Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





2010 Mazda3

1151618202128

Comments

  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    The 2010 mazda3 is a overall well done car, but the mpg needs to be there if mazda wants to compete with the cars that get 35 to 39 mpgs, that includes the both the i and s models

    Considering that the Mazda3 is Mazda's best seller, and is considered one of the best cars in its class for 7 model years now, I really do not think that statement is true. Besides, what car in this class gets 39mpg? I can't think of one. Not even sub-compacts like the Fit or Yaris or Accent get that.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,728
    An opinion is neither "true" nor "false."

    Several cars in this class can get 35 to 39 mpg on the highway: Civic, Corolla, Elantra, Focus for example can all reach upper 30s on the highway. Actually the Mazda3i can also, at least the pre-2010 cars could. And there are some mid-sized cars with power comparable or better than that of the Mazda3s that can get over 35 mpg on the highway. I am talking about real-world mpg vs. EPA here. If the original opinion was regarding average fuel economy or EPA numbers, then I agree that is a stretch for a car like the Mazda3 since there are few cars of any kind that hit those numbers.
  • igozoomzoomigozoomzoom Waleska, GeorgiaPosts: 791
    The 2.0L MZ3 'i' with 5-speed manual has an EPA highway rating of 33mpg. The highway rating drops to 29mpg for the 2.5L in the 's' models. For the sake of comparison, the Civic Si is also rated at 29mpg and the Toyota Matrix (2.4) gets 28mpg highway.

    The Civic (1.8L) has an EPA highway estimate of 34mpg (manual) or 36mpg (automatic). Ford Focus, using the same 2.0L engine as the Mazda3 i (w/o VVT), gets 35mpg highway. So there's no question, that there are other small cars with better fuel economy than the Mazda3. But most (all, IMO) aren't nearly as much fun as to drive as the MZ3. Quite a few buyers (based on sales figures) are willing to sacrifice a few mpg to get the "Zoom Zoom"!

    In most other markets (including Canada), Mazda offers the 2.0L engine in both the 4-door and 5-door bodystyles. The U.S.-spec 5-door is unusual having the 2.5L engine and 17" alloy wheels standard. In Canada, you can get a 5-door with 2.0L and 16" steel wheels. I'm surprised, especially considering current economic conditions, that Mazda didn't offer the entry-level 5-door model here in the U.S.
  • unicorn62unicorn62 Posts: 13
    I didn't just buy the mazda 3 sport for the " zoom zoom" if i need the power to merge on the highway the power is there as well in passing. I got the sport because the color i have you can only get in the s model. Like i said if mazda want to keep selling the 3 they need to work on the MPG's or people will look to other cars that do and mazda will lose people they had before. :mad: I'm happy with the style of the car but they need to work more on the MPG's!
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,728
    Quite a few buyers (based on sales figures) are willing to sacrifice a few mpg to get the "Zoom Zoom"!

    Maybe if the Mazda3 had fuel economy on a par with the Civic/Corolla/Focus, we'd see the Mazda3 at or near the top of the small-car sales charts instead of those cars. A car can have both excellent fuel economy and crisp handling--Honda has proven that. Maybe Mazda could add an "HF" trim (high fuel economy) to the Mazda3 for people who want both, but wouldn't mind sacrificing some power to get it.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    His post was not an opinion really, and nor was my remark. He made a claim that the Mazda3 cannot compete with the fuel economy it gets. Mazda has proven that to be not true. Nothing to dispute there.

    I really try to shy away from "real world fuel economy", because it all depends on how you drive and where you live. Do you really think the majority of 2010 Fusion Hybrid owners are going to get over 1,400 miles per tank (over 80mgp average), like the drivers of the Fusion Hybrid experiment got? I think not. I know that example is a quite extreme, but, it is a case where driving habits influence fuel economy.

    But, as far as the EPA is concerned, there is no compact that gets 39mpg. If there is a car that is rated that well, I would sure like to know!
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    Let's see how far off Mazda is from those you mentioned.

    Toyota Corolla LE: 26/35 (132hp/128tq) , XRS 22/30 (158hp/162tq)
    Honda Civic: 26/34 (140hp/128tq)
    Ford Focus: 24/35 (140hp/132tq)

    Mazda3: i 25/33 (148hp/135tq) , s 21/29 (167hp/168tq)

    With far more power and better proven performance then the listed above competition, and at most a 1mpg city and 2mpg highway fuel economy disadvantage, I think it's an absolute joke to say that the Mazda3 is not on par with the competition. It's not like we are talking about 5 or 6 mpgs here. 1 to 2 is the difference. Give me a break.....
  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,152
    "But, as far as the EPA is concerned, there is no compact that gets 39mpg. If there is a car that is rated that well, I would sure like to know!"

    The 2009 VW Jetta TDI 6-Speed: 30 City, 34 Combined, 41 Highway. :shades:

    Best regards,
    Shipo
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,728
    Yes, the Mazda3's fuel economy is "on a par." It would be nice if it equalled or exceeded that of competitors that are of older design, like all of those you listed above, but that is asking for too much I guess.

    I think it's weird though that Ford can get 34 mpg on a mid-sized sedan with an engine of comparable power to the Mazda3s, yet the Mazda3s gets 5 mpg less, yet is a lighter car. :surprise:
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,728
    Then there's the Insight and (mid-sized) Prius at over 39 mpg, but we digress. :)
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    That is an interesting point. As is how Ford gets 3 mpg (hwy) less for that very same midsize vehicle with the very same engine, but in a different trim level.

    Also, oddly, the Fusion with 2.5 (non S) is rated at 22/31, while the Mazda3 with 2.5 engine is rated at 22/29. Yet both are at 25 mpg combined.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    The 2009 VW Jetta TDI 6-Speed: 30 City, 34 Combined, 41 Highway.

    I stand corrected!!!
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    It would be nice if it equalled or exceeded that of competitors that are of older design, like all of those you listed above, but that is asking for too much I guess.

    There is nothing wrong with wishing for that. In fact, I wish it were better as well. But, since the rest of the car is light years ahead of the others, it does not concern me. That is how Mazda builds and markets their cars.

    As far as the age of each design goes, the Corolla and Focus are little over a calender year old. The Civic is the only one due for a redesign, probably next year.
  • autonomousautonomous Posts: 1,769
    I think it's an absolute joke to say that the Mazda3 is not on par with the competition.

    According to the EPA site (fueleconomy.gov), here are the combined ratings (that is a combination of highway and city driving) for several recent vehicles with automatic transmissions:

    31 - 2009 Honda Fit
    29 - 2010 Toyota Corolla ; 2009 Honda Civic (non-hybrid)
    27 - 2009 Ford Focus ; 2010 Mazda3 i
    25 - 2010 Mazda3 s ; 2002 MazdaProtege

    The difference between the top rank (35 mpg) and the lowest (25 mpg) is about 20%. Mazda has not significantly boosted the fuel economy of its Mazda3 s since 2002 (when the model was known as the Protege). The Mazda2 promises a welcome change on this front.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,728
    The Focus a little over a year old? Hardly. It's an ancient design as cars go, about ten years old without a full redesign (here in the US, anyway--other lands get a more modern Focus). The Mazda3 is the newest compact design out there--until the Forte debuts, anyway. BTW, check out the power and fuel economy numbers of that car, then tell us that the Mazda3 is "light years" ahead.
  • Not necessarily, unicorn62.

    The Mazda 3s is NOT an economy car. It is a compact, but it is meant to for buyers who want style, equipment, and some power in an attractive style and want only decent fuel economy........kinda like a poor man's 3-series. The Lancer (the current generation), Jetta and Rabbit/Golf are also similar.
    Given the performances of these cars, their fuel economy is very reasonable. Mind you, they are NOT economy cars.

    One Mazda 3i is perhaps an economy car. Its fuel economy figures are only 1 or 2 mpg lower than the Civic/Corolla competition, but it has at least 8 hp more! I think a loss of 1 or 2 mpg for 8 hp is worth it!
    Mazda could probably modify the gearing to get an extra 1 or 2 mpg (like the Focus), but then the character of the car would no longer be sporty enough to qualify as zoom-zoom!

    The question is whether or not the major priority for buyers of compact cars is fuel economy. Looking at the success of the Mazda 3, it appears like there is a considerable market for compact-but-not-economy cars.
  • BTW, check out the power and fuel economy numbers of that car, then tell us that the Mazda3 is "light years" ahead.

    Cars are not judged by fuel economy and power numbers alone!

    What compact non-luxury car has steering-controlled headlights, a near-luxury car interior, dual-zone air-con, and a (class-leading) sporty-but-comfortable-and-refined ride all in one package? The fact that the Mazda 3 has all these, for an affordable price, is a major reason why it is "light-years" ahead of its competition!
  • Have you considered the displacement/power output in your list? The Fit, Corolla and Civic are 1.5 L or 1.8 L with 140 hp or less. The Focus and Mazda 3i have 2.0 L engines with 148 hp......the Mazda 3s has 167 hp!

    Given the power output of the Mazda 3, its fuel economy is competitive with the competition (Focus, Lancer, Golf/Rabbit, Jetta). The Mazda 3i has the same fuel economy as the Focus!

    BTW, comparing the fuel economy of the Mazda 3s (167 hp) and the Protege (130 hp), it's very clear that Mazda has made a lot of progress since 2002!......how does a 37 hp gain for the same fuel economy sound?

    Mind you, the real competition of the Mazda 3s are the Jetta, Golf/Rabbit, Lancer and perhaps the Impreza.
    The Mazda 3i has competitive fuel economy with the Focus, Civic and Corolla. The Fit is not a Mazda 3 competitor.
  • unicorn62unicorn62 Posts: 13
    Blackadder, I had a small suv the nissan rogue(08) that got 33.5mpg doing 60mph and 32.0 doing 65mph the rogue is alot heaver and has the 2.5l engine and has 170hp with 175torque, now you tell me why the mazda3 shouldn't get better mpg's. :confuse: By the way i am not a he i am a she BACKY!!!
  • Backy (a.k.a. unicorn62), the FWD Rogue is rated 22/27 city/hwy by the EPA. The Mazda 3s is rated 22/29 for the automatic. The Rogue weighs 3281 lb; the Mazda 3s weighs 3064 lb. I would say the Mazda 3s fuel economy compares well with the Rogue! (BTW, a 200 lb wieght difference is not "a lot heavier".....that's about the weight of an average 6-ft man!)

    When you take the Mazda 3s for what it is, a compact-but-not-economy car, its fuel economy is very competitive. Look at similar cars:
    VW Rabbit 2.5 L (170 hp): 21/29 mpg
    Mitsubishi Lancer 2.4 L (168 hp): 21/28 mpg
    Subaru Impreza 2.5 L (170 hp): 20/27 mpg.

    In fact, compared to its competition, the Mazda 3s has class-leading fuel economy! Remember: a compact car is not necessarily an economy car!
  • Well, Shippo, you know we're talking about gasoline, non-hybrid cars here...... LOL!
  • I think it's weird though that Ford can get 34 mpg on a mid-sized sedan with an engine of comparable power to the Mazda3s, yet the Mazda3s gets 5 mpg less, yet is a lighter car.

    I suspect a lot of it has to do with the gearing. The Mazda 3s probably has shorter gear ratios in order to make the car sportier or more responsive, whereas the Fusion probably has taller gear ratios that enhance fuel economy at the cost of responsiveness.
    I haven't driven either the 2010 Mazda 3s or the 2010 Fusion, but I would bet that the Mazda 3s feels/is faster or at least more responsive.

    When you compare the Mazda 3s' fuel economy to other compacts with around 170 hp that are meant to be sporty (eg, Rabbit, Lancer GTS, Impreza), its fuel economy is, in fact, class-leading.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    I had a small suv the nissan rogue(08) that got 33.5mpg doing 60mph and 32.0 doing 65mph the rogue is alot heaver and has the 2.5l engine and has 170hp with 175torque, now you tell me why the mazda3 shouldn't get better mpg's

    Have you driven the Mazda3 in exactly the same way and if so what mpg did you get?

    If you are comparing your actual mpg to an EPA rating, that is not a valid comparison as the EPA highway test does not consist of cruising at a steady 60 or 65 mph. Most (all?) cars exceed the EPA highway number when driven in that way.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    According to the EPA site (fueleconomy.gov), here are the combined ratings (that is a combination of highway and city driving) for several recent vehicles with automatic transmissions:

    31 - 2009 Honda Fit
    29 - 2010 Toyota Corolla ; 2009 Honda Civic (non-hybrid)
    27 - 2009 Ford Focus ; 2010 Mazda3 i
    25 - 2010 Mazda3 s ; 2002 MazdaProtege


    Well, the Fit is a sub-compact, so it does not belong in this class. You also forgot to mention that the Corolla XRS gets a EPA combined 25mpg, same as the Mazda3 s and the Mazda3 s has a considerable power advantage.

    So again, I do not see how 2 mpg's is a big deal. Answer this in all seriousness, is 2 mpg's the difference between "competitive" and "not competitive"? I sure don't think so.
  • unicorn62unicorn62 Posts: 13
    Jeffyscott, I have the 2010 mazda 3s. i drive the car like i did the rogue, I don't drive it like a sport car. I haven't gone on a long trip with it yet to find out what the true mpg's are like i did with the rogue. Autonomous: I was talking to a girl that has the nissan sentra sl and she told me she went on a trip and got 41mpg and its a gas car not hybrid.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,728
    When you compare the Mazda 3s' fuel economy to other compacts with around 170 hp that are meant to be sporty (eg, Rabbit, Lancer GTS, Impreza), its fuel economy is, in fact, class-leading.

    I don't see how 21/29 mpg with 167 hp can be considered "class leading" when another member of the class gets 22/32 mpg with 173 hp. Class-leading in terms of some luxury features being available, and maybe class leading in terms of handling, but not in terms of power or fuel economy.
  • "When you compare the Mazda 3s' fuel economy to other compacts with around 170 hp that are meant to be sporty (eg, Rabbit, Lancer GTS, Impreza), its fuel economy is, in fact, class-leading.

    I don't see how 21/29 mpg with 167 hp can be considered "class leading" when another member of the class gets 22/32 mpg with 173 hp. Class-leading in terms of some luxury features being available, and maybe class leading in terms of handling, but not in terms of power or fuel economy."

    The Fusion is not in the same class as the Mazda 3s, Rabbit/Golf, Jetta, Lancer GTS and Impreza. Or are you talking of another car?
  • autonomousautonomous Posts: 1,769
    Sorry to say, aviboy, but you appear to have totally missed the point.
    To clarify, here are a few questions for you (and anyone else interested!):
    - Do you think most drivers think that fuel economy is important in the choice of vehicle?
    - Do you think an auto manufacturer that increases the horsepower while maintaining the same fuel economy on a vehicle is responding to demand for improved fuel economy?
    - Do you think there is a shift in the marketplace away from larger heavier vehicles towards lighter vehicles that are more fuel efficient?
  • mz6greyghostmz6greyghost Posts: 1,230
    I have the 2010 mazda 3s. i drive the car like i did the rogue, I don't drive it like a sport car. I haven't gone on a long trip with it yet to find out what the true mpg's are like i did with the rogue.

    You also won't find out the "true" mileage until you allow the car to be "broken in", so to speak. The Mazda3, just like my Mazda6, usually will see an increase in fuel economy after a few thousand miles. It's actually quite common in Mazda vehicles as a whole: mileage increases as the vehicle gets "broken in".

    I don't see why the 3 won't be averaging in the mid-30s within a few months...
  • mz6greyghostmz6greyghost Posts: 1,230
    - Do you think most drivers think that fuel economy is important in the choice of vehicle?

    Of course. The real question is: would I settle for a coma-inducing Corolla or Civic just to get 2 more MPG? I wouldn't, and there are more than a few others on this forum that feel the same way.

    - Do you think an auto manufacturer that increases the horsepower while maintaining the same fuel economy on a vehicle is responding to demand for improved fuel economy?

    Yes. Why? They're getting better overall performance for the same amount of $$$ in gas. Case in point: Your Protege example. A car that has almost a 30 percent INCREASE in horsepower is huge, no matter what class the vehicle is in. It also usually means that fuel economy drops, since there's more power, but not in this case.

    - Do you think there is a shift in the marketplace away from larger heavier vehicles towards lighter vehicles that are more fuel efficient?

    Like my father-in-law? He drove a gas-guzzling '95 TBird before trading to a '09 Mazda3. Two more doors, 33% less cylinders, 30 MORE horsepower, and a fuel bill that's a fraction of what it was before with the Ford. He also thinks it's more fun-to-drive than the TBird, and miles ahead of the Corolla that he tried out on a test-drive.

    Sorry, but I've also driven the Corolla and Civic, and I'd GLADLY spend a few extra $$$ in gas if I could still have FUN behind the wheel, and I'll still say the same thing when (not if) gas hits $5/gallon.
Sign In or Register to comment.