Howdy, Stranger!

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





Mazda Mazda2

245

Comments

  • igozoomzoomigozoomzoom Waleska, GeorgiaPosts: 790
    edited August 2010
    If you need OEM wheel covers in the future, you can find them much cheaper from an auto salvage dealer via www.car-part.com. For instance, plastic wheel covers for a 2008 Mazda3 can be had for under $20 each. Ones in less than perfect, but still pretty decent, condition are $10 or less each! Just FYI...

    I have a 2006 Mazda3 with the factory 17" alloy wheels and I learned the hard way just how expensive they are to replace! :cry: They retail for $436 from Mazda, even now! I had a run-in with a very nasty pothole (at least 8" deep) and it bent both wheels on the right side of the car. I lucked out an found one used at a local salvage yard in great shape for $125 and had one of the damaged ones reconditioned for $100- good as new.

    Along with the wheels, the replacement tires are also ridiculously expensive for a compact car that only had a sticker of $18k. The original Goodyear Eagles were toast at 32k miles and a new set of identical Goodyears would have cost almost $1100! I laughed at the tire guy and quickly found a set of Dunlops for $600 that lasted longer than the original ones!

    The Mazda2 has 185/55VR15 tires on all models, with plastic wheel covers on the Sport and Alloys on the Touring model. Just out of curiosity, I checked the prices for replacements and they range from $100-$120 locally. Not as bad as a Mazda3, but they ain't the $40 175/70R13s I remember buying for my old Hondas either.

    At least both models of the Mazda2 deliver a lot of features at a very reasonable price ($1100-$1600 less than similar Fiesta models). I also think the MZ2 is the better looking of the two and the 5-speed manual is peppy enough and has acceptable fuel economy. But the MPG ratings with the 4-speed automatic aren't very impressive...27/33 with a combined average of 29MPG (per FuelEconomy.gov). The only competitors with lower figures are the Chevy Aveo (25/34 and 28mpg avg) and Nissan Versa 4AT (24/32 with 27mpg avg). The Fiesta 6AT is rated at 29/38 and 33mpg combined and Honda Fit (base model) gets 28/35/31 (Fit Sport is rated at 27/33/30).
  • sandman_6472sandman_6472 Coral Springs, FLPosts: 2,576
    Our '05 Mazda 3s has the 16" alloys and the tire prices are pretty reasonable. I was able to get a "buy 3/get 4" tire deal from my mechanic on some decent Yokahoma tires and look almost brand new with almost 2 years and 24k on them. We didn't like the ride of the 17" alloys when we bought the car and have been quite happy with the smaller diameter alloys. Hoping this will be the last set of tires we'll have to buy for it!

    The Sandman :sick: :shades:

    2014 Hyundai Tuscon SE/2005 Mazda 3s/2008 Hyundai Accent GLS/2009 Nissan Versa SL hatch

  • micwebmicweb Posts: 1,617
    Good observations igozoomzoom. Tirerack has replacement tires ranging from $79 to $99 already - the $99 are the o.e.m. replacement, the $79 have a rebate offer and are summer Yokohamas. They also have $86 Hankook 418. All are the required V rated tires. Consumer Reports tested the Hankook in this V variation and gave it a Very Good rating for noise (important to me), very good in ice braking (amazing for a "V"), and very good in ride comfort (also amazing for "V", most have a stiff and hence uncomfortable sidewall. V rated tires on a car that one magazine tested with a top speed of about 103 mph are interesting - clearly there for handling not speed, although some tire advisors tell me they would rather drive a V rated tire across a hot road at 85 mph than an H rated tire.

    In terms of fuel economy, for careful drivers the Mazda 2 may surprise - it is 200-300 pounds lighter than its competition, and 100-300 cc. smaller. I believe those factors will make up for shift-point and other tuning biased towards spriteliness instead of beating the EPA cycle test. Or I could be wrong and the slight mileage penalty in the Mazda2 could be due to cost cutting in the engine - single point instead of multi point fuel injections, coatings or lack thereof on the cylinder wall, etc. All we know for sure if that Mazda intended to deliver a fun car and not the thriftiest one - a theme across the whole line - and I'd rather give up 2-3 EPA rated mpg than the fun factor.

    Take a look at Valerie Neff's review of the Fiesta - she loved the Euro spec one with the 5 speed when she was one of the "early drivers' program" but now she has an North American spec with the automatic, she's cool on it - the automatic disappoints her.

    Well we can wait for more reviews to come out and then weigh them Rotten Tomatoes style, but the early reviews threw a curve ball at me by preferring the slightly down market 2 to the slightly up market Fiesta - enough to get me to test drive the M2 - and it is indeed sweet. Without getting pretentious and running up the tab too high.
  • micwebmicweb Posts: 1,617
    Car and Driver is reporting 10.1 0-60 times for the automatic and 9.1 for the stick; they also anecdotally reported the stick is "far more satisfying to drive." That compares to Consumer Guide which reports no real difference between the stick and auto. But I think CG may have been referring to real road driving and not performance tests. Performance tests can be misleading because who burns out and floors it all the way to 60 mph in 2nd gear (the usual way to get the best 0-60 times because shifting from 2nd to 3rd eats up time)?

    I would have to agree with "more satisfying to drive" though - not based on my particular test drive of the 2, but on the many stick shifts and few automatics I've driven the past 10 years - you feel more connected and alert with a stick shift. Of course, on city streets and in slow and go traffic you can wish for an automatic....
  • micwebmicweb Posts: 1,617
    Car and Driver reported 9.9 and 8.5 0-60 times for the 2009 Fit in automatic and stick - if we can disregard sample variations, the automatics are comparable and the Fit stick is clearly faster.

    That, in fact, is how my (separated by two weeks) test drives of the Fit stick and Mazda stick felt - the Honda felt a tad quicker and freer rev'ing.

    Caveat: I revised my opinion on the radio after a revisit and think I owe the stick shift Mazda2 a second drive.
  • micwebmicweb Posts: 1,617
    Automobile has this to say about the 5 speed vs. automatic issue:

    I drove both the automatic and manual Mazda 2 within days of each other and while both cars impressed me, the manual 2 is, in my mind, the much better package. On the highway, the four speed-auto runs out of gears causing revs to consistently stay up over 3000 rpms. The manual's fifth gear is just enough to keep revs and noise down in the cabin. I was cruising at 80 mph on the highway and, unlike the 2 with the auto box, the manual car never sounded buzzy. In fact, the engine sounded remarkably at ease. Impressive. At this speed, even in fifth gear our Four Seasons Honda Fit's 1.5-liter 4-culinder would have been deafening. link title

    Two comments. Generally automatics are tuned to run at lower rpm than the stick shift - when I test drove the M2 auto at 70 mph, rpm were not "over 3000 rpm". If this test driver was speeding and slowing (passing cars then slowing etc. then speeding back up) the automatic may have been "hunting" by dropping out of lockup in 4th gear or even down to 3rd causing the rpm to run higher (I had a similar experience with a 4 speed auto trying to follow a friend one time). Conversely, the stick shift in the Yaris LB, Fit, and Golf (all from personal experience) ran about 800 rpm higher than the auto versions - 3800-4000 rpm at 80 mph - geared so you wouldn't be likely to need to downshit to 4th on the freeway.

    In other words, I think this test driver was pushing both cars on the freeway and found it easier to maintain speed without noisy downshifts in the stick shift. From that perspective the comment is probably valid - but it's not the usual scenario of keeping up with the flow of traffic at 75-80, where downshifts aren't needed very often if at all.

    Was IS fascinating is the comment on noise level. I found the Fit "buzzy" at 80 because it is turning about 3850 rpm, pretty high. Apparently the Mazda2 has found a way to keep the cabin quiet (the rpm may still be high, but to no ill effect). That's a big plus. Noise levels have been one reason I've shied away from the Fit despite the superb seating ("Magic Seating").
  • micwebmicweb Posts: 1,617
    Motor Trend is reporting 9.0 second 0-60 for the stick, .1 better than Car and Driver, so it looks like there isn't a lot of sample to sample or test to test variations.

    http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/hatchbacks/1008_2011_mazda2_test/index.html
    Turns out the manual Mazda2 faster than everything in our recent Budget Banshees four-way comparison test. In fact, the only thing quicker than the Mazda2 in this segment is Honda's Fit Sport manual, which puts down an absurd 8.3 sec./60 time and 16.3 sec./84.8 mph quarter mile - an advantage that doesn't translate to handling."

    ">link title
  • micwebmicweb Posts: 1,617
    From Motor Trend comparison test of Fiesta Fit Versa Yaris LB

    INTERIOR NOISE - Cruising @ 70 mph, sones/dBA

    Fiesta: 24.7/67.5 Fit: 25.2/67.6 Versa 23.8/66.0 Yaris LB 27.0/69.2

    Read more: link title

    Note that although the one review cited in my earlier post lambasts the noisiness of the Fit, there isn't much difference in actual dB between the Fiesta which gets kudos for quietness and the Fit which gets lambasted for noisiness. Maybe the character of the noise?
  • sandman_6472sandman_6472 Coral Springs, FLPosts: 2,576
    Our Versa is a quiet car with great seats but just can't get used to the CVT and how it spools up the speed from a stop...not enough umph for me...prefer a regular auto tranny which can get out of it's own way when necessary. The kid don't mind and it's her car so... Seriously can't wait to drive the Mazda2 and the Fiesta back to back to see which we could live with on a daily basis.

    The Sandman :sick: :shades:

    2014 Hyundai Tuscon SE/2005 Mazda 3s/2008 Hyundai Accent GLS/2009 Nissan Versa SL hatch

  • micwebmicweb Posts: 1,617
    Nice video review on Consumer Reports - does not require a subscription:

    link title/

    If above link does not work, cut and paste:

    http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/video-hub/featured/featured-videos/mazda2/173- 87256001/490985308001/
  • autonomousautonomous Posts: 1,769
    Great video! I'm looking forward to the CR article with all the details.
  • micwebmicweb Posts: 1,617
    Buried in the side bar on the Edmunds Inside Line test results are noise results for the 2009 Fit and 2011 Mazda2 - at 70 mph, they test the Fit at 70.4 dB and the Mazda2 at 72.9 dB, an audible difference. In comparison, they rated the VW Rabbit (2006) at 66 db at 70 mph cruise.

    I am puzzled why subjective reviews say the Mazda2 is much quieter....
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    Loudness, a subjective measure, is often confused with objective measures of sound strength such as sound pressure, sound pressure level (in decibels), sound intensity or sound power. Filters such as A-weighting attempt to adjust sound measurements to correspond to loudness as perceived by the typical human. However, loudness perception is a much more complex process than A-weighting. Furthermore, as the perception of loudness varies from person to person it cannot be universally measured using any single metric.

    Loudness is also affected by parameters other than sound pressure, including frequency, bandwidth and duration.


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness
  • igozoomzoomigozoomzoom Waleska, GeorgiaPosts: 790
    I test drove two versions of the Mazda2- the 'base' Sport model with 5-speed manual transmission (True Red) and a Touring with 4-speed automatic (they call the color 'Spirited Green', but I call it 'Kermit Green')....I can't imagine actually buying that color for the long haul, but that's just my opinion. It's not as garish as the Fiesta's "Lime Squeeze Green", thankfully. Not to mention Yellow Blaze or Bright Magenta (ick)! Not sure what Ford is thinking, but I digress....back to the Mazda2 test drives...

    I can confidently say that the Mazda2 Sport (5MT) is the best value among these subcompact models. For $14,730 (including $750 Destination), you get Power Windows, Locks & Mirrors, A/C, Remote Keyless Entry, a rather decent sounding 4-spkr audio system with AUX input, side-impact airbags & head air curtains, Stability Control, Traction Control, ABS with Brake Assist & Electronic Brakeforce Distribution and it even has standard front & rear carpet floormats! The Honda Fit Base 5MT costs $920 more but lacks Brake Assist, Stability Control, Traction Control and Keyless Entry. The Ford Fiesta SE is $1140 more than the Mazda2 Sport and has most of the same features (except Brake Assist and you have to pay extra for rear floormats) but doesn't add any features despite the higher price. :confuse:

    When I first learned that the MZ2 engine only made 100hp, I was a little concerned. But the car weighs 200+ pounds less than most competitors (Fit and Fiesta) and the little 1.5L peak hp and torque output is reached at lower revs than the other guys. It's torque peak (98 whopping lb-ft) is at 4000rpm, while the Fit's 106lb-ft is at 4800rpm. The combination of lower weight and a little more power accessible lower in the rev range give the car plenty of 'zoom-zoom'. It actually reminded me of driving a friend's '87 Mazda 323 3-door hatchback way back in high school....I was surprised at how much spunk that little car had and it was a blast to drive. Thankfully, the Mazda2 has a much nicer interior design with better than average fit-and-finish and material quality that isn't abysmal (although the Honda Fit's interior design is uglier to me, Honda doesn't skimp on using the best materials). I was very impressed with the seat comfort, especially for a small car. I'm 6'2" and 235#, so I don't find a lot of very small cars to be comfortable. The Chevy Aveo seats = purgatory, IMHO.... :surprise:

    I also took a drive in a Mazda2 Touring with an automatic tranny. My expectation was that the Touring upgrades would be absolute necessities for me, if I were to buy one. But I was dreading the performance-robbing automatic shifter like I would a root canal! For the most part, both of those expectations were way off base!

    The Touring model does add some nice goodies to the standard features list (Cruise Control, upgrade to 6-spkr audio w/ controls on steering wheel, leather-wrapped steering wheel, Alloy Wheels, Rear Liftgate Spoiler, Red Piping on Seats, Fog Lights, Trip Computer) for $1455 more than the Sport. The Automatic adds another $800, so the price of the car I drove was $16,985. It's still a very reasonable price for a subcompact with that level of equipment....but it's also crossing into Mazda3 i Sport price range! As good as the Mazda2 is, the Mazda3 is simply MORE car, even if it has less features when comparing the i Sport to a MZ2 Touring. It's almost like a style vs. substance dilemma comparing the two...

    As for the 4-speed automatic- When I think of a small car with limited power being saddled with an automatic, I always flash back to my step-mom's '87 Toyota Tercel! :cry: It was rockin' 78hp (I think "hp" meant hamster-power in this one instance) and a 3-speed automatic...the neighbor kid's Barbie Dream Car could outrun it in the 1/4 mile! :blush: If you managed to get up to 55 or 60mph on the highway, you could floor it and it would kick down to 2nd and rev so hard that it would shake the fillings in your teeth, but that speedo needle wouldn't move. You just had to wait for gravity (or drafting) to help you out eventually.

    In the Mazda2, the automatic is very well suited for city driving (stop-and-go). It doesn't feel the least bit underpowered and it knows how to downshift just as quickly as it upshifts. A lot of automatics rush thru the gears to get into O/D for fuel economy, but getting a downshift takes a heavy foot and some patience. Not the case with the MZ2. thankfully. It did an acceptable job of merging onto a 70mph freeway, although I gunned it at the top of the ramp. The problem that I noticed was that it runs out of steam over 70mph. Flooring it at 70 will get a quick downshift to 3rd, but forward progress isn't nearly as swift as it feels in slower situations. I recently had a 2010 Toyota Corolla rental car for several weeks and it also had a 4-speed automatic. Overall, the MZ2 felt quicker than that Corolla in all situations, so it's probably more than adequate for most drivers.

    I didn't intend for this to be so long, but I was very impressed by the little charmer known as Mazda2! Anyone else taken one for a drive? Or perhaps even purchased one?
  • igozoomzoomigozoomzoom Waleska, GeorgiaPosts: 790
    The Mazda2 is available in six color choices, according to the Mazda site, press releases, brochures, etc. But Aquatic Blue doesn't show up in any dealer inventory, just the other five colors....what gives?

    I test drove and really liked the Mazda2 Sport yesterday, but I would want the Aquatic Blue if I buy one....or maybe they could just spray on the Celestial Blue they use on the MZ3 s, that would work.. ;)
  • autonomousautonomous Posts: 1,769
    edited September 2010
    Touring model does add some nice goodies to the standard features list ....but it's also crossing into Mazda3 i Sport price range! As good as the Mazda2 is, the Mazda3 is simply MORE car, even if it has less features when comparing the i Sport to a MZ2 Touring. It's almost like a style vs. substance dilemma

    Agreed, I also find the pricing model for the Mazda2 is curious. In Canada, the Mazda2 GS automatic is approaching the price range of a Mazda3 GX automatic with a more powerful engine and more space. On the other hand, the Mazda2 is lighter and more fuel efficient. Does this mean the base model of the Mazda2 will be the choice for most buyers as they will get the fuel economy and the price point?
  • sandman_6472sandman_6472 Coral Springs, FLPosts: 2,576
    We've had such good luck with our '05 M3s that the wife is now saying she's leaning towards one, preferably a 2012 Touring model as she hated the seat fabric on the Sport model & I really want the alloys. Not crazy about the 15" size, as we have 16"'s right now and it drives like it's on rails. But our girls have the 15" size on their sub compacts and are happy with the size. And 15" tires do cost less to replace.

    We'd go for the Silver color unless they add a blue one. Just not sure how happy she'll be going from a 2.3 down to a 1.5 engine...the lack of power is something she'll notice right away but she says she really wants to go a size smaller. She'll get whatever she wants but I'll push for a 2012 model on whatever she buys.

    The Sandman :sick: :shades:

    2014 Hyundai Tuscon SE/2005 Mazda 3s/2008 Hyundai Accent GLS/2009 Nissan Versa SL hatch

Sign In or Register to comment.