Many thanks for the further responses.

It was a Jaguar XF I was referring to, so a car that does exist but which temporarily acquired an air of mystery due to a typo.

I think the best bet is to send him a link to this thread and if he wants to comment he can join the forum and do so.

Hello, feller!

Much better to hear the tale from the horse's mouth than expect authoritative representation via someone who bought a Ford Powershift!

Hello- I am the person who bought this car.A lovely brand new gunmetal grey Mazda 2.2 diesel sel-nav. I didn't want a nearly new one, or a petrol one or a pre-registered one or a Skoda.

I am very happy with it so far. I was fully conversant with what I was doing when I bought it, I know about DPF filters and how they can clog if mileages/revs are low,I know that a serious motorway blast is adviseable every month or so to burn off those bits. It is lovely to drive,it has excellent fuel economy ,a punchy torquey motor and so far,everything works. 60k miles, 3 year warranty so if it goes wrong -they can fix it.

So I will watch with interest and see whether my new wheels become a disaster, as some posters seem to predict or whether-as I suspect-I get trouble free motoring into the next few years.

In the meantime-I ought to say hello somewhere on this forum!

From my limited knowledge, but more by what I've read about what seems more useful is that diesels equipped with DPFs need a decent run on faster moving roads at least once a fortnight, and those most affected (most prone due to the design of the system and exhaust and/or does a lot of short and/or slow speed journeys from cold) once a week. Of course, that means you may need to use more fuel (see below) if the car is actively regenning its DPF as you get to your destination.

None of this 'guarantees' no DPF problems, as the car itself doesn't know when the driver will be doing a longer journey on a fast bit of road (to do an active DPF regen - it just does it when it has to, a bit like empying a bin when its full, rather when its not raining outside), but for those with better DPF systems, doing so will help passively regen the DPF and thus the unit needs less frequent active regens.

As has been said on the forum (but you won't necessarily be aware of yet - check out other threads on this to see more), when you pull up at the 'end' of your journey, don't switch the engine off - open the door, and if you smell a burning smell coming from under the car, it's the DPF actively regening, which means it needs to be driven around for a good few miles more (I'm not an expert on this - other who are can tell you how long - your dealership should anyway) so that the DPF regen can finish and not quickly clog up if you switch the car off before it has done so.

Again, from memory, keep an eye on the oil level in your car, as the Mazda diesel engines suffer from issues related to rising oil levels as well (hopefully someone else can fill you in [or you can do a search on the forum or interweb to check]) - the main 'point of failure' on many of these engines, I think particularly the 2.2TD.

Bear in mind that the warranty WILL NOT likely cover problems associated with inappropriate driving if you don't follow the manufacturer's guidance in the handbook. I would hope Mazda have been good enough to include something like the above about the pitfalls of using diesel-powered cars predominantely for short trips and how to look after the DPF, as not doing so would be a potential financial disaster if sale people kept flogging them to punters who know they are doing that sort of driving. Note also that its a 60k miles or 3 years, whichever comes first, so likely the 3 years in your circumstance.

I can fully understand why you chose the 2.2TD over (say) the 2.0 petrol, as it is far more responsive an engine (I've test driven the 2.0 petrol in the smaller 3 and CX-3 and its ok, but not significantly better than my old 1.6 petrol 3 in performance terms) and, on longer journeys, probably 5-10mpg better than the petrol engine.

Still, best of luck and welcome to the forum, even if you're reading all this 'after the fact'. Let us know how you get on, as that's how we, and eventually (hopefully) the manufacturers get to know how life in the real world of car ownership affects the running and reliability of cars.

Yes, much appreciated, Andy.

Far more generous, intelligent and constructive than "is this an April Fools joke", for example.

he Seat was faster, more refined, more flexible and averaging 45 mpg for almost 4 years very nearly as economical. It was also £2000 cheaper than the equivalent diesel, using Honest Johns real MPG figures the break even point (taking the lower depreciation of the diesel into account) was over 60,000 miles, far longer than we keep cars these days.

...and that's probably not taking into account any expensive issues on a modern diesel that might cost the Earth to fix, if you keep the car after its 5th or 6th birthday. Too many punters these days just look at the mpg only. More fool them for not doing their homework (and it doesn't take that much, with the Interweb and forums such as this to help) at all - just plain lazy. Odd that, given the car is the second most expensive purchase a person will likely ever make in their lifetime.

HJ has a good reputation amongst those who use it

The real mpg for our recent cars has been very close to the HJ figure thus I feel that I ca trust it in calcs. Examples, Leon TSi HJ 44.9vmpg ours about 45 mpg. Ceed CRDi HJ 50.2 mpg ours about 51 mpg. Superb HJ 45.5 mpg ours about 44 mpg. BMW 118d HJ 48.9 mpg ours about 47.5 mpg. Please note that all our figures are calculated and not from the fuel confuser on the dash.

There is however one anomoly. The Note. HJ 44.6 mpg but we are averaging over 49 mpg after 3 years and its still improving after every tankful. It was probably the tightest engine we have ever had, as the miles have increased it has noticably loosened up and the performance and mpg have both improved. Shame its going next month.

Wise words Argy.

Forewarned is forearmed and knowing that the dpf is a prime potential source of trouble means I will use best knowledge running the car in the way that suits it best , taking into account my motoring needs.

To suggest I bought it purely with mpg in mind is just silly frankly. I walked in to the dealer intending to test the petrol but decide I liked the diesel much more. If it blows up so be it but I don't think it will. I've always gone with my gut feeling on every car that I've ever owned and all have given great service.

Time will tell !!

It's also reasonable to hope that - given that the first problems with Mazda diesels that we heard about concerned cars mad in the mid-2000s - Mazda will have applied some redesign work to the engine in question so as to have sorted out the problem.

Out of the last 200-300 or so cars I have bought and sold with about 80% of them probably diesel I think I've had about 3 with DPF issues.

There are some know crap designs (and Mazda has been one of them) but most seem to have no issues even when used mainly for town use. Many do actually re-generate just at low speeds and do not need motorway runs.

9/10 if a DPF blocks it is a secondary symptom of something else wrong elsewhere.

The whole isssue is vastly, vastly over blown in this forum and whilst it should be a consideration when buying unless you have very unusual mileage patterms probably not something which should be top of the list to worry about when buying.

...in your opinion. It depends upon the make, how they are used as well as the specific design of the DPF and related systems - the apparent design flaw with (I think) a certain JLR car means that it CANNOT passively regen its DPF due to its location. Other cars, e.g. Hondas, seem to have been designed better to be less susceptible (but not immune) to their DPF clogging up if the car is mainly used for short urban trips, others somewhere in between.

I'm not sure how you can make such sweeping statements without knowing the full usage history of the cars you sell, especially if you a) only sell second hand cars and are an independent, so those sold may not be maintained at your firm, or b) only sell new cars at a main dealer of one make, therefore have most of your knowledge from one brand.

No-one has said that 'all' diesel cars equipped with DPFs have or will have problems, regardless of usage pattern, but the instances of problems appear to be, from what HJ says he gets in his postbag and from other industry insiders, far higher than older diesel engined cars or petrol engined cars for their emissions control and exhaust systems.

That may well mean this accounts for another 5% (say) than for the other categories, but its still significant, even if the DPF doesn't have to be replaced, but cleaned out by a forced regen at the dealer or a more thorough clean at a specialist. This, if needed reasonably regularly, would not be an insignificant cost to the owner, and may persuade them, especially now with all the negative publicity, to (rightly) switch to a petrol or hybrid petrol engined car that would better suit their usage pattern. The car might then be sold on to someone who DOES need it for long distance driving, thus the issue is then negated for that car.

I would prefer to say that the 'DPF issue' has probably peaked due to all the (negative) publicity and greater amount of information available to us all, as well as (finally) car manufacturers are actually paying attention to the media coverage and complaints from car owners who were (say) deliberately mis-sold or just unaware of/indifferent to this issue after sales of diesels cars has dropped a lot, especially when the increase in petrol cars means that EU limits on corporate CO2 (without getting fines) could be breached or gone even further into the red, incurring even more fines per car.

Andy You do write some rubbish i have to say.

The Skyactive design is a Mazda only product, up until last year only fitted to Mazda cars, since then Toyota have bought a 5% stake specifically to study the Mazda engine design, which they say they greatly admire.

Its no coincidence that some Toyota engine now have a simular ratio of 13 to 1 compression, used in other markets, we have 14.1 ratio's in the UK.

Why would anyone want to tie in with Honda, they are no longer the cutting edge engine maker they once were, they aren't even capable of making a F1 engine that is both competitive or reliable.

A post not without fair points, FO, so let me respond as best I can.

I started it because antipathy to diesels is in the news, on this forum in spades, and I find it hard to believe that every smidgeon of that negativity is based on sound evidence rather than anecdote. I was looking for that sound evidence rather than flippant remarks about April 1st.

My acquaintance, being someone who doesn't part with his money without careful thought and research, appears to have swum against that tide. Knowing him as I do, he obviously had sound reasons for doing that. I didn't post before he bought because it wasn't up to me to direct his buying habits for him, for the reasons given above. He knows more about cars than I do, so I didn't consider that to be my place.

Because I know him and trust his judgement, I'm confident that he has given the matter sufficient thought, but hoped to benefit in any case from the expertise of some of those who used this forum.

Thanks you! What a gracious and sensible post.

This is a great car to drive. The engine is wonderfully well sound proofed so bangs and rattles are almost non existent.There is s great slug of smooth power at low revs thats missing completely from petrol,even turbo petrol engines, and that's a very alluring asset.

It only remains to see whether the car stays trouble free and as it is brand new and as I rarely take no for an answer with warranty matters, I am quietly confident! Counting no chickens though.

I don't believe this is a poor engine if attended to regularly - like many others. Cars whose motors have been neglected are a different matter, as usual.

I agree. We had a 1.6 TDCi C-Max for 5 years and never had an issue (other than a cracking alternator belt). Chap who bought it had it 7 years. It died late last year at 12 years old. He has no complaints, one of his longer lasting cars. He maintains them well but they lead a hard life.

We're lucky to have lived through and (hopefully) owned quality cars that were built during the 'sweet spot' period of automotive manufacturing

I have been lucky to have quality cars and still have quality cars. I have also had right piles of bull excrement which were the norm in the 60's, 70's and into the 80's.

Todays cars are absolutely brilliant. A vast majority never need to see a garage between services, never fail to start on a damp/cold winters morning and don't rust away before your eyes before they are 5 years old.

There are undoubtably some dogs out there but they are few and far between and if buyers were more careful they could be avoided.

Its not a perfect motoring world but its a hell of a lot closer to perfection than it was 30, 40 or 50 years ago.

I couldn’t agree more, today’s cars are brilliant. If you think of the problems we used to have with older cars. Rust, bad starting and running, poor road holding and mpg. That was with none of the gadgets that we all have become used to. I think the only way we have gone backwards is that cars used to have comfortable rides, now that’s more the exception than the norm and I for one don’t think that’s an improvement.

Ventilation systems aren't as good now. Many cars used to have a separate cold air feed, independent of the warm air vents. I can't think of many cars that do this anymore except BMW and Mercedes.

<< I am seriously contemplating keeping my 12yo Mazda3 (barring terminal corrosion, OK at present) for a LOT longer, >>

As I mentioned above, our workhorse car just passed its 10th anniversary. My backup vehicle will reach its 28th next month and is in a surprisingly good state of preservation, with 146K on the shell and about 100K on the engine, which has been thoroughly overhauled. It also passed its MoT wothout advisories. If I choose to have it repainted it could almost approach showroom appearance. It has no airbags, satnav, crumple zones, cupholders, rearview cameras or many other gizmos, but it gets me enjoyably from A to B. And doing what I can to improve it helps to pass the time.

I've not had any problems with my 2016 Mazda diesel, but the bigger issue for me is the paint. Have you had any issues with yours in terms of how easily it chips?

Personally i would ignore most of what has been posted on this forum.

I'm on my 3rd diesel with a DPF, never had an issue with any clogging, never take it on a trash down the motorway to clean, which is a stupid idea.

I only do 7K miles a year, mileage is 90% A and B roads, run it on Tesco fuel mainly, tow a caravan of 1700kg, and not had an issue worth talking about.

Some early Skyactive engines which came out in 2012 did have problems with excessive oil rise, prematuring cams and prematuring brake vacuum pumps, i had the latter and was only aware of it during the 2 year service, the garage tested it under a campaign and it failed, so a new one was fitted.

I latter learnt that the engine was with in a batch fitted with the dogey cams and so traded it in for my present 2015 cx-5. This one has very little oil rise considering the number of times i have interupted a regen. And apparently a 2017 owner with over 8K on his car reports no oil rise, he is a working mechanic.

The latest 6 has been refined over its lifespan and is now the optimum time to buy one IMO.

My present 175ps 420nm 2.2 diesel with AWD and torque convertor auto is brilliant, and i will be probably buying another when the 190ps 450nm diesel becomes available in the UK, at present it's only in Japan.

In other markets the 6 is available with a 2.5 NA engine, and a 2.5T petrol with 420nm of torque.....

I would sooner listen to owners of the car with personal experience myself rather than sweeping statements made on this thread. I know a few who are on their second CX-5 diesel now not just myself. Speaks for itsself.

Of cause a NA petrol will be potentially more reliable than any turbo engine, mazda are one of the few that still offer 2L NA engines.

Edited by xtrailman on 07/04/2018 at 14:22

but when it comes to mazda diesels, there are simply too many horror stories

Why take the risk on an expensive purchase?

At 7000 miles a year buying a diesel is not beneficial regardless of brand. Mazda charge £2500 approx extra for the diesel and using HJ's real MPG figures you would need to be do 100,000 miles before you recouped the money. Considering that the OP is hoping to keep the car m,any years recouping some of the extra £2500 does not figure in the calcs.

That is 14 years. If the OP has DPF (or any diesel related issues) in the 14 years he could be well out of pocket.

It simply does not make sense.

However

Having driven a couple of Mazda 2 litre petrols I have to say that are pretty poor so if it came down to a decision based on Mazda 6 petrol v Mazda 6 diesel on a short test drive I can probably see why the diesel won.

Fortunately there are other brands available who make excellent petrols.

I buy tow cars, a 2L NA petrol 2L Mazda engine would be a step back 20 years for me. I also only run one car so reliability is important to me, so i usually buy Japanese cars made in Japan.

Cost doesn't actually come into any decision i make buying a car, only power, torque kerb weight, and noseweight limit.

I towed for many years, the Caterham on a covered transporter, wieghed about 1200kg all in. Originally towed with a Golf GTi. 112 bhp, 112 torques, kerb weight 970 kg and a tow limit of 1200 kg. Never had a single issue even though we were as close to the limit as possible, used it from 1989 to 1996. Then in 1996 bought a Golf TDi. 90 bhp and 148 torques. Towed better without a doubt and with a limit of 1500kg we had a bit of spare capacity. Then in 2002 came a Mondeo TDCi 130 PS which although brilliant we did not tow that much with it, sold trailer soon after be bought the car.

If we were still towing now I would probably be looking at something like the Octavia VRS TSi. 230 PS and 258 torques (from 1500 to 4600 rpm) I would expect it to be brilliant.

With our low annual mileage a diesel would be totally stupid (forgetting the extra purchase cost) and why take the risk when there are petrol turbo's out there that have the ability to do the job.

On the subject of Mazda Skyactive DPF I have yet to read of a single post that mentions DPF failure and the need to replace one.

Read: www.honestjohn.co.uk/carbycar/mazda/6-2013/?sectio...d

On (the 2013 and onwardds) Mazda 6s doing (often but not exclusively) short trips an interruption of the apparently very frequent active regens of the DPF results in the rising sump oil level. Many reports on the 'Good & Bad' part of the Review, including ones from 2016 & 2017. Sounds like a significant problem (even if the DPF itself isn't always replaced) to me...also many other problems on the 2.2TD models, far more than on the 2.0 petrol (including that fitted to the 3 mk3 as well).

I have no axe to grind BTW - I've owned a Mazda3 (admitedly a 1.6 petrol mk1) since new, had it maintained at my local main dealer all throughout its life with no major problems, just normal 'wear and tear' replacements. I'm a fan of Mazdas, and know how good to drive the 2.2TD is, far better (much more powerful and responsive) than the de-rated 2.0 petrol (not much quicker unless you rag it) than my 1.6 petrol.

A shame the 2.5 petrol (185hp, same as the diesel, though probably a lot less torque) hasn't made it to our shores - apparently its doing a good trade Down Under and probably in North America. That I could've gone for in the 3 (especially if they had an auto option).

Thats right not a single DPF has been reported being replaced, only oil rise, and not everyone gets it.

The problem as I see it is due to the DPF actively working far more than it should need to, even for drivers who don't do that many short trips. To me, that indicates a design flaw with the emissions control system, which includes that of the DPF, how and when it operates.

Rather than knackering the DPF as happens on other engines, the problems on the Mazda 2.2TD end up affecting other, but related systems. Who cares if the DPF isn't always broken if other engine components have to repaired or replaced at great cost or inconvenience on a regular basis?

What parts are you talking about?

The way the Mazda carries out its regens isnt very impressive, usually its based on mileage not use, on the 2017 model update, the timed intervals are now about 300 miles.

If they're 'timed intervals', then that's daft in my view, as the rate at which the DPF clogs up depends on the type of driving done - the more short trips and slow speed urban driving (and from cold) you do, the quicker it clogs up that if you do longer trips at faster speeds, creating less soot to burn off.

The point seems to be (in my view, and it seems, many other people's) generally that, as well as some other makes and models (e.g. the latest Land Rover Disco Sport, others) suffer particularly if you do anything other than longer trips at faster speeds or work the engine hard (e.g. towing) that passively burns off the soot. This may result in different problems, but it still seems to be a design flaw in my view.

Please don't take our criticism of this particular engine so personally, just because you've bought a car with it. You may have had no issues, and that's great, as otherwise its a great engine as regards driving, but you have to recognise that the vast, vast majority of the problems with Mazdas are associated with the diesel engines.

I think that you also need to recognise that just because you haven't had any problems, then that does not mean no-one else will (or should) have any, or that all those complaints about them in HJ's Good and Bad section are 'fake news' or suchlike.

I haven't timed the regen length but its not long, the BMW over 40 miles sounds like it was faulty.

I don't think Mazda are going about it correctly either, but using mileage to regen at least helps offset any sensor error monitoring the differential pressure across the DPF to activate a regen.