Would you eco-mod a Mazda MX-3 ?

[bhazard]

Originally Posted by Cd

Thanks for the link, but you must be a member to read.
So what you are saying is that an engine and transmission from an Aspire could work in an MX-3 ?

It will bolt to the stock engine. Other than that you would have to figure out mounting etc, and use festiva axles.

When swapping an F-series trans into a festiva, you use 323 axles, because festivas and 323's are the same width. When you swap the G-series in, you use 323gt/mercury capri axles, as they are also the same width.

The best trans for mpg purposes is the escort pony trans with the 3.40 final. Its an F-series.

[almightybmw]

bhazard, thanks for the refresher and corrections on the nomenclature! It's been a few years, glad you can offer a more recent opinion. I was mixing my finals with the 5th ratio, looks oddly confusing now.

And as for what he's stating, I 100% agree. I've read the same information he has, and it's the best combination.
If you want a small motor, swap the 1.3L and the f-series Escort Pony transmission. Tall gears and low power, should be able to break 50mpg with the standard updates to aerodynamics. Most of the performance guys are trying to get rid of the F-series transmission, so you can pick it up for cheap, $50 or so. Same goes for the 1.3L and the engine harness. I'd bet for $150 you could have everything you need if you're patient and ask nicely to those who are swapping out.

Do some tuff testing now, just to get a baseline on the aero, so you know where to go.

[Cd]

almightybmw- Sorry if I gave you the wrong impression - I do not own an MX-3.
I actually have the '93 Civic hatch that I referred to earlier. I did a lot of homework and bought the Civic because it had the best balance of fuel economy, reliability, and safety over cars like the Metro or the MX-3.
I always wanted an MX-3 though, but passed it up due to its fuel economy. Now years later, I find myself still looking at MX-3s purely on looks alone.

( I suppose it's like looking at a beautiful lady, but knowing you are better off with what you already have. )

Also, with the expense of an engine swap, that's just not going to happen.

This is just a 'what if' sort of thread. I wanted to see if it was possible to get good mileage without anything major like an engine swap.

Actually, there is a guy building an MX-3 EV a few miles from where I am. I tried to make contact, but he never responded.

[alohaspirit]

Originally Posted by Cd

( I suppose it's like looking at a beautiful lady, but knowing you are better off with what you already have. )

for me, its like looking at an 7.5
(but shes more high maintenence/cost more keep happy)


when youre already with an 7

[nimblemotors]

I noticed the MX-3 some months ago, and thought it would have good aero and be a good car for a MPG project. There is on for sale for $300 not too far away, needs some work obviously. I'm thinking making it an EV, but I also think I may be able to use its roof line and hatch on the back of my MG Midget. Obviously a lot of work, but could be worth it instead of trying to fabricate custom parts from scratch.

[YukonCornelius]

The main reason it doesn't meet any of your expectations is simply because it is a Mazda.

[cfg83]

Cd -

I always thought of the MX-3 as a fat CRX (see that vertical rear window slice on the MX-3?!?!?!?!?). Without the CRX, I don't think the MX-3 (or the Toyota Paseo or the Nissan Pulsar NX) ever get made.

I agree with almightybmw that if you can find a tall-geared tranny from somewhere in Mazda's (or Ford's?!?!?!) parts bin, then you would be half way there. Then slap on 2-size up tires for maybe a 4+% gain.

Also, the manual got decent MPG :



That compares favorably to my horrible 0.36 Cd SW2 that also weighs 2300+ lbs :



My edge is in my highway-happy top gear, but Multiades swapped a 5th gear in a 1994 Mazda Protege and was uber-pleased :

http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...10-a-2748.html

CarloSW2

[bhazard]

Originally Posted by SVTwithMPG

The main reason it doesn't meet any of your expectations is simply because it is a Mazda.

Whats that supposed to mean?

[Cd]

Originally Posted by cfg83

Cd -

I always thought of the MX-3 as a fat CRX (see that vertical rear window slice on the MX-3?!?!?!?!?). Without the CRX, I don't think the MX-3 (or the Toyota Paseo or the Nissan Pulsar NX) ever get made.

I agree with almightybmw that if you can find a tall-geared tranny from somewhere in Mazda's (or Ford's?!?!?!) parts bin, then you would be half way there. Then slap on 2-size up tires for maybe a 4+% gain.

Also, the manual got decent MPG :



That compares favorably to my horrible 0.36 Cd SW2 that also weighs 2300+ lbs :



My edge is in my highway-happy top gear, but Multiades swapped a 5th gear in a 1994 Mazda Protege and was uber-pleased :

http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...10-a-2748.html

CarloSW2

Despite the fine lines of the car, it would look like the cost of getting at least 40 MPG from the car would be prohibitive. An engine swap or even the gear swap is more expensive than the cost the car itself ( used )* .
That's too bad because I love the look of the car.

34 MPG is not horribly bad, but certainly not good considering that the 4cyl. engine actually has less HP than a similar 4cyl. in a Civic.

* I would love to be wrong on this.

[RobertSmalls]

Originally Posted by bhazard

Whats that supposed to mean?

Mazda has generally specialized in lightweight, small, sporty cars. The engines are tuned for power at the expense of fuel economy, and the gearing is way too short for the cars to be of interest here. See e.g. the RX-7 and RX-8, MazdaSpeed3, and the tagline "Zoom-Zoom".

If you want the MX-3 to do what a car with that body shape should do, you need to strip the essence of Mazda out of it. The ECU, transmission, and maybe even the engine have to go.