2003 Mazda Protege

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 MAZDA PROTEGE 5. WHILE IDLING THE ENGINE, IT MISFIRED AND TWO OF THE CYLINDERS DID NOT MAKE A CONNECTION. AN AUTHORIZED TECHNICIAN REMOVED A SCREW FROM THE CYLINDER WITHIN THE ENGINE AT HIS OWN EXPENSE. THE TECHNICIAN ALSO STATED THAT THE INTAKE MANIFOLD WAS LOSING SCREWS AND AFFECTING THE CYLINDERS. THE MANUFACTURER OFFERED NO ASSISTANCE. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 83,000 AND THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 79,000.

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 MAZDA PROTEGE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE EXHIBITS A NO-START CONDITION. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER, AND A TECHNICIAN CONCLUDED THAT THE FAILURE WAS CAUSED BY SCREWS THAT HAVE FALLEN FROM THE BUTTERFLY SHUTTERS INSIDE OF THE INTAKE MANIFOLD AND THAT THE REPAIRS WOULD COST $1000.00. NO REPAIRS WERE MADE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED; HOWEVER, NO ASSISTANCE WAS PROVIDED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 107,000.

MY 2002 PROTEGE 5 (BUILT DECEMBER 2002) HAD A CATASTROPHIC ENGINE FAILURE, DUE TO LOOSE VICS SCREWS FROM THE INTAKE MANIFOLD COMING LOOSE AND BEING SUCKED INTO THE COMBUSTION CHAMBER. THESE SCREWS SHEARED OFF THE TOP OF MY SPARK PLUG, AND DESTROYED MY PISTON AND VALVES. THE OUTWARD SYMPTOMS WAS A LOUD 'COIN IN THE WASHING MACHINE' SOUND COMING FROM MY ENGINE, FOLLOWED BY A SUDDEN LOSS OF POWER AND STALLING. AFTER THE ENGINE WAS OPENED, 3 OF 8 VICS SCREWS WERE OFF COMPLETELY, AND THE REMAINING 5 WERE LOOSE. THIS IS CLEARLY THE IDENTICAL DEFECT TO A RECALL FOR PROTEGE 5'S BUILT SHORTLY AFTER MY VEHICLE (EMISSIONS RECALL 3005C), BUT MY VEHICLE WAS NOT COVERED IN THE RECALL. READING ONLINE BOARDS FOR PROTEGE OWNERS, IT IS CLEAR THAT THIS IS A FREQUENT DEFECT EFFECTING BOTH OWNERS IN AND OUT OF RECALL RANGE, AND THAT THIS VICS RECALL SHOULD BE WIDENED TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL OWNERS. QUOTES FROM MAZDA FOR REPAIR ARE ~$5000 FOR A NEW INTAKE MANIFOLD, VALVES AND PISTONS, AND LABOR TO REPAIR. *TR

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 MAZDA SPEED PROTEGE. WHILE DRIVING 20 MPH, THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO SHAKE SEVERELY WHEN THE CONTACT RELEASED THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL. HE EXPERIENCED DIFFICULTY STEERING AND CONTROLLING THE VEHICLE. HE TOOK THE VEHICLE TO A DEALER AND WAS INFORMED THAT THE VARIABLE TUMBLE CONTROL SYSTEM SHUTTER VALVE BECAME STUCK IN THE CLOSED POSITION. THE FAILURE PREVENTED AIR FROM ENTERING THE VEHICLE. THROUGH ONLINE RESEARCH, HE DISCOVERED A RECALL FOR THE SAME FAILURE ON THE REGULAR MAZDA PROTEGE. THE MANUFACTURER STATED THAT THE MAZDA SPEED PROTEGE HAD NO RECALLS. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 72,000 AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 75,000.

THE 2003-2003.5 MAZDASPEED PROTEGE POORLY DESIGNED LIMITED-SLIP DIFFERENTIAL HAS SEEN A FAILURE RATE OF OVER 125 DOCUMENTED CASES ONLINE. WHEN THIS PART FAILS, THE VEHICLE DOES NOT RESPOND TO ACCELERATION CAUSING A SAFETY ISSUE AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS AND RESIDENTIAL SPEEDS. WHEN THIS PART FAILS, IT COULD CAUSE THE VEHICLE AND PASSENGERS TO BE AT RISK FOR ROADSIDE REAR END CRASHES DUE TO LOSS OF POWER ESPECIALLY IF THE DRIVER IS CHANGING LANES AT HIGHWAY SPEED. THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN A WIDESPREAD PROBLEM FOR THIS PARTICULAR MODEL AND MAZDA USA HAS DENIED ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR ISSUING A RECALL. 2003-2003.5 MAZDASPEED PROTEGE OWNERS HAVE HAD THE LIMITED SLIP DIFFERENTIAL REPLACED ONLY TO FIND THE ISSUE RE-APPEAR AND FAIL AGAIN. HERE IS A LINK TO THE DOCUMENTED LIST OF OWNERS WHO HAVE HAD THIS FAIL. (HTTP://WWW.MSPROTEGE.COM/FORUM/SHOWTHREAD.PHP?T=64821&PAGE=29). SOME FAILURES HAVE EVEN BEEN DANGEROUS. I WOULD ASK THAT THE NHTSA LOOK DEEPLY INTO THIS SITUATION BEFORE SOMEONE GETS HURT OR WORSE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. *TR

THE LOW BEAM HALOGEN BULB (HEADLIGHT) ON THE PASSENGER SIDE OF MY MAZDA RECENTLY BURNED OUT. > FIRST COMPLAINT--BECAUSE OF A CRAMPED ENGINE COMPARTMENT, THE BULB IS DIFFICULT TO REPLACE. I HAVE SMALLISH HANDS FOR A MAN. THERE WAS BARELY ROOM TO ACCESS THE BULB SOCKET (HOLDER) ON THE OUTSIDE CORNER OF THE HEADLIGHT "POD". > SECOND COMPLAINT--THE BULB HOLDER WAS COMPLEX. THE BULB PLUGS INTO AN "INTERNAL" SOCKET; THIS PAIR SLIDES INTO THE HEADLIGHT "POD"; THE PAIR IS THEN HELD IN PLACE BY A WIRE CLIP; EVERYTHING THUS FAR GETS COVERED BY A RUBBER GASKET; AND LASTLY, THERE'S AN "EXTERNAL" CONNECTION (PLUG). > THIRD COMPLAINT--THE HEADLIGHT "POD" IS A INTRINSICALLY LOUSY DESIGN. EVEN IN BROAD DAYLIGHT, I COULDN'T SEE THE CATCH-POINT FOR THE WIRE CLIP. > FOURTH COMPLAINT--THE "POD" ITSELF IS FRAIL. IT'S APPARENTLY PLASTIC. THE PLASTIC APPARENTLY AGES BADLY. MY GENTLE ATTEMPT TO REFASTEN THE WIRE CLIP BROKE SOMETHING ON THE BACK OF THE "POD"--I DON'T KNOW WHAT. SO I WAS FORCED TO REPLACE THE "POD" ASSEMBLY AT A COST OF OVER $400. > NOTE--I'D PREVIOUSLY REPLACED THREE HEADLIGHT BULBS ON THIS CAR; AND THOUGH SUCCESSFUL, I WAS FRUSTRATED WITH THE PROCESS EACH TIME. > THERE OUGHTA BE A LAW! > AN OWNER SHOULD BE ABLE TO REPLACE ANY SAFETY-RELATED LIGHT BULB ON THE OUTSIDE OF THEIR VEHICLE WITH 1) NO PRIOR EXPERIENCE MECHANICALLY, EG, A TEEN BARBIE-BIMBO; 2) ONLY MODEST HAND DEXTERITY, EG, AN OLD FART WITH ARTHRITIS; 3) NO TOOL MORE COMPLEX THAN A COMMONPLACE SCREWDRIVER; AND 4) WITHOUT AN OWNER'S MANUAL, EG, AN OLDER USED CAR. > THE GOAL HERE IS TO EMPOWER AN OWNER TO KEEP THEIR VEHICLE IN SAFEST CONDITION. I REQUEST THAT THE USDOT ISSUE AND ENFORCE SUITABLE STANDARDS FOR THE MANUFACTURE OF "FAMILY" VEHICLES. > IT'S TOO '!@#$% LATE TO HELP ME. I DOUBT WHETHER I'LL EVER BUY ANOTHER MAZDA.