Used car running cost: Mazda

As one of Japan’s smaller car makers, Mazda has had more than their share of ups and downs. Some of those downs were self-inflicted, and came about as a result of their single-minded pursuit of unusual engineering solutions. And yet, they always managed to pull through somehow, usually as a result of the flip side of the Mazda coin: their highly practical side dictates that Mazda will always have proven, conservative products to offset their wilder side.

For proof of this, look no further than their global product line-up in the late 1980s and 1990s. On the one side was a pair of exotic, rotary-powered cars (the Cosmo and RX-7), a mad micro-sports car (the Autozam AZ-1), and a two-seater roadster (the evergreen MX-5). At the opposite side was the Mazda Familia (323) and Capella (626), which were highly conventional in concept and execution. It was always the practical side which kept the wild side afloat, however – strong sales of their “normal” products effectively financed their “weird” products.

Today’s line-up is a lot more ordinary, with only the MX-5 still around to tickle the fancy of enthusiasts, but, knowing Mazda, I’m willing to bet that they have some engineers toiling away in a secret room somewhere in Hiroshima, trying to iron the kinks out of a possible new rotary engine. But how does their unique and stubbornly individualistic approach affect the running cost of their cars? We’ve looked at some of their older cars, and ranked them from worst to best.

Mazda RX-7 and RX-8

Thanks to those charismatic rotary (Wankel) engines, the Mazda RX-cars are notoriously expensive to run. This is partly due to the rotary engine’s relative fragility and cost of maintenance, and in equal measure due to the rotary engine’s prodigious thirst. These cars are only for enthusiasts, and those of limited means shouldn’t even consider buying one of these exotics.

Mazda 626

Mid-sized front-wheel drive sedans didn’t get any more conservative than this – the Mazda 626 was every bit as unremarkable in concept as its equivalent Toyota or Nissan. This low-risk design approach gave us a car with decent fuel economy (at least, for the 4-cylinder variants), fair performance, and good durability. This applied even more to the generation, which first arrived in 1983, than to the last two iterations (which were saddled with somewhat fragile electronics and thirstier engines), but those old cars are getting really scarce these days.

As far as Mazda’s mainstream models go, the 626 and its MX-6 cousin are among the more-expensive Mazdas to run, purely because of parts becoming difficult and pricey to source, and the thirst of the available V6 engines.

Mazda Etude/Astina

Available over two model generations, the Etude was brilliant to drive. The Astina (derived from the first-generation Etude) expanded on that dynamic excellence with a stylish bodyshell, but retained the same mechanical bits as the top-level Etude of the day.

These cars had a good reputation for reliability back in the 1990s, but with the passage of time, it’s become clear that keeping them on the road was bound to be expensive, due to the rarity and high prices of spare parts. They weren’t particularly fuel-efficient either, even when new, so it’s a given that running an Etude or an Astina will be rather expensive in the long term.

Mazda CX-7

We didn’t see many of these strange SUV/Crossovers in South Africa, as they landed with a high purchase price and very thirsty 2.3-litre DISI-Turbo 4-cylinder engine. Consequently, spare parts are bound to be expensive, due to the large number of unique components; and because there were so few around to begin with, aftermarket support is rather lacking as well. Expensive maintenance and heavy fuel consumption means that the interesting CX-7 will have very high overall running cost.

Mazda CX-5

While it’s nowhere near as profligate as the CX-7, the Mazda CX-5 was also quite thirsty in its first generation. A mid-life update with SkyActiv engines helped somewhat, but it was never an economy champ in the real world. Maintenance cost should be quite reasonable, however: the CX-5 shares much of its platform with the Mazda6 and some engines come from the Mazda3, so it shouldn’t be too expensive to service. This combination makes the CX-5 only slightly more expensive to run than its bigger brother, the Mazda6.

Mazda6

As the first of the new-millennium Mazdas, the Mazda6 benefited from its tie-up with Ford, which gave them the resources to develop a very cost-effective new mid-sized sedan. As a result, the Mazda6 was notably less thirsty than its direct predecessor, with good durability and build quality.

This car marked the start of an era when most new Mazdas became more fuel-efficient and somewhat cheaper to maintain, making a Mazda6 (of any generation) a good pre-owned buy. Newer generations are however rather larger than that first Mazda6, adversely affecting real-world fuel consumption (and thus running cost) purely because of their larger dimensions.

Mazda MX-5

Mazda’s little sports car has never been an economy champ, but its light weight ensures that it’s not excessively thirsty. However, maintenance is somewhat more involved than for other Mazdas, and spare parts are scarce and thus rather pricey. These factors conspire to place the MX-5 mid-pack in terms of running cost.

Mazda CX-3

Because it’s based on the current Mazda3’s platform, the CX-3 should cost about the same to run. The only significant difference is that it rides a little higher, and doesn’t offer the smaller, more-economical 1.6-litre engine at all, so it can’t quite match the Mazda3 in overall running cost.

Mazda 323

This model had an exceptionally long life in South Africa, surviving until 2003 in the guise of the Mazda Sting. They were rather obsolete by the time the Sting eventually fizzled out, but there was a good reason why they hanged around so long: they were cheap to maintain and frugal with fuel. Simple mechanical bits meant that the 323 was easy to work on, leading to lower labour rates, and spare parts were easily and cheaply available. It’s only now, 15 years after its demise, that the venerable 323 has become rather more expensive to run, simply because the parts supply is drying up.

Mazda3

With particular reference to the first-generation model, the Mazda3 can be surprisingly expensive to run. This isn’t due to any particular durability flaw or pricey maintenance, but because the first Mazda3 was inexplicably thirsty. The engines, which were shared with the Ford Focus of its day, weren’t supposed to be such heavy drinkers, but there are plenty of reports of these cars coming nowhere near their claimed fuel consumption. That’s a real pity, as the Mazda3 has always been really nice to drive and very durable, which did bring down their running cost somewhat, but those fuel bills do put a bit of a damper on our enthusiasm for this generation.

To their credit, Mazda has worked hard at reducing the thirst of subsequent Mazda3 generations, to the point where the current model (which is due for replacement soon) is roughly on par with its competitors. They seem to be robust as well, making the current-generation one of the most-appealing Mazdas on sale at the moment.

Mazda2

This is the budget-conscious buyer’s Mazda of choice. Now into its second generation, the Mazda2 has always offered a sparkling driving experience and decent performance. The current model is very fuel-efficient (especially in its rather pricey diesel form), but even the petrol variants aren’t too thirsty. They’re also very well-made from high-quality materials, which gives durability a nice boost, and all these factors combine to make the Mazda2 a great choice for both the heart and the head.