Howdy, Stranger!

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





Honda Civic vs Mazda3

1202123252665

Comments

  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    oh, I def. agree. A more accurate comparo would be the Prius Vs the Civic Hybrid. I personally do not like the Prius, I would buy the Civic instead. I was just doing some research on the topic, because some people may shop the two. My initial thinking was that it would not be that different, but it was.
    I personally would not buy a hybrid, but, what I really like about Honda is that they incorporated it into one of their best sellers, instead of creating a whole new vehicle, like Toyota did with the Prius. Toyota then followed suit with Highlander Hybrid, and soon to be Camry Hybrid.
    Another thing about the Civic Hybrid, what's up with the funny wheels? Was there an issue using the wheels from the LX or EX?
  • The Accord I'm talking about actually is an LX (at least that's what it says at the back..). It is the current model w/o Alloy wheels, no CD changer.. don't know the exact age... it has about 9000 miles, so it can't be that old. So I guess ist was way more expensive than our Mazda 3 5-door (which we bought including Wisconsin 5.5 sales tax, title, fees, moonroof/6 CD-changer, Xenon, tire pressure monitor, 17" alloy wheels, ABS/SAB package.... for 20100 $.. does Honda even offer Xenon and TPMS?)
    By the way, the rear window antenna is bad.. even outside the reception sometimes is bad. The "real" antenna on the Mazda even allows decent radio in our armored concrete uderground parking.....
    I didn't mean to say the Accord is noisy (since the engine cruises and accelerates well at 15000 rpm.... nice job), but someone said the mazda would be... which is wrong. both engines are fine. I suppose I'd love either one in either car.
    Still, if you love big sedans, the accord is fine..
    Let's drop the Accord... it was just an idea of me to compare the Mazda (and it reaches in that class of cars...somehow).
    Since we look for a second car, I'd consider a Civic (that's why I test drove one) I could live with the higer price and the design (though I don't love it). Since we have the Mazda 5-door our secondary car can be a sedan (we need at least one car that can carry something bulky). The overall quality and economy would make me get one.... but, do I want to look at a speedometer that looks like "back to the future"? That is so GM in hte 90's (even GM dropped that)
    (for the same reason I never buy a Toyota Yaris with Speedometer in the center....)
    I know it is taste and subjective.... but still ugly to me and my wife.
    As far as the hybrid goes, as long as they still use batteries that age, lose efficience and capacity, you will have expensive repairs and lose mileage over time.
    The fact that Mazda needs more fuel is more related to the more powerful engine than to the efficency of the enginge. I wish Mazda offered their smaller engines in the US (like the 1.6 l in Europe etc...) or the 2.0 l in the 5-door (which still would enable me to zoom zoom....:-). A better Gear adjustement for the 5th gear could improve highway economy by 2-3 miles easily w/o altering the engine.
    So, technically they have the ability to compete w/ Honda mileagewise, but don't do so (which is more the fault of the American public that wants more power than economy...)
    anyway, both are great cars, depending on what you are looking for... as long as you stick to Toyota, Honda, Mazda.... you are not too wrong and won't regret buying them (if you decided what you are looking for in a car)
    We personally wanted a hatchback, and the Mazda is cheaper than the Matrix, better (no dead spots!) and way less expensive than any other hatchback (which mostly is a SUV etc.) Wish Toyota and Honda would bring over their civic Hatchbacks, Corolla Hatchback and Wagon... then I might "cheat on" Mazda.... but not for a sedan :-)
    And having a car that we love, and intend to keep for years... for that I give up some gallons of gas. We keep the car till it dies.. that saves us more money than just some gas. Again, if Honda ever drops the digital speedometer, or/and brings the hatchback we might change our minds.....
    By the way: I also considered Corallas... but they are not available w/ ABS or side airbags (not in reality.. only on special order... that tells you what Toyota thinks of safety :-)
    hope honda's safety for everyone forces everyone else to offer safety...
  • ctalkctalk Posts: 646
    There is one thing the Mazda3 doesn't offer that the Accord has, a 244hp V6 engine! :shades: Oh, and space, comfort etc.

    Just went to the auto show. Looked at two of these cars very closely. I felt more comfortable in the Civic, especially in the back seat. The leg room in the Mazda's rear seat was quite tight. The front seats were also less comfortable IMO. I really like the 3's styling both inside and out. I like the Civic's styling, but the front is still a little odd. The interior is also still odd, but I've grown to like it.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    I'm not going to take that conversation on the Accord any further...I just wanted to say that I wish my Accord accelerated to 15,000 rpms like the one you drove!

    I'm just kidding, I know it was a typo. :-)

    But seriously, my gf bought (her parents did,actually) a Corolla w/SAB and ABS right off of the lot.

    As far as the strange wheels on the Hybrid (vs. LX or EX) go, they are very aerodynamic, and much lighter than steel or alloy wheels on LX and EX Civics.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    Thanks for the info on the hybrid wheels...I guess that makes sense. Those hybrid buyers (not all) are usually into weird things, such as those funny looking wheels.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    Yeah...driving a hybrid is buying a car for it's "statement", although less so with a Civic since it generally blends in with the other Civic models. The Prius is a better example of making the "green" statement.
  • Then the Insight must be a really green statment! ;)
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    The insight must be a REALLY green statement...

    Liiiime Greeen!
  • where did you get a Corolla w/ ABS/Airbags? Here in wisconsin (people drive like insane, and we have winter..) for some reason toyota doesn't seem to consider it important...
    Salesman told me, that people are afraid of explosives in the car and ABS is overrated :-)
    Wish I could buy a car jsut in the Internet.....
    I mainly only consider cars like honda (ABS/airbags standard), Mazda (not standard, but models w/ ABS/airbags are actually on the lot in large numbers)..... I heard of the new Nissan vErsa, which is supposed to have that standard too..
    Anyway, toyota seems to be bad.... Scion barely gives you airbags (ABS standard, though), the new Yaris doesn't get Airbags at all 9except for the front ones)..... somehow toyota gets more into the Kia/chevrolet niche regarding to safety available...
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    Well, it wasn't MY purchase, but my girlfriend's. She bought it at a local dealership to her (at the time she lived in Montgomery, AL. It wasn't a problem to get for her. Maybe it's just a regional thing? BTW, her Corolla is a silver 2004 LE Auto, cloth, CD/TAPE player, and wood trim. I believe she said it was between $17k and 18k.

    She now has 18k miles on it, with a few problems. The warped steering column and a loose ignition cylinder (key wiggles around a lot in its housing). I'm not convinced that the column wasn't of her own doing (jumping a curb maybe, she's not the best driver!), but the dealership said it wouldn't be. Whatever, it just means that they are picking up the cost of it!
  • patpat Posts: 10,421
    Well, the Corolla is not on topic here.

    Let's get back to the Mazda3 vs. the Civic, please.
  • mrblonde49mrblonde49 Posts: 626
    "Ok. Write back next year when you have the Mazdaspeed 3, then we'll have something to talk about. "

    No need to wait until next year - car was officially intoduced yesterday

    http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/AutoshowArticles/articleId=109468

    "As on the Mazdaspeed 6, the Mazdaspeed 3's turbo 2.3-liter uses direct injection and has a 9.5:1 compression ratio. However, Mazda is giving an "over 250" horsepower estimate for this 3 compared to 274 on the 6, due to different exhaust routing and emissions equipment. Torque should hold steady around 280 at 3,000 rpm. "

    So now we all know it will smoke the Civic Si
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    So now we all know it will smoke the Civic Si

    I also read that the car will come with a fire extinguisher to put out the flames after it smokes the Si, and others for that matter... :P :D
  • midnightcowboymidnightcowboy Posts: 1,978
    Yes and the fire entiguisher is thrown in for free after you pay the additional $6,000= $8,000 over the Si.

    With that price you are getting close to S2000 territory and the S2000 will still smoke the Mazdaspeed3 :P

    Seriously, the Mazdaspeed3 sounds like an awesome car ;) It would be neat to run it against a Caliber SRT4.

    cruis'n in my little 237 Hp 2.2L 4 cyclinder with the top down :shades: ,

    MidCow
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    Yes and the fire entiguisher is thrown in for free after you pay the additional $6,000= $8,000 over the Si.

    At the Honda dealership in my town, they are selling a 2006 Civic Si for $20,540. It seems as if the Mazdaspeed3 will mot likley not go over $25K. They have stated it will be "very affordable".

    With that price you are getting close to S2000 territory and the S2000 will still smoke the Mazdaspeed3

    The S2000 is over $30k. That's more then $5000 away. Also, Mazda has reported "horsepower will be over 250" with 0-60 in "under 6 seconds". I would not say the S2000 will "smoke" the MS3.

    Yes, the Si will be more affordable. The Mazdaspeed3 is just more of a car then the Si.
  • lucidlucid Posts: 1
    Again,people are comparing NA engines with turbo charged engines.It has always been a problem with Honda comparisons.Maybe Honda should turbo charge the S2000,oh! no! it can't do that,people would cry foul because the S2000 may have 50 -80 more HP than it's competitors.As for this "comparison" I mean really,160 HP from a 2.3ltr?Are those figures enough to get anyone excited?It just shows the superioty of the Honda engines,Mazda needs a 2.3 ltr TURBOCHARGED engine to get a performance edge,because ,just like many other manufacturers ,Mazda cannot build powerful NA engines,it's just too hard aww :cry:
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    Mazda cannot build powerful NA engines,it's just too hard aww

    Where did you read, or hear that Mazda "connot build a powerful NA engine?" Do you work for Mazda? Are you a auto insider? What evidence do you have to base this on? Just curious. Do you think it is a possibility Mazda just wanted to smoke everyone by building a turbocharged engine? If you haven't noticed, turbocharging is on a major comeback! Even Acura (Honda) is using a similar engine in the RDX!!! BTW, Mazda has a MZR 2.3 NA that puts out 300hp, built in junction with Cosworth.
    Also, they do have a 1.3L engine that puts out 238!
    BTW, I would not cry if Honda built a turbocharged S2000, but then, the price would probably be so high , no one would buy it! Maybe people cannot justify paying almost $40K for a Honda. Slap an Acura label on it, and it would have better luck.

    I mean really,160 HP from a 2.3ltr?Are those figures enough to get anyone excited?
    The Mazda3 is considered by many to be the "hottest compact in America". Also, read the reviews on that vehicle. I wonder if that classifies as "enough to get anyone excited"? :P
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    Seriously, the Mazdaspeed3 sounds like an awesome car It would be neat to run it against a Caliber SRT4.

    In all seriousness, you are right. But, the MS3 will probably be compared to the GTI as well, which just recently was compared to the Si. So, you can see how the MS3 may be compared to the Si.
    Another reason it may be compared against the Si is because a lot of Honda people has been saying "well ,the Civic comes in the Si, and that spanks the Mazda3 s" So, Mazda people are going to respond by saying "well, we have the Mazdaspeed3, which will spank your Si" Make sense?
    This is why the auto industry is so much fun :shades:
  • slate1slate1 Posts: 84
    I'm not trying to start anything here... just posting my thoughts after test driving both of them.

    The Civic is a great car. The interior is very well thought out, displays are unusual and very nice. The seats are comfortable and the back seat is plenty comfortable for the average adult.

    I drove the EX coupe with an automatic first and found the car to be fine to drive but nothing spectacular. I was especially un-impressed with it's ability to get up to passing speed and just felt that it was generally under-powered.

    I switched over to the manual transmission and the driving experience was much improved. The 1.8L engine though has that typical four cylinder whine to it and the car is obviously geared to favor MPG over performance.

    I came away feeling the Civic would make a great commuter car - but just isn't that fun to drive in my opinion.

    The Mazda3i was up next. The interior is a bit more traditional but every bit as well appointed as the Civic's and my wife and I both found the seats to be more comfortable.

    Driving the 3i with the 2.0L engine and manual transmission was just fun. It was quick, responsive, and very nimble - just felt like it was begging to go faster. Albeit at the expense of a little fuel economy over the Civic.

    One concern though is the side-impact safety rating on the 3i. Side curtain airbags are standard on the Civic and are only available as an option on the Mazda3.

    After returning to the Mazda dealership - I decided to take a look at a 3s with the larger 2.3L engine. WOW - the interior has very nice gauges - giving it a much nicer look than the 3i. Driving the 3s was everything driving the 3i was - just more.

    I ended up with a Mazda3s GT - comes standard with the side curtain airbags, leather, navigation, etc. and it didn't cost me much more (about $1,500) than the EX with navigation. The fact that the Civic is a first-year design and the Mazda3 in its third year played into my decision as well.

    In my experience, the Mazda3 is just a much more fun car to drive.
  • mrblonde49mrblonde49 Posts: 626
    Again,people are comparing NA engines with turbo charged engines.It has always been a problem with Honda comparisons.Maybe Honda should turbo charge the S2000,oh! no! it can't do that,people would cry foul because the S2000 may have 50 -80 more HP than it's competitors.As for this "comparison" I mean really,160 HP from a 2.3ltr?Are those figures enough to get anyone excited?It just shows the superioty of the Honda engines,Mazda needs a 2.3 ltr TURBOCHARGED engine to get a performance edge,because ,just like many other manufacturers ,Mazda cannot build powerful NA engines,it's just too hard aww "

    I don't get your whole rant. Is turbocharging cheating? Is a NA engine that is much more underpowered than it's turboed competitor somehow more noble in your mind?

    Turbocharging is one method to get more power out of a car. Every manufatcurer can do it if they choose. And today's turbo's don't cause reliability issues like they may have in the past.

    People are comparing the 2 cars because they will always be competitors.

    And, ya know, that's the title of this thread
Sign In or Register to comment.