• Aug 14th 2009 at 2:54PM
  • 7

2010 Mazda CX-7 MZR-CD - click above for high-res image gallery

Mazda will be showing off the newly refreshed CX-7 with the latest MZR-CD 2.2-liter diesel next month at the Frankfurt Motor Show. This will be the first Japanese brand diesel to feature an selective catalytic reduction system. Like other SCR systems, this one uses urea injection to convert NOx emissions to nitrogen and water. The AdBlue (aqueous urea solution) is stored in a tank under the rear cargo area and injected into the exhaust stream ahead of the catalytic converter.

The urea tank is sized to support service intervals of about 12,000 miles so the drive shouldn't run out of urea before regular service intervals. The CX-7 will conform to EURO-V emissions standards Unfortunately, the diesel will only be offered in the European market.


[Source: Mazda]

Mazda to Exhibit first Japanese Car with SCR System at Frankfurt Motor Show

Leverkusen, 12 August 2009. The Mazda stand at next month's Frankfurt Motor Show (IAA) will exhibit the first Japanese passenger car to have a diesel engine mated to a Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) system. This technology will be offered exclusively to European customers in the new diesel facelift version of the CX-7, Mazda's sports crossover SUV, which will go on sale in October this year.

Under the bonnet of Mazda's flagship SUV, the clean-running and highly efficient MZR-CD 2.2-liter turbo diesel engine with SCR will offer customers outstanding eco-friendly performance. Mazda CX-7 facelift complies with Euro Stage V emissions regulations, despite being a roomy SUV.

The SCR system purifies vehicle exhaust gases by spraying AdBlue® aqueous urea from a storage tank – fitted under the luggage area – directly into the exhaust flow in front of the catalytic converter. This causes a natural chemical reaction in which the AdBlue® converts approximately 40 percent of the NOx into harmless nitrogen.

Thanks to the compact design of the SCR system the CX-7 Diesel delivers the same 455 litres of luggage space (VDA) as the gasoline engine version, and it is user-friendly. By minimizing consumption of AdBlue® to make sure it lasts for at least 20,000 km under normal driving conditions, refills are required only at each scheduled maintenance.

Joining the new clean-running CX-7 facelift diesel in Frankfurt will be a host of other environmental technologies currently making Mazda's European line-up greener than ever before – including Mazda's fuel-saving i-stop system, and rotary hydrogen powertrain technology, among others.

Mazda's press conference will be held in Hall 3.1, Stand A7, on 15 September, at 12:45 local time.




I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 7 Comments
      • 6 Years Ago
      Downtoearth:

      >Selective bias, cherry picking anyone?<

      I said UNCONTROLLED emissions. Read much?


      >DPF is extremely failure prone, clogs easily and looses its capability over time.<

      Not the current generation of DPF. There were passive regeneration DPFs that were used on some Mercedes-Benz models in the 1980s that plugged easily and were discontinue as a result. The current DPFs use active generation which prevents clogging.

      As far as DPF effectiveness is concerned, as of January 2007, heavy-duty diesel trucks were required to meet a 0.01 g/hp-hr PM emissions, which could only be accomplished with DPF. Their "useful life" is 435,000 miles which means that they have to meet the 0.01 g/hp-hr requirement for at least that far or they won't be certified. If DPFs are robust enough to meet that requirement, I see know reason to suspect they won't in LDVs. Toyota has shown that the effectiveness of DPF actually INCREASES with age to at least 200,000 KM (Tetsu Watanabe, Toyota Motor Corporation, "Development on Simultaneous Reduction System of NOx and PM from a Diesel engine." Proceedings of the 2003 DEER Conference).

      By the way, there are several studies which have shown that concentration of aerosol (PM) from DPF-equipped diesel engines is lower than the concentration of aerosols in FILTERED tunnel air (e.g., http://www.dieselnet.com/papers/0209czerwinski/ ).


      >Naturally, chavs and other sort of societal trash driving diesels and doing so, unable to afford the DPF maintenance, ignores the fact they expose other drivers and pedestrians to highly carcinogenic substance.<

      Pure speculation on your part. I in no way endorse removal of any emission control equipment, including cats on gassers.

      Toxicity of PM emissions at the cellular level has been shown to be greatest with high-emitting GASOLINE engines per unit mass (Mauderly, et al., "Components Responsible for The Health Effects of Inhaled Engine Emissions." Proceedings of the 2007 DEER Conference).

      Also, if diesel PM is as "highly carcinogenic substance" as you claim, why have studies shown that miners exposed to much higher concentrations of DPM than any ambient levels generally have not shown any higher levels of lung cancer (Hesterberg, et al., "A Critical Assessment of Studies on the Carcinogenic Potential of Diesel Exhaust." Crit Rev Toxicol. 2006 Oct;36(9):727-76)?

      Also, EPA has declined to assign a cancer risk factor to DPM because the evidence is too weak in their opinion (EPA, "Hazard Assessment Document for Diesel Engine Exhaust.") They also recently acknowledged that they have UNDERESTIMATED PM emissions from gasoline vehicles in their emission inventories by a factor of 1.6 (60%) based on a study they commissioned in Kansas City (EPA, "Analysis of Particulate Matter Emissions from Light-Duty Gasoline Vehicles in Kansas City.")


      >At the same time, hybrids remain at the top of low exhaust toxicity without needed any additional, unreliable and expensive devices. Just a plain old catalytic converter.<

      What about the VOCs (including benzene, a KNOWN carcinogen) from the distribution and storage of the fuel they use (gasoline)? Diesel fuel is nearly non-volatile and doesn't contribute to these emissions.

      I have nothing against hybrids other than they currently use the wrong fuel.
      • 6 Years Ago
      Bring that to the US and I will buy one.
        • 6 Years Ago
        You can get a diesel SUV in the US right now. VW makes a very nice one although a roomy station wagon will get you almost the same utility with lots better fuel economy. Jetta wagon or even a Prius. No reason to wait for something that will not happen. Start getting better mileage now.
      • 6 Years Ago
      Not sure why EVERY diesel car in the history of the world has to be mentioned here. First of all, many of these are barges consuming more diesel than efficient cars consume gasoline. Second, with the particulate, NOx, and CO/HC emissions of diesels much higher than of gasoline engines, the contribution to health and local environment is definitely negative.

      Maybe diesel articles should concentrate on 1) unusually efficient diesels, and 2) diesels which are truly clean. There should be an article on how clean these "clean" diesels are in comparison to today's gas and hybrid vehicles.
        • 6 Years Ago
        tomW - diesel engines tend to have LOWER emissions of CO and HC than gasoline engines UNCONTROLLED. The uncontrolled NOx emissions are about the same, but they're controlled more easily on gasoline engines (by three-way catalyst) because gas engines run essentially stoichiometric (no excess O2 to interfere with the reduction of NOx to N2 and O2).

        Diesels do tend to have higher PM MASS emissions (which is how PM is currently regulated), but the particle NUMBER emissions from gasoline engines can approach that of uncontrolled diesel engines under many common driving conditions (e.g., high load). DPF (used on every on-road diesel vehicle since January 2007 in the U.S.) has virtually eliminated PM emissions (both mass and number).
        • 6 Years Ago
        wxman:


        > diesel engines tend to have LOWER emissions

        Selective bias, cherry picking anyone? Diesels are considered the dirtiest internal combustion propulsion technology, with hybrids being by far the cleanest.

        http://adac-ecotest.awardspace.biz/



        > DPF (used on every on-road diesel vehicle since January 2007 in the U.S.)
        > has virtually eliminated PM emissions (both mass and number).

        DPF (diesel particulate filter) is a scam introduced by car manufacturers to bypass emission standards only when vehicle is brand new.

        DPF is extremely failure prone, clogs easily and looses its capability over time. Together with being very expensive to repair, diesel driving poverty class is unable to maintain their cars and REMOVE DPFs in order to make their cars spewing more lung cancer particulate matter but being a bit cheaper at the same time:

        google.com/search?q=dpf+removal
        google.com/search?q=dpf+delete+kit
        clubtouareg.com/forums/f43/dpf-removal-26997.html
        puredpfdelete.com
        alfaowner.com/Forum/alfa-159-brera-and-946-spider/178840-dpf-removal.html
        briskoda.net/octavia-ii/few-questions-re-dpf-removal-not-performance-supplier-related/152518

        DPF Removal downpipe and Custom-Code DPF-OFF Software RELEASED:
        seatcupra.net/forums/showthread.php?p=2549988

        forums.dieselpowermag.com/70/6733466/duramax/lmm-dpf-removal/index.html
        DPF removal: uk-mkvs.net/forums/p/179455/1180550.aspx#1180550
        briskoda.net/superb/superb-2-0-dpf-removal/102508
        ford-trucks.com/forums/630972-no-more-dpf-3.html

        Milltek DPF removal downpipe
        seatcupra.net/forums/showthread.php?t=210582

        Golf GT TDI DSG 170 REMAPPING VIA DPF REMOVAL
        uk-mkivs.net/forums/p/227301/1615984.aspx

        [...and dozens of similar...]


        Naturally, chavs and other sort of societal trash driving diesels and doing so, unable to afford the DPF maintenance, ignores the fact they expose other drivers and pedestrians to highly carcinogenic substance.


        At the same time, hybrids remain at the top of low exhaust toxicity without needed any additional, unreliable and expensive devices. Just a plain old catalytic converter.
        • 6 Years Ago
        *Thank you*. I couldn't have said it better myself.