Mazda CX-30
REPORT 4
£28,875 OTR/£29,425 as tested/£353pcm
WHY IT’S HERE
What’s it like to live with a SkyActiv engine?
DRIVER
Sam Philip
THE BIG QUESTION WITH THIS CAR, AS EQUIPPED WITH MAZDA’S spiffy new SkyActive-X engine is: is it economical? According to Mazda, it certainly should be. SkyActive-X is, at a technical level, something of a revolution in the world of internal combustion: a petrol engine that employs diesel-style compression ignition – rather than the traditional spark ignition – for, potentially, diesel levels of fuel economy.
Officially, the 2.0-litre 4cyl in our CX-30 makes 180bhp, yet should return, on the trusty ol’ WLTP cycle, 48mpg – equating to just 105g/km of CO2 . And all without any cheaty hybrid assistance, or even a turbocharger.
After 4,000-odd miles of motoring, I’m averaging just under 40mpg. On the one hand, that’s pretty handy for a 180bhp, one-and-a-half-tonne SUV. On the other hand, that’s maybe a little underwhelming for an engine promised to be the next great leap forward in petrol economy.
So in the name of science, I decided to look back at the economy figures of the last couple of petrol cars I’ve run. Because I’m a boring old git, I’ve been driving pretty much the same routes, at pretty much exactly the same speeds, for the past few years, so these should be comparable numbers.
Exhibit A: Audi Q2, 2016. Slightly less powerful (148bhp from a 1.4-litre turbo), slightly smaller, slightly lighter car. My average economy, in six months of driving: 41mpg. So a little higher.
Exhibit B: Honda Civic, 2017. Similarly powerful (180bhp from a 1.5-litre turbo), similar space inside, but a regular hatch rather than a crossover, so a little lower and lighter. My average economy: 42mpg. Again, a mite higher.
Conclusion? At this stage, the frugality of SkyActive-X looks respectable rather than revolutionary. Whatever, it’s not quite the quantum leap we dearly hoped it would be. Still a fine engine though.