Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see May lease deals!

2014 Mazda 3 s vs. 2015 Volkswagen Golf SEL Comparison Test | Edmunds.com

Edmunds.comEdmunds.com Member, Administrator, Moderator Posts: 10,315
edited June 2014 in Mazda
image2014 Mazda 3 s vs. 2015 Volkswagen Golf SEL Comparison Test | Edmunds.com

Edmunds compares the 2014 Mazda 3 s and the 2015 Volkswagen Golf SEL hatchbacks. Includes on-road driving impressions, instrumented test data, specs, photos and more.

Read the full story here


  • Options
    manny_c44manny_c44 Member Posts: 1

    The base 1.8T Golf starts at 18k (or 19k not including the launch edition) and the base 2.5L Mazda starts at 25,000. So you are saving 6 or 7 thousand(!) dollars for comparable power and dynamics (and if you opt for the manual in the Golf the transmission is probably better too). I'm sure if you put the equally-priced Mazda 2.0L against the 1.8T manual the comparison would've skewed heavily in the opposite direction. That's the comparison that I would be most interested in (though this one was good too).

  • Options
    smrtypants44smrtypants44 Member Posts: 25

    According to the vw website the HID option for the Golf includes AFS, in your article you make it sound like its something you can only get on the mazda.

  • Options
    mustang5507mustang5507 Member Posts: 2

    It's bizarre the Golf doesn't offer adaptive headlamps anymore. My 2012 TDI has adaptive headlamps plus cornering lamps (when foglamps are not on). As well - I'm averaging over 41mpg lifetime. Have seen as high as 58 on the highway. Seeing as this Golf lost 300 or so lbs over the MK6, I anticipate the Diesel will handily outdo the Mazda 3 mileage.

    All in all though the 3 does look a lot better than the MK 7 Golf - and what I've heard from other magazines about the tuning of the steering and transmission, seems they took a step back in prioritizing performance over economy.

    Would have been nice to see a Focus in the mix too....

  • Options
    patinthecitypatinthecity Member Posts: 40
    edited June 2014

    This article is wrong; the Golf is only available with a 5-speed manual transmission, not a 6-speed. Plus, a true base addition of a Mazda3 would be the 2-liter version which starts at under 19-grand, but has a standard 6-speed manual transmission that I've read has decent performance. Pit the base Golf against the base Mazda3; I'm more curious to see the differences with the manual trans versions.

  • Options
    amickeyamickey Member Posts: 25

    Good comparison. The right models were compared in this article.
    The Mazda & VW in this comp have similar components, accessories & specs (both are their respective brand's range toppers until a Speed3 & GTI come out in the future).
    The outcome of this comparison is similar to others that have come out: that the Mazda3 is the class leader in the compact hatchback segment.

  • Options
    bankerdannybankerdanny Member Posts: 1,021

    How does the VW's mid range acceleration compare to the Mazda? I would think that in consistently moving traffic the VW's far superior torque curve would make it better to drive.

  • Options
    loopy3loopy3 Member Posts: 1

    I don't think in any other market in the world does VW use a conventional slush box . They must have been scared about using the 7 Speed DSG in America. But given how awful this automatic seems maybe they should have had the guts to do it.

  • Options
    bc1960bc1960 Member Posts: 171

    IIRC, the 2.0l Mazda3 was only a few tenths less quick than the 2.5l, nor was the handling far off, and it weighs even less, so it's far from clear that the Golf would be notably superior; perhaps just close to equal. Like Mazda3 i vs. s, manual Golfs have smaller, narrower tires than the SEL; the transmission probably isn't going to transform the handling. Testing when lower-spec Golfs become readily available will tell.

  • Options
    smoothmoosesmoothmoose Member Posts: 1

    I own the 2.5L Mazda 3s. But also test drove the 2.0L 3i MT. I can see the 3i only being slight slower on 0-60 drag times, as it has with MT option you can do a clutch drop launch. No way to launch on the 2.5L. That said the 2.5L has noticeable more torque, across the powerband and down low. Thus for day-to-day driving the 2.5L provides a more pleasing driving experience.

  • Options
    incognito4incognito4 Member Posts: 3

    I briefly drove the Jetta 1.8 (SEL) automatic and it was impeccable.

Sign In or Register to comment.