Don't buy a diesel Mazda.
To be fair, a well-maintained high mileage diesel would likely be a better bet for reliability than a low mileage one, as the chances of the former doing essentially all longer trips where active DPF regens aren't required will be many magnitudes higher, and thus many reliability issues associated with repeated short trips from cold (and thus likely interrupted active DPF regens) will be minimal.
Essentially the car has been doing 20,000 miles per year. I would thus hope that the car has been serviced more often than just once a year, assuming the manufacturer's interval is 12,500 as their petrol cars (I haven't checked - please confirm).
I don't think they ever had an 'extended' service interval requirement like many of the German makes. IO would certainly want to know if (especially over the last 2 years) whether the car has been doing short trips regularly - I've come across some cars over the past year years doing astronomical mileage under its first owner (hire car?), then almost nothing on the next. That would mean for certain diesels that DPX / fuel dilution problems would be now emerging.
It might not have been so bad for a one-owner older car (I mean early 1st gen car, not the 2nd) with a proven, complete usage and full service history / evidence of high TLC ownership along with a low selling price. You could offset the risk via the lower purchase price.
Still, I'd much rather go with a gen-2, 2L (SA-G) petrol (shame they never sold the 2.5L SA-G in anything other than the 4WD top-spec version) for [reliability] peace of mind - too much of a potentially very expensive risk on a diesel.
|
