......anyway end of topic, moderator please delete thread thank you kindly sir.
I think the thread is worthy of being left open as it will serve to highlight what others believe i-stop or stop-start serves.
@rmvf - maybe my initial response came across as being somewhat terse which it certainly wasn't meant to be of course and probably down to too much brevity.
In my opinion one has to weigh up the cost of any possible fuel savings made over the lifetime of the car ( which at best can only be a guess I'm sure you'll agree) when offset against the extra production costs which are obviously passed on to the end purchaser. It would be easy to forget other contributing factors such as the limitation of the type of battery that must be installed especially the wet cell type used by Mazda which I for one am certainly not a big fan of.
Having done a fair amount of reading on the subject, I have formed the opinion that for the annual mileage that I cover and, perhaps more importantly, how this mileage is undertaken, the i-stop function simply isn't worth it. For 99% of the time that I am stopped during a journey it is as a result of an accident/construction work on the motorway where numerous stop-starts repeated over a very short interval and/or once again short interval and repeated start-stops on 'A' roads when approaching roundabouts etc.
I am of the school that believes (rightly or wrongly) that for longer stops e.g. where traffic is completely stopped for a respectable period of time then i-stop/stop-start lends itself to savings on the fuel front but not so for shorter stops. In the case of the longer stops one can always turn the engine off of course.
The following article is worth a read in so much as it supports the use of i-stop with Mazda getting a mention
http://home.bt.com/lifestyle/motoring/motoring-features/the-truth-about-stop-start-engines-11363870847326 although I'm still not convinced.