the issue.
Mazda sales have been somewhat stable and consistent over the last 5 years – a fairly stable and consistent drop of some 13%+ for the brand over that period from 319k+ to 279k.
Diesels.
Why bother. The EPA has choked them down so much that the MPG is not much better than GAS. Add in the price premium for Diesel over gas at the pump – the advantage is greatly reduced. Then add in a Diesel option is a $1500-4000 upcharge.
The business case for Diesel is confirmed. It is a NO GO FROM THE START. Add in the stink and the noise and NVH, forget em!
It may make sense for PIG up trucks. You need/want the power and MPG from a diesel when you are hauling. But you use the PIG UP for pulling more than 3000# what? 10 % of the time. 3000 miles per year. (Im not talking about real trades men tho.)
Mazda gonna Mazda.
I can’t believe no one in the organization didn’t have the wherewithal to kill this project years ago. Hard to imagine a bigger waste of money than whatever premium they’re asking for this powertrain “upgrade”
“Hard to imagine a bigger waste of money than whatever premium they’re asking for this powertrain “upgrade””
I can think of one – a rotary.
Touche lol
The money for the diesel development would have been better spent on a PHEV option offered at a reasonable MSRP.
But more important, Mazda needs to fix their marketing. You can’t sell to people that don’t know you exist.
“Furthermore, to add more layers to the engine’s bizarre history, its return may well coincide with the appearance of an all-wheel-drive, diesel-powered Mazda 6 (the market for which must surely measure in the single-digit dozens.)”
Will place a gentleman’s wager that you’re wrong. I know enough people (myself included), to get the market to this into double-digits. And those who loved the Mazdaspeed products would be interested in this as they are now at that age group for this product.
Having waited anxiously for over 3 years to see the rumored diesel Mazda6 wagon appear on our shores I had a few used cars to buy time. Ultimately leasing a Mazda6 GT with the 2.5 turbo 1.5 years ago, but I would turn it in early and purchase an AWD Mazda6 wagon of 2.5 turbo or diesel turbo variety (the diesel being preferred).
Direct injection gasoline motors are great while young and fresh but have expensive issues as they age.
“Direct injection gasoline motors are great while young and fresh but have expensive issues as they age.”
As opposed to SCR-equipped diesels that took 5 years for the OEM to re-tune for certification?
I expect you will be very mistaken if you think a Mazda6 TD will prove more reliable than the Mazda6 2.5T.
It s not always the “diesel” that will give you headaches, but the emissions, and those parts aren’t cheap. Plus they’re guaranteed to be “dealer-only”, and only while they feel like providing them.
Don’t expect the aftermarket to be scrambling to help you, engine or emissions.
Yup. When my DPF split, the VW dealer was the only place to go, and they only paid half. Going from the TDi to a 1.4 liter gas turbo, VW’s latest, shows that diesel isn’t worth the effort. The gas engine is designed for a torque bump down low and doesn’t BOOOOSSST like a classic turbo. I get 34 mpg on regular, so compared to 39 mpg diesel, the gas car is cheaper to run. The diesel did pull slightly better, but the only people who should own a diesel particulate filter are truckers. It is almost like they shot for the diesel power curve when they calibrated the 1.4 turbo. I wonder what it would do chipped….
You can just say “diesel” and we’ll do the “turbocharged” math.
But here is interesting data for mazda
—————- Jan —– Feb
Mazda 3 ——–2,496 — 3,759 <—-
Mazda 6 ——–1,755 — 1,730
Mazda CX-3 —–1,146 — 947
Mazda CX-30 —–2,368 — 3,754 <—-
Mazda CX-5 ——12,908 — 14,462
Subaru CrossTrek — 8,131 — 8,287
Subaru Impreza — 3,978 — 3,916
Subaru models, as expected, have higher volumes than equivalent models from Mazda.
You said this as if it was always like that. Its expected! I remember otherwise. And not too long ago
If they never sold 1 in the USA this is good news.
Diesel is great for towing.
Unibody CUV…not so great for towing.
Gas 1.95 and plunging.
Note to Mazda: sell the sizzle not the diesel
So the diesel is still AWOL…and I still don’t care.
The question isn’t why it’s gone now but why they brought it in the first place. Diesel in passenger cars is an idea whose time has come and gone.
Not surprised. The business case for passenger car diesels in the US is tough. High regulatory costs are hard to absorb at the lower end of the market. The higher up front cost is hard to overcome when the 30% fuel economy benefit is offset by 25% per unit higher fuel costs.
Mazda has been always about ICE, not hybrids or electric; Toyota is helping with that effort. Mazda builds this diesel along with 1.5 and 1.8 variants to market across the globe. I would guess they sent 1000 diesel equipped units of their most popular model to take the temperature of US buyers and that will determine whether they send in any additional models.
A diesel Mazda is not going to happen in the US. Announcing a diesel in the US was less about it happening and more about gauging how many would actually be interested enough in buying a diesel Mazda. Also the regulations against diesels in the EU Mazda might have believed at some point similar regulations would be enacted in the US. Mazda might have decided that a diesel would not sell well enough in the US to be worth getting it certified and the period of time that they would be allowed to sell a diesel. The VW dieselgate would be enough to discourage any auto company from offering a diesel especially in the US.
Imagine having to support the few diesels they actually did sell.
Then imagine the awful trade-in poison they will be to their owners and the used-car dealers who take them off their hands.
I wish modern Mazduh was AWOL – over priced vehicles with fake luxury. A brand truly in search of a real reputation – they put on aires for no reason.
And as usual, you’re the only genius here. What pile of crap do you navigate over the highways and byways, so that I know what to avoid?