**For Future owners** 2.0L MZR vs 2.0L SkyActiv

[Akiba48]

So I test drove the Mazda 3 SkyActiv hatchback with an auto transmission today (thanks to homieG @ Avante Mazda :) ) and here are my impressions and the comparison between the old 2.0L MZR.

The SkyActiv engine is butter smooth and feels very refined. Pretty quiet too.
However, this car is slow. I'm not sure if it's because it's still using the break-in oil, but it felt really sluggish compared to the MZR.
Under normal driving 40-60km/h, it will keep the revs well under 2000rpm. Not a bad thing considering their aim was to maximize fuel efficiency, I could definitely FEEL that it's gonna save MUCH more gas than the MZR that I'm driving.
The 2.0L MZR, it feels a bit more peppy than your average family vehicle like the Civic or Corolla. The SkyActiv felt like it belonged with that average group. Heck, I got overtaken by at least 3 cars because of it's slow acceleration.

I couldn't really try out the sport mode because I was driving in 40-60km/h zones. However, gear changes are much smoother than the old 5 speed.
Not exactly a drawback, but it likes to jump to 2nd gear IMMEDIATELY. As the light turns green, I step on the gas...it felt like it was lugging something heavy because it just didn't move. You really need step on the gas to about 50% or more if you want to achieve a start like the MZR.

Not sure if they adjusted anything on the suspension or it's just those leather seats, or I totally forgot the feeling of stock tires...ride felt softer and more comfortable.

Nothing else to comment since everything else is more or less the same.

Overall...if you're looking at fuel efficiency, SkyActiv is great.
But if you don't care about that...it's the 2.0L or the 2.5L MZR.
The car just felt boring...it felt NOTHING like the commercial (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjz747ZyTQk) :chuckle

[beyond]

So I test drove the Mazda 3 SkyActiv hatchback with an auto transmission today (thanks to homieG @ Avante Mazda :) ) and here are my impressions and the comparison between the old 2.0L MZR.

The SkyActiv engine is butter smooth and feels very refined. Pretty quiet too.
However, this car is slow. I'm not sure if it's because it's still using the break-in oil, but it felt really sluggish compared to the MZR.
Under normal driving 40-60km/h, it will keep the revs well under 2000rpm. Not a bad thing considering their aim was to maximize fuel efficiency, I could definitely FEEL that it's gonna save MUCH more gas than the MZR that I'm driving.
The 2.0L MZR, it feels a bit more peppy than your average family vehicle like the Civic or Corolla. The SkyActiv felt like it belonged with that average group. Heck, I got overtaken by at least 3 cars because of it's slow acceleration.

I couldn't really try out the sport mode because I was driving in 40-60km/h zones. However, gear changes are much smoother than the old 5 speed.
Not exactly a drawback, but it likes to jump to 2nd gear IMMEDIATELY. As the light turns green, I step on the gas...it felt like it was lugging something heavy because it just didn't move. You really need step on the gas to about 50% or more if you want to achieve a start like the MZR.

Not sure if they adjusted anything on the suspension or it's just those leather seats, or I totally forgot the feeling of stock tires...ride felt softer and more comfortable.

Nothing else to comment since everything else is more or less the same.

Overall...if you're looking at fuel efficiency, SkyActiv is great.
But if you don't care about that...it's the 2.0L or the 2.5L MZR.
The car just felt boring...it felt NOTHING like the commercial (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjz747ZyTQk) :chuckle

I'd just like to throw in my 2 cents :)

I have a SkyActiv w/ the 6 spd manual transmission. I never tested the auto so I wouldn't know anything about the transmission or the gearing...

I agree w/ the OP that the car is slow. I mean, it doesn't feel like there's any torque at all under 2000 RPM's. However, if you push it past 3000 RPM, it feels like it comes alive a bit more. I'm not saying that it's fast. I'm just saying the "spirited driving" only comes in after 3000 RPM's. There's nothing in the low end at all. Whenever I need to pass anyone on the city streets, I usually have to downshift to 2nd to do so. On the highway, sometimes I need to downshift to 3rd or 4th to pass anyone. The torque in this car is pretty crappy lol. But in my opinion, if you want to have more fun, opt for the manual tranny and keep the revs above 3000.

For me, I don't mind b/c I really like the gas saving benefits. And if I do want to have some fun, I'll just shift at higher RPM's :)

Just my 2 cents :)

[sarujo]

Just out of curiosity, what RPM do you get with the 6MT when cruising on the HWY at 100km/hour in 6th?

[beyond]

I'll double check next time I'm on the highway....I think it should be at around 2500 if I remember correctly

[NOTLguy]

My Mazda 3 Sport Sky runs at about 1800-1900 rpm with cruise control at 100 km/hr on the QEW.

NOTLguy

[zmz3]

My Mazda 3 Sport Sky runs at about 1800-1900 rpm with cruise control at 100 km/hr on the QEW.

NOTLguy

Awesome!

This is great to hear. The Civics do 2000k rpm on 100km/h, I am happy to see Mazda improving on that. Fuel Efficiency and decent handling is coming together - at last :)

[Aitch]

I know what you mean about it feeling slow in auto mode under 2000rpms. Remember the car is built for fuel economy, so unless you tell it you want to go fast (mash the pedal for POWAAAAH) it doesn't give you much and keeps the revs low. Whenever I know I'm going to need to get going in a hurry (coming out of a driveway, changing lanes in stop-and-go traffic) I put it in M so it holds the gears in the appropriate rev ranges to get me going.

I've said it before in a couple of places - my auto Skyactiv is about 90-95% as fun to drive as my manual 2007 GS (2.0L). The main difference is that I'm driving an auto which is great but still not as direct as the old standard transmission.

[beyond]

I know what you mean about it feeling slow in auto mode under 2000rpms. Remember the car is built for fuel economy, so unless you tell it you want to go fast (mash the pedal for POWAAAAH) it doesn't give you much and keeps the revs low. Whenever I know I'm going to need to get going in a hurry (coming out of a driveway, changing lanes in stop-and-go traffic) I put it in M so it holds the gears in the appropriate rev ranges to get me going.

I've said it before in a couple of places - my auto Skyactiv is about 90-95% as fun to drive as my manual 2007 GS (2.0L). The main difference is that I'm driving an auto which is great but still not as direct as the old standard transmission.

Oh man, you don't miss the 3rd pedal? I had an Audi A3 before w/ the dual-clutch auto tranny...and while it was relatively fun to drive, I still missed the 3rd pedal...a lot...hahaha
It'll be hard to go get another auto car again (for me anyways)

[Aitch]

Oh I definitely miss it, but it was a necessary sacrifice (easier for the wife to drive - no comments about her just learning manual either).

[greyseason]

My Mazda 3 Sport Sky runs at about 1800-1900 rpm with cruise control at 100 km/hr on the QEW.

NOTLguy

how is yours so low? i read this and checked while driving home, and at 2000rpm im just over 90kph, about 2250 at 100kph. its a 2012 sky sedan manual

[mParsonz]

First 2012 I test drove was the auto SkyActiv.. I loved the car it just seemed so damn sluggish.. I never even test drove the auto MZR I just told them I wanted the 5spd MZR lol, never even test drove it before I purchased it, but its a real fun car.

[NOTLguy]

how is yours so low? i read this and checked while driving home, and at 2000rpm im just over 90kph, about 2250 at 100kph. its a 2012 sky sedan manual

Not sure why that is but I checked it again and in D - drive, it is about 1900 rpm at 100 km/hr.

[JD@WhitbyMazda]

I believe the 6MT has closer ratio gearing to help those who want a more 'spirited' drive stay closer to the power band. Revs are higher at highway speeds as a result.

[beyond]

^ explains why the auto is rated at a higher MPG then

[greyseason]

thanks guys. ill stick with the manual ;) still averaging 40mpg. right now im at 5**km at half tank :)

[rgs]

My automatic Skyactiv hatch revs at about 1800 at 100 kph. I have to get up close to 110 to get over 2000. I don't notice a lack of power but maybe that's because I'm coming from a Honda Fit. Much more power than that car. Every time I touch the pedal to pass it leaps ahead. So far very satisfying.

[Akiba48]

My automatic Skyactiv hatch revs at about 1800 at 100 kph. I have to get up close to 110 to get over 2000. I don't notice a lack of power but maybe that's because I'm coming from a Honda Fit. Much more power than that car. Every time I touch the pedal to pass it leaps ahead. So far very satisfying.

Really? My first choice was a Honda Fit before I got the Mazda. I didn't feel that the Fit lacked power even though the engine specs were much lower. Because the car was light, it felt so much fun to drive. I chose the Mazda in the end because the price for a Honda Fit was just too absurd. Even as a second hand vehicle, resale value is pretty darn high for small car. Even until now, I still want a Honda Fit.

[rgs]

The Mazda3 is far more powerful than the Honda Fit. Passing with the Fit was always suspensful, gas pedal pushed hard against the floor and hoping for the best. With the 3 it's just a touch of the pedal and the car takes off. And I get better gas mileage with the 3 than I got with the Fit even though the 3 is a much better cars. Believe me, you're lucky you didn't get the Fit.

[Nova 3 GT]

I'm surprised that the 2.0L Sky engine is a tad slower than the 2.3MZR which has exactly the same HP rating. Maybe the torque has something to do with it...Mmmm...

[hisakix]

I would just like to add to not forget how much both 2.0L vehicles cost. You get what you pay for. As competitive as the compact segment is....that's just it...it's entry level. My gf and I share a 2012 GS sky sport and a 2010 Acura TSX with a V6 and obviously the TSX is has better acceleration among other performance enhancements but I do not feel the GS is "slow" by any means. The skyactiv was NOT designed to be a track car, so you have to keep things in perspective. Apples to apples, not apples to oranges. I think it is safe to assume most of the time people here are using their economy cars (Mazda 3s) as a means of transportation. In the city I feel this car is completely adequate, that red is probably going to stop me even if I was accelerating on the V6 over the 2.0L Sky. Assuming you are in urban city zones (40-60) those people overtaking you must have some pretty powerful vehicles or they are driving needlessly aggressive.

[greyseason]

I love my mazda3 sky with the 6M. Threw on a knew shifter knob,, and love the feel even more now. Im at 17k km and as my fuelly shows, the gas milage is no joke, but mine are almost completly highway driving

[lcianf01]

thanks guys. ill stick with the manual ;) still averaging 40mpg. right now im at 5**km at half tank :)

Wow that really good. for my 05 2.0l at half a tank i'm at 350-370 range. On a full tank i get 650-700. If full high way around 740-760

i do one tank 91 and two tank reg and than 91. I don't know if that matter.

[greyseason]

God bless sky activ :headbang

http://i1048.photobucket.com/albums/s377/greyseason/b64be510.jpg

[mazda72]

no way ^^^ 260km and only 1 bar gone? :drool

[greyseason]

Yeah! But as soon as I started it up today it went down. To add, that was me driving gingerly with no AC on, but three trips up to 160. Might have been a little higher without that haha

[sarujo]

Yup..no way..just bizarre inaccurate fuel gauge. I have noticed strange fuel gauge behaviour on the 2010 2.0L MZR as well.

Put it this way, 55L tank and assume 260km and 5.0L/100 km. That's about 13L of fuel used or about 24% of the total tank. So ya, 1 square is totally off.

Greyseason's fuelly page is innaccessible so no way to see the real figures


no way ^^^ 260km and only 1 bar gone? :drool

[greyseason]

how can i make it accessible? That photo was also at the end of its 'square' it disappeared on start up when it was idling high to warm up. Seems lejit to me, but i also fill it up to the brim with gas. he's what mine is as i was leaving work today around 330

http://i1048.photobucket.com/albums/s377/greyseason/3aa7f1f5.jpg
^ according to my brain math, im getting around 80km per square, but it seems to go down quicker once im past half. i should go out and take a pic, but once i got home, around 20min ago from work (70ish km drive) i was at 4**km and was at a quarter tank. I think ill go do that.

[greyseason]

and here it is at it sits in the driveway, i should have about 10km left til it goes down another square, but still quite impressive
http://i1048.photobucket.com/albums/s377/greyseason/51f5eb86.jpg

[RTEnthusiast]

How big is the tank? What's the best you can do on a full tank?

Damn it, I'm going to have to book a Sky 3 for a couple weeks and see what I think. I really didn't enjoy the Sky CX-5.

[greyseason]

its a 55L tank, but i remember when i first bought it, the dealer put like 60L in, and i found that when the car was brand new, i got better gas milage. Maybe that was from me driving 'proper.' the best ive done, on almost a full talk is 8** something, but i usually fill up at half tank. lemme see if i have the picture. got it.
http://i1048.photobucket.com/albums/s377/greyseason/9d1d02da.jpg
i think if i keep driving the way i have been, i can beat that.

Ps, anybody in the kw area should go to stratford to grab gas, i filled up for $1.211 yesterday! awesome compared tot he $1.275 in kitchener

[greyseason]

check my fuelly now and see if it works

[greyseason]

what didnt you like about the cx5? they seem nice, but thats just to look at.

[RTEnthusiast]

what didnt you like about the cx5? they seem nice, but thats just to look at.

Here's my review:

http://doubleclutch.ca/674/have-a-kid-want-to-save/

[mazda72]

Wow! Amazing fuel economy..... I want a Skyactive 3.

[greyseason]

I have to add in, it's all about how you drive. I try and keep just under 100 on the highway. I was at 430km when I left this morning. I was in a bit of a rush so I went 120 almost the whole way there, ad I could definitely notice my mileage goes down. From about 80km per square, to 40 ish. I'm not usually in a rush, so my gas usage shows that.

[greyseason]

Just got home from my commute from work (Ingersoll) and snapped a pic of where im at now. Note, went down to half tank at 573km

http://i1048.photobucket.com/albums/s377/greyseason/cef0b613.jpg

[sarujo]

it's fine now.


check my fuelly now and see if it works

[Wes08M3]

and here it is at it sits in the driveway, i should have about 10km left til it goes down another square, but still quite impressive
http://i1048.photobucket.com/albums/s377/greyseason/51f5eb86.jpg

Forgive me if I'm missing something but how is each 'square' 80km of driving if you went 411km and were only down 3 squares? By my math thats almost 140km per square. Which seems unrealistically high even for a Skyactiv. The fuel gauges aren't linear on our cars but damn 400+km on a 1/4 tank? That's like TDi territory, maybe even better, which can't be right... You sure theres nothing wrong lol?

Also, you shouldn't be filling the tank to the top of the filler neck. It's bad for the EVAP system. The pump stops for a reason. I'm sure this also has something to do with your seemingly impossibly good fuel economy lol.

[greyseason]

is that so? the EVAP thing? i never knew that, ill have to try that from now on. Usually i get about 120-150 before my first square goes down, and im assuming thats cause i fill it right up. im gunna run this tank low to see what i get, then ill fill it up til the pump stops and see what i get

edit, the picture with 585km is more accurate to what ive been getting but still high, i get around 450-500 at half tank usually.

[sarujo]

At the end of the day, all that matters is how many km's travelled total divided into total # of Litres to fill up. Fast or slow squares is irrelevant. I would be more impressed seeing a calibrated ScanGauge2 showing fuel consumption during driving both on the highway and city.

[Wes08M3]

At the end of the day, all that matters is how many km's travelled total divided into total # of Litres to fill up. Fast or slow squares is irrelevant. I would be more impressed seeing a calibrated ScanGauge2 showing fuel consumption during driving both on the highway and city.

Yes the number of squares isn't actually relevant for fuel economy. But it is good to know that your fuel gauge is correctly reading the amount of fuel in the tank.

[Aitch]

is that so? the EVAP thing? i never knew that, ill have to try that from now on. Usually i get about 120-150 before my first square goes down, and im assuming thats cause i fill it right up. im gunna run this tank low to see what i get, then ill fill it up til the pump stops and see what i get

edit, the picture with 585km is more accurate to what ive been getting but still high, i get around 450-500 at half tank usually.

What I really want to know is, is this all highway driving (I assume it must be) and what speed do you usually average?

[NOTLguy]

I would like to add my experiences with my new Skyactiv since May 18th.

1st fillup - 617 km - 7.09 litres/100 km.
2nd fillup - 527 km - 8.76 litres/100 km
3rd fillup - 589 km - 6.74 litres/100 km
4th fillup - 606 km - 6.56 litres/100 km

Average = 7.24 litres/100 km overall. :-)

The last fillup included half time highway driving at 100-110 km.hr with cruise control on and the rest city driving. The first three fillups were 90% city driving. Not bad for this period in the cars life. I expect that after the first oil change it will get even better.

NOTLguy

[beyond]

Do you guys notice that after 1/2 tank, the fuel bars drop really quickly?

Like GreySeason, I got like 400 km at 1/2 tank. When I hit around 480 km, around 3 bars of gas drop and I'm only left with 3 bars?

[greyseason]

What I really want to know is, is this all highway driving (I assume it must be) and what speed do you usually average?

Depends, this week I've been doing around 95-100, but on my way to work I usually feel rushed so ill go 110-120, and it's about 99% highway this week

[greyseason]

At the end of the day, all that matters is how many km's travelled total divided into total # of Litres to fill up. Fast or slow squares is irrelevant. I would be more impressed seeing a calibrated ScanGauge2 showing fuel consumption during driving both on the highway and city.

When I fill up I'll post my L/100km with my findings. Since I found about fuelly, I use it every fill up

[Wes08M3]

Do you guys notice that after 1/2 tank, the fuel bars drop really quickly?

Like GreySeason, I got like 400 km at 1/2 tank. When I hit around 480 km, around 3 bars of gas drop and I'm only left with 3 bars?

Yes the fuel gauge does not decrease linearly. It seems to be a Mazda 3 thing in general not just a SkyActiv thing. My GT does it too. Though it seems like its even less linear for the SkyActiv based on what you're saying. 3 bars disappearing after only 80km of driving seems odd.

[peterm15]

Yes the fuel gauge does not decrease linearly. It seems to be a Mazda 3 thing in general not just a SkyActiv thing. My GT does it too. Though it seems like its even less linear for the SkyActiv based on what you're saying. 3 bars disappearing after only 80km of driving seems odd.

All of my cars have been the same way. As well as my work truck and moms jeep.

[Wes08M3]

All of my cars have been the same way. As well as my work truck and moms jeep.

Yeah my other cars were the same way too. But not as bad as beyond is describing.

[beyond]

Yeah my other cars were the same way too. But not as bad as beyond is describing.

Maybe it's b/c I do 90% city driving -__-
I had to fill up last night at around 560 km travelled (before the light turned on)

My tank was 1/2 way when I travelled around 350-400 km
Then another 1/3 gone around 480
Then finally another 2 bars gone around 560.

[greyseason]

so i finally filled up today after work. Heres a picture of just before i filled up, and a snapshot of my fuelly when i filled up.

http://i1048.photobucket.com/albums/s377/greyseason/a8110703.jpg

http://i1048.photobucket.com/albums/s377/greyseason/3593922c.jpg

[sarujo]

10L left in the tank with gas light on seems accurate. Looks like you are getting Mazda's claimed mileage, which I assume is with all hwy driving. I'm curious to see SKY mileage figures when driven in the GTA area with heavy traffic. Judging from your Fuelly logs, you are doing 6 fills per month; 2 more than me. I bet you are changing your oil more frequently as well. My 2.0L MZR is still cheaper in comparison! :chuckle

Glad to see that SKY is living up to its claims.

[greyseason]

haha thanks man! ive only ever got 47mpg twice, including this time, but overall, still great on gas, and yeah ive already had two oil changes haha, next one at 24k.

(why am i still awake! went tot he casino last night for the first time, ****ING RAD time there haha)

[cSPEED]

47mpg is ****ing nuts.

[Aitch]

Two trips to Alliston this week netted me 600km/tank for the first time.

[greyseason]

Was your car weighed down with stuff? And have the AC on? I almost never have the AC on in my car.

[Impressive]

Was your car weighed down with stuff? And have the AC on? I almost never have the AC on in my car.

Bags

[Akiba48]

God bless sky activ :headbang

http://i1048.photobucket.com/albums/s377/greyseason/b64be510.jpg

WTF? 260 FOR 1 BAR????
Dam, my MZR only gets 50 for the first bar, then 40 for the rest :(

[genericmoniker]

Mazda 2 owner chiming in, averaging somewhere around 6.6L/100km 80% city, 20% highway.

[greyseason]

Thats awesome for all that city ^ what's the TII gettin? Haha or do you prefer not to check? My aunt has a GSL-SE I wanna take of her hands :) maybe in a year or two

[genericmoniker]

Let's just say my dad's pickup gets better. :bang

[greyseason]

haha ouch. Is it stock? or is it ported? single? are you on the club?

[WHO]

Resurrecting the thread...

We have two 2.0L MZRs, one is 2008.5 auto, the other is 2012 stick.

Although the auto one is only the 4-speed variety, I can confirm it turns much slower in highway cruising. It can go more than 100 before it touches the 2k range.
The more recent stick shift is already at about 2,500 RPM at 100. It actually bothers me seeing it rev so high at such low speeds. I can only imagine how much better the MPG could be only if they would've geared it differently.

Yet, I get better mileage with the stick shift. The engine is problably more efficient which would explain why it can turn faster but still take in less fuel.
Of course, there's also the style of driving. My wife is a bit less "proactive" than me and likes to speed up fast.

I, on the other end, am more of the hyper-mileage type, even in city driving which accounts for like 95% of my driving. If I see a light turn red far away, I just go on neutral and cruise to the light, I try to avoid "stop and go" driving. I shift at no more than 2k, which I guess is the positive aspect of being low-geared. Higher highway revs, but decent acceleration even at lower revs.

One thing I don't like when I drive my wife's car in the city, is that when you let go of the gas, it goes back to idle, below 1k. Problem is, if you only let go of the gas for a split second, it still falls all the way to idle, then as soon as you touch the gas again, it suddenly revs back up... that can't help the MPG. It's like leaving the tranny in neutral and just toying with the gas pedal, revving the engine up and down over and over again. The gap in achieved MPG between city/highway is consequently much bigger on the auto than stick shift, I noticed.

In any case, with all this marketing/hype about how MPG is getting so much better with newer technology etc, fact of the matter is my old 2001 Nissan Sentra 1.8L was getting significantly better mileage than this newer car. I was getting real-world 7.2L /100km in the exact same driving routine I am now getting about 8.5 with the 2012 Mazda. Sure, it's got about 25-30 more HP, and it's 2.0L vs 1.8, but they were both 5-speed and I have the exact same driving pattern.
My wife never could be bothered with tracking her MPG.

I hope the MPG will get better after I do my first oil change. I'm at ~3,500 km now, and will do my oil change as soon as weather permits, so probably in a month or so. I'm not holding my breath though, I really don't think it'll make such a big difference.

[mathew.poulos]

Wow great write up and a good read,

One question and I see people say this on here all the time...how do u shift No Higher than 2K? Your barely moving? Doesn't ur engine bog when u do that?

[greyseason]

nooe, i try to shift between 2-2.5k (im a hyper mileager too) and the car dowesnt bog. My rule is to try and keep it around 2000rpm all the time, unless i wanna go fast baha

[WHO]

No problem shifting "so low". But yeah let's just say you don't acheive 0-50 km/h in 5 seconds doing that haha

Although, if you shift quick enough, shifting low doesn't necessarily mean slower acceleration, you can step on it, yet still shift quickly... of course you'll defeat the purpose a bit by doing that (step on it = worse MPG) and you'll never speed up as fast as using the whole gear but, it's doable.

[greyseason]

I just like to drive gently on the highway, so when i want to step on it, im already happy with my mileage

[Mangtoos]

I found the best way to curb lead foot syndrome is to put a MPG gage connected to the ECU. It's amazing watching it drop as you push in the pedal, and rise as you coast or stick to lower RPMs.

[greyseason]

I just ordered a ultraguage today! Can't wait for it to get it

[Booter22]

I just ordered a ultraguage today! Can't wait for it to get it

yea those look pretty cool. just never thought in my 3 id have a "need" for it. more of a want. but it would be nice to know coolant / engine temps prior to if it ever were to over heat.

[greyseason]

yea those look pretty cool. just never thought in my 3 id have a "need" for it. more of a want. but it would be nice to know coolant / engine temps prior to if it ever were to over heat.

Engine temps as we'll as instant. Fuel Econ to help me see as I drive. Ill have to play around with it once it arrives

[WHO]

I double-checked my numbers on the freeway the other night on the 5-speed : 2,750 RPM @ 100km/h, and 3,000 @ 109.
So starting at about 2,000 RPM @ 70, it seems to go by "steps" of about 250 RPM per 10 km/h. But, passed 100 km/h, it goes faster... like 250 RPM for every 8 or 9 km/h. I'd figure the faster you get, the more this gap diminishes. At 120 it seemed to be around 3,300.

[Hads_Carbon3]

http://i1048.photobucket.com/albums/s377/greyseason/a8110703.jpg


Thats amazing!

[113GT]

Even the 2.5 can be fuel efficient.

http://imageshack.us/a/img20/8792/photo3qc.jpg