Well, consider this. The compression ignition engine makes 15.8 percent more power. That efficiency gain is effectively coming for ‘free’, in engineering terms at least. Suddenly Mazda’s claim that the engine is between 15 and 17 percent more efficient than the Skyactiv-G is objectively borne out.
Corresponding to the renaming of the e-Skyactiv X engine, Mazda’s 2.0-litre Skyactiv-G engine is moving to e-Skyactiv G naming and across the CX-30’s 122ps 2.0-litre range CO2 has been reducedENERGY CONSUMPTION, CITY/HWY. 125/86 kW-hrs/100 miles. CO2 EMISSIONS. 0.62 lb/mile. According to Mazda, the four-door 2012 Mazda3 Skyactiv-G can achieve 40 mpg. Read on to learn more on the 2012Hi Scotty I am thinking of getting one of the latest gen Mazda 3's with a SkyActiv-G 2.5 Engine with a manual transmission. This engine has been around since 2013, I haven't heard anything really bad about it, just wondering your opinion about this engine. Will probably be the last car I buy. Mine has been pretty solid for 50,000 miles. I
Skyactiv 2.0 vs 2.5L reliability. Between the 2.0 and 2.5L, is one more reliable than the other? I had a 2.0L for almost 5 years, 60k miles, and had no issues. I've also had a 2.5L up until 36k miles. Both were great. Any long term data on these two engines? Both are strong and reliable. It just comes down to a preference in MPG or HP.
6z7N7v.