Mazda3

pzev · December 2003

So the boat had to swing by Florida on the way right? I'm in the southeast and still waiting for the Mazda3.

buggywhip · December 2003

C&D positively raved about the Mazda3, just as I predicted. The car is truly phenomenal--great engine, Mercedes-like interior, unmatched handling. Trouble is, it's relatively expensive. I'd like a MZ3 with the 2.3L, but it'd be much cheaper just to buy a Mazda6i. Probably cheaper to insure too....

lavaorange3 · December 2003

...and slower, no doubt. Glad C&D liked it though... Out here all or magazines arrive about 30 days late, so maybe I'll see the article by the new year!

regfootball · December 2003

I guess I don't care if it made 10best for this year. It easily the best small car I've driven and between the Mazda and Focus and upcoming Volvo products means Ford has the small car market cornered. Toyota makes a good small car, too, but not as exciting. Where is the general in this market?

zaimon · December 2003

I'm waiting on pins and needles for this new issue. I expected the Mz3 to get more NA press attention by this time of year. Motor Trend is running a First Drive on the 3 for January, nothing new.

pzev · December 2003

You have an automatic 2.0 Protege sedan now right? I'd just like to know how the overall power compares to the Protege you drive now. I want to make sure the 2.0 Mazda3 is on par with the 2.0 Protege.

On my short test drives with the Protege and Mazda6 (different days) the Protege felt faster to me. It also felt more nimble and athletic than the Mazda6. The problem again though was I was so uncomfortable in the Mazda6 seat that I just wanted the test drive to end so that may have influenced how I felt about the Mazda6.

It would be a shame to go all this way and only to find out the Mazda3 seat is uncomfortable as well. Never have I felt so uncomfortable in a car before as I was in the Mazda6.

dinu01 · December 2003

Will get more interior pics tomorrow - yes the grey/black has a pattern too. It came too dark in that pic.

Will also compare acceleration to my 2.0 AT PRO ES.

Will check the seats for adjustments, etc...

Dinu

PS: Keep the requests coming guys!

gotenks243 · December 2003

GT GFX = $22,440
At a current .767 exchange rate, that equals about $17,211 US dollars.

To match the ABS, moonroof, and larger wheels of the GFX, a US buyer has to add the 1AB, 1MC, and 1SP packages to the 3s, but that also adds features not on the GFX: Side Curtains and 6-disc CD. With slightly higher content, the 3s works out to $18,585.

Still, that difference isn't enough for my fellow US buyers to cry fowl. We only have state sales tax to worry about, 7% in my neck of the woods. In Canada (at least in certain provinces) Provincial Sales Tax is required in addition to Government Sales Tax (please tell me that is what GST stands for). There's a tax on air conditioning in Canada on top of that. But the big difference is having to pay only 7% tax in Ohio versus 15% in Ontario (8% PST, 7% GST), for example.

Factoring that in, a GT GFX bought in Ontario would cost the equivalent of $19,792, whereas a 3s in Ohio would be $19,885. The prices after taxes are virtually the same.

My ideal 3s has side airbags and no moonroof, so fortunately that car can be configured on at least one side of the border.

Mike

pzev · December 2003

It seems like the only thing holding you back from the 2.0 is the lack of balance shafts. Other than the smoked taillights it sounds like the 2.0 would be better for you. I'm sure it wouldn't be noticeably slower than the Protege you have now.

Is it just the noise issues that concerns you? The 2.0 might even give you slightly better handling with the lighter engine. It'll definetly give you slightly better insurance rates, better fuel mileage, PZEV emissions, mesh grille, beige interior, black gloss vs. titanium, save $700, etc.

I do have to admit though, it does seem like they're only offering the 2.0 out of default. Add the leather steering wheel and shift knob, two-tone cloth (not sure if this raises the price any), bigger brakes, delay dome light thing, blue/red gauges, and other little things then the prices would be very close. Seems like they do this to make the 2.3 seem even more sporty and give them bragging rights over the 2.0 owners. How much more could it have cost them to add balance shafts and/or VVT to the 2.0?

pzev · December 2003

"My ideal 3s has side airbags and no moonroof, so fortunately that car can be configured on at least one side of the border."

Right on. At least the Mazda3 isn't like the Mazda6 and you have to take a hole in the roof to get safety features. Also if I remember correctly, on the 2.0 in Canada, to get 16" alloys and ABS you have to take a moonroof. The MazdaUSA option packages may be more confusing, but I'll take confusion over Honda-style option packages anyday.

bluong1 · December 2003

for an additional of $700 in the s trim one also get: 16" alloy, fog light, lever type driver's seat lifter & manually adjustable lumbar support, 2 tweeters, and different interior trims+body cosmetic.

backy · December 2003

To answer your questions:

I have driven several automatic 2.0 Pros (LX). I thought the 3 felt quicker. Certainly a more solid car than the Pro, with a more compliant ride and less engine noise. I own a 5-speed Elantra but have driven automatics; I thought the 3 was at least as quick as the auto Elantra, maybe a bit quicker--the Elantra does pretty well, slightly less weight than the 3 but also fewer horses, but good torque too. I reiterate that my choice is the 5-speed, but I think those who like an autoshifter and aren't speed demons will be fine with the performance of the 3i automatic. There's the shift-for-yourself feature if you want more control. You really need to take one for a drive and see for yourself.

As for visibility, I had no issue there.

pzev · December 2003

I'm counting in that the 2.0 has the power package on it. I think the tweeters, seat adjustments, and 16" alloys all come on the power package. Foglights aren't included though, and probably cost $200 to get installed by the dealer. I'm not worried about foglights though so it's ok. The foglights alone though could account for $50 or so of the difference in price, hard to say though.

Either way, the 2.0 isn't much of a deal. I do value fuel economy, lower insurance, and that $700 price difference more than I do the extra power. As far as the VVT and balance shafts are concerned, not sure if I will notice a major difference. I'm tempted not to test drive a 2.3 at all so I won't know what I'm missing.

If it wasn't for the sport grille and smoked taillights there would be a remote chance I would consider the 2.3, assuming the two-tone interior looked ok. Unless the smoked taillights and sport grille look good on the car, those are deal-breakers for me on getting a 2.3.

pzev · December 2003

Wow! Sounds good. Just I was worried about the automatic's gearing on the 2.0 (it's supposedly different from both the Protege and 2.3 Mazda3), extra weight, and lack of low-end torque compared to the Protege. Combine these factors together and it made me worry how the 2.0 auto would do. I'll definetly test drive one when I get the chance.

wongpres · December 2003

gotenks243:

GST stands for Goods & Services Tax. Living in Ontario, I had to pay $3,500cdn in taxes (this includes GST & PST) for my Mazda3. I also had to pay for air conditioning tax and one more tax (but these 2 totalled less than $200cdn though). So yes, we're taxed like crazy.

MazdaUSA Mazda3 packaging:

MazdaUSA did the option packages very well for the Mazda3. Very reasonable and sensible.

pzev:

Yes, the boat that just reached Jersey was in Jacksonville, FL on the 25th.

fowler3 · December 2003

"How much more could it have cost them to add balance shafts and/or VVT to the 2.0?"

I thought the 2.0L engine IS the 2.3L without balance shafts and VVT and downstroked a little? The 2.3L engine should have been at least 20hp more for the upscale models.

"C&D positively raved about the Mazda3, just as I predicted. The car is truly phenomenal--great engine, Mercedes-like interior, unmatched handling."

I read C&D's report, too, and they said nothing like the above. Me thinks that's a bit of "reading into it what you wanted it to say".

C&D did like the hatchback, but lamented the loss of the Protegé-like handling and tossability, due to the 3 being heavier and more refined.

"black gloss vs.titanium"

It's black gloss trim on the 3i dash vs. satin silver finished trim on the 3s dash above the glove box door.

State sales tax in North Carolina is 3%. Maybe just before Thanksgiving dinner I should have said, '...and thank You for the 3% sales tax. Amen'.

fowler3

tomcat630 · December 2003

"Top 10...available by december first- was not held by the MZ3"

That explains it. Where is GM? Corvette and F bodies made Top 10 list a few times before, and the 1983 Caprice.

RE: 2.0 vs. 2.3
The 2.0 isn't too slow, but once in a 2.3, it's hard to go back.

combustible1 · December 2003

I sat in the showroom model first. I was expecting a little more headroom based on the spec numbers.. not bad, but not as good as I had hoped. I still had to lower the seat to it's lowest position for head clearance, thus limiting my ability to adjust later for fatigue on longer trips. Not much better than the MZ6 & TSX that I've been comparing it against.

I was disappointed with some of the interior plastics too, namely, the gas and trunk releases, as well as the window/mirror controls felt and looked really cheap. The carpet was thin, not looking like it will hold up long. Somebody reviewed earlier saying that the headliner was kind of flimsy. I agree, as it was a little saggy right behind the moonroof. Dashboard layout is attractive, but thin and hard, leaving the impression of functionality, but no luxury. Same impression of the doors. I know this is all pretty common to this category of car, i.e., subcompacts, but it's a little step down from what I'm used to.

The rearview mirror is a definite "get rid of".. too short. I would splurge for the dimmable mirror just for the added length. The glove box.. talk about deep! WoW! I understand that the depth is to accomodate the Nav controller for those cars that will have that feature. Huge bonus of space for everyone else.

Drivers seat felt a little hard and had thinner padding it seemed. However, it didn't fatigue me sitting there for a while like I thought it might from my initial impression. That's good.

Backseat leg and headroom were disappointing for me, but I'm 6'1", so take that for what it's worth. For me, the lack of space back there means I can only ever hold 2 passengers.. unless I"m willing to contort my body a bit in the driver seat for the person behind to be more comfortable.

Another negative: the fuel door, like with the MZ6, doesn't have a means to hold the cap in place when it's unscrewed.. dangling cap = scratched paint.

ON THE ROAD:

Let me preface with saying that I drove with the saleguy (meaning I couldn't concentrate) and it was only for 15 minutes on mostly straight roads with decent pavement.

Acceleration: more than adequate. (I've been driving a 130HP 2900lb car up to now). I've only ever driven AT, so from that perspective, I was more than happy with the 2.3l acceleration. I punched it a few times at different speeds, and maybe noticed a lag once, but only briefly.. no big deal to me.

Finally (yes here's the finally!), the car seemed fairly quiet to me. When you punched the engine, you definitely heard it, but otherwise, it was pretty quiet. Road noise wasn't bad at all, and this was with the 17" wheels. I was pleasantly surprised by this. The only thing I couldn't check was wind noise, as the fastest I ever got to was about 55-60mph.

I'll need to take another longer ride on my own to get a deeper impression, and determine whether I can live with some of my complaints.

shroud · December 2003

I finally got to sit in one (not the one I have ordered, but basically same model in different paint).

Wow. Nirvana. I can't WAIT for my car now!

Jarrett

(If the one I sat in - which was indigo blue instead of the titanium I ordered - was automatic, I almost would have taken that instead!)

combustible1 · December 2003

those colors, the titanium and the darker indigo blue, would probably end up being my two final choices too.

I saw the same dark green the 3 is getting on an MZ8, and that color looks very interesting too, particularly in direct sunlight.

However, that green was the same on the minivan, so maybe the MZ8 had more to do with my favorable impression.

zaimon · December 2003

Does Mazda have another car in the works?

combustible1 · December 2003

RX8 I mean. MZ RX8, if you will.

combustible1 · December 2003

thanks petpad. I am considering the TSX, but would rather not spend that much. So yes, it's not exactly a fair comparison, but that is why I'm comparing the two, hoping I could be satisfied with the 3.. and spend the money I save on a nice plasma TV.. or on some good drugs.. or expensive call girls.. the possibilities are endless! ;-P

Seriously, the cost difference down here, especially the way I would spec out the 3 (loaded), isn't as great as up in Canada evidently. It's about $22,500 vs. $28,000 between the two.

creakid1 · December 2003

petpad Dec 1, 2003 11:53pm
considering the difference in price

The US$27k TSX is about $6k higher than a loaded Mazda3 w/o navigation, but has stability, power seat, powerful stereo, dual-zone auto climate &, most important, a 2.4 liter engine that revs rather quietly. Not to mention better noise insulation & super aerodynamic underbody cladding. Only the soft bushing made the steering feedback even worse.

Of course, I hate leather, auto, auto climate(I only appreciate charcoal air purifier as seen in 325i) & maybe even moonroof, so the price difference would be even greater.

CAR, who complained about the Euro Accord' steering(which already has slightly better steering feedback than the Acura TSX) also mentioned about the new Golf Vs lack of steering feel/confidence compare to the Mazda3. (more on that later)

creakid1 · December 2003

combustible1 Dec 1, 2003 11:04pm
Another negative: the fuel door, like with the MZ6, doesn't have a means to hold the cap in place when it's unscrewed

The holder gets dirty. You dont want the dirt to end up in your gas tank.

creakid1 · December 2003

fowler3 Dec 1, 2003 9:50pm
I thought the 2.0L engine IS the 2.3L without balance shafts and VVT and downstroked a little? The 2.3L engine should have been at least 20hp more for the upscale models

The balance shafts are drag that wastes energy & ruins output/fuel economy. Thats why 6-cyls are cool.

creakid1 · December 2003

pzev Dec 1, 2003 7:11pm
At least the Mazda3 isn't like the Mazda6 and you have to take a hole in the roof to get safety features.

A hole in the roof also makes the structure weaker to withstand crash, as thats how it looked to me as I recalled from the picture Bruno posted for you a while back.

creakid1 · December 2003

pzev Dec 1, 2003 6:59pm
It seems like the only thing holding you back from the 2.0 is the lack of balance shafts. Other than the smoked taillights it sounds like the 2.0 would be better for you. I'm sure it wouldn't be noticeably slower than the Protege you have now.

Is it just the noise issues that concerns you? The 2.0 might even give you slightly better handling with the lighter engine. It'll definetly give you slightly better insurance rates, better fuel mileage, PZEV emissions, mesh grille, beige interior, black gloss vs. titanium, save $700, etc.

Insurance rate? Nah, my insurance is cheap. That $700 includes lots of stuff. Besides, the 2.0 stick is the noisiest Mazda3 on the fwy sold in N.A., unlike "your" 3i auto. & I plan to increase the tire diameter to quiet down the rev, & hence, need more power to compensate. When I want the optional stability(& maybe even Bose) on the '05 model, what's the chance of the 3i...

bluong1 · December 2003

Billy: got you! Indeed, the 16" alloy, lever type driver's seat lifter & manually adjustable lumbar support, 2 tweeters is in 1PP package.

I agree with Preston, the US Mazda3 packaging is good. I haven't heard many people complaining. Extremely good sign. ;-)

As for CA vs US price, I thought Canadians have too pay an extra $105 for metallic/mica colors, i.e., all but pure white. Right?

Does anyone know where I can find a picture/schematic of the balance-shaft for 4-cylinder engine (not necessary Mazda)? I'm curious to see how it looks. Good point from creakid that the shaft is a drag (I guess it's touching the thick oil), oh well...

Greg: good review! yes I have noticed that the rear mirror is short too, but I though it doesn't need to be longer as the (5-door) rear windows is kind of narrow as Jim have pointed out recently. Am I wrong?

The Nordic (dark) Green is only available in i-trim with beige interior. Not a bad combination.

dinu01 · December 2003

Not sure if this is what you need, but it's a good site to brush-up on engine knowledge:

http://autozine.kyul.net/technical_school/engine/smooth2.htm

and probably the coolest site: http://auto.howstuffworks.com/engine2.htm

Dinu

shroudatwork1 · December 2003

"Got my stickers for the alarm today and I'm debatting defacing the windows with a sticker for the sake of warning a would-be thief... I hate add-ons like stickers on windows,windshield etc, like state/province safety stuff or even maintenance reminders, which I peel off. I still have the dorky dealer's back licence plate frame but it is a goner very soon. "

Where did you get the alarm sticker?

- Jarrett

bluong1 · December 2003

Thanks.

- the howstuffworks site doesn't show the balance-shaft for inline-4, does it?

- the twin balance-shaft showed in the autozine doesn't seem to touch the oil pan. Question is: Does Mazda 2.3L use the same design [I think it is, because Mazda specifically mentions the balance-shaft rotates at twice speed than the crank]? If yes, why creakid think then the balance shaft has significant drag?

dinu01 · December 2003

HowStuffWorks does not show it, you're right. It's just a good site with interesting info presented in a cathcy graphic way on all subjects, including cars.

Dinu

petpad · December 2003

Jarrett, the Mazda 3 Owner's Manual has a section on the anti-theft alarm, and it says that models equipped with the feature will have the stickers waiting for them in the glove compartment. I had no stickers in the glove compartment so I called my dealer and asked for some, which they got for me. I haven't installed them yet so I'll scan them and email them to Bruno for his Yahoo Pic page.

Bruno, I dont think I had to pay extra for the "Lava Orange Mica" paint - but it may be an extra on base models, not sure.

INteresting discussion on the safety aspect of having a sunroof. I hadn't had one since my 1986 Jetta and was looking forward to have another one. I guess everything in life is about risk management, and I would venture to say that a hole in the roof, in my case, is "acceptable" risk. Of course, there's always the Miata...

Pet

bluong1 · December 2003

you wrote: I dont think I had to pay extra for the "Lava Orange Mica" paint - but it may be an extra on base models, not sure.

I don't know. But I saw it on the CA build-your-own website, as soon as I click on metallic color, $105 is added.

My P5 have a moonroof, and frankly I can't detect any difference in the rigidity with P5s w/o. The factory moonroof seems to be smaller than most aftermarket one.

dinu01 · December 2003

Sunroof: The Mazda sunroofs are VERY small compared to other cars (in general). I just like the extra light

Paint Cost: $105 on ALL colours EXCEPT white. See mazda.ca - same thing applied in 2001 when we got the PRO.

Dinu

gee35coupe · December 2003

Gotta have em on any 4 cylinder larger than 2.0 liters. The only reason we sold our Protege was the 2.0 was buzzy at high speeds. My Civic SI revs even higher but is smooth as Mobile 1 on teflon.

petpad · December 2003

Well, I went to the build thing on Mazda.ca, and it does add 105 for the paint, called "Sunset Orange Mica" in my case (could be lava orange elsewhere...). So what this means is that I got it included, or they forgot to charge it because I was the very first one and they had no paperwork at all on the car! Finally a break for me after buying into the paint sealant/scothguard scam!! (JK :-) I am not too worried about them cuz they made a good commission on me, paying full MSRP, and I also bought 4 rims and 4 Nokians Hakkapiilleta's 1. So there... I will most likely spend a lot more there too in future years as well.

Pet

dinu01 · December 2003

I think you mentioned it before, but can you let me know a bit more about the winter tires you got?

Size:
Price out the door:

Thanks!
Dinu

combustible1 · December 2003

creakid1 Dec 2, 2003 1:51am

not an equal trade-off, as far as I'm concerned. Heck, I would think the amount of dirt or debris collected from the cap holder would dwarf the amount that comes from the delivery truck tanks and the gas station containers, etc.

Besides, this minimal dirt would likely settle to the bottom of your tank. You'll be fine just as long as you don't drive on empty and get that dirt sucked up into the engine (which would get intercepted by the gas filter anyway).

Case closed..I stand by my complaint! :-P

combustible1 · December 2003

bluong1 Dec 2, 2003 5:55am

good question.. I'll need to take another look and see if the shorter mirror is fine because of the smaller rear window opening. I didn't really pay attention to that when I was in the car. I only noticed that it was short and assumed it would be a problem.

lavaorange3 · December 2003

Got curious, so I buzzed around to the various discussions on the subject, and I found a number of lengthy threads on other boards, one in particular re: the Nissan 2.5L, that focused on removing your balance shafts in order to gain ~6hp. I guess I'm not much of a racer boy anymore - had an SS396 once that would rattle your brain loose - but to intentionally create vibration for 6hp seems kinda short-sighted, esp. for a daily driver. Opinions?

groovypippin · December 2003

After perusing many posts from many people, I would like to contribute the following thoughts.

1) Why in the world do so many of you insist on comparing the interior quality of this vehicle to cars costing as much as 50%-75% more money?

No its not as nice as an Acura TSX. No its not as nice as an Audi A4. No its not even as nice as a Honda Accord.

It is however, both in terms of design and execution head and shoulders over anything else in its own class, with the exception of the Jetta. Even the Jetta, however, tops out at thousands and thousands of dollars more than the M3.

2) Performance. It's got either 148 or a 160 HP. If you can't wring any performance out of that, you need to go back to drivers ed. About the only criticism or concern that I have heard here that I agree with is that because the car is so much more refined than the previous generation that by measurements taken from the good old "butt dyno", it doesn't seem as nimble, responsive and fun.

Having driven the 2.3L sedan, Its certainly a compromise I can live with. Still lots of fun and much more refined.

3) On a totally unrelated note, saw a full-load 2004 Mazda MPV with GFX for the first time on the weekend. Holy mother of god is that an incredibly good looking vehicle now. Seriously, check it our in person. I was quite blown away. Too bad the new 3.5L V6 doesn't show up until 2006.

4) Back to the interior, because a lot of the comments in here are REALLY chapping my hide. I am still completely mystified that so many people here are nickle and diming what is probably the best looking interior that Mazda has ever produced - not to mention in my humble opinion, the head and shoulders best looking interior in its class. Go sit in a Civic. Go sit in a Sentra. Go sit in a Focus. Go sit in a Corolla. Then tell me that the M3 is a chintzy piece of crap inside.

OK I feel better now.

mazdaman6 · December 2003

Well said!

shroudatwork1 · December 2003

"I am still completely mystified that so many people here are nickle and diming what is probably the best looking interior that Mazda has ever produced - not to mention in my humble opinion, the head and shoulders best looking interior in its class. "

Totally. For the *price*, I absolutely love the interior.

bluong1 · December 2003

http://www.picturetrail.com/gallery/view?p=999&gid=3214735&am- p;uid=1674612

combustible1 · December 2003

just kidding.

I've already explained the reason why I am comparing this car to the TSX (if I can live with the quality and feature compromises of the 3, I'll be $6K better off). Therefore, the complaining about it makes no sense to me. (and I realize you probably aren't just talking about me, but I'm sure my recent posts are in part what set you off on your little 'venting spree').

Yes, it's a different class of car, but I include that info so you can understand where my perspective and judgements are coming from, i.e., why I'm more critical of the car in some ways.

If anything, you should take comparisons to more expensive cars as a compliment to the 3.

I am not and never would even remotely consider a Civic, an Elantra, a Sentry a Corolla, or a Protege, for that matter. Too boring, ugly or unispiring to me. The 3 is on my "radar screen" because it is a definite step up from those of it's class size..

I'm just not sure if it is enough of a step up for me to live with for the next 8-10 years. If I traded cars every 2-3 years like some of you people, I would be much more forgiving and less anal about this stuff.

redkey1 · December 2003

I do not think insults are neccessary. I think what we need to look at here is people's different perspectives from a financial standpoint when it comes to cars. For many (and most on here, most likely), the car they desire is out of their reach financially (TSX would be a strech for me) so they are looking for the next best thing.....when you think about it there isn't much in the way of sporty, non-econo, smaller sedans on the market right now that can be had for low 20's w/ lux features (jetta?). The 3 now fills that bill and very nicely, hence the reason so many people are excited about its arrival. Mazda has taken an econo-car (the protege) and spiffed it up into a small sports sedan. VW (not to start a relaibility war) has done very well w/ the jetta in this space and it too was once nothing more than your standard econo-box (like the civic, sentra, corrola). From the other side, anyone who can truly afford to spend 27k or so for a car would not really consider a 3 b/c to them the TSX is the value option and something higher (BMW 3 series, Audi A4) would be their desired vehicle. And for the record, I could afford the 3 .... could strech it out for the TSX if I really wanted to (and ate ramen noodles for the next 5 yrs) but I'd love a BMW. My $.20.

bluong1 · December 2003

Hey, we don't want your $.02, keep it for your ramen noodle! LOL

mdaffron · December 2003

My Mazda dealer received its first shipment of Mazda3's about three hours ago, and my sales manager kept his promise and called me about five minutes after the truck arrived!

Woo-HOOOOOO!!!

I'm off work in ten minutes, digital camera in hand. But not only to take pics -- I'm gonna drive one of these puppies! As a Protege owner since 1992 (1992 LX, 2000 ES, 2002 Protege5), maybe I can give some first-hand, experienced comparison viewpoints tomorrow!

Would spend more time ... but must leave ... time to zoom ... zoom zoom ... ZOOM ZOOM ZOOM!!!

Meade

P.S. What kind of car will Meade be driving to work tomorrow? Future unclear! (Especially since the sales manager said they have some "loyalty cash" for Protege owners trading up to 3's!!!)

Mazda3

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles