2.0 e-Skyactiv-X GT Sport 4dr saloon

Premium feel, drive and looks powered by novel super-lean burn engine tech. A coronary bypass in the era of electrification?

So are you reluctant to embrace the new age of electrification? Are you sceptical about hybrids? Do you find automatic gearboxes leave you cold, disconnected and uninspired? Do you like to know what the car is up to under the bonnet whilst you drive? Do you still believe there's hope for the Internal Combustion Engine (ICE)? Do you like to pay homage to the past whilst embracing the best of the present? And do you like, or are you at least willing to entertain the Japanese car market - specifically Mazda? If so, you might (I say the following cautiously) be onto a winner with this car, the Mazda3. Offered only in hatch and saloon forms, it competes against the likes of the Focus, Golf, BMW 1-series, Kia CEED, Skoda Octavia and so on. But it's the saloon that I'll be focusing on because, erm, that's what I bought...

Three months into my ownership and so far so good. The updated e-Skyactiv-X is definitely smoother and slightly more responsive than its very slightly lower-powered predecessor ("Skyactiv-X") and is useful for getting up to speed and coping with the cut and thrust of motorway driving. 0-60 takes around 8 seconds, more than enough for most situations. No, there is not the low-down flexibility that you'd find with a turbo, but it shifts pretty well to say it's naturally aspirated (the supercharger is for efficiency not power in this car). The car is generally quiet and refined in all situations, if a bit fidgety on the larger (18 inch?) wheels that come GT sport trim for this model year.
The interior is simply superb with a supreme sense of comfort, quality and refinement that makes all journeys very pleasant. I admire Mazda for keeping things simple, i.e. not hiding essential controls in complex menus accessible via a touchscreen. The rotary-dial and "semi" analogue gauges are also welcome for this reason. The safety systems can be "over-zealous" particularly the autonomous braking and collision system, but at least these can be turned off with the press of a button.
I will now address the matter of fuel economy given the claims Mazda makes about the "revolutionary" nature of the Skyactiv-X's combustion tech and fuel-saving abilities. I'll fire the predictable throw-away comment at readers first: fuel consumption (like on any other vehicle) entirely depends on driving style and journey type. Inevitably, the motorway/A roads are where this car excels. I have filled up 5 times since January 11th (day of collection) and have achieved: 51.8, 40.6, 45.4, 36.5 and 42.1 mpg. I have calculated these values myself using an excel spreadsheet (essentially GALLONS CONSUMED/TRIP DISTANCE COVERED) rather than taking the car's predicted MPG values at face value (they underestimate fuel consumption by 2.7 mpg on average).
The highest figure (51.8mpg) reflects the vehicle having been cruising at around 70mph on an 80 mile motorway run with pathological care applied to throttle use. The intermediate values (40-45mpg) reflect varied mixtures of town/medium distance driving in varied weather conditions. The lowest value (36.5mpg) reflects short journeys in the cold, sometimes driven aggressively within legal limits. In practice, this equates to a vehicle range varying from 410-580 miles.
These values are not bad considering 1,440kg (or thereabouts) of Mazda is being hurtled about, but it should be emphasised that the "revolution" in terms of fuel-sipping (>50 mpg) commences only at low engine loads when the block is spinning at 2-2,500rpm in top gear (60-70mph). Obviously, for town driving, a self-charging hybrid which has a dedicated battery to fall back on for tackling short distances
is going to be much better in this regard - the implication is obvious depending on your priorities. That said, the start-stop is a pleasure to use - utterly seamless and undoubtedly offsets higher rates of fuel consumption in (sub)urban contexts.
If you haven't gone to sleep by now, I'll mention the issue of practicality. For a 6 footer (just), it's excellent in the front, reasonable in the back. Better than the hatchback (as stylish as that is), and better lit thanks to a lower continuous window line and the sunroof. The boot is way bigger than the hatch albeit with an inevitably more awkard opening. I'll update this piece at the end of April to let you know if I've successfully managed to get my computer desk through the opening..... Try not to laugh.
On the matter of reliability, it's too early to say as I have only clocked 1600 miles with the car in 3 months, but so far so good. One lives in hope.

Report as offensive