60,000 mile Mazda 5 Diesel - keep or sell?

hewhoisnotintheknow

until recently i had a peugeot with 330 thousand on the clock

if you believe all the people you speak with on here your mazda should manage 100 times what my unreliable french heap managed



btw the Peugeot is still going strong with its new owner

[Deleted User]

Dull plodder? Best MPV of the lot! When I bought it I tried most of the MPVs because I needed 7 seats, and this one was the best to drive (citroen picasso was the worst, and the toyota verso was the dullest). I also have an old 206 (pre-DPF) which is more fun to drive (it's like a go-kart), but for a long journey across the country give me the Mazda any day.

It is a bit of joke that people are having to periodically take their diesels for a long fast drive if it doesn't get this normally - makes a mockery of attempts to reduce emissions.

BeenThroughItAll

UsernameAlreadyExists wrote: »

I would rather shave my own eyeballs than drive a V70.

See, I knew it.


Luckily, I have other toys for fun-time

BeenThroughItAll

[quote=[Deleted User];65769298]
It is a bit of joke that people are having to periodically take their diesels for a long fast drive if it doesn't get this normally - makes a mockery of attempts to reduce emissions.[/QUOTE]

Only those that bought a diesel when they're not doing sensible miles have that problem.


Mind you, it does make a mockery of the emissions crap. That's why I suggest knock the stuffing out of the DPF and stop believing all that liberal tree-hugging bo-lax.

atrixblue.-MFR-.

I'd imagine that your problems are a light coming on, and on digital diagnosis it says DPF regen cycle failed, that doesn't mean its not working as it should, it simply means that the DPF tried to do multiple regen cycles but didn't finish them, due to short trips, even when a light is on I'd give it go up the local dual carriage way for half hour watch the light go out and not return for while.


The clutch thing, dual mass flywheels come with horror stories, but many survive and new clutches can be attached with out replacement of the fly wheel, plus a conversion kit to solid mass flywheel is almost half the cost of buying a dual mass and you wont notice any difference TBH and when the clutch goes again youll only ever end up replacing the clutch and not a flywheel.

[Deleted User]

really to improve air quality diesel cars should be banned:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/news/10862975/Emission-tests-substantially-underestimate-pollution-pumped-out-by-diesels.html

I wouldn't say it's bo-lax, air pollution is real, it affects peoples health, and is very obvious to anyone when they go to London or any major city. Moscow is terrible, and when combined with the heatwave they had in 2010 very lethal.

I got a diesel, I was lured by the better torque than the petrol Mazda 5s, I recognize my hypocracy.

BeenThroughItAll

[quote=[Deleted User];65769462]really to improve air quality diesel cars should be banned:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/news/10862975/Emission-tests-substantially-underestimate-pollution-pumped-out-by-diesels.html

I wouldn't say it's bo-lax, air pollution is real, it affects peoples health, and is very obvious to me anyone when they go to London or any major city. Moscow is terrible, and when combined with the heatwave they had 2010 very lethal.

I got a diesel, I was lured by the better torque than the petrol Mazda 5s, I recognize my hypocracy.[/QUOTE]


I'm not disputing the science. I just don't really buy into the personal pollution concern that much, as my contribution to air pollution is dwarfed by that of commercial vehicles, fossil-fuel power generation, and those bloody great ships which ply the oceans. Any change I make to a newer, more efficient vehicle will be more than outweighed by the environmental cost of making it in the first place.


Far too many people change their car every three years for no good reason other than to impress their friends, and that's causing plenty of damage in its own right in terms of the building and recycling cost of new and old vehicles respectively.


Add in the lunacy of battery powered electric vehicles and the massive environmental impact of all those cells being manufactured, with the raw materials being shipped all over the world for the finished goods to then be shipped back and any remaining qualms I might have had are erased completely.


Until the remaining nuclear-objectionist eco-morons finally recognise that currently nuclear generation is our only realistic option for satisfying growing power need, and hydrogen fuel cells are more widely adopted as a motive power energy source for vehicles, one, two or five hundred more diesels on our roads ain't gonna make one iota of difference.

atrixblue.-MFR-.

BeenThroughItAll wrote: »

I'm not disputing the science. I just don't really buy into the personal pollution concern that much, as my contribution to air pollution is dwarfed by that of commercial vehicles, fossil-fuel power generation, and those bloody great ships which ply the oceans. Any change I make to a newer, more efficient vehicle will be more than outweighed by the environmental cost of making it in the first place.


Far too many people change their car every three years for no good reason other than to impress their friends, and that's causing plenty of damage in its own right in terms of the building and recycling cost of new and old vehicles respectively.


Add in the lunacy of battery powered electric vehicles and the massive environmental impact of all those cells being manufactured, with the raw materials being shipped all over the world for the finished goods to then be shipped back and any remaining qualms I might have had are erased completely.


Until the remaining nuclear-objectionist eco-morons finally recognise that currently nuclear generation is our only realistic option for satisfying growing power need, and hydrogen fuel cells are more widely adopted as a motive power energy source for vehicles, one, two or five hundred more diesels on our roads ain't gonna make one iota of difference.

Britain and Ireland compared to the rest of the world is a small drop in the ocean literally to even have a global impact on emission restrictions and reductions anyway an while weve been drummed and drummed about CO2 emissions, recycling etc, its not even the biggest threat to the planet as paid think tanks and government scientists and PM's in government want us to believe. the gov cant eco tax natural methane, or even human and animal and micro orginisms that produce it so the next best thing is make a hype of CO2 and make money from it as there how many CO2 producing products on our roads lands and waters?

[Deleted User]

Far too many people change their car every three years for no good reason
other than to impress their friends, and that's causing plenty of damage in its
own right in terms of the building and recycling cost of new and old vehicles
respectively.

I totally agree, and I reckon bangernomics is far better for the environment than getting a new prius.

I don't agree on some of your other points, but there's plenty of other more political forums where these arguments can be discussed endlessly. I'm signing off now, so thanks for the advice, I think I will keep the Mazda, glad I can justify it in my mind now.

harveybobbles

One major issue to the OP with this lump on an engine is this:

Unburnt FUEL will end up in the SUMP!! Awful design, google it!

This will be your next issue if the car is only doing low miles.

I'd persoanally get rid and buy a petrol car.