The Mazda 323 has had one of the longest and most strategically intricate production histories of any Japanese passenger car in the People’s Republic of China, originating with the Hainan-Mazda joint venture established in 1992 between Hainan Motor Works and Mazda Motor Corporation. The Haikou-based partnership was a structurally unusual arrangement for the period — positioned on subtropical Hainan Island rather than in any of China’s established industrial centres, and operating with a peculiar mix of older and newer Mazda platforms produced both in full local manufacture and as complete knock-down (CKD) assembly. The original output included the Mazda 929 L4 wagon and 929 HD sedan (CKD), the Mazda 626 GE (CKD), the Mazda MPV LV, and from 1998 the locally-produced sixth-generation Mazda 323 BG.
The structural turning point came in 1998 when First Auto Works (FAW) acquired a majority shareholding in Hainan Motor Works, which automatically transferred FAW into majority position within the Hainan-Mazda joint venture as well. The Mazda 323 was the first vehicle of the joint venture to receive FAW’s «CA» corporate designation, replacing the earlier Hainan-Mazda «HMC» designation. Two production variants were marketed: the CA7160, equipped with a Mazda-sourced 1.6-litre engine producing 86 hp and 125 Nm of torque (sold 1998–2000), and the CA7130 introduced in 2000 with an unusual powertrain configuration: a 1.3-litre «8A1» engine, sourced from FAW-Toyota in Tianjin and produced through that separate joint venture. The 8A1 power unit produced 84 hp and 110 Nm and was simultaneously fitted to several other FAW-group products of the period including the Tianjin Xiali 2000.
Production of the Mazda 323-badged vehicle in China ended in 2004, replaced by the Haima Family (Chinese name: 海马福美来, Haima Fumeilai) which had been launched in 2003. The Haima Family was a substantially restyled derivative of the eighth-generation Mazda Familia / 323 platform, retaining the underlying Mazda BJ chassis architecture with revised front and rear styling treatments, and equipped with a 1.6-litre petrol engine mated to either a five-speed manual or four-speed automatic transmission. The transition to Haima-branded production marked the beginning of a strategic separation between the Mazda corporate parent and the Hainan-based manufacturing operation that had previously borne its name.
The full corporate restructuring concluded in 2006 with Mazda’s formal withdrawal of equity from the Hainan-Mazda joint venture. The exit had been signalled in advance through FAW’s 2002 acquisition of Hainan Automotive, which had effectively rendered the Hainan-Mazda partnership a tripartite arrangement (Mazda + FAW + Hainan Auto) rather than the original bilateral structure. Following the 2006 dissolution, Hainan Auto became fully independent under the new corporate name Haima Automobile Group Co., Ltd., headquartered in Haikou and (later) with R&D facilities in Zhengzhou. Mazda transferred its Chinese manufacturing relationship to a new FAW-Mazda joint venture without Hainan Auto involvement, while Haima retained the rights to continue producing vehicles based on the older Mazda platforms that the Hainan-Mazda joint venture had originally licensed.
The continued production at Haima Auto under platform-licence rights from Mazda would prove commercially significant: alongside the original Haima Family, the company introduced the Haima Happin (Haifuxing 海福星) as a parallel 323-derived sedan in 2003, with the model receiving styling updates in 2007 and 2010 before discontinuation in 2012. Both nameplates ran on the same underlying BJ Familia platform inherited from the original joint-venture period, and both retained Mazda’s engineering DNA in their suspension architecture, structural geometry and powertrain mounting points. The arrangement is a representative example of a broader pattern in late-2000s Chinese automotive industry restructuring — where joint-venture exits by Western and Japanese partners produced independent Chinese marques (such as Haima) that retained access to legacy product platforms even as the foreign partner moved its primary manufacturing relationship elsewhere. Chery and several other Chinese OEMs were navigating broadly similar territory during the same period, though through differently-structured arrangements.
