Toyota's new subcompact will use Mazda's Skyactiv engine

[Kal-El]

.....................

SALAMANCA, Mexico -- Toyota Motor Corp. will add Mazda’s fuel-efficient Skyactiv engine to its tiny stable of borrowed powerplants when it sources a new Mazda2-based subcompact from Mazda’s just-opened assembly plant here.

The car will get Toyota-designed sheet metal on the outside but Mazda’s high-compression, fuel-injected Skyactiv gasoline engine under the hood, said Keishi Egawa, CEO of Mazda’s operations in Mexico and director of its plant here.

“They will make model-specific investment for the Toyota vehicle,” Egawa said in an interview at last month’s factory opening. “Stamping, dies -- that is theirs,” he said, as well as “some of the interior design work.” But the Toyota spinoff will use “our engine,” he said.



The factory will allocate about 50,000 vehicles for Toyota from its full annual capacity of 230,000 units. Output for Toyota is expected to begin after April 1, 2015, but before March 31, 2016.

Using Mazda’s Skyactiv engine may help Toyota burnish the appeal of its subcompact offerings. The car is pegged to replace the lackluster Yaris, the latest generation of which arrived in the United States in the fall of 2011 with a carryover engine and transmission. It would be one of only a few direct-injection engines at Toyota. Only select Lexus nameplates, the Scion FR-S and some Japan-market Toyota sedans, such as the Crown, use direct injection.

For Mazda, it means maximizing economies of scale at its Mexican operation. It also allows Mazda to promote its Skyactiv technology as the powerplant for a well-respected rival.



Mazda has not released details of the next-generation Mazda2, but it is expected to enter production in Mexico as early as the second half of this year. The company began producing the Skyactiv-equipped Mazda3 sedan and hatchback at the site in January.

While the Japan-market Mazda2 already offers a 1.3-liter Skyactiv engine, the current U.S. version does not get Skyactiv treatment. The next generation is expected to receive the whole set of Skyactiv technologies, including the new engine, transmission and chassis.

Mazda is migrating its entire lineup to the lightweight Skyactiv architecture, which aims to boost fuel economy while maintaining responsive driving dynamics. A key mission of the Salamanca plant is to further the penetration of the Skyactiv lineup in other markets.



A Toyota spokesman confirmed that Toyota’s Mexican-built spinoff of the Mazda2 will get a Mazda engine assembled on-site. He declined to comment on what other Skyactiv technologies, such as chassis components, would be used in the Toyota version.

Toyota is no stranger to using engines from other manufacturers, although it does so rarely. Its Scion FR-S uses an engine from Subaru-builder Fuji Heavy Industries, and its Verso minivan gets a diesel engine from BMW AG. The Lexus LFA sports car, which ended production in 2012, was powered by a V-10 engine from Yamaha Motor Co.

In October, Mazda will open an engine machining shop next to its Salamanca assembly plant. It will be flexible enough to machine any engine in Mazda’s lineup, gasoline or diesel. Supplying some of the engines to Toyota may help it achieve better economies of scale.

Mazda currently mounts only the 2.0-liter Skyactiv gasoline engine in the Mazda3s assembled in Mexico. Mazda3s with the 2.5-liter engine are manufactured in Japan.

A Mazda spokesman declined to give future engine deployment plans for Mexico.

[Kal-El]

Interesting choice for Toyota. I guess they're having a hard time figuring out how to make money selling a sub-compact in the states. So this is the solution.

I'm getting a feeling that the "Yaris" name will be replaced. Tercel, Echo, Yaris, ???...

It's time for Toyota to make a good name and stick with it.

[nookandcrannycar]

Very,very, interesting. Have you heard anything from any other source re how the Yaris will end? By that I mean...Will there be a 2015 Model Year Yaris? (4th year of normal 5 in a generation)?...or...Will they just keep selling 2014 Yari until they run out of them, thus intentionally leaving a void until the new vehicle enters the pipeline?....or...?????

[Astroman]

Exactly what I am wondering. First I've heard of the yaris being retired :cry:

Maybe the lackluster part in the release could have been fixed by releasing some of the features sold in other countries, like AWD, turbo, other engine options, etc.

[nookandcrannycar]

Maybe the lackluster part in the release could have been fixed by releasing some of the features sold in other countries, like AWD, turbo, other engine options, etc.

Yep. I agree 100%.

[mirapatec]

Having looked at the options other countries get with their Yaris, I believe the Yaris sales in the US would be much higher if those options were available here. Sadly, I feel the Yaris is an afterthought by Toyota for the US market.

[Kal-El]

Very,very, interesting. Have you heard anything from any other source re how the Yaris will end? By that I mean...Will there be a 2015 Model Year Yaris? (4th year of normal 5 in a generation)?...or...Will they just keep selling 2014 Yari until they run out of them, thus intentionally leaving a void until the new vehicle enters the pipeline?....or...?????

Haven't seen any other info on it. Time table seems odd since the 3rd gen will be 4 years old for 2015. I have to assume this model will run through '15. That would be 1 year less than a typical cycle. My guess is an all new model for the 2016 model year. I think Mazda’s version (the Mazda2) will come out one year earlier.

Having looked at the options other countries get with their Yaris, I believe the Yaris sales in the US would be much higher if those options were available here. Sadly, I feel the Yaris is an afterthought by Toyota for the US market.

The Yaris is most certainly largely ignored by Toyota in the US. It is simply a required offering at the bottom of the lineup. It helps with the CAFE number. With no money to be made with it they just did the minimum carrying over a 3 generation old engine and transmission.

Here's a look at what the Mazda2 will look like that Toyota with be sharing with.

http://o.aolcdn.com/dims-shared/dims3/GLOB/crop/1244x835+9+0/resize/628x417!/format/jpg/quality/85/http://o.aolcdn.com/hss/storage/adam/e12ef417b446bc796c4c30eb3c86c683/Mazda-Hazumi-Concept.jpeg

[nookandcrannycar]

Haven't seen any other info on it. Time table seems odd since the 3rd gen will be 4 years old for 2015. I have to assume this model will run through '15. That would be 1 year less than a typical cycle. My guess is an all new model for the 2016 model year. I think Mazda’s version (the Mazda2) will come out one year earlier.

Thanks for the info. I hope you're right.....and that the manual transmission and the hand crank windows stay available on a 2015 USDM 3-door L.



3 generation old engine and transmission.

I realize some consumers feel this is a negative, but I feel it enhances value per dollar and reliability....two important attributes in this market segment

[Thirty-Nine]

The Prius c is outselling the Yaris is outselling the Yaris by more than a 2:1 ratio. Plus, there isn't much profit to be made on the Yaris, so there isn't much marketing. Totally not surprising. This is the case with most subcompact cars in the lineup.

Case in point, my buddy and I were car shopping yesterday. Stopped at the Mazda dealer to look at a Mazda2. First thing the guy said was, "Have you considered the Mazda3? It's bigger, gets better fuel economy ..."

Bring you in with the cheap subcompact in hopes of upselling you. After BSing with the sales guys (it was late and slow), they sales manager said they don't make any money on Mazda2s at all. He actually said after everything is said and done, the dealer takes a $795 loss on each Mazda2 they sell. While I'm sure they get some sort of kickback or incentive for selling damn near anything on the lot, I also believe they make nearly nothing if nothing on the sale of the subcompact Mazda. I'm guessing it's that way all around, too.

I think we'll see more of this platform/engine sharing as manufacturers look to cut costs and increase profits on small cars.

[ciscobear]

I'm convinced these guys are mad as hell. They expect sales from selling a lack luster car?

[nookandcrannycar]

The Prius c is outselling the Yaris is outselling the Yaris by more than a 2:1 ratio. Plus, there isn't much profit to be made on the Yaris, so there isn't much marketing. Totally not surprising. This is the case with most subcompact cars in the lineup.

Case in point, my buddy and I were car shopping yesterday. Stopped at the Mazda dealer to look at a Mazda2. First thing the guy said was, "Have you considered the Mazda3? It's bigger, gets better fuel economy ..."

Bring you in with the cheap subcompact in hopes of upselling you. After BSing with the sales guys (it was late and slow), they sales manager said they don't make any money on Mazda2s at all. He actually said after everything is said and done, the dealer takes a $795 loss on each Mazda2 they sell. While I'm sure they get some sort of kickback or incentive for selling damn near anything on the lot, I also believe they make nearly nothing if nothing on the sale of the subcompact Mazda. I'm guessing it's that way all around, too.

I think we'll see more of this platform/engine sharing as manufacturers look to cut costs and increase profits on small cars.

I like the current Mazda 2. I just look at the owner reviews I come across, and I don't think I have ever read one where the owner was getting 40 MPG (or more) combined. A fair number of us here on Yarisworld get those numbers (and more would without 'a lead foot' :biggrin:).

[nookandcrannycar]

The Prius c is outselling the Yaris is outselling the Yaris by more than a 2:1 ratio. Plus, there isn't much profit to be made on the Yaris, so there isn't much marketing. Totally not surprising. This is the case with most subcompact cars in the lineup.

Case in point, my buddy and I were car shopping yesterday. Stopped at the Mazda dealer to look at a Mazda2. First thing the guy said was, "Have you considered the Mazda3? It's bigger, gets better fuel economy ..."

Bring you in with the cheap subcompact in hopes of upselling you. After BSing with the sales guys (it was late and slow), they sales manager said they don't make any money on Mazda2s at all. He actually said after everything is said and done, the dealer takes a $795 loss on each Mazda2 they sell. While I'm sure they get some sort of kickback or incentive for selling damn near anything on the lot, I also believe they make nearly nothing if nothing on the sale of the subcompact Mazda. I'm guessing it's that way all around, too.

I think we'll see more of this platform/engine sharing as manufacturers look to cut costs and increase profits on small cars.

I love the Prius c, I just don't want to give up having a manual transmission. A Honda hybrid with a manual transmission won't work (for me) in this climate (my understanding is that with those particular models, the A/C doesn't work when it's on electric power). Most people don't care about having a manual transmission, so I can see why the Prius c is doing so well when compared to the Yaris.

[Exiwolfman]

i dont get it cos Prius C here starts at 25k a LE Yaris is 15k that is a huge jump in price as for km saved on fuel ...do the math and its not worth it. I do understand why engine share with Mazda...save money make money at least they did not pick ford engines lol
My next car will be a new Yaris 2012 up but then again the Mazda2 looks nice and very well priced....pluse it would be my 5th Mazda lol im only on my second Toyota.

[nookandcrannycar]

i dont get it cos Prius C here starts at 25k a LE Yaris is 15k that is a huge jump in price as for km saved on fuel ...do the math and its not worth it. I do understand why engine share with Mazda...save money make money at least they did not pick ford engines lol
My next car will be a new Yaris 2012 up but then again the Mazda2 looks nice and very well priced....pluse it would be my 5th Mazda lol im only on my second Toyota.

The spread is smaller here. The Yaris LE starts at $16,015 + destination + T & L and the Prius c One starts at $19,080 + destination + T & L.

[fnkngrv]

I love the Prius c, I just don't want to give up having a manual transmission.

Period. End. Of. Story.

http://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0167/3466/products/Real_Men_Use_Three_Pedals_1024x1024.jpg?v=13719999 88

:headbang::headbang::headbang:

Disclaimer: To me it also includes women...even more so with women honestly!

:bow::bow:

[fnkngrv]

Thing that will really suck for anyone wanting to be an enthusiast per my understanding is that there are barely any mods for the SkyActiv mills. Yeah, yeah, yeah...I know most folks don't purchase a Yaris for "enthusiasm" sake, but it is still something to consider. About the only interesting thing that I have seen is an SRI that is actually giving folks 2-3mpg higher results than stock which for many folks pays off the SRI in a year with roughly $165-$180 in savings.

[nookandcrannycar]

Period. End. Of. Story.

http://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0167/3466/products/Real_Men_Use_Three_Pedals_1024x1024.jpg?v=13719999 88

:headbang::headbang::headbang:

Disclaimer: To me it also includes women...even more so with women honestly!

:bow::bow:

:thumbsup:

[nookandcrannycar]

Period. End. Of. Story.

http://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0167/3466/products/Real_Men_Use_Three_Pedals_1024x1024.jpg?v=13719999 88

:headbang::headbang::headbang:

Disclaimer: To me it also includes women...even more so with women honestly!

:bow::bow:

I only know three women I would let drive me around at a very high rate of speed. I'm related to one of them, and NEITHER of the other two (one of whom owns a Glock 9) would EVER have a DD that was equipped with anything but a manual transmission :thumbsup:!

[Hershey]

There's a Toyota dealer that has a C1 for $18,159 , C2 for $18,489 , C3 for $20,239 and a C4 for $22,199 . There's a Prius V3 for $24,169 . These are new '13s . A 2014 Yaris LE with the 4 speed auto is $17,480 before discounts . Not too much of a gap .

[JustPassinThru]

...comes a time when you've been there, done that.

I've driven a Fuller Road-Ranger ten-speed non-synchro. Floated the gears. Been there, done that; and since selling a manual is harder, when the time comes...why fight it? I have the start of arthritis in the hips.

To the point: I wonder how Mazda's drivetrain is gonna hold up next to Toyota's. Not all Japanese cars or engines are alike. Mitsubushi's V6s in Dodge products were not ANYWHERE near as reliable as Toyota engines; they were not any better than Dodge's own engines.

The Geo was a great car - while it lasted. 100,000 was its life; and I had three and can speak with authority.

Will this be another lemon Toyota makes? The flat-front van was a turkey; and not just because it rusted. It didn't have the strongest engine, either, and it wasn't cheap to repair when it did have problems.

[Kal-El]

Thanks for the info. I hope you're right.....and that the manual transmission and the hand crank windows stay available on a 2015 USDM 3-door L.


I'm sure a manual will still be available, although the future of manual transmissions are bleak. With automatics now more fuel efficient, and sales of manuals extremely small, automakers are pulling away from them. Even Ferrari and Lamborghini are no longer putting sticks in pure sports cars. Customers don't want them.

As for crank windows? I think their days are numbered. Although the trouble free simplicity is nice, I would never buy a car without power accessories again. My Yaris is manual and I always wish I had power.


I realize some consumers feel this is a negative, but I feel it enhances value per dollar and reliability....two important attributes in this market segment

That's certainly a big benefit with Yaris. There's no engine/transmission combo that will out last the Yaris's, in this segment or perhaps any other.

That being said, a 4 speed just doesn't cut it anymore. Especially when 6 speeds are becoming common. They provide smoother shifting and more efficiency. That's what a majority of buyers are looking for.

[Kal-El]

...comes a time when you've been there, done that.

I've driven a Fuller Road-Ranger ten-speed non-synchro. Floated the gears. Been there, done that; and since selling a manual is harder, when the time comes...why fight it? I have the start of arthritis in the hips.

To the point: I wonder how Mazda's drivetrain is gonna hold up next to Toyota's. Not all Japanese cars or engines are alike. Mitsubushi's V6s in Dodge products were not ANYWHERE near as reliable as Toyota engines; they were not any better than Dodge's own engines.

The Geo was a great car - while it lasted. 100,000 was its life; and I had three and can speak with authority.

Will this be another lemon Toyota makes? The flat-front van was a turkey; and not just because it rusted. It didn't have the strongest engine, either, and it wasn't cheap to repair when it did have problems.


Although a Mazda is no Toyota in terms of longevity, I wouldn't hesitate buying a Mazda. Historically, they have been very well made. I have faith that this collaboration will work nicely. This Yaris replacement will no doubt fall short of the Yaris' unbelievable reliability, but it should prove to be a great car.

[Hershey]

The 1.3 ltr. used in the Ford Festiva ( Mazda 121 ) can / could last for 200,000+ miles .

[why?]

I guess most super cars and sports cars are never driven by "real men," since most don't come with manuals anymore. Try telling F1 drivers they are not "real men."

[Thirty-Nine]

Regardless of the "real men" thing, I always prefer a manual. It's just more fun and engaging to drive.

[yougojay]

My testosterone levels are way too high to be driving a manual transmission anymore :iono:

[nookandcrannycar]

I guess most super cars and sports cars are never driven by "real men," since most don't come with manuals anymore. Try telling F1 drivers they are not "real men."

^^^^^ A specific car for a specific purpose. If they can squeeze better performance out of an automatic, then that must be why the cars are so equipped. However, this doesn't necessarily reflect their non-track/non-professional preference :smile:.

[Kal-El]

That's the thing with today's automatics. They've now surpassed manuals in performance and efficiency. Other than enjoyment and durability, those were main selling points for sticks.

Automakers such as Lamborghini, Ferrari, & Porsche will tell you that you wouldn't be able to drive their cars as quick rowing the gears yourself.

[JustPassinThru]

That's the thing with today's automatics. They've now surpassed manuals in performance and efficiency. Other than enjoyment and durability, those were main selling points for sticks.

Automakers such as Lamborghini, Ferrari, & Porsche will tell you that you wouldn't be able to drive their cars as quick rowing the gears yourself.

It's a sad loss for a tradition; but the truth of it is, in this age of electronic controls and drive-by-wire, an automatic makes more sense.

My 2009 Yaris was a manual. It was, IMHO, an imperfect setup. The electric accelerator didn't allow for easy double-clutch gear-syncronizing - as in a downshift at speed in traffic. Goose the pedal, and the computer would ignore it. Stab it again, and it would over-rev...and hold the high rev for half a second. Annoying.

Manual transmissions are a soon-to-be dead technology - like carburetors and distributors and points and condenser. It is what it is...some change is very good, and some, depressing...but there's no stopping progress.

[Thirty-Nine]

The differences is, however, a transmission can have a direct correlation on driving experience, whereas a carburetor or distributor does not.

Back in 2010, I had the Mitsubishi Lancer RalliArt turbo for review. It had plenty of power; fantastic Recaro Seats, and all-wheel drive. I took it on one of the curviest roads in the area to see how it handled. I was using the paddle shifters to blast through the gears, thinking, yes—this car is pretty fast. But you know what? The road wouldn't been more fun to pilot in my Yaris with a manual transmission despite the fact I'd likely be going slower. It's more engaging, more fun to me to press in the clutch and grab a gear. If speed is the only thing you're going for, then fine. However, there's something pure, something emotional about rowing your own gears—something that'll never be replaced by an automatic, CVT, or dual-clutch transmission. And while I do think all of the above-mentioned forms of automatics transmissions have their place (towing, fuel economy, traffic, whatever), they're just not as fun for me.

I will admit, the CVT is growing on me for cars that are miserly. If getting the best possible fuel economy is your sole goal, they do make sense. And ditto that for the dual clutch transmissions: If being as fast as possible is your goal, then the dual clutch makes sense. However, if I'm looking for fun, I'll take a manual most times.

[nookandcrannycar]

efficiency

....but automatics only surpass manuals in 'COST efficiency' for people who don't know how to drive a manual properly :biggrin:.

[nookandcrannycar]

The differences is, however, a transmission can have a direct correlation on driving experience, whereas a carburetor or distributor does not.

Back in 2010, I had the Mitsubishi Lancer RalliArt turbo for review. It had plenty of power; fantastic Recaro Seats, and all-wheel drive. I took it on one of the curviest roads in the area to see how it handled. I was using the paddle shifters to blast through the gears, thinking, yes—this car is pretty fast. But you know what? The road wouldn't been more fun to pilot in my Yaris with a manual transmission despite the fact I'd likely be going slower. It's more engaging, more fun to me to press in the clutch and grab a gear. If speed is the only thing you're going for, then fine. However, there's something pure, something emotional about rowing your own gears—something that'll never be replaced by an automatic, CVT, or dual-clutch transmission. And while I do think all of the above-mentioned forms of automatics transmissions have their place (towing, fuel economy, traffic, whatever), they're just not as fun for me.

I will admit, the CVT is growing on me for cars that are miserly. If getting the best possible fuel economy is your sole goal, they do make sense. And ditto that for the dual clutch transmissions: If being as fast as possible is your goal, then the dual clutch makes sense. However, if I'm looking for fun, I'll take a manual most times.

:thumbsup: +1000. I couldn't have said it better myself!

[nookandcrannycar]

Also, try (in a pinch) to compression start an automatic. I've been told that, technically, it is possible....but I've never seen it happen.

[Styx]

I found this while searching for more info on the Mazda 2.

http://www.edmunds.com/car-news/mazda-hazumi-concept-previews-mazda-2-replacement-2014-geneva-auto-show.html

From the article:

Toyota last year signed a deal with Mazda to get 50,000 annual units of the Mazda 2 subcompact, which will replace the Yaris in Toyota's North American lineup. The cars will be built in Salamanca, Mexico.

I guess they meant engines.

[Hershey]

The MAZDA 2 manual has a smooth engaging clutch and precise shifting . It's the easiest I've ever encountered in 30 years of driving . Much better than that of the 1st and 2nd generation Yaris . Hopefully that'll carry over . Maybe I could get the other 1/2 to drive a standard again :rolleyes: .

[JustPassinThru]

Also, try (in a pinch) to compression start an automatic. I've been told that, technically, it is possible....but I've never seen it happen.

You mean, push-start?

That ended with the Power-Glide. Chevrolet's old two-speed automatic could be push-started...I can't imagine how that worked, but the old-timers say it was possible. The then-new-in-the-1960s corporate TurboHydraMatic, used across all GM car lines and even with International Harvester and Kaiser Jeep, did away with that flow circuit. A THC automatic being pushed to start would play dumb, right until the bearings burned for lack of lubrication.

I have never heard of a Toyota automatic being able to be push-started. It's not like it might be a hidden-feature; it has to be designed in, with flow pumps that work both ways, from input either on the engine side or the output shaft.

[nookandcrannycar]

The MAZDA 2 manual has a smooth engaging clutch and precise shifting . It's the easiest I've ever encountered in 30 years of driving . Much better than that of the 1st and 2nd generation Yaris . Hopefully that'll carry over .

I wonder what the CD of the new model will be? Perhaps it will be lower than the current Mazda 2 and Mazda 3, and help the new model get at least 40 MPG combined.

Maybe I could get the other 1/2 to drive a standard again :rolleyes: .

:laugh:

[nookandcrannycar]

You mean, push-start?

Yeah. Over the years (with different cars), if I had a situation where the car wouldn't quite turn over and start, I always knew that (if the car had a manual transmission) I could push the car, gain some momentum, get in the car, put it in gear, and let out the clutch to start the car. Most of the cars I've had with manual transmissions have been small, relatively light cars. I like knowing this is a possible easy solution to being stranded, and I have (at times) utilized this procedure.

[fnkngrv]

The MAZDA 2 manual has a smooth engaging clutch and precise shifting . It's the easiest I've ever encountered in 30 years of driving . Much better than that of the 1st and 2nd generation Yaris . Hopefully that'll carry over . Maybe I could get the other 1/2 to drive a standard again :rolleyes: .


Who's to say that they use a Mazda transmission though? The reason why you see the same transmission for example in the FR-S/BRZ/86 stable is because it is an Aisin transmission which is or course a "different" manufacturer altogether and provides transmissions for several companies over the years. I never bothered to really look at it, but in other Toyota collaborations do they use the same transmissions in them? For example the Corolla/Prism, etc?

[Kal-El]

There's certainly a possibility that the transmissions will be shared. Would make sense to mate the same transmissions with the same engine across models. Remember also that the platform itself is being shared.

You do have to wonder why Toyota is going this route in the first place. Toyota sells more small cars world wide than any other company. There's numerous options for Toyota to use for a North American subcompact. They would "simply" need to outfit a factory in the US or Mexico or even Canada to build it. Building the Yaris in Japan and shipping it here is why it makes no money. Why would they need to use a tiny company (compared to Toyota) to build their subcompact? I'd expect this to be the other way around (Toyota building Mazda’s subcompact).

[Hershey]

Years ago we owned a '86 Chevy Nova ( Corolla ) with a 3 speed auto . We were told by a transmission specialist that the Nova tranny is Mazda . Not sure if that was the case , did find it interesting . That tranny went on for 260,000+ miles and could of went further if the engine didn't go . I would have tranny fluid changed at around every 35,000 miles . Also used Slick 50 for it , the shifts were smooth .

[fnkngrv]

Also used Slick 50 for it , the shifts were smooth .


Slick 50 .... now there is a blast from the past! :laugh:

[why?]

There's certainly a possibility that the transmissions will be shared. Would make sense to mate the same transmissions with the same engine across models. Remember also that the platform itself is being shared.

You do have to wonder why Toyota is going this route in the first place. Toyota sells more small cars world wide than any other company. There's numerous options for Toyota to use for a North American subcompact. They would "simply" need to outfit a factory in the US or Mexico or even Canada to build it. Building the Yaris in Japan and shipping it here is why it makes no money. Why would they need to use a tiny company (compared to Toyota) to build their subcompact? I'd expect this to be the other way around (Toyota building Mazda’s subcompact).

Yea, but Mazda already had the factory and the ability to make the engines. That is cheaper than building an entire new factory, plus Toyota has shared parts with almost every single other car company at one point or another. I'm surprised they are even bothering though, it would make more sense to keep the Corolla and the Prius C as the bottom of the line. That is unless the new car's price can go back to reasonable again.

[toad]

interesting...i had an old mazda 323 many years ago that i loved! i would totally buy a toyota/mazda conglomerate.