2002 Mazda Millenia vs. my 97MaxSE
2002 Mazda Millenia vs. my 97MaxSE
OK, so I didn't race one, but I rented a 2002 Millenia while I was in Denver last week...
Ofcourse they ran out of Maximas!!! You think I'd rather drive a japanese Ford???
ughh....
Anyway, the 02Millenia has NO *****!!!
My Max is low on power 'cuz the bad KS is robbing me...but, as soon as I got back into my car (ah...heaven
) did I ever notice a difference -- and the base for the Mazda is almost $4000 MORE than a Maxima...what a rip!
FLO_BOY
Ofcourse they ran out of Maximas!!! You think I'd rather drive a japanese Ford???
ughh....Anyway, the 02Millenia has NO *****!!!
My Max is low on power 'cuz the bad KS is robbing me...but, as soon as I got back into my car (ah...heaven
) did I ever notice a difference -- and the base for the Mazda is almost $4000 MORE than a Maxima...what a rip!FLO_BOY
the millenias have very bad pickup... main reason is cause they were designed that way... i was considering getting one a while back. But i was told that when you floor one, it doesn't let you go WOT right away. It builds up the speed gradually... More luxurious type of feel supposedly.
weird!
weird!
Originally posted by multiplexor
the millenias have very bad pickup... main reason is cause they were designed that way... i was considering getting one a while back. But i was told that when you floor one, it doesn't let you go WOT right away. It builds up the speed gradually... More luxurious type of feel supposedly.
weird!
the millenias have very bad pickup... main reason is cause they were designed that way... i was considering getting one a while back. But i was told that when you floor one, it doesn't let you go WOT right away. It builds up the speed gradually... More luxurious type of feel supposedly.
weird!
So, you're saying that even the Millenia S is slow? I guess that miller cyle S/C ain't all that. They should get back to rotary. That was their game.
DW
DW
Originally posted by tabridge5
my brother has a 1997 millenia. he has the model with the supercharger in it. off the line it is slow because of how heavy it is. after he gets going those things are fast.
just my $.02
my brother has a 1997 millenia. he has the model with the supercharger in it. off the line it is slow because of how heavy it is. after he gets going those things are fast.
just my $.02
im saying that the millenias are slow off the line but they will catch up to you. my brothers car can kill me in race.
Originally posted by dwapenyi
So, you're saying that even the Millenia S is slow? I guess that miller cyle S/C ain't all that. They should get back to rotary. That was their game.
DW
So, you're saying that even the Millenia S is slow? I guess that miller cyle S/C ain't all that. They should get back to rotary. That was their game.
DW
Originally posted by dwapenyi
So, you're saying that even the Millenia S is slow? I guess that miller cyle S/C ain't all that. They should get back to rotary. That was their game.
DW
So, you're saying that even the Millenia S is slow? I guess that miller cyle S/C ain't all that. They should get back to rotary. That was their game.
DW
naw the miller cycle engine is sweet and all... just that if you can bypass that "luxirious, not torque feel" type of take off. Then you're set

I have no doubt that is is a very capable car though
OK. So the Millenia is tuned more like a Lexus 430 or Q45, then. More for very good highway performance while sacrificing a little on the 1/4 end. That's cool. It just sounded kinda weak from your descriptions.
DW
DW
Originally posted by dwapenyi
OK. So the Millenia is tuned more like a Lexus 430 or Q45, then. More for very good highway performance while sacrificing a little on the 1/4 end. That's cool. It just sounded kinda weak from your descriptions.
DW
OK. So the Millenia is tuned more like a Lexus 430 or Q45, then. More for very good highway performance while sacrificing a little on the 1/4 end. That's cool. It just sounded kinda weak from your descriptions.
DW
yeah, that sounds about right

it's made for older people who want that power but hate being thrown back in their seat when they gun it...
hehe
Was that a Millenia, or a Millenia S?? Big difference 
DW

DW
Originally posted by Evan
Car and Driver tested a Millenia in 2000 and posted an 8.5 second 0-60 and a mid-16 second 1/4 mile. Not a bad car, but I don't see one of these beating any Maxima at off the line or at highway speeds.
Car and Driver tested a Millenia in 2000 and posted an 8.5 second 0-60 and a mid-16 second 1/4 mile. Not a bad car, but I don't see one of these beating any Maxima at off the line or at highway speeds.
Guest
Posts: n/a
The Miller Cycle engine is a fantastic engine, it's just too small for the Millenia S' weight...only 2.3L. If the engine size were increased 3.0L, that engine would make 275 HP (assuming all the engine was properly optimized for the size increase). It's a great engine, Mazda just undersized it. While the power/acceleration were viewed as good back when the engine was first used, now (5+ years later), the engine is simply underpowered.
Mazda needs to go back and redesign the motor as a 3.0L and they'd have a huge winner there.
Rotaries suck. They die at 60-70K miles like clockwork. I personally don't like changing engines as often as I change brake pads. That's an engine that will never see much use due to it's inherent lifetime limitations.
Mazda needs to go back and redesign the motor as a 3.0L and they'd have a huge winner there.
Rotaries suck. They die at 60-70K miles like clockwork. I personally don't like changing engines as often as I change brake pads. That's an engine that will never see much use due to it's inherent lifetime limitations.
Originally posted by dwapenyi
So, you're saying that even the Millenia S is slow? I guess that miller cyle S/C ain't all that. They should get back to rotary. That was their game.
DW
So, you're saying that even the Millenia S is slow? I guess that miller cyle S/C ain't all that. They should get back to rotary. That was their game.
DW
Wow. Didn't realize that the miller engine was so tiny. I guess Mazda was quietly hiding that fact.
As for rotaries, yeah, they're un-reliable, burn oil like crazy. Mazda still hasn't licked that oil consumption issue lat time round with the RX-7, but man, driving them is pure joy! Torque ALL over the rev band, consistantly right up to redline. turbine like motor. Buzzy smoothness that you just don't get with reciprocating pistons.
Mazda's bringing back the rotary in the RX-8. Hopefully they'll last a bit longer. At one point, Mercedes Benz almost produced a monster rotary sports car, but at the last minute, the killed it. Presumably because of oil consumption/reliability issues.
DW
As for rotaries, yeah, they're un-reliable, burn oil like crazy. Mazda still hasn't licked that oil consumption issue lat time round with the RX-7, but man, driving them is pure joy! Torque ALL over the rev band, consistantly right up to redline. turbine like motor. Buzzy smoothness that you just don't get with reciprocating pistons.
Mazda's bringing back the rotary in the RX-8. Hopefully they'll last a bit longer. At one point, Mercedes Benz almost produced a monster rotary sports car, but at the last minute, the killed it. Presumably because of oil consumption/reliability issues.
DW
Originally posted by Keven97SE
The Miller Cycle engine is a fantastic engine, it's just too small for the Millenia S' weight...only 2.3L. If the engine size were increased 3.0L, that engine would make 275 HP (assuming all the engine was properly optimized for the size increase). It's a great engine, Mazda just undersized it. While the power/acceleration were viewed as good back when the engine was first used, now (5+ years later), the engine is simply underpowered.
Mazda needs to go back and redesign the motor as a 3.0L and they'd have a huge winner there.
Rotaries suck. They die at 60-70K miles like clockwork. I personally don't like changing engines as often as I change brake pads. That's an engine that will never see much use due to it's inherent lifetime limitations.
The Miller Cycle engine is a fantastic engine, it's just too small for the Millenia S' weight...only 2.3L. If the engine size were increased 3.0L, that engine would make 275 HP (assuming all the engine was properly optimized for the size increase). It's a great engine, Mazda just undersized it. While the power/acceleration were viewed as good back when the engine was first used, now (5+ years later), the engine is simply underpowered.
Mazda needs to go back and redesign the motor as a 3.0L and they'd have a huge winner there.
Rotaries suck. They die at 60-70K miles like clockwork. I personally don't like changing engines as often as I change brake pads. That's an engine that will never see much use due to it's inherent lifetime limitations.
My last car was a 95 Millenia, and compared to my Max it was a slug. It was the 2.5l non s/c version, automatic with 18's. The car was built more towards the luxury end of the scale, while the Max is obviously more towards the sport end of things. One problem with the Mazda is the lack of aftermarket support, there is nothing to be found for that car, which is why I ended up buying a Max. My wife liked the Mazda better and I like the Max better....Nuff said.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
My Coffee
New Member Introductions
15
Jun 6, 2017 02:01 PM
Unclejunebug
5th Generation Maxima (2000-2003)
10
Apr 2, 2016 05:42 AM
MaxLvr21
5th Generation Maxima (2000-2003)
14
Oct 17, 2015 12:11 PM




