[Blue Mazda]

moderator edit, context from another thread (split)

Yeah but it was a V6 S/C Mazda6 with more HP and TQ than this one. I would rather have that engine . I forgot if it had AWD.

All that weight on the front end will just make it very nose heavy. Plus you don't need displacement when you have boost. Just take the lighter 4-cyl and run a little more boost, all while keeping front end weight in check. Plus the 4-cyl is a Mazda engine and not a Ford Duratec.

True , especially the last sentence .

Oh boy, here come the honda boys beating on the "Ford Duratec Engine" in my Mazda 6...... There are absolutly NO issues with the Duratec BLOCK that is in a Mazda 6. Do you realize that Porsche designed it? Are you aware that there are people out there pushing 350+ HP out of them and having no issues at all with them? Are you aware that the reliability of the Ford cars with them nowadays is on par with your Hondas and Nissans? The problems with those engines was what Ford was putting around them, not the engines themselvles and those issues are circa 1990. Do a little research before you go bashing something you don't know a thing about........

 

[SteVTEC]

Oh boy, here come the honda boys beating on the "Ford Duratec Engine" in my Mazda 6......

:rolleye2:

There are absolutly NO issues with the Duratec BLOCK that is in a Mazda 6.

"Anymore" and "you hope". The early Duratec engines suffered from crank bearing issues IIRC which required rebuilding but they've been reliable "since 1999".

Do you realize that Porsche designed it?

Really? How bout some proof. Got any? Talk is real cheap. SAE white paper perhaps? Some official documentation from Ford or reputable automotive media source?

Here's all I found on that.

http://www.internetautoguide.com/reviews/2000/2000_Ford_Contour.html

Employing four valves per cylinder and double overhead cams, the Duratec V6 was engineered with the help of Porsche Engineering and Cosworth, which specializes in Ford racing engines.

"with the help of" Good for Ford. That doesn't mean that Porsche designed the whole thing, and there's a ton more to engines than just the block.

Are you aware that there are people out there pushing 350+ HP out of them and having no issues at all with them?

So what? There are guys here pushing in excess of 400HP at the crank out of J30A1's, and I know of some Maxima and Camry guys that have well over 400 chp and probably closer to 500 chp with "no issues" on the engines either. Nice work on their part, but not ground breaking or "new". Lets see them clear 500 wtq on all stock internals (Nissan VQ head gaskets blow just north of there) and then you'll really impress me.

Are you aware that the reliability of the Ford cars with them nowadays is on par with your Hondas and Nissans?

:bs:

Not according to Consumer Reports and JD Power, the two most well known and respected names in automotive data mining in the US. Lets see you back this up with some proof. Yeah the Mazda6 is "on par with" but you generalized and said "Ford cars" and that just isn't true. The Ford Taurus and Ford Escape haven't been winning any quality and reliability awards, have they?

The problems with those engines was what Ford was putting around them, not the engines themselvles and those issues are circa 1990.

Well you can't just drive an engine.

Do a little research before you go bashing something you don't know a thing about........

oh really

I have my reasons for not being all that enthusiastic about the Duratec as installed in the 6s and they're perfectly legit reasons. And it has nothing to do with reliability or modding potential or how much HP it can old stock or any of that.

 

[Blue Mazda]

Hmm.....curious, you do realize that the upper end of the engine is all Mazda, not Ford, don't you Steve? Duratec "installed" in my 6? Duratec family, but they didn't just rip it out of a Taurus and plop it in. And all the proof I need is the fact that so far the 6 has been as reliable or better than the Accord has been per consumer reports. How is that a "you hope". The "Proof" you provide is for the Duratec 25, not the Duratec 30. Last time I checked my car was a 3.0ltr, which isn't the same engine as I have in my 6 now is it. If you check out consumer reports, the Taurus and Sable finished as about average for reliability, the Mazda 6 finished fourth.....ahead of Altima and Accord. Matter of fact, per Consumer Reports, the Mazda MPV, which also has a Duratec 30 engine in it as a direct drop in from Ford finished 2nd, just below Toyota and ahead of Honda and Nissan for reliability. If 6 club was up I could get you the link to the Duratec 3.0 pushing more like 400 hp with stock internals, but it has been down for a while. And, I know you can't just drive an engine, but we were TALKING about an engine......did you forget? Would seem like the Duratec, which has been fine in terms of mechanical strenght since the 90's isn't the reason why Ford's cars are only average in reliability. I ment to say that the mechanical quailty or engine quality of Ford is not below par compared to Honda and Nissan. I don't think I see many Honda's and Nissans winning any quality awards these days either Steve. The 6 has been BETTER THAN many of them in quality AND it has a Duratec family engine. And I would immangine that the prototype of the 6 which was supercharged had, oh I don't know, a Mazda 6 V6 engine with a supercharger on it? I wouldn't think they would have taken one from a Taurus just for the hell of it. Really wouldn't think it would matter though. I know the drill, someone disagreed with you, now you can take your pot shot back, not back anything up and close up this thread....... Bottom line is it was a stupid comment and if you want to "stand behind it", hey, that is your perogative :rolleye2:

 

[Blue Mazda]

And also Steve, if you specifically go onto Consumer Reports.org and look up the Taurus, Escape, Tribute, MPV, 6, Sable or whatever, they have all been given ratings of Very Good or Excellent for engine and transmission for the last 3-4 years (not the 6 of course, it didn't exist). Matter of fact, all of these vehicles were given the "reccomended" mark by Consumer Reports. For current models of these vehicles, JD Power only has intitial quality ratings, and does not specifically break out the engine as a rated component. So flaws in mechanical quality could be anything. I wouldn't think that would be admissable to a discussion about the dependability and durability of an engine since it is not specifically identified like on Consumer Reports. Just admit it was a stupid statement or stand by it, what ever.........I think it was a stupid statement......

 

[SteVTEC]

Yeah I knew it had Mazda DOHC heads and Mazda VVT, that's really old news. :laugh:

http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=39&article_id=1863&page_number=1

As far as reliability, 2000-2001 Accord transmissions are still rated "better than average" in Consumer Reports, yet Honda is already on to warranty extensions. The fact is, issues do exist the trannys are FAR from bulletproof. Otherwise the failure rate would not be much if anything above zero percent. So if you say that Duratec engines are getting "very good or excellent", the "very good" part doesn't exactly inspire confidence. A major drivetrain component ought to be getting straight excellents on high quality import cars known for reliability, and if it isn't it's definitely worth looking into before considering one. What are the issues with the Duratec then? Do you even know?

Here's why I don't like the FORD Duratec 3.0 as installed in the Mazda 6s.

Toyota 1MZ-FE 3.0L V6 w/VVT-i: 222 lb-ft
Honda J30A4 3.0L V6 w/VTEC: 212-222 lb-ft
Nissan VQ30DE-K no VVT 3.0L V6: 217 lb-ft
BMW 3.0L Inline-6 w/Double VANOS: 214 lb-ft (under-rated, more like 224 probably)
Toyota 1MZ-FE 3.0L V6, no VVT: 209-214 lb-ft
Nissan VQ30DE 3.0L V6, no VVT: 205 lb-ft
Honda J30A1 3.0L V6 w/VTEC-E: 195 lb-ft
Ford Duratec 3.0L V6 w/Mazda S-VT: 192 lb-ft :gotme:

The Duratec 3.0 with higher compression, and torque optimizing S-VT has less peak torque than a Honda J30A1 with VTEC-E (for economy) and a lower 9.4:1 CR.

Why is the Duratec with its DOHC head, S-VT variable valve timing, and 10.0:1 compression down by 20 or even 30 lb-ft of torque vs the competition at the same displacement? Is that not a bit sub-par? Did Ford not concentrate enough on internal friction reduction? Perhaps. Did they not pay enough attention to internal weight reduction and lowering reciprocating mass? Perhaps. Is their engine design not as volumetrically efficient as the competition? Perhaps. Are the cams real dinky? Perhaps. Are the ports and other induction/exhaust items not optimized well? Perhaps. Is the engine management and factory tuning non-optimal? Perhaps. Could it be a combination of many of the above? Quite likely. I also don't like that it has less low-end torque than my 10 year old Nissan 3.0L (dyno links below) with variable nothing. Ford is using tumbler valves in the intake manifold to meet emissions it looks like, which is a quick and dirty way to accomplish that but at the expense of torque apparently. Why not a true variable runner length or volume setup? I also don't like that it's not significantly quicker than the TSX despite having a 3.0L V6 vs a 2.4L I-4, and that the gearing in the TSX is such that it could actually pull on a 6s from a roll in various situations. Shall I post up a dyno and gearing analysis (which I have done) for you? I just need to make the screen captures and upload if so. Let me know.

Oh yeah, here's those dyno links:
Stock VQ30DE dyno: 170 wtq @ 2500 rpm
Stock Duratec 3.0 S-VT dyno: 155 wtq @ 2500 rpm

I *LOVE* the 6. Looks awesome, great handling, roomy and styling inside, but I just feel that the FORD V6 is sub-par and has a lot of wasted potential. In many ways it's similar to the old J30A1 engine in my Accord, and I didn't care for that engine at all with its lack of torque and crummy low-end. Wards called the J30A1 engine "sleepy". But the new J30A4 is now a Ward's 10 Best engine. And it's still a 3.0L engine just like the Ford. And it still has a 10.0:1 CR like the Ford. Why is the Ford so down on both torque and power? (note: cuz the Honda has VTEC is not the correct answer)

BTW, did DuratecPerformance from 6club or anybody come out with an aftermarket ECU solution for the 6 yet? You know the factory timing is set for 87 only and apparently won't advance further on premium fuel like Honda, Nissan, and Toyota engines all will. Hence, the need for an aftermarket ECU solution to tap into hidden potential which will cost you money that competing engines already tap into with the stock ECU. When they're done with the Duratec 3.0, have them stop over here about cracking the ECU for the J30A1 guys. Same issue, and tons of people with money that they're willing to spend.

Nissan, Honda, and Toyota's 3.0L's are all arguably better and more powerful, and all of them have made Ward's 10 Best engines list at one point or another. Where is the Ford? Ford could have done a much better job. It's the domestic philosophy. Get it to where it's "good enough" and then ship it. They generally don't go the extra mile like the Japanese and Germans do to get as much out of the engine as possible straight from the factory. That very philosophy is probably where a good chunk of that missing 20-30 lb-ft of torque is. It has all the high-tech goodies, so where's the torque? In terms of power output, it's about 5 years behind the rest of the market.

bleh...well so much for "Porsche engineering" which you have yet to provide proof of by the way. :blah: Yeah, I guess I don't know anything about Duratec engines either.

So I stand by my "stupid" comment, thank you very much.

 

[CaliAtenza]

How do u think the V6 engine can be improved?...i have the Injen intake, and while it provides plenty of zoom!, the lack of low end torque is still noticible...

 

[Plumaccordcoupe]

So I stand by my "stupid" comment, thank you very much.

So will I .

I know the Duratec in the Mazda 6s is about as good as the engine in my car (J30A1). But that isn't saying much since the J30A1 was lacking low end torque (compared to other 3.0L V6's) even back when it first came out in 1996 (used in the 1997 model year Acura 3.0 CL). How do I know the Duratec V6 in the Mazda 6s is that bad? Simple, I read the 1/4 times posted up for the auto 6s and saw that they were about the same as the 6th gen AV6. Why don't I like the Duratec V6 in the 6s? Because it has the almost the same performance (auto vs. auto) as an engine of the same liter size that was made over 5 years before the 6s was ever released.

It is not “bashing”, it is fact (most of which can be found in Stevtec’s posts) .

 

[brex]

moderator edit, context from another thread (split)

Oh boy, here come the honda boys beating on the "Ford Duratec Engine" in my Mazda 6......

Lol.. at Mazda section, Steve is being called a honda boy... :rofl2: how many names u got now steve? we should get Guinness world record to pay steve and v6p a visit..

 

[Blue Mazda]

Er......brex, if you read the thread, a guy named Plumaccord also made the same comment, and I am not sure, but based on the name.......I think he MIGHT......correct me if I am wrong........own........well........a Honda...........and be........correct me again if I am wrong........a boy............therefore being.........a HONDA-BOY......... :bonk:

 

[Teirs]

^^ stick to the main arguement boys

haha that new "WTF gun" smiley is funny.

 

[Blue Mazda]

That is a great analyzis of the strengths and weaknesses of the Duratec 30 SteVTEC, and I concur 1000% with your points, which I will get to in a second....... However, your initial stupid comment was inslulting the strength and warewithall of the Duratec 30 to handle a supercharger, not, why it only makes 192 lb/ft peak torque, not why it is a little light in the loafers at low RPM. In terms of the reliability ratings, for the last 3 years EVERY car that has the Duratec 30 in it has gotten a rating of Excellent for reliaiblity no matter what the name plate on the front of the car has said. MOST of them have gotten an exellent rating by consumer reports for at least the last 5 years. Go take a look at consumerreports.org for yourself. THAT my friend, is all the support I need for my claims that your FIRST opinion was an un-educated one. If you want to stand by THAT opinion, despite the facts, than that is your perogative.......

 

[brex]

Er......brex, if you read the thread, a guy named Plumaccord also made the same comment, and I am not sure, but based on the name.......I think he MIGHT......correct me if I am wrong........own........well........a Honda...........and be........correct me again if I am wrong........a boy............therefore being.........a HONDA-BOY......... :bonk:

hmm.. i did.. and i didn't see anyone calling him honda-boy except you.. :gotme:

mind you, i didn't meant any disrepect when saying that... it was just generally steve isn't being call a "honda-boy" anywhere else on the site.. especially on the honda section.. lol.. hence.. :rofl2:

i think its so tough being in steve's position, especially when he points out some flaw and problems with legit information backing it up.. he is still being bash every possible way.. name calling? that's nothing new..

 

[brex]

That is a great analyzis of the strengths and weaknesses of the Duratec 30 SteVTEC, and I concur 1000% with your points, which I will get to in a second....... However, your initial stupid comment was inslulting the strength and warewithall of the Duratec 30 to handle a supercharger, not, why it only makes 192 lb/ft peak torque, not why it is a little light in the loafers at low RPM.

hmm.. let's be fair here.. i don't think steve's original comment has anything about it handling a supercharger or reliability.. let's not change this fact so late in the game..

I have my reasons for not being all that enthusiastic about the Duratec as installed in the 6s and they're perfectly legit reasons. And it has nothing to do with reliability or modding potential or how much HP it can old stock or any of that.

you specifically didn't like him stating publically on his dislikes of duratec engin, steve later backs up with solid info... for the spirit of debate, can you tell me now that his reasons and information is not legit? full of BS or whatnot?

like you said.. you agree 1000% with what steve had said.. so why are you still saying his first comment was "un-educated" one? when he had already shown you so much analysis and fact.. and you agree to them all!?!? :boink:

not all things are created perfect.. there are bounds to be flaw here and there.. heck.. i love my honda but i also know what's wrong with it.. i will gladly accept the fact when someone like steve had take the time to present them to me..

 

[Blue Mazda]

Now, on the arguments about the weakness of the Duratec 30 vs other engines on the market today. I don't get where this arguement came from based on my original arguement, becasue no where in there did I say it was the best or the most techically advanced engine out there, weather it be in the 6s or another vehicle. The reason why this engine was used in the 6 as opposed to a new Mazda engine is a matter of money. Mazda does not have the R&D dollars that Honda does, and is a part of the Ford Motor Company umbrella. Mazda was given the Duratec 30 workings from Ford, and in a limited budget was asked to get what it needed out of that. Yes auto to auto, the 6s Auto performs only slightly better (about 1/4 to 1/2 second better) than the old Honda V6. But it was better than anything else that Mazda had on its drawing board to enable it to compete with the likes of Honda, Nissan, and Toyota. The reasons for the low torque number of the Duratec 30? Comes down to Bore and Stroke I believe. The Duratec 30 has a longer bore than stroke (89mm x 79.5mm) vs the Honda 3.0L which has an equal Bore and stroke (86mm x 86mm). If you know something about engines, this set up does not lend itself to being a torque monger. The Ford version of the Duratec 30 makes 200 HP and 200 lb/fto of torque, vs the Mazda tuned version which makes 220HP and 192 lb/ft of torque. Sure, Mazda lost a little torque, but gained 20peak HP with its set up. Why is this important? Let's face it guys, HP sells cars. Mazda knows this. Mazda needed this car to do well. Is there room for improvement? Well based on what we have seen over in Mazda land, Mazda "could" spend R&D dollars and make the same enhancements that Honda made for the 2003 version of its V6 engine if they wanted to boost performance. If I understand correctly, the new Accord V6 makes more power than the old one due to a new intake manifold, air intake and exhaust set up as well as enhancements to the VTEC system. Well, us 6 folks have already pulled 20 extra hp and torque out of the Duratec in the 6 just by adding an Injen intake and a device made by an outfit called CP-E that changes the fuel trims to make the car not run so rich at WOT. The 6 also makes use of the very same intake manifold as is found on a Taurus or any other Duratec 30. Mazda could re-design or enhance this piece to make better use of its variabile valve timing set up. And the exhaust, well that could always use some work. Look, let's face it. I HAVE a 6s and can tell you that the Mazda version of the V6 is not a bad engine at ALL. However, I have a manual tranny. I have said this before on other boards, if I was an auto person, I am not sure I would have bought this car in an automatic. This engine needs to be at a boil to get the performance that is there out of it. Overall, the 6 is a very balanced performer which is what I like about it. Is it the macho **** man brag to your buddies HP monger of the world? No. But overall, it drives circles around the cars that are as far as I am concerned. I am not real concerned with my 1/4 mile times, or impressing my buddies by how much HP my car is rated for. As someone who owns this car it is easy to go on the defensive about this stuff. Don't you think it might be a little tiring to have un-educated teenie bopers on this board say that the 6 is a Ford, its a bad car becasue it has a Ford engine, the 6 is a rebagged Taurus and on down the line........haters haters haters haters....... That's all it is.

 

[Blue Mazda]

Since you didn't go back and read it Brex, here is the post by SteVTEC about the 6 V6 being supercharged over in the post about the MPS 6. It is conveniently not included in THIS thread, which was created off of that one. THIS is the original arguement point.....so I am not changing the game one bit...... You however might want to get INTO the game if you wish to argue this point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Plumaccordcoupe
Yeah but it was a V6 S/C Mazda6 with more HP and TQ than this one. I would rather have that engine . I forgot if it had AWD.

Reply by SteVTEC:
All that weight on the front end will just make it very nose heavy. Plus you don't need displacement when you have boost. Just take the lighter 4-cyl and run a little more boost, all while keeping front end weight in check. Plus the 4-cyl is a Mazda engine and not a Ford Duratec. :ugh:

 

[SteVTEC]

Go take a look at consumerreports.org for yourself. THAT my friend, is all the support I need for my claims that your FIRST opinion was an un-educated one. If you want to stand by THAT opinion, despite the facts, than that is your perogative.......

Wrong YET AGAIN.

I NEVER said I based my "STUPID" opinion on the reliability issue.

I have my reasons for not being all that enthusiastic about the Duratec as installed in the 6s and they're perfectly legit reasons. And it has nothing to do with reliability or modding potential or how much HP it can old stock or any of that.

Wow...all excellents in engine reliability for the first 3 years. That matches a Chevy Impala. If you have different standards then that's fine, but I expect import engines to go their entire life without any major issues, not just 3 years. Especially considering that out of warranty engine work could cost an arm and a leg no matter how small the problem.

I really don't think most people buying a 6 (or an Accord, or a Camry, or any other car in this segment) are really gonna care if the engine is strong enough to hold a supercharger. And BTW, the Accord can hold a supercharger, as can the Camry, as can the Maxima, so I really don't know what that proves anyways. :gotme:

An Acura TSX can out accelerate a Mazda 6s in the low-end, despite only being a 4-banger vs a V6. That reminds me of my '01 Accord V6 and I find that "stupid" on Ford's part. Forgive me.

And you still have yet to provide proof that the Duratec was designed by Porsche. I'm just going to keep sticking that point to you until you either back it up or withdrawl it.

 

[brex]

Now, on the arguments about the weakness of the Duratec 30 vs other engines on the market today. I don't get where this arguement came from based on my original arguement, becasue no where in there did I say it was the best or the most techically advanced engine out there, weather it be in the 6s or another vehicle.

lol.. that IS the whole argument on this thread.. you basically didn't like Steve's "stupid" comment about Duratec engine.. so you bring up this X arguement, then another Y argument, then basically call out Steve on him knowing nothing but ****... you're the one bring up the whole argument in the first place!

As someone who owns this car it is easy to go on the defensive about this stuff. Don't you think it might be a little tiring to have un-educated teenie bopers on this board say that the 6 is a Ford, its a bad car becasue it has a Ford engine, the 6 is a rebagged Taurus and on down the line........haters haters haters haters....... That's all it is.

Yes, you will get on defensive about this stuff just like how i will get on defensive when someone saying **** about Honda.. being defensive is one thing (which everyone does from time to time).. being not open minded and calling names is a different issue..

steve had said in his post that he actually likes 6 a lot.. his comment from the begining had always being just the Duratec engine that Ford/Mazda for some reason decided to put in.. no one had ever said 6 is a bad car here...

with all the argument he had put in already.. how can u even call him un-educated teenie bopers? if u wanna call me on that.. no problem.. frankly.. i don't know this much **** about cars anywayz (but i am far from being a teenie anymore).. but neither did i bash 6 and say it is a bad car.. so where did you get your idea that we're all bashing 6 as a bad car? :boink:

 

[Blue Mazda]

Than what would you base it on? Your post said you favor a Turbo 4 becasue it is a Mazda engine instead of the Duratec. I don't know, that implies to me you don't think the Duratec can handle a supercharger? I know you have other reasons in terms of weight, but that is what you said, stop changing it around, your EXACT words are above....... If that isn't what you mean.......what did you mean. I interpret it is you don't think it can handle it. Also, MOST of the cars with the Duratec 30 have Excellents for AT LEAST the last 5 years. I encourage you to take a look for yourself. You are Mr Fact man, go get'em dog? You are being Mr. Biased bullshit opinion man right now and you are so caught up in it you can't even see it. I am basing my arguent on what YOU said. What YOU said has nothing to do with who desiged the engine. If you weren't taking a shot at reliability, than what did YOU mean. You keep attacking reliability despite the Proof, so it's a little hard for me to believe that your point was that a Duratec can't handle a supercharger. You point that the Duratec was designed WITH Porsche by Cogsworth/Ford was correct.......yay SteVTEC, you got one right........ You are clinging to the MOST obscure point and ignoring the main point despite the proof. And on your shot at the 6 V6 vs the TSX.....read my other post. Cu mon Steve, your better than to cling to a Bullshit arguement like this.

 

[Blue Mazda]

Steve, can you plese tell Brex that he is totally off in left field and that this arguement was moved here from the MPS thread, as I posted above, but he still doesn't seem to get what we are discussing....... He isn't going to listen to me. And Brex, I am not calling Steve an uneducated tennie boper, just the people that post this kind of stuff. I am ignoring anything else you post to this and would suggest you stop posting unless you get on point........you are off in left field becasue you are trying to join an arguement that you aren't a party to.

 

[brex]

Since you didn't go back and read it Brex, here is the post by SteVTEC about the 6 V6 being supercharged over in the post about the MPS 6. It is conveniently not included in THIS thread, which was created off of that one. THIS is the original arguement point.....so I am not changing the game one bit...... You however might want to get INTO the game if you wish to argue this point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Plumaccordcoupe
Yeah but it was a V6 S/C Mazda6 with more HP and TQ than this one. I would rather have that engine . I forgot if it had AWD.

Reply by SteVTEC:
All that weight on the front end will just make it very nose heavy. Plus you don't need displacement when you have boost. Just take the lighter 4-cyl and run a little more boost, all while keeping front end weight in check. Plus the 4-cyl is a Mazda engine and not a Ford Duratec. :ugh:

if you didn't notice.. it is on the first post of this thread.. and I had read the other thread as well... :rolleye2: i based on my opinion about you changing the argument based on the information i got from the first post..