At this particular dealership, you have no choice -- they're putting the nitrogen in the tires before the cars go out on the lot.
They've also put a sticker on the car window from a web site -- something like safetire, I don't recall exactly -- that claims the nitrogen will save you $300 a year in tire wear and mileage. Hmmm. Sounds like a stretch.
I just got my 2009 mazda 6. Comet grey, v6, grand touring,w/grey interior. Also got the bose and sunroof. I traded in a 2007 Saturn Aura with 35,000 miles. The ride is smoother and quieter than the aura. I really like the gauges, but the speed dial is a little small with the numbers. Stereo rocks. Plenty of room. Looks great from every angle. Couple of things I wish it had is movable peddles and 15 amp receptacle. The seats are comfortable, but the lumbar support doesn't adjust much. Mine came with not only carpet mats, but also rubber mats on top of those. Not sure if it was supposed to. All in all, I really like this car. Any questions please ask.
I took an "i touring" 2.5/auto on an extended test drive. The 2.5 had enough power and did not work hard at all to accelerate quickly. It did make its share of engine noise when pushing it. Not anything extreme but you could hear it rev. The handling and braking were exellent for a car this size. I did notice on another car on the lot that the driver side tail light assembly did not fit properly. Where it wraps around the quarter panel towards the rear door protruded out from the body more than it should have compared to the others. The front leg room was impressive but I noticed that my left foot wanted another inch or two of width room. The kick panel on the driver side protrudes out either because the engine pcm is located there or the wheel well is there. The dealer was giving no discounts and also had the $35 nitrogen surcharge on the sticker. Models with sunroofs lose too much headroom for me. I am comparing this to a V6 Dodge Charger. The interior room specs are close on both cars yet the Charger seems a lot more spacious and has less engine noise. The Charger also gets 6 less mpg than the Mazda 6 with a 2.5. If a $1000.00 discount can be negotiated on the Mazda 6 it would still cost $2500.00 more than the Dodge. At 10,000 miles per year it would take about 8.5 years to make that price difference up with the Mazda in gas savings. However, I believe the resale value on the Mazda would easily off set the price difference. I also prefer the 17" wheels over 18" wheels as far as styling goes. The blue color looked sharp but is not available with the beige interior. The color limitations with the manual transmission is a deal breaker for me but overall the Mazda 6 is an impressive car that out classes anything Toyota, Nissan and Honda have in this class.
I stopped and sat in a loaded GT yesterday. Pretty much loaded for $30 seems like alot of car for the money. At 6'6" i was impressed by how much headroom( with a sunroof) and legroom it had. From the pictures I had seen I thought it was similar to a Lexus but in person it is much more appealing.
he only downside I saw in my short look was the rear seat release was change to and the seats did not come down like they used to.
I did not drive one because they did not have a 4 cylnder Touring model in yet.
Congratulations on your purchase. Gray is probably my color pick at the moment, but I haven't seen one in person yet.
What do you think about the radar system that warns you of vehicles in your blind spot? On my test drive, it beeped a few times. I would love it if I were unaware of the vehicle, but in tight city driving you often change lanes safely in pretty tight circumstances. On my test drive, I was gaining speed in relation to the other car and knew it was safe, but I got a beep anyway.
I really like the radar. Mine doesn't beep unless I try to change lanes with someone next to me. Otherwise it just lights up on the mirror. I will try to post pictures tomorrow. The color looks grey in the dark, but blueish gray in the sun. I really like it.
What do you think about the radar system that warns you of vehicles in your blind spot
I think this system is overkill. People should just adjust their side mirrors correctly and they wouldn't have a blind spot. Most people have their mirrors turned in so far they can see the side of their car when in fact they should only see the side of their own car if they tilt their head and almost press their cheek against the driver window. This has the added benefit of not having glare from the lights from cars behind you blinding you as the light is directed further out and not into your eyes. Google it and you'll come up with all kinds of safe driving schools, national safety council, etc explaining the process to correctly adjust your mirrors to completely eliminate blind spots.
It seems to me that the tech wiz options like blind spot radar and auto dimming side mirrors would not be necessary if people would just adjust their mirrors correctly. However, it seems that a lot of people are so in love with how their cars look that they adjust the mirrors so they can the sides at all times??? :confuse:
Stopped by the dealer close to me today and they only had two 6's on the lot. One was the comet grey V6 grand touring and pretty decked out. MSRP was about 30K. Very nice looking in that color and very nice looking overall. I think they could have did a little better job on the rear exhaust ports though. Interior was sharp but I didn't see a "mute" button on the left side of the steering wheel for the radio controls. I really find that handy on my 07 Mazda6. Also, there is a button on the right side of the steering wheel with a funny looking symbol on it. Does anybody know what that is?
The only other new 6 they had was a blue I4 auto Sport. Didn't care for the blue nearly as much. I liked the "zebra" striped seats but the wheel covers looked pretty chintzy. All in all though they are very nice looking cars.
Drove by a dealer Sunday (they were closed) and saw a good half dozen or more new M6s on the lot.
Mixed feelings at best. I've probably seen 500 pictures of the vehicle so I didn't expect any surprises on looks. None the less I wasn't that impressed with the styling when I saw it in person. Obviously a matter of individual taste but it just doesn't do it for me from a styling standpoint. Actually the area I liked least in pictures (front end) seemed the most attractive part of the car in person. Profile to me is too long and a bit overdone with styling cues.
The interior on the other hand I thought was terrific in leather and even in the half leather. The cloth was another story. Don't like the velour-like portion. Would need to have leather or half leather which obviously raises the price by 1.6-3K. I was looking for an I Touring at around 23K. 26-29K is more than I want to spend.
If I can't get past the styling or jacking the price up to get leather I'm back to square one and I had hoped to make a move in the next week or two.
Other cars I've looked at are the Jetta SE ( a little small and the seat bolsters bother my ample frame) the Legacy SE (no 08's available and therefore no rebates or financing deals on 09s) and Charger SE Plus (a real bargain but bigger than I like and who knows where Chrysler will be a year from now).
Anyone here have thoughts on the legacy and Jetta. I was told I could get S-Plan on a M6 and by my reckoning that would mean about $1800 off sticker on a iTouring. For me Black or Dark Blue mute some of the styling excesses and that would be the only likely color chices for me.
Anyone here have thoughts on the legacy and Jetta.
Legacy: Decent styling and AWD, but little to no rear-seat room, cheap-looking interior (IMO), and AWD does nothing but waste gas for the days you don't have to drive in 6 inches of snow.
Jetta: Nice interior, good power from 2.0 turbo-4, but they've been at the bottom of reliability/dependability surveys since the '90s, and with good reason. I've yet to meet a current or former VW owner that hasn't taken a few extra trips to the dealer, warranty or otherwise (and non-warranty work is NOT cheap).
Back on topic: Saw a new 6 with non-dealer plates on the road yesterday, and the Kona Blue has really intrigued me, although the Black Cherry and Comet Gray aren't half bad either. Hmm...
Jetta: Nice interior, good power from 2.0 turbo-4, but they've been at the bottom of reliability/dependability surveys since the '90s
I don't think that is quite true, I think they had beaten Kia, Jaguar, and Land Rover from time to time.
However, the new jetta (with 2.5) has been rated average or better by CR for reliability. They had insufficient data on the turbo Jetta (the Passat turbo and GTI are still below average). The 2.5 has adequate power to me, but then so does the old 2.3 4 cyl Mazda6.
Back on topic: Saw a new 6 with non-dealer plates on the road yesterday, and the Kona Blue has really intrigued me, although the Black Cherry and Comet Gray aren't half bad either
I like your choices Black Cherry and Comet Grey are my first 2 choices. Is the Kona Blue as Smurf looking as it is in the brochure? Someone had posted a picture on another site of a Blue 6 and it looked much darker.
I would never consider a Jetta to be honest with you. I would buy a Hyundai before I buy a VW. They are expensive to maintain.
We were considering a Legacy for my wife, she drives an Impreza now (has had a few issues and gets crappy gas mileage). I like the interior of the Legacy because of their soft to the touch materials and I think they have good build quality. However, the car is small on the inside. Much smaller then my Mazda6. Also, I do not see the point of having AWD year round when it snows a hand full of times AND she's a teacher and does not have to go to work when it snows anyways! She won't do without AWD. She really wants an Outback. So, until a good used one comes along (right now a new Outback is a bit out of my price range), we are going to hold on to her Impreza.
Is the Kona Blue as Smurf looking as it is in the brochure? Someone had posted a picture on another site of a Blue 6 and it looked much darker.
It is darker in person. If you're familiar with the deeper blue that's offered on the Altima, IMO it's slightly darker than that. It's definitely darker (and better looking IMO) than the bright island blue that the prev-gen 6 had.
My first Mazda was a 1973 RX-3 coupe. I'm the internet guy for a Mazda dealer in Ohio, now driving my 8th - a 2008 Mazda6 "i" Sport Value Edition, which I ordered with a 5-speed. Fantastic sedan - it handles like my Miata (still in the family), but with 4 doors and a trunk! We got our first shipment of 2009's Saturday - 8 of them, all 3 trim levels, and all powertrains. I drove the "i" 6-speed today, and what a difference! It's quieter, more solid, but still handles like a Mazda. The seats are great (cloth or leather). My 9th Mazda is now on order ("i" Touring, roof and convenience packages, 6-speed manual), and if you're a Mazda person, go drive one - we're edging into Lexus territory, but with Mazda handling and driver involvement.
If you're S-plan, as Mazda calls it, or X- or A-plan through Ford, you get invoice pricing less an unpublished $500 rebate (applied after tax). The inital buildout will heavily favor the more expensive models, but the Sport (with no options) that I drove today is one impressive automobile. CamCordTima, look out!
8mazdas, How is the lease program compared to Honda/Toyota? A $31,000 2009 Camry V6 w/ every option except NAV leases for $354 a month plus tax.(36month, 12k/year no money down). Can you lease a Mazda 6 S GT w/ Bose/moonroof for similar? Due to the worse gas mileage, the Mazda would actually have to beat it by about $15-20/month to be a wash. I want a 6, but not if it won't lease competitively.
Mazda has introduced lease programs with the new model, and it should compare favorably with the Camry, depending on where you live (here in Ohio, tax is included with any quoted lease). Admittedly, the new Mazda6 is going after the Camry market, but they are not the same, and here's my take on it: If cars were pasta, a Mazda is al dente, and everything else is mushy, to some degree - go drive them both!
Interesting to see that Edmunds killed the new 6 for it's handling and braking. Two things of which I thought Mazda did quite well, considering how much bigger the car is then the one it replaced.
I like the new design, but I didn't care for the gray color, too plain, does seem to metallic, how is it up close, is it just paint color, or does it actually have metallic flecks in it, like the camry's gray color.
They have have done a good job on the design, it looks more substantial, with more stance to it, than the older model of which looked really dated, had that economy car kind of look. I would definitely take a look at this model, if I was in the market now. I am sure many will buy this model with its new look, not saying its really original styling, but atleast it can almost speak for itself and not look to conservative like other competitors.
Edmunds said it had zoom-zoom still and then said it couldn't keep up with an Altima. So they were speaking out of both sides. If you can't keep up with a creampuff Altima then the car's performance is questionable. I was excited to hear they made a new 6 but after looking at its size I'm wondering why Mazda is leaving behind it's smaller athletic feel for monstrously large vehicles (CX line, the new 6, etc).
for monstrously large vehicles (CX line, the new 6, etc).
Does this include a lot of other midsizers as well? It's smaller than the Accord. If you look at the new 6 it really doesn't appear much larger. I would also drive it myself before I condemn the handling. Edmunds went from calling the 1st gen 6 their "editors most wanted" to bad mouthing the same car. Take braking, Edmunds is saying of the new Mazda6 and I quote, "Their braking performance also doesn't seem to be impressive, as this 3,593-pound car comes to a halt from 60 mph in 127 feet". Consumer Reports reported the 2008 Mazda6 stopped from 60 in 132 feet. CR reported the '08 Altima's stopping distance to be 136 feet.
I'm not saying that CR tests or reviewers are any better or worse than Edmunds but I feel that you REALLY have to assess a car yourself before you start parroting the magazine car reviewers.
I'd take it all with a bit of salt. The review does seem a bit waffley
Still, they also posted the first 0-60 and rolling-60 time that I have seen (6.4 and 6.1).
I am not sure the Altima can do tha and I know the Altima has some pretty large torque steer issues with its drivetrain. . And even if it is 'faster' it wouldn't be by much and likely more a driver ability issue.
I mean, I remember when spirt cars only did 0-60 in 7.5.
I want a driver oriented car, but I have no illusion about this being like a BMW. I don't think anything about the review indicated it would not be at least as good as the Altima/Camry/Etc.
Yeah, they said the Altima handles better and that the 6 and that the .81 on the skid path was poor. Also, the 127ft distance to stop did not impress them either. Hence why I say Edmunds killed the Mazda6 in the handling and braking department.
I just found it odd that Edmunds would say it drives well in one sentence and then compare it to an Altima in another. Regardless, the super poor highway fuel economy with a V6 is troubling. How is that Mazda got SUV numbers out of a V6 with a 6 speed auto?
I was surprised at Edmunds' assessment of how noisy the tires are on concrete, saying it "trundled along like cart wheels." That sounds a little like hyperbole.
I was probably on an asphalt section during my interstate test drive, but the car seemed quiet enough to me. I think a rough textured concrete road is probably going to create enough tire noise in many cars for passengers to at least notice the difference between than and smooth asphalt.
rupbre:
Since you have the same model as Edmunds tested -- s GT -- could you give us some feedback on this question. Have you driven it on a textured concrete highway? How was the noise level?
Any other owners have experience in this area yet?
I am trying to figure out when a .81 skidpad for a mid-sized sedan became "poor". It wasn't too long ago that was considered supercar territory. Now it's "poor". :surprise:
20 years ago, maybe a .81 was good. Back in the earl 90s the RX, MR2, 300ZX all nailed high 80s. Now high 90s to over a g is minimum for supercar entry. Times change. Back in the 90s a 0-60 of 6.5 seconds was considered fast. Now most family sedans with V6s put that down. Go back 20 more years and you'll see there's an obvious progression.
I have driven on concrete and it is a touch louder, but still quieter than my old Aura. Concrete seems to create more noise on any tire. What I did notice is if the concrete is ground down as they do in Minnesota to smooth out old concrete, the car pulled a little once in a while by the groves. This only happened on one stretch of highway. The color grey looks grey in the dark or in the shade, but looks blue grey in the sun. The pictures I have don't do it justice. Also, I looked at the Mazda 6 because its bigger than its predecessor. The old style was just too small for 4 full size people. I do love this car. Magazine reviews kill me. I never drive as fast as they do or do the G's they do. I mostly look to see how quiet it is, how good the quality of stuff their is, and other more normal stuff. JMO
Ah, but you have to remember how old some of us are.
I can go back much less time, just 2 years, to a mid-sized sedans comparo done by C/D in which only one car broke .80. So in the realm of mid-sized family cars, is .81 really being "killed"? If so, there must have been a huge leap in handling in the mid-sized sedans field in the past 2 years! Also, I wonder if the Mazda6's standard ESC had anything to do with the .81.
Anything from .80 to .83 is about all you can really expect on a car this size without a much higher degree of tuning and more than all season touring rubber (put some UHP All Seasons on it and test it then).
I seem to recall the Altima and Accord 'coupes' doing .81/.82 recently, anyway.
My 1988 MX-6 had its muffler replaced under warranty (back then the warranty was ONE year!) and I replaced it 3 more times in the next 8 years. Also replaced one of the major exhaust pipes at about year 6.. If there is a company out there besides Mazda NOT using SS exhaust parts, I don't know who they are.. If any car company needs to use SS (or a different muffler supplier), it's Mazda... I've owned about 7 other cars since I bought the MX-6 and have never had to replace any exhaust parts on them. Otherwise, it was a great car and I'm looking forward to test driving the new Mazda6 i..
Just out of curiosity, I asked my Honda service department about my '04 Accord's exhaust system and they said it was made of a material that combined the features of steel, aluminized steel, and stainless steel, which are the three types of tubing that seem to be used.
Anyone know what is normally used today in most new cars? Or what's used in the new Mazda6? How do we know it's not stainless steel?
I checked out an i touring today, gray exterior and gray cloth interior. I found the gray exterior to be pleasing and is probably my choice now. However, I was counting on a gray interior to lighten things up a little, but Mazda has selected a gray that is far too light for my taste. I felt like I would get it dirty just looking at it too hard. This is subjective, of course, but I believe Mazda make a bad decision here. The medium gray cloth interior, for instance, in my '04 Accord is much more practical.
I'm trying to adjust now to the prospect of a black interior. On the cloth, there is some relief in that the zebra striping has a little gray in it.
I haven't seen the beige cloth interior yet. Maybe it will be a more practical shade, and I could pair it with the black cherry exterior.
Comments
It's somewhat useful but costco and others do it for free. There's no reason it should cost a dime.
They've also put a sticker on the car window from a web site -- something like safetire, I don't recall exactly -- that claims the nitrogen will save you $300 a year in tire wear and mileage. Hmmm. Sounds like a stretch.
Would love some pics!!
Between that and Black Cherry for me but don't see any pics of either online, Mazda site is not great.
he only downside I saw in my short look was the rear seat release was change to and the seats did not come down like they used to.
I did not drive one because they did not have a 4 cylnder Touring model in yet.
What do you think about the radar system that warns you of vehicles in your blind spot? On my test drive, it beeped a few times. I would love it if I were unaware of the vehicle, but in tight city driving you often change lanes safely in pretty tight circumstances. On my test drive, I was gaining speed in relation to the other car and knew it was safe, but I got a beep anyway.
I think this system is overkill. People should just adjust their side mirrors correctly and they wouldn't have a blind spot. Most people have their mirrors turned in so far they can see the side of their car when in fact they should only see the side of their own car if they tilt their head and almost press their cheek against the driver window. This has the added benefit of not having glare from the lights from cars behind you blinding you as the light is directed further out and not into your eyes. Google it and you'll come up with all kinds of safe driving schools, national safety council, etc explaining the process to correctly adjust your mirrors to completely eliminate blind spots.
It seems to me that the tech wiz options like blind spot radar and auto dimming side mirrors would not be necessary if people would just adjust their mirrors correctly. However, it seems that a lot of people are so in love with how their cars look that they adjust the mirrors so they can the sides at all times??? :confuse:
The only other new 6 they had was a blue I4 auto Sport. Didn't care for the blue nearly as much. I liked the "zebra" striped seats but the wheel covers looked pretty chintzy. All in all though they are very nice looking cars.
Mixed feelings at best. I've probably seen 500 pictures of the vehicle so I didn't expect any surprises on looks. None the less I wasn't that impressed with the styling when I saw it in person. Obviously a matter of individual taste but it just doesn't do it for me from a styling standpoint. Actually the area I liked least in pictures (front end) seemed the most attractive part of the car in person. Profile to me is too long and a bit overdone with styling cues.
The interior on the other hand I thought was terrific in leather and even in the half leather. The cloth was another story. Don't like the velour-like portion. Would need
to have leather or half leather which obviously raises the price by 1.6-3K. I was looking for an I Touring at around 23K. 26-29K is more than I want to spend.
If I can't get past the styling or jacking the price up to get leather I'm back to square one and I had hoped to make a move in the next week or two.
Other cars I've looked at are the Jetta SE ( a little small and the seat bolsters bother my ample frame) the Legacy SE (no 08's available and therefore no rebates or financing deals on 09s) and Charger SE Plus (a real bargain but bigger than I like and who knows where Chrysler will be a year from now).
Anyone here have thoughts on the legacy and Jetta. I was told I could get S-Plan on a M6 and by my reckoning that would mean about $1800 off sticker on a iTouring. For me Black or Dark Blue mute some of the styling excesses and that would be the only likely color chices for me.
Legacy: Decent styling and AWD, but little to no rear-seat room, cheap-looking interior (IMO), and AWD does nothing but waste gas for the days you don't have to drive in 6 inches of snow.
Jetta: Nice interior, good power from 2.0 turbo-4, but they've been at the bottom of reliability/dependability surveys since the '90s, and with good reason. I've yet to meet a current or former VW owner that hasn't taken a few extra trips to the dealer, warranty or otherwise (and non-warranty work is NOT cheap).
Back on topic: Saw a new 6 with non-dealer plates on the road yesterday, and the Kona Blue has really intrigued me, although the Black Cherry and Comet Gray aren't half bad either. Hmm...
I don't think that is quite true, I think they had beaten Kia, Jaguar, and Land Rover from time to time.
However, the new jetta (with 2.5) has been rated average or better by CR for reliability. They had insufficient data on the turbo Jetta (the Passat turbo and GTI are still below average). The 2.5 has adequate power to me, but then so does the old 2.3 4 cyl Mazda6.
I like your choices Black Cherry and Comet Grey are my first 2 choices. Is the Kona Blue as Smurf looking as it is in the brochure? Someone had posted a picture on another site of a Blue 6 and it looked much darker.
We were considering a Legacy for my wife, she drives an Impreza now (has had a few issues and gets crappy gas mileage). I like the interior of the Legacy because of their soft to the touch materials and I think they have good build quality. However, the car is small on the inside. Much smaller then my Mazda6. Also, I do not see the point of having AWD year round when it snows a hand full of times AND she's a teacher and does not have to go to work when it snows anyways! She won't do without AWD. She really wants an Outback. So, until a good used one comes along (right now a new Outback is a bit out of my price range), we are going to hold on to her Impreza.
It is darker in person. If you're familiar with the deeper blue that's offered on the Altima, IMO it's slightly darker than that. It's definitely darker (and better looking IMO) than the bright island blue that the prev-gen 6 had.
http://i324.photobucket.com/albums/k359/csrwgtn/CarPicture3.jpg
http://i324.photobucket.com/albums/k359/csrwgtn/CarPicture1.jpg
If you're S-plan, as Mazda calls it, or X- or A-plan through Ford, you get invoice pricing less an unpublished $500 rebate (applied after tax). The inital buildout will heavily favor the more expensive models, but the Sport (with no options) that I drove today is one impressive automobile. CamCordTima, look out!
How is the lease program compared to Honda/Toyota? A $31,000 2009 Camry V6 w/ every option except NAV leases for $354 a month plus tax.(36month, 12k/year no money down). Can you lease a Mazda 6 S GT w/ Bose/moonroof for similar? Due to the worse gas mileage, the Mazda would actually have to beat it by about $15-20/month to be a wash. I want a 6, but not if it won't lease competitively.
Click me!
They have have done a good job on the design, it looks more substantial, with more stance to it, than the older model of which looked really dated, had that economy car kind of look. I would definitely take a look at this model, if I was in the market now. I am sure many will buy this model with its new look, not saying its really original styling, but atleast it can almost speak for itself and not look to conservative like other competitors.
"Killed"? I must have read a different review. :confuse:
Does this include a lot of other midsizers as well? It's smaller than the Accord. If you look at the new 6 it really doesn't appear much larger. I would also drive it myself before I condemn the handling. Edmunds went from calling the 1st gen 6 their "editors most wanted" to bad mouthing the same car. Take braking, Edmunds is saying of the new Mazda6 and I quote, "Their braking performance also doesn't seem to be impressive, as this 3,593-pound car comes to a halt from 60 mph in 127 feet". Consumer Reports reported the 2008 Mazda6 stopped from 60 in 132 feet. CR reported the '08 Altima's stopping distance to be 136 feet.
I'm not saying that CR tests or reviewers are any better or worse than Edmunds but I feel that you REALLY have to assess a car yourself before you start parroting the magazine car reviewers.
Still, they also posted the first 0-60 and rolling-60 time that I have seen (6.4 and 6.1).
I am not sure the Altima can do tha and I know the Altima has some pretty large torque steer issues with its drivetrain. . And even if it is 'faster' it wouldn't be by much and likely more a driver ability issue.
I mean, I remember when spirt cars only did 0-60 in 7.5.
I want a driver oriented car, but I have no illusion about this being like a BMW. I don't think anything about the review indicated it would not be at least as good as the Altima/Camry/Etc.
I was probably on an asphalt section during my interstate test drive, but the car seemed quiet enough to me. I think a rough textured concrete road is probably going to create enough tire noise in many cars for passengers to at least notice the difference between than and smooth asphalt.
rupbre:
Since you have the same model as Edmunds tested -- s GT -- could you give us some feedback on this question. Have you driven it on a textured concrete highway? How was the noise level?
Any other owners have experience in this area yet?
Thanks.
all-season tires = noisy
as do comments like:
The extent to which a sporty nature implied by Mazda's zoom-zoom catchphrase is still present in this car...
and
In this 2009 Mazda 6 s Grand Touring sedan, this zoom-zoom character may not be as overt as it was on previous models...
I can go back much less time, just 2 years, to a mid-sized sedans comparo done by C/D in which only one car broke .80. So in the realm of mid-sized family cars, is .81 really being "killed"? If so, there must have been a huge leap in handling in the mid-sized sedans field in the past 2 years! Also, I wonder if the Mazda6's standard ESC had anything to do with the .81.
I seem to recall the Altima and Accord 'coupes' doing .81/.82 recently, anyway.
Oh well
So I guess .81 is good but not as good as .81, or even better, .81. :P
Otherwise, it was a great car and I'm looking forward to test driving the new Mazda6 i..
:mad: :mad:
My 1986 Horizon needed exhaust about every 3 years, but then our 1989 Voyager had SS and it lasted the life of the car (12 years).
Mazda has not really gone back to non-SS, have they?
Anyone know what is normally used today in most new cars? Or what's used in the new Mazda6? How do we know it's not stainless steel?
I'm trying to adjust now to the prospect of a black interior. On the cloth, there is some relief in that the zebra striping has a little gray in it.
I haven't seen the beige cloth interior yet. Maybe it will be a more practical shade, and I could pair it with the black cherry exterior.