Howdy, Stranger!

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





Mazdaspeed3 vs. VW V GTI vs. Civic Si

13940424445

Comments

  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    OK, a Civic Si with a Mugen suspension and aero kit, and a different Honda exhaust. I did not see any mention of more power. If it heads near $30K, its WAY over priced. I would rather buy the Mazdaspeed3 and add the Mazdaspeed intake and exhaust that adds make the engine a 293hp and 310tq monster.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    the jdm civic type r sedan :222 hp, 8500 redline, 18 lightweight wheels, and incredibly well handling suspension that actually allows this civic to lap FASTER than a stock s2k, and brembro brakes.


    I was in St. Lucia and picked up a British car mag, forgot the name, but, on the cover, it had a comparo between the WRX, Mazda3 MPS (Speed3 over here), and Civic Type-R. It was a pretty good article. The Subi came in last, the Mazda 2nd, and the Type-R 1st. Mazda got kudos for being the fastest, and handling while the Type-R won because of handling and driving ergernomics.
  • eldainoeldaino Posts: 1,618
    yeah right now the brits love the type r, i've seen it proclaimed as the best hot hatch over there right now by a few euro car mags. (funny because edmunds review of it was less than stellar.)

    the type r i was talking about avi is the jdm version. its the one with the huge brakes and 222hp engine.

    some sources say 212, but the engine in the EUROPEAN hatch type r is supposed to be only 198 hp. Its essentially our si's engine, but tuned for torque and midrange. (it has more of it too rated at 142 lbs.)

    it actually only has a torsion beam rear suspension; but the interior and exterior simply own our si and the jdm type r(which is just a jdm civic sedan.)

    even though its technically the lesser of the two, i'd love the euro type r hatch, the sytling is amazing and its still quite a bit quicker than our si, if not quicker than the jdm r.

    again, the styling alone is the selling point. on top of that, while it does lack an lsd, it comes with a stiffer suspension, noticably bigger brakes, awesome wheels and a better k20.
  • creakid1creakid1 Posts: 2,032
    It is absurd that the Euro Civic w/ such low-tech suspension can beat the Control-Blade GTI & C-1 Focus ST, per most Brit magazines. That's b/c lowered sport versions don't use much suspension travel, & therefore the crude suspension geometry doesn't show much. The 5-cyl turbo in the C-1 Focus ST also hurts, no wonder it got ranked behind the GTI:
    creakid1, "2008 Ford Focus future vehicle" #43, 19 Jan 2007 2:11 am

    But once comparing the "normal" versions, the order almost always goes reverse. The C-1 Focus w/ 4-cyl beats both the Golf (Rabbit) & the Euro Civic, mainly b/c the Euro Civic's ride sucks & neither can match Focus' steering feel.
  • creakid1creakid1 Posts: 2,032
    "...but i would hardly call the gti a pentalty box..."

    Yeah, but I'm sure the 30th Edition is, per some Brit magazine who found it too uncomfortable for British roads. :)

    "creakid...i'm suprised you say that the focus st rides less 'nervously' over roads than the 3...i test drove one the other day and it was good fun, and sportier than my rabbit."

    I only drove the '04 Mazda3's, so I don't know if its quick-rebound ride has changed or not. But the Focus ST has retuned the suspension after the '05 & no longer using the SVT shocks. No wonder Consumer Reports mentioned how comfortably the '06 ST rides.

    "is the st the c-1 chassis? i was always under the impression that the c-1 chassis can only be found under the euro focus..."

    Some Brit magazine also found the old BMW E36 3-series more fun than the E46 3-series mainly due to the more lively steering feel & more playful oversteer from the multi-links. So even an E36 w/ std suspension is still more fun than an E46 w/ the less comfy sport suspension.

    The same goes to the old C-170 Focus I vs the C-1 Focus II. The only thing wrong w/ the U.S.-spec is the over assisted steering on all but the discontinued SVT model. But I know how to fix that by tapping into the pwr-steering wires. I can also have this cheaply equipped car sound insulated by Dynamat to feel more luxurious.

    British Top Gear said:
    comp386, "2008 Ford Focus future vehicle" #47, 19 Jan 2007 10:14 am
    In other words, the old C-170 Focus I beats the Mazda3 & the Golf V.

    It also beats its own new version in fun but not ride/handling compromise (see post#67):
    creakid1, "Ford Focus 2005 release date" #67, 25 Dec 2004 12:39 pm

    That's right, you don't want to give up a lively tail if the high-tech Control Blade design can harness it w/in a predictable level.
  • eldainoeldaino Posts: 1,618
    hey man whatever works works. i too was a bit of a snob and scoffed at this (and that with me being a honda fan), but you know what? like someone else on this site said its excecution that counts.

    if the focus or mazda 3 accomplished what they do using a torsion beam, than i'm sure you wouldn't complain. ;) there is no denying the purity of the type r philosophy.

    plus creakid, you haven't driven the type r have you? i'd say the brits are pretty savvy on their hatches...they know what they are doing. ;)
  • eldainoeldaino Posts: 1,618
    maybe i should clarify... i thought the c-1 chassis was the only reason why the focus was fun, and the only chassis that had the control blade suspension.

    i was under the impression that that 3 here in states was the only offering with the control blades....so your saying that even your focus st has them?

    but then again, you and top gear also think that regardless of the suspension, this older focus is more 'fun'? ok i get that. i'm just trying to confirm that this is what you are saying! because you mentioned it 'beating' the 'new' version, whereas i thought the c-1 was kinda oldish and not anything 'new'.
  • eldainoeldaino Posts: 1,618
    never mind, i got educated on wikipedia.

    i know the differences now, so i guess the question i have is if the mk1focus in europe is the same suspension as the focus st we have here, because the wikipedia article on the american focus that i just finished reading didn't identify the chassis codes on the american focuses, just the euro ones.

    having said that, compared to the older euro focus AND the new c-1, most euro guys, including top gear, still think that the rabbit feels the nicest with regards to ride comfort, while stil having a sporty edge, even if its not as big as the old focus or c-1. so yeah, you were right. the rabbit does kinda ride like a luxury car.
  • creakid1creakid1 Posts: 2,032
    "if the focus or mazda 3 accomplished what they do using a torsion beam, than i'm sure you wouldn't complain. there is no denying the purity of the type r philosophy."

    According to Brit magazines, the better Civic Europeans dream of is the multi-link-rear sport sedan privately imported from Japan!

    MkV's Control Blades really improved the MkIV GTI.

    Read post #44 & #45:
    creakid1, "Ford Focus 2005 release date" #44, 6 Oct 2004 2:56 pm
    Even today, VW never really duplicated the liveliness of the original MkI GTI, which has torsion-beam. But again, it's the steering that shines, & having multi-link rear on the MkI Rabbit is likely to make it even better.

    So far, I've collected a non-sport (springs/swaybar modified to match the LX sedan purely for comfort!) '00 Civic hatch, which sucks in steering feel & ratio, but its multi-link Double Wishbones all around was amazing when showing how evenly all 4 wheels drifted the same time! I doubt if the new Euro Civic can achieve such balanced drifting talent, or just having this level of road holding w/o hurting the ride comfort.

    I also collected an '84 MkI Jetta Wolfsburg (Recaro front seats) coupe & added GTI swaybars. Repairs have been troublesome, but, besides the fun manual steering, the rear seat was very comfy & cushes road shocks uncannily well!

    Last year, I collected the latest E36 -- '99 328is. Looking forward to power-wag its tail by adding LSD.

    My latest collection is of course, the just-discontinued '07 Focus ST w/ a big 4-cyl & quick steering ratio, & corners way sharper & w/ less front-end plow than my 6-cyl BMW.

    I'm still keeping my twin-cam '90 Protege LX w/ TTL suspension, which does scary donuts all the time, especially in the rain. But its steering feel is so good & the ratio is quick.
  • creakid1creakid1 Posts: 2,032
    "...so i guess the question i have is if the mk1focus in europe is the same suspension as the focus st we have here..."

    Only our SVT had identical setting as their ST170. Our ST sedan also had the same suspension but w/o the lowered springs.

    Euro suspension settings vary from std to Ghia to ST170 to RS. Lately, ours starts from S/SE (no rear swaybar) to SES to ST. Back around '02, our Street Edition sedan/wagon (comes in bright yellow, red or blue) had Euro-setting suspension. I test drove it, & it felt pretty firm -- probaby the Euro Ghia setting. I ordered one but then cancelled it, b/c the Advance Track (stability program) was only available on the softly sprung ZTS.

    The old-design ligher-body C-170 has no subframes, so the car feels more direct to handle but noisier than the C-1. By the way, the Control Blade is just a cost-effective way to duplicate the expensive multi-link found in the early-'90's MkI Mondeo wagon.

    For those of you not familiar w/ C-1's (& C-170's) original ancestor Mondeo wagon, here's a recent ST220 sedan version of it:
    http://www.wheels24.co.za/Wheels24/Galleries/w24_GalleriesModelPicDisplay/0,,675- - - - - - - - - - - - -13649,00.html
    I'm sure it looks very familiar :D
    http://www.wheels24.co.za/Wheels24/Galleries/w24_GalleriesModelCompNavIndex/0,,6- - - - - - - - - - - 75,00.html

    & the 1st mass-produced C-1 Focus sedan started in Taiwan since late '04:
    http://roadtest.u-car.com.tw/roadtest-detail.asp?rid=61
    Scroll down & see another interesting corporate face from a Foreign-market Ford. Wow, like the Golf V, it even has rear A/C ducts.

    No wonder I don't think the exterior of my '07 C-170 U.S. Focus ST looks outdated :P
  • No not Europe, I'm in New Zealand. The Edition 30 GTI has only just come out, so it might make it to the US - ask your VW dealer (if enough of you ask your VW dealers you might be able to get it!)
  • creakid1creakid1 Posts: 2,032
    Add a lag-free supercharger to the 1.4 turbo can do no less while less fuel/emission is needed:
    http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/carreviews/longtermtests/209883/volkswagen_golf.htm- - - - - - - - l

    This engine is finally coming to America along w/ the new body:
    http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/spyshots/209759/volkswagen_golf.html
    The bulky, heavy, weak low-end, gritty-sounding & thirsty 2.5 5-cyl is finally dead. So the output of your next std Rabbit can be tuned to "Edition 30" level? & everyone of them can now ride on DSG. I wonder what's gonna happen to the 4-link Control Blade rear suspension when they simplify it this time.
  • eldainoeldaino Posts: 1,618
    According to Brit magazines, the better Civic Europeans dream of is the multi-link-rear sport sedan privately imported from Japan!

    which ones? all the recent ones i have read are NOT talking about the jdm type r (the sedan you mentioned) but about the torsion-beamed hatch that is exclusive to them. (europe.)

    i think the type r from japan would fare horrible in europe, its suspension is tuned way to much for track use to be a daily driver for most.
  • eldainoeldaino Posts: 1,618
    The bulky, heavy, weak low-end, gritty-sounding & thirsty 2.5 5-cyl is finally dead. So the output of your next std Rabbit can be tuned to "Edition 30" level? & everyone of them can now ride on DSG. I wonder what's gonna happen to the 4-link Control Blade rear suspension when they simplify it this time.

    man! weak low end? what are you talking about!? thats the problem with the 2.5: its MOSTLY low end!

    I dunno about the rabbit being tuned to edition 30 levels...where on this report does it say that? and i didn't see where they said they would simplify the control blades...they are just tweaking them.

    and granted, this is a uk website: the 2.5 engine is nonexistant there, so we don't know what vw of america has in store for us yet, even though i wouldn't mind some different engine choices. I just hope the base price doesn't go up, the interior retains its luxury (thoug i feel that this is going to be the first thing to go, it'll still be nice, about as nice as mazda or honda, but it may not be slightly superior like it is now. And they better keep the rabbit nameplate!)

    i didn't find any real proof or insinuation that the 1.4 is coming to the US. IT may make the gti irrelevant!

    to top it off, the mk VI looks only very slightly different than the mkV; and its hard to tell with all the coverings. But i only detect slight refreshings of the body, a bit more muscular. the biggest changes will be under the hood and in how its produced.
  • creakid1creakid1 Posts: 2,032
    Which one? I don't remember. I'm not even exactly familiar w/ the difference b/t type R & S. But that British article talked about the availability of the sedan imported from Japan. They all have the steering wheel on the right side anyway. Japan also export Civic sedans w/ the steering wheel on the left side.
  • creakid1creakid1 Posts: 2,032
    "man! weak low end? what are you talking about!? thats the problem with the 2.5: its MOSTLY low end!"

    My bad. I only read about the difference b/t VW's 2.3 5-cyl & 1.8 4-cyl turbo from British "CAR" when the V5 was first available more than a few years ago. They said the V5 doesn't cost less, has weaker low-end torque but no more pk hp, consumes more fuel & the nature of the 5-cyl also sounds less smooth. So the only reason they can think of for this V5 to exist is that the 1.8 turbo's continueous max-torque produces a constant accelerating rate along w/ a non-music-like unchanging sound throughout the rev range. This is simply boring & therefore feels less satisfying than an engine w/ rise-&-fall torque curve that give you a sweet spot. In other words, the 1.8 turbo is less challenging & therefore less "fun" in a way.

    http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/carreviews/firstdrives/59942/volkswagen_golf.html
    "The result is 168bhp - about the same as the old 2.3-litre V5."

    There's no doubt that the 2.5 has much more low end than the 2.3, as both have similar max peak hp. Just like the 2.8 in my BMW 328is has about the same peak hp as the weaker-low-end 2.5 in the 325i.

    But, compare the low0end of the 2.5 5-cyl to this mighty "tractor"- "big-rig"- "locomotive"-like double-charged 4-cyl monster... I don't know:
    http://www.motorbar.co.uk/vwgolf14gt.htm
    "When you look at the 'paper' specification and performance figures
    for VW's new 1.4-litre TSI dual-charged petrol engine and see it is
    more powerful, faster, more fuel efficient and less polluting than the relatively-new 2.0-litre FSI direct injection petrol engine, it's hard
    to believe what you're reading can be possible.

    But, I can assure you, it most certainly is. At last, a petrol engine which drives like a diesel but is quieter although not yet quite as frugal with fuel. Turn the ignition key and the new 1.4-litre unit springs into life — no diesel rattle or clatter. Slip it into first gear and accelerate. Change up to second, third, fourth and so on and there is a huge amount of power. And, more importantly, torque — making the car easy to drive at slow speeds in town or in traffic. On the open road, thanks to supercharger and turbocharger power or a mixing of both, the engine is really responsive and strong during acceleration. There are no steps between these boosted stages. It is a petrol unit, but
    it's just like driving a diesel. Remarkable."

    "I dunno about the rabbit being tuned to edition 30 levels...where on this report does it say that?"

    http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/carreviews/firstdrives/59942/volkswagen_golf.html
    "Installed in the new Golf GT, it gives 0-60mph in less than eight seconds, plus 39.2mpg economy and impressive CO2 emissions of 173g/km. But headline figures aside, the most striking aspect is the TSI's performance. Put simply, it feels like a large, lusty engine, with lots of punch and power right up to 6,500rpm."

    http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/carreviews/longtermtests/209883/volkswagen_golf.htm- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - l
    "Power has increased to 230bhp – that’s the same as the Edition 30"

    Well, it's the same 1.4 super-&-turbo.

    "and i didn't see where they said they would simplify the control blades...they are just tweaking them."

    It was another British article that mentioned about "simplifying it" for cost-cutting purpose. & the word "tweaking" simply sounds better. We'll see.

    The Focus has expensive suspension. The Golf/Rabbit MkIV has expensive interior. The MkV had both expensive interior & suspension. & the MkVI is just a cheaper-built of the MkV? Well, at least they said they will improve the steering ("feel" perhaps?). You know, all it takes for the Rabbit to beat the Focus (& rest of the world) is the steering feel & reliability!

    http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/carreviews/firstdrives/59942/volkswagen_golf.html
    "The result is a vehicle that rides and handles well. A Focus is sharper, but Ford doesn't yet have a 'super-turbo' engine. Not even James Bond has one of those."

    Nah, I'll pass this "James Bond-ish" high-tech engine 'cause the Focus is still a sharper drive, especially when there's an U.S.-only Mazda-developed 2.3 normally-aspirated meaty 4-cyl on tap :D

    Here's why. This high-tech VW engine is far from perfect. Otherwise, BMW's 3.0 6-cyl nearly-lag-free turbo wouldn't be such a big deal:
    http://www.thecarconnection.com/Auto_News/Daily_Auto_News/Euro_Drive_VWs_Golf_TS- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I.S173.A11836.html?pg=2
    "You have to be very deliberate in your requests for power (a serious bootful of gas is needed to convince the engine of your desire for a rapid increase forward motion) at which point the Golf GT (maybe a future Rabbit for you Yanks?) jumps to its feet takes off like a startled, er, bunny. It's the most on/off engine I've ever encountered, which is ironic when you consider that the whole point of adding a supercharger was to reduce turbo lag and make it feel more urgent."

    "i didn't find any real proof or insinuation that the 1.4 is coming to the US. IT may make the gti irrelevant!"

    Well, maybe VW wants to take time to tune the throttle for a few years before introducing it to a big & sensitive/picky market like the U.S. w/o ruining its image again. Same reason why they changed the 2.3 V5 to 2.5 for the U.S.

    Just remember, even the 2.0 8v in the non-GTI/GLI MkIV also got replaced by the Audi-designed 1.8 20v turbo gradually before the MkV came out. How about this? It'd be fun if I bet you that by the time the MkVI U.S.-spec Rabbit/Jetta comes out, a super-&-turbo 4-cyl will become the std engine. :D & people won't complain about its non-GTI-like mpg, either :P
  • eldainoeldaino Posts: 1,618
    thanks for the links!

    i really wouldn't mind the 1.4 tsi at all, i just didn't know how vw would position it...i hope it will be reliable!

    the new edmunds article comparing the bmw m3 and some competitors included a gti edition 30...they said it was great and that its going to become the standard engine in the gti when the mkVI comes out, so if thats the case, butting the 1.4 tsi in the rabbit would makes sense.
  • andres3andres3 CAPosts: 5,343
    Wrong. Reliability should be everyone's number one concern as it is the biggest cost to the eventual owner. While it might be true all car brands have lemons..... it is also certainly true that Dodge may make as many as 1,000 lemons for every single (1) lemon Honda makes, for example.

    In my experience with VW, they are not lemons, but simply cars with parts that break down semi-regularly.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    While it might be true all car brands have lemons..... it is also certainly true that Dodge may make as many as 1,000 lemons for every single (1) lemon Honda makes, for example.

    As a Honda owner who has watched his dad burned by Chrysler twice, I still have to say that making a comment like that sure seems inflammatory, like you are looking for a fight.

    You won't find it from me, since I dont completely disagree, but c'mon, 1000 lemons from Dodge for every 1 Honda lemon? That's just major exaggeration.
  • creakid1creakid1 Posts: 2,032
    statistically 7-yr old Japanese cars have as many problems as 4-yr old American cars. Take your pick.

    If you lease a made-in-Germany Rabbit for 3 yrs, then you might only have to deal w/ around one unscheduled break down, which isn't too bad consider how this little bunny pampers you every single day w/ 1st-class ride comfort & decent quietness all wrapped in an easy-to-park exterior dimension that'll find you parking spaces easily. I don't recall the bulky '95-99 Toyota Avalon w/ low-tech suspension riding this comfortably!
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    don't recall the bulky '95-99 Toyota Avalon w/ low-tech suspension riding this comfortably!

    Or any 95-99 VW for that matter
  • andres3andres3 CAPosts: 5,343
    Okay... maybe it was exaggeration... but major exaggeration.... I wouldn't be too sure.

    I'd be willing to bet the actual ratio is close to 100:1 for Chrysler branded (jeep/dodge/plymouth) lemons vs. Honda lemons.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    100:1 for Chrysler branded (jeep/dodge/plymouth) lemons vs. Honda lemons.

    I still think that may be an exaggeration. Keep in mind, lemons are only considered, or reported as lemons, if the mfg buys it back from the customer. Mfg's do all they can to avoid that. Just because YOU think the vehicle is a lemon, does not constitute it a lemon, but, rather a piece of Sugar Honey Iced Tea :sick:

    A more correct statement may sound something like this: "The ratio of Chrysler brand vehicles to experience problems compared to Honda is likely to be 100:1" And that STILL may be an exaggeration!
  • forbesjforbesj Posts: 22
    I bet it's more like 5:1 or something like that.

    And I'm no Chrysler fan.
  • eldainoeldaino Posts: 1,618
    I don't really like lemons to begin with.

    ;)
  • creakid1creakid1 Posts: 2,032
    "Or any 95-99 VW for that matter"

    Wrong! The '98 Passat & '99 Jetta all rode so comfortably not even the '07 Accord can match. Consumer Reports also feels that the current MkV Jetta/Rabbit rides no more comfortably than the old '99 MkIV Jetta/Golf.

    B/c when I test drove the '99 Jetta, I noticed it's MSRP is lower than the less-comfy-riding '99 Avalon.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    Me neither, and I live in the sweet tea capital of the country!
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    The '98 Passat & '99 Jetta all rode so comfortably not even the '07 Accord can match.

    Wrong! First off, ride quality is subjective, and the 99 Jetta never rode anywhere near the comfort that I have when I am in my fathers 03 Accord.

    Consumer Reports also feels that the current MkV Jetta/Rabbit rides no more comfortably than the old '99 MkIV Jetta/Golf.

    Well, it better! It's a new design!! The MkIV ride was not all that great!

    B/c when I test drove the '99 Jetta, I noticed it's MSRP is lower than the less-comfy-riding '99 Avalon.

    Two totally different vehicles. The Jetta is a compact/mid sized vehicle, and the Avalon is a full sized sedan. If the Jetta was more expensive, it would have been a total rip off. The Jetta better compares to the Corolla, rather then the Avalon.
  • creakid1creakid1 Posts: 2,032
    "Wrong! First off, ride quality is subjective, and the 99 Jetta never rode anywhere near the comfort that I have when I am in my fathers 03 Accord."

    Good point. & to be reasonable, I did noticed that the '99 Jetta riding less than perfect -- sometimes slightly lumpy & sometimes slightly floaty. But the '95-99 (I never rode the '00 or newer) Avalon had quicker up-&-down motions over larger bumps & therefore didn't glide as well as the Jetta in a relaxing manner, at least when I sat in the back seat.

    "Well, it better! It's a new design!! The MkIV ride was not all that great!"

    Consumer Reports also has the tendency to notice the ride smoothness over the superficial road surface quite a bit rather than just larger bumps. That's most likely why they somewhat prefer the ride of the previous generation Passat/Jetta over the current ones. But now w/ Control Blades' better ride/handling compromise that made the cars "too" close to perfection, VW probably purposely made the ride a little coarse so buyers will spend more $ to get the Audi A6 instead.

    Consumer Reports also rates the steering feel not during the handling limit. That's why they found more steering feel in the MkV GTI than in the Civic Si. Ditto the G35 over the 325i. But other magazines pointed out that it's the other way around when these cars are being pushed to limit!

    I've been arguing w/ my relatives that VW's are great b/c they ride better than Japanese cars. & they hate VW's due to the nightmares they had w/ the two 1st-yr MkII Jetta's long time ago. But one of my cousins just returned the Passat after his 3-yr lease, then the next lease -- an '07 Accord -- only drew criticizms from his family member about the ride comfort, turning radius, can't see over the hood...

    Again, bulkier but still less comfy than the VW.

    The Euro Civic may be great on the track, & in many cases, beating the GTI, C-1 Focus, Mazdaspeed3, etc., but that's only when they didn't care about the ride.
This discussion has been closed.