Mazda Etude

Mazda Etude

There is 1 generation. The Mazda Etude 1 generation ran from 1987-01-01 to 1989-12-31 as a Hatchback 3-door with all 11 versions in that window. There is no later generation in this catalogue, so the buy decision is not “old versus new body.” It is which of the 11 powertrains to take inside the same three-door hatch.

There is 1 generation. The Mazda Etude 1 generation ran from 1987-01-01 to 1989-12-31 as a Hatchback 3-door with all 11 versions in that window. There is no later generation in this catalogue, so the buy decision is not “old versus new body.” It is which of the 11 powertrains to take inside the same three-door hatch.

Engines and specs

Every version is Gasoline, Inline, 4 cylinders, Front, transverse, 95 fuel, boost listed per row. Names are kept exactly as in the catalogue; identical names are split by horsepower and by drive.

Power per litre (hp ÷ litres): 1.5 AT / both 1.5 MT = 76 ÷ 1.498 = 50.7 hp/l. The 85 hp 1.6 MT / 1.6 AT = 85 ÷ 1.598 = 53.2 hp/l — only 2.5 hp/l more than the 1.5, despite 100 cc extra (1598 − 1498). The 110 hp 1.6 MT / 1.6 AT = 68.8 hp/l. The 140 hp 1.6 MT pair = 87.6 hp/l, 1.73 times the 1.5’s specific output.

The 1.5 family is the only Carburetor group (compression 9.5, bore × stroke 78 × 78.4). All 1.6 versions use Distributed injection (multi-point) and 78 × 83.6. Compression is 9.3 on the 85 hp 1.6s, 9.4 on the 110 hp 1.6s, and 7.9 on both Turbo 1.6 MT (140 hp) versions — 1.5 points lower than the 110 hp naturally aspirated 1.6, which is the arithmetic that comes with Turbo.

Performance and economy

0–100 km/h is not measured on all 11 versions. Top speed is not measured on all 11. City, highway, and mixed consumption are not measured on all 11. CO2 is not measured. Eco class is not measured. Tank volume is not measured. There is therefore no mpg ranking in this catalogue. What can be ranked is mass versus horsepower, because kerb weight is measured on every version.

kg per horsepower (kerb ÷ hp):

• 1.6 MT (140 hp, FWD): 970 ÷ 140 = 6.93 kg/hp — best in the range.
• 1.6 MT (140 hp, AWD): 1060 ÷ 140 = 7.57 kg/hp.
• 1.6 MT (110 hp): 950 ÷ 110 = 8.64 kg/hp.
• 1.6 AT (110 hp): 1000 ÷ 110 = 9.09 kg/hp.
• 1.6 MT (85 hp, FWD): 930 ÷ 85 = 10.94 kg/hp.
• 1.5 MT (FWD): 855 ÷ 76 = 11.25 kg/hp.
• 1.5 AT: 865 ÷ 76 = 11.38 kg/hp.
• 1.6 AT (85 hp, FWD): 970 ÷ 85 = 11.41 kg/hp.
• 1.6 MT (85 hp, AWD): 1075 ÷ 85 = 12.65 kg/hp.
• 1.5 MT (AWD): 980 ÷ 76 = 12.89 kg/hp.
• 1.6 AT (85 hp, AWD): 1115 ÷ 85 = 13.12 kg/hp — worst in the range, 1.89 times the kg/hp of the FWD Turbo 1.6 MT.

Torque spread: 112 Nm on the 1.5s, 123 Nm on the 85 hp 1.6s (+11 Nm, and the peak drops from 3500 rpm to 2500 rpm), 132 Nm on the 110 hp 1.6s (+9 Nm versus 85 hp, but the peak rises to 4500 rpm), 186 Nm on both Turbo 1.6 MT (+54 Nm versus the 110 hp 1.6, peak at 5000 rpm). The Turbo step is the only torque jump larger than 11 Nm.

Dimensions and weight

Gross weight is not measured on all 11 versions. Wheel sizes are not measured. Tank is not measured. Ground clearance is measured only on four versions: 155 mm on 1.6 MT (110 hp), 1.6 AT (110 hp), and 1.6 MT (140 hp, FWD); 150 mm on 1.6 MT (140 hp, AWD) — 5 mm less than the FWD Turbo. Clearance is not measured on the 1.5 family and not measured on the 85 hp 1.6 family.

Kerb weight, lightest to heaviest:

• 1.5 MT (FWD): 855 kg
• 1.5 AT: 865 kg (+10 kg versus the FWD 1.5 Manual)
• 1.6 MT (85 hp, FWD): 930 kg
• 1.6 MT (110 hp): 950 kg
• 1.6 AT (85 hp, FWD) and 1.6 MT (140 hp, FWD): both 970 kg
• 1.5 MT (AWD): 980 kg
• 1.6 AT (110 hp): 1000 kg
• 1.6 MT (140 hp, AWD): 1060 kg
• 1.6 MT (85 hp, AWD): 1075 kg
• 1.6 AT (85 hp, AWD): 1115 kg

AWD versus FWD at matched engine and gearbox:

• 1.5 MT: AWD 980 kg minus FWD 855 kg = +125 kg for AWD.
• 1.6 MT (85 hp): AWD 1075 − FWD 930 = +145 kg.
• 1.6 AT (85 hp): AWD 1115 − FWD 970 = +145 kg.
• 1.6 MT (140 hp): AWD 1060 − FWD 970 = +90 kg.

The 110 hp pair has no AWD row in the data: both 1.6 MT (110 hp) and 1.6 AT (110 hp) are FWD only.

Front and rear suspension is Independent, spring on all 11. Front brakes are Disc on all 11. Rear brakes split: Drum on the 76 hp and 85 hp versions; Disc on the 110 hp pair and both 140 hp 1.6 MT versions. That is the only chassis difference the numbers show besides weight, drive, and the 5 mm clearance drop on the AWD Turbo.

Which version to choose

There is no price in this catalogue, so “what the extra money buys” is read as what the extra kilograms, horsepower, valves, Turbo, gears, and AWD buy on the sheet.

If the goal is the lowest mass: take the FWD 1.5 MT (76 hp). At 855 kg it is 10 kg lighter than 1.5 AT and 75 kg lighter than the lightest 1.6 (1.6 MT 85 hp FWD at 930 kg). You keep 76 hp, 112 Nm, Carburetor, Manual 5, FWD. You give up 9 hp versus the 85 hp 1.6 and 64 hp versus the Turbo. kg/hp is 11.25 — middle of the pack, not the worst.

If the goal is an Automatic on the 1.5: there is only 1.5 AT — FWD, Automatic 3, 865 kg, same 76 hp / 112 Nm engine as the Manuals. Versus 1.5 MT (FWD) you pay 10 kg and drop from 5 gears to 3. There is no AWD Automatic 1.5.

If AWD is required on the smallest engine: the only 1.5 AWD is 1.5 MT (AWD): still 76 hp, still Carburetor, Manual 5, 980 kg. Versus FWD 1.5 MT that is +125 kg and kg/hp rises from 11.25 to 12.89. Versus the AWD 85 hp 1.6 MT you are 95 kg lighter (980 vs 1075) but 9 hp and 11 Nm down, and you stay on Carburetor instead of Distributed injection (multi-point).

If the goal is the mild 1.6 without Turbo: the 85 hp / 123 Nm family is the step that adds 100 cc, injection, and 9 hp. FWD 1.6 MT (85 hp) at 930 kg is the efficient way to take that step: 10.94 kg/hp, better than any 1.5. FWD 1.6 AT (85 hp) at 970 kg adds Automatic 4 and 40 kg versus that Manual. AWD on this engine is expensive in mass: 1.6 MT (85 hp, AWD) 1075 kg and 1.6 AT (85 hp, AWD) 1115 kg. The AWD Automatic is the heaviest Etude and the worst kg/hp (13.12). Buy AWD here only if drive layout is the point; the numbers do not reward it with more power.

If the goal is naturally aspirated punch without Turbo: the 110 hp pair is the only 4-valves-per-cylinder 1.6 without Turbo. 1.6 MT (110 hp) is 950 kg, 110 hp, 132 Nm, Manual 5, FWD, rear Disc, clearance 155 mm. Versus FWD 1.6 MT (85 hp) that is +25 hp, +9 Nm, +20 kg, valves 4 instead of 2, compression 9.4 instead of 9.3, and rear Disc instead of Drum. Versus FWD Turbo 1.6 MT (140 hp) you give up 30 hp and 54 Nm and save 20 kg (950 vs 970), with boost No instead of Turbo. 1.6 AT (110 hp) is the Automatic twin: 1000 kg, Automatic 4, same 110 hp engine, +50 kg versus the 110 hp Manual.

If the goal is maximum power: both 1.6 MT (140 hp) versions. FWD: 970 kg, 140 hp, 186 Nm, Turbo, Manual 5, rear Disc, 155 mm. AWD: 1060 kg, same engine, 150 mm, +90 kg. There is no Automatic Turbo in the data. Versus the 110 hp Manual, FWD Turbo adds 30 hp and 54 Nm for 20 kg. Versus the 76 hp FWD 1.5 MT, FWD Turbo adds 64 hp and 74 Nm for 115 kg (970 − 855). Specific output 87.6 hp/l is the top of the range; FWD Turbo kg/hp 6.93 is also the top of the range.

If the goal is AWD plus the strongest engine: only 1.6 MT (140 hp, AWD). It is 15 kg lighter than AWD 1.6 MT (85 hp) and 55 kg lighter than AWD 1.6 AT (85 hp), with 55 hp and 63 Nm more than those 85 hp AWD cars. That is the AWD pick on arithmetic: same drive, less mass than the 85 hp AWD pair, more than 1.6 times the horsepower (140 ÷ 85 = 1.65).

If the goal is Automatic and you can skip AWD: compare 1.5 AT (76 hp, 865 kg, Automatic 3), 1.6 AT (85 hp, FWD, 970 kg, Automatic 4), and 1.6 AT (110 hp, 1000 kg, Automatic 4). The 1.5 Automatic is 105 kg lighter than the 85 hp FWD Automatic and 135 kg lighter than the 110 hp Automatic. The 110 hp Automatic buys 34 hp over the 1.5 Automatic (110 − 76) for 135 kg, and rear Disc plus 4 valves per cylinder. The 85 hp FWD Automatic sits in the middle on power and is 30 kg lighter than the 110 hp Automatic with 25 hp less. Do not take 1.6 AT (85 hp, AWD) unless AWD is required: 1115 kg for the same 85 hp as the 970 kg FWD Automatic is +145 kg for no extra horsepower.

Reliability / problems (what the sheet actually shows): the catalogue does not list failure rates. What it does list is feed and boost. Carburetor is only on the three 1.5 versions. Distributed injection (multi-point) is on all eight 1.6 versions. Turbo is only on the two 140 hp 1.6 MT versions, which also run the lowest compression (7.9). Rear Drum is on the 76 hp and 85 hp cars; rear Disc is on 110 hp and 140 hp. Those are the hardware splits a buyer can check against a given car; they are not a durability score.

Short ranking by job:

1. Lightest daily FWD Manual — 1.5 MT (FWD), 855 kg, 76 hp. 2. Lightest Automatic — 1.5 AT, 865 kg, 76 hp. 3. Best naturally aspirated 1.6 Manual — 1.6 MT (110 hp), 950 kg, 110 hp, 8.64 kg/hp. 4. Best Automatic if 110 hp is wanted — 1.6 AT (110 hp), 1000 kg. 5. Best power-to-weight — 1.6 MT (140 hp, FWD), 6.93 kg/hp. 6. Best AWD on power and mass together — 1.6 MT (140 hp, AWD), 1060 kg, 140 hp. 7. Avoid if mass per horsepower is the metric — 1.6 AT (85 hp, AWD), 13.12 kg/hp, 1115 kg.

All 11 versions share Gasoline, Inline 4, Front, transverse, Independent, spring suspension, front Disc, and 95 fuel. The buy decision is which of 76 / 85 / 110 / 140 hp, which of FWD / AWD, and which of Manual / Automatic — with every name kept as 1.5 AT, 1.5 MT, 1.6 MT, and 1.6 AT, distinguished where names collide by 85 hp, 110 hp, or 140 hp and by FWD versus AWD.