To each their own. I don’t consider cars that aren’t offered in manual. 

Yes, but there are other packaging benefits, like not having to work around a driveshaft and a rear differential. Arguments could also be made about FWD being easier for the unitiated to drive in inclement weather. It also seems that AWD systems are easier to add on a transverse layout although. 

Agree, I have a MK7R and it goes like stink, but compared to what it replaced (C7), it has zero character. I immediately turned to “soundaktor” off because it sounded so fake. The resonator delete helped but it’s still very quiet.

Subaru was the lone exception until they went EL exhaust headers and now they sound…

username checks out

Right, and if we are talking about a company who currently sells RWD V8s, switching to Turbo I6, that makes a lot of sense. But Mazda trades almost entirely in FWD 4 cylinders. I am just having a hard time seeing how they incorporate this into their line up.

If they can figure out how to transversely mount it, then it will work fine, but I am having a hard time picturing this going into anything but very high end vehicles, they very kind Mazda doesn’t have the cache to sell in the US.

Yes, quite a few companies offered V8s and V6s that were scaled versions of each other (GM comes to mind). But also, companies like Honda, offered V6s despite being a company that primarily traded in inline 4s. To me that tells me that packaging was their primary decision.

I just think in a world that is increasingly switching to smaller displacement, turbos, hybrids, and EVs that Mazda introducing a higher displacement engine doesn’t make a lot of sense.

I mean, the Rotary, despite all it’s faults, is one of Mazda’s legacies. Nobody else was willing to devote itself to a non-piston engine the way they did.

I just feel like BMW is the perfect case AGAINST I6s right now, despite them continuing to put them in their high end cars. They have proven that you can use a turbo 4 in just about anything, and they are a “luxury” car maker.

Meanwhile, Mazda made the decision to go NA and is playing catch up on turbos and now they…

One would argue there is no need for an I6 in a line up like Mazdas though. The turbo 2.5 they have is powerful enough to power anything they currently produce. I am not saying I am not grateful but it certainly lights off the center in my brain that has concern for Mazda’s viability as a company, when they make…

BMW begs to differ...but yes, I6 don’t really make a lot of sense imo. It’s longer than a V8, but less powerful. V6s are significantly more compact and equally powerful and easier to fit in a FWD platform.

I hear you making a strong case for taking bike, bus, rail, or walking to work. 

But in this particular example, he has the 99 phones set to driving directions, so it appears google maps is “taking his word for it”.

I doubt google over-rides the method of transport that you choose. I don’t know where you live, but carpools lanes near me don’t go any faster than the rest of traffic. :/ 

Wait, so you are mad that now everyone does what you do? Classic.

I checked my phone but I don’t see an app called “brain”. Guess I am SOL.

Hot Take:

turbo bottom? Is that the new power bottom? 

Been there done that, the Ford Era of Mazda sucked balls, let’s not try that again.