Howdy, Stranger!

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





Honda Civic vs Toyota Corolla vs Mazda3

12325272829

Comments

  • bpizzutibpizzuti Posts: 2,743
    11+ seconds 0-60 is fairly slow, or as you say, not quick. One thing I have to worry about is highway merging...it might be able to do it, but it'd be the worse option (though yes, I'm sure that once it gets to highway speed it can hold it). Still I could probably make do except for the following.

    The other problem is major: it barely gets 30 MPG. The Elantra beats it by 3 MPG, and is fairly close to the same weight (Under 200 pound difference). The Cobalt with it's 2.2L engine, gets better MPGs (along with more HP and torque) and is 300 pounds heavier.

    Hmm, maybe Suzuki should think about sourcing GM's 2.2L instead of using their own mill. Because that Cobalt beats the Suzuki in a 0-60 run, despite the Cobalt being 300 pounds heavier.

    Of course, at this point we're starting to get a bit off topic. :shades:
  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,152
    I concur about the Suzuki, we took one out for a test drive (Mrs. Shipo thought it was cute), and we were stunned to find that our Dodge Grand Caravans were much quicker to sixty than the "Zuki". The poor acceleration combined with the relatively poor fuel economy got it immediately crossed off our list.

    Best Regards,
    Shipo
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,737
    Now you're comparing apples to oranges--FWD vs. AWD. So as you say, let's get back to the 3 FWD cars in the topic. None of which is AWD. If you want that, you need to go someplace else.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    Mazda is the sportiest of the bunch but terrible mileage for automatic,

    Over 30mpg's for a 2.0L with 148hp is not terrible.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    The compact Mazda 3 with 148 hp gets the same highway mileage as a midsize Altima with 175 hp, and Accord with 190 hp. 23 in town is equal to the Altima as well, with the CVT. That's actually pretty amazing for Nissan, although off-topic, so I'll leave it alone.

    Give it the 5-speed, Mazda. These things spin way too high RPMs on the interstate.
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Posts: 2,743
    It was always that way..with the 4-speed too. The 2.3 engine just doesn't have that much low-end torque...I love that Nissan engine, but they won't attach VSC to it.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    The Civic and Corolla both have low-rpm cruising gears while having less torque than the Mazda, which has an extra 500cc of displacement. Mazda just chooses not to allow it!

    And, I meant they should put the 5-speed auto in the 2.0 model.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    Mazda's new 2.5 gets 30 highway, 23 city (I think) with 170hp. Pretty much on par with most other mfrgs. But, since it is not in the Mazda3 yet, no sense talking about it.

    My main point was that the fuel economy in the Mazda3 i is not "terrible" It's not class leading, but far from terrible. It's not like it's a Hemi or anything. Many owners report getting mid 30's on the highway.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    No doubt; it's certainly not terrible. You summed it up well. I'd take a Mazda 3 2.0 over a lot of other offerings in the class; the Corolla for starters!
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    Since we are talking about 2.0L engines, and Nissan was mentioned (Altima), I think even though the Sentra is not listed in the thread title, I don't think anyone would have an issue with me talking about it.

    The Nissan Sentra 2.0L gets 24/31 w/ auto(25/33 w/ CVT) 140hp/147tq. The Mazda3 2.0L gets 23/30 w/ auto (24/32 w/ manual) 148hp/135tq. Pretty much dead even.

    It seems both Nissan and Mazda would benefit with having their more powerful / fuel efficient 2.5L in these cars.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    Nissan has the 2.5 in the SE-R Sentra, making 180hp. Doesn't it?

    I believe there is a $16k-$20k forum we could go wake up! Wanna join me?
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Posts: 2,743
    Where's it at? I'll come. I like Nissan's cars a lot but continually curse them for not offering ESC or traction control on the 4 cyl machines (except the Rogue for some reason...which means they COULD put it on anything with the 2.5/CVT).
  • trikev19trikev19 Posts: 18
    Hyundai doesn't sound very exciting, but you should drive the Elantra. Its fun to drive, less expensive and has a better warranty. Resale value is a problem , but no worse than Mazda.
  • sandman46sandman46 Posts: 1,798
    We have this in the wife's 3s and it's a hoot to drive...it's got great get up and go but does suffer in the mileage department. A smooth driver compared to my Civic and the Elantra I tried recently...beats those two in the fun factor and smoothness categories hands down.
    Had the 3 last week for my daily driver with the wife being out of town and it was definitely a fun commute. Haven't tried the 3i with the 2.0 engine as of yet but the wife said it didn't have enough grunt for her to merge onto I-95 so she went with the 3s. Her previous car was the Altima with the 2.4 and that car moved very nicely and was a real sleeper in the comfort department but with the 2002 models increase in size and weight, she went for the '05 3s.
    Still puts a smile on both our faces when we're behind the wheel, but I still prefer my '06 Civic. We will be buying 2 cars this Thanksgiving for the girls and will be trying out all the econoboxes and hoping to make a deal on the same car for both. can't wait to start the search!

    The Sandman :)
  • smallcar1smallcar1 Posts: 76
    Sandman,

    Since you have both the 3S and the Civic w/ automatic how much worse is the 3S's mileage than the Civic?
  • patpat Posts: 10,421
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Posts: 2,743
    Too bad there isn't an "economy hatchbacks" group to match. :shades:
  • will26will26 Posts: 62
    I have an 07 Ex Civic and my boyfriend just bought the 09 Corolla S. My first impression was that the corolla looks nicer than the Civic from the outside with the spoiler and ground effect package. The seats in the Corolla are more comfortable than my car. It seems there is more cushioning.
    As far as the plastics everyone is concerened about. I didn't see that the doors on the Corolla will be as scratch prone as my car. There is some cloth on the Corolla door. I already have many marks from fingernails on my inner door. I can't say the same for the stereo area. It seems like that could get scratched pretty easy on the Corolla. The back seat is not as roomy in the Corolla but the front seat seems to be about that same as the Civic in roominess. Yes the clock placement sucks in the Corolla and the arm rest could have a little cushion.

    For power the Civic obviosly wins but not by much. The Corolla has a lot of passing power but there is more of a lag when you first step on it. As for the ride, the Corolla is smoother but not by much and it is quieter in the cabin. The interior in the Civic looks more updated with the electronic controls and dashboard display. I love the digital speedomoter in mine and don't care for the amber glow of the interier at night on the Corolla.
    All in all I would say if I could choose between the two I would go with the Corolla. Love the looks of the outside and the seats are very comfortable. The ride is almost the same and the Corolla is quieter.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    Resale value is a problem , but no worse than Mazda.

    As a whole, Hyundai does not have great resale value. With Mazda that is not the case. Some models have wonderful resale, and then others do not. The Mazda3, MX-5, and RX-8 have above average resale value. The Mazda6, Tribute, B-Series are not so great. The Tribute and B-Series I can understand why, but, the Mazda6 has always been puzzling to me. The CX's have not been out long enough to accurately asses resale values.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,737
    Well, sometimes the discussion turns to hatches in there, and so far no one has complained. :)
  • sandman46sandman46 Posts: 1,798
    The 3s gets about 25 or so in the city driving and about 32 on the highway. Both great cars to drive and we're pretty happy. I now know why the a/c has problems cooling quickly in the 3...all that black in the interior heats up significantly and it's probably a necessity to tint the windows. Unfortunately, the wife won't do it so she lives with the few minutes of intense heat until things cool down.
    I, on the other hand, have the lightest tint on the Civic and since my handicap parking space at work is sheilded by the building from the west sun, my car cools down much quicker.
    But I wouldn't let this one issue dissuade anyone away from the 3 if they really like the car...using a windshield shade will probably help alot. Like I said, the 3 is a much more exciting car to drive...much like a little race car which just adds to the fun. It's a little pocket rocket especially in the "S" version.

    The Sandman :)
  • smallcar1smallcar1 Posts: 76
    Wow, that is awesome mileage on the 3S. What do you get with your Civic?
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    I get the same FE on my 2005 Mazda6 i. Same 2.3L engine, and my A/C works great! They are different A/C units, though.
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Posts: 2,743
    That's a WHOLE lot better than what I'm getting on my 2.3l Mazda3...I'm getting between 27 and 29 MPG. Thats NYS gas though, which is pretty much all E10
  • sandman46sandman46 Posts: 1,798
    Getting 29 in the city and 36 on the highway which is pretty respectable in my world. Very pleased and when I need my speed fix, I just jump in the 3s like I've said before.
    Very anxious to test drive the new Corolla XLE actually. If I had to get a Corolla, that'd be the one for me. Don't like the body cladding on the S model and the LE seems to have taken over the old CE spot in the lineup. But I'll bet the XLE will sticker out higher than the Civic LX. The EX probably should go against the XLE with the more powerful 2.4 engine. Bet that sucker is as fast as the 3s.

    The Sandman :)
  • smallcar1smallcar1 Posts: 76
    I'm in NY and that is still better than the 22-26 MPG I get in my '96 Altima w/ a 2.4L.
  • smallcar1smallcar1 Posts: 76
    I looked at a Corolla LE yesterday and you are right the interior looked more like a CE interior used to. Suprisingly there was only 1 Corolla on the showroom floor although the salesman said they had loads in stock. There was no Prius on the floor either. The slaesman said they were out of them and the next 7 Prius's would be getting were already sold.

    I thought the driving position was better in the Corolla then the Civic because I could see part of the hood. I could not tell where the front of the car was in the Civic since I could not see the hood at all. I do like the body shape of the Civic better though.

    I wonder how the A/C is on the Corolla, the new Camry has had some complaints that it does not get cold enough.

    There are few XRS models and professonal reviews note that it has a rough ride. If professional reviewers who always value handling most of all say it has a rough ride the ride must be bad.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    I'm 6'5" and can't see the front of any car I've ever driven except for a '96 Tahoe SUV. The rest all have raked hoods that I can maybe see the two or three inches closest to the windshield, but no further.

    None is easier to see the front end of than another; and that includes a 2004 Corolla that I used to drive fairly regularly.
This discussion has been closed.