I saw from a photo that the U.S. version of the 6 will not have rear adjustable headrests that is found in European and JDM versions. Instead, it has the integrated headrests like the ones found in the current Accord and Altima. I personally would like the adjustable headrests for safety reasons. The Camry and 2003 Accord will have adjustable rear headrests.
I was going to suggest that this might be a base model (DX?) car. Except looking at the pics, its pretty much comprehensively equipted with manumatic transmission, steering wheel radio controls, CD/Changer. The only "downmarket" piece seems to be the wheels, which I assume to be the standard 16" set.
Whoever said that the "bad news is that the cars will be made in Flat Rock" must be living in a vacuum. Where are the facts to back up this claim. Do you think a good car has to be "untouched by US workers"?
The Mazda plant has been making cars since 1986 with no major problems. It is about the same level as the other 'Transplant' auto plants.
coming from the editors here at Edmunds, whose stated preference in the mid-size sedan wars is the Passat. When they offer up the Mazda6 over a Passat, then we'll be talking...
the way I listed the cars is NOT my ranking for these cars (though close).
Actually, when I listed them it wasn't my intention to rank them, but since you guys start to rank them out of blue, I might as well throw my ranks in there!
my ranks (pure guessing and base on pictures/specs, haven't driven any of them)
1. Mazda 6 (extremely, totally, completely BIASED vote ) 2. VW Passat (gets high ranking solely by being GERMAN :P) 3. Nissan Altima (the Power, the Power, the POWER!) 4. Honda Accord (Looks less flabby than the Camry, even though according to Edmunds it handles worse than Camry SE) 5. Toyota Camry (still execellent car, but against these competition, somebody's gotta take last )
Passat at first! Give me a break what an ugly car when compared to the Mazda. Not very sporty at all.
Mazda wins no questions. People just need to get rid of old ideas they have about certain car companies. The Passat is a lot less sporty but not at all a bad car.
Reliability plays a part, as well as being fun to drive and being efficient. Sorry, but "average" doesn't play so well when the others are "above average" or "well above average" in CR's rankings.
Besides, I don't like the chromed bloated-pig look of the current Passat (or new Accord).
This month's publication has an article about the 6, and they mention the hatch and wagon will be available in the summer of 2003!
Whoopee! I can't wait to drag my wife out and check them out when they arrive. I'd like to see how the wagon and hatch compare to the P5 (which I'd get if the 6 hatch or wagon don't prove out better...I'm giving the next-gen Protege/Focus platform a wide berth until it proves itself, given the spotty record of the Focus in NA so far).
I guess all the input to their customer service lines and the chat messages have gotten Mazda NA's attention and convinced them to not wait until next winter to introduce the hatch and wagon to NA!
How can everyone be ranking vehicles that they havent even driven yet? Isnt that a bit premature? And what trim lines/engines is everyone talking about-4s or V6s? I think that will play a major factor as well. ~alpha
It is hard to judge how these cars fall into order, as well as the applicable criteria. If its all-out performance, Altima and the Mazda6 likely move to the top. If its size, Accord and Camry may be better choices. The Passat has greater luxury overtones with the percption of greater performance and quality. One wildcard is the Acura TSX (aka Honda JDM/Euro Accord) on sale in 2003 as a 2004 model here in NA.
I have driven the Passat (extended period), the Altima (test drive), and been in a Camry for a test. I rate them:
1. Passat. Why? There is just something about VW interiors. That's what it's all about for me. The front seats are very uncomfortable though, but the interior is the best of the lot, reminicent of an Audi, for thousands less. The power is pretty good, but they need to firm up the base suspension a little bit and reduce the body lean.
2. Altima: Nice power, nice ride, very roomy inside, nice comfortable seats. But KILL that cheap plastic interior! And those taillamps are hideous as well. Car also looks pretty large, and I don't like larger cars with bigger turning circles. They are a headache to park. View out the back isn't really perfect either.
3. Camry: It's a boring ride. So tranquil, so quiet, almost puts you to sleep. I can be put to sleep watching TV at home. I prefer to be kept alert, awake, aware, and having fun when driving. I also don't really care for the styling either. It looks like an Avalon that someone left in the dryer too long.
I can't wait to drive the Mazda6. I hope that it has driving dynamics like the Protege ES I used to have (Edmunds said it does). That was a good handling little car. I also hope the Duratec engine is more reliable than the one in the Taurus is. I read that there were alot of problems with the car when it first came out. Also, the last 2 cars that were introduced (Focus, Tribscape) by FoMoCo were riddled with recalls. I will wait to see how the records of the cars are before buying a first year model, since it looks like Ford can't be trusted.
But I tell you what, if they can mix the driving characteristics of the Protege ES with the interior quality/ambience of the Passat/Jetta and have decent power and no recalls, I will definitely be checking out one once the lease on my Jetta expires.
I think I said before I ranked anything that everything I put down is PURELY HYPOTHETICAL, based on pictures and factory specs on paper, hence in a sense it's actually very even playing field (a hypothetical field of course) since there's no bias caused by personal driving experience.
Closed Circuit to Vocus: If you find the seats of the Passat are uncomfortable, why would you even consider it? Sure, the interior is nice to look at and touch, but if your [non-permissible content removed] hurts from sitting in those rock hard, short bottomed seats, what's the point?
Yes, I agree - the 3.0 (and the old Contour 2.5) V-6 Duratec is the best thing to come out of FoMoCo in a LONG time!
I know a number of people with very high mileage (150K+) cars, and a cousin that has a 2-year old Taurus SE that he's already put 75K miles on - absolutely flawless performance, and better highway mileage than my car at an average speed of 75mph (around 34 mpg).
Although I'm pretty certain I'd be happier with the lighter front-end (and associated improved handling dynamics) of the 4-cylinder Mazda 6, preferably in hatchback trim (if I can wait that long!)
Malt, do you (or does anyone else) know if the 4-cylinder will have something along the lines of a "Sport" package - larger, low profile wheels and tires (16" or more) and a tighter suspension?
I was wondering the same thing this morning. I'll probably be looking at the 4cyl, 5spd and as far as I know, the suspension will have the same feel regardless of engine. In years past I had a 6cyl manual 626 and while the power was fun to play with the car sure did feel big. The 4cyl 5spd I had didn't have the same suspension, yet it did feel lighter.
And isn't the Mazda 6's transmission (the 6-speed) for the V-6 Duratec going to be a Mazda unit? I don't think FoMoCo even has a manual transmission that they can mate to the Duratec 3.0l.
In my book - this would be a good thing, although if they use a Ford transmission for the 5-speed automatic (again, I understand the Tribscape and Taurus use a 4-speed auto, right) - then I might be worried.
I think the article in Zoom Zoom mentions all 6 transmissions will be imported from Japan.
I think the JATCO 5-spd is the AT for the 6cyl, same as that now available for the MPV, I think. I haven't driven one, but I hear from a reliable source that it's very good (right maltb?).
I have 02' MPV that has the exact same combo (3.0 Duratec and JATCO 5 speed auto transmission) I am pleased with it so far. Also I had done some research and found lot of postitive reviews on duratec. It is considered as one of the better engine designed. According to some posts on MPV forum, the same (may be with slight modifications) engine is used in some Jaguar model as well. Edmunds'MPV formus (some old posts) have good info about the 2.5 and 3.0 lt engines.
JATCO (Japan Transmission Co ???) is reputed for its transmission designs. Although I don't know if this 5 speed in MPV/Mazda 6 is brand new design or not.
The Mazda6 sedan and hatch pretty close in size. The hatch is a few inches shorter overall, with basically the same passenger volume.
I like the interior of the new Accord better, and have more confidence in Honda's reliability. The Mazda6 may be an interesting out-of-the-box alternative, however. I'm not buying for a while, so I have plenty of time to contemplate matters related to the Accord, TSX, and of course the Mazda6. I would predict something like the Mazda6 winning a Car and Driver comparison test, but the Accord being named a "10-Best".
When the wagon version of this vehicle is introduced, what will it be called? I am really hoping that they don't used the "Protege5" as a precedent, and call this one the "6-5". That would suck. I already hate calling the Saabs by those ridicululous names. Grr. ~alpha
The V6 gets a 5-speed manual transmission. From carseverything.com: "The A5M transmission is used for leveraging the higher-torque engines, including the V-6 gasoline engine and the diesel variants. This five-speed manual transmission also features Mazda attention to detail for optimal shift quality."
Yeah - the X-type 2.5 and 3.0 use the same 6-cylinder Duratec (massaged - probably not) from the Mondeo/Contour/Taurus. If its good enough for Jaguar ...
Although that isn't an accurate or justifiable line of thought any more - I'm told the S-type feels like a Lincoln (LS V-8) these days. Pity, "Ford Killed the Jaguar Star" (Queen!)
Its a brand new Mazda designed and built engine, all-aluminium, very efficient. Its been mentioned on most of the (European and Japanese) reviews. Reviews in US magazines and websites, where everyone is inexplicably obsessed with HP and V-6 engines, tend to concentrate on that version only.
These new 4-cyl engines (ranging from 1.8 through 2.3l IIRC) will form the basis of the drivetrains in all FoMoCo (that's Volvo, Ford, Mazda and others) cars over the next few years.
say that the engine is more than adequate. At this point, its the top engine in the 5door sport model.
The V-6 will likely ultimately go faster, but the 4cyl. may end up being the better all around choice. We drove both 4cyl. and V-6 Accords before buying, and I found the 4cyl. to be better balanced with better steering. This is obviously due to the weight, or lack thereof, over the front axle between the 4cyl. and the V-6.
This is one reason I'm interested in comparing the Mazda6 to the Acura TSX, which will likely have only a high reving 4cyl power plant.
For the "run-of-the-mill" 6s, anyway. US is obsessed with HP ratings. Regarding the UK review, I assume they use UK gallons for the fuel economy figures. How does their "combined" rating compare to US EPA city/hwy, so far as duty cycle?
Comments
http://www.familycar.com/RoadTests/Mazda-6/Images/RightRear.jpg
The Mazda plant has been making cars since 1986 with no major problems. It is about the same level as the other 'Transplant' auto plants.
They were almost Mustangs, phew.
http://www.bonforums.com/plants/plant_closings031201.htm
http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/roadtests/firstdrive/68223/article.html
And here's what the editors have to say about the Accord's styling:
"Want to see a beautiful mainstream Japanese sedan? Look at the 2003 Mazda 6."
Score Mazda 6 1, Honda Accord 0
YEAH!!!
I smell a new midsize sedan comparo test in 2003!
2003 Mazda 6
2003 Honda Accord
2003 Nissan Altima
2003 VW Passat
2003 Toyota Camry
the ultimate showdown!
1 Passat
2 Mazda 6
3 Honda Accord
4 Altima
5 Camry
bwahaha
2)Altima
3)Mazda 6
4)Camry
5)Accord
Actually, when I listed them it wasn't my intention to rank them, but since you guys start to rank them out of blue, I might as well throw my ranks in there!
my ranks (pure guessing and base on pictures/specs, haven't driven any of them)
1. Mazda 6 (extremely, totally, completely BIASED vote
2. VW Passat (gets high ranking solely by being GERMAN :P)
3. Nissan Altima (the Power, the Power, the POWER!)
4. Honda Accord (Looks less flabby than the Camry, even though according to Edmunds it handles worse than Camry SE)
5. Toyota Camry (still execellent car, but against these competition, somebody's gotta take last
Mazda6
Passat
Camry
Altima
Accord
Jeff
Mazda wins no questions. People just need to get rid of old ideas they have about certain car companies. The Passat is a lot less sporty but not at all a bad car.
Altima
Camry
Accord
Passat
Reliability plays a part, as well as being fun to drive and being efficient. Sorry, but "average" doesn't play so well when the others are "above average" or "well above average" in CR's rankings.
Besides, I don't like the chromed bloated-pig look of the current Passat (or new Accord).
Whoopee! I can't wait to drag my wife out and check them out when they arrive. I'd like to see how the wagon and hatch compare to the P5 (which I'd get if the 6 hatch or wagon don't prove out better...I'm giving the next-gen Protege/Focus platform a wide berth until it proves itself, given the spotty record of the Focus in NA so far).
I guess all the input to their customer service lines and the chat messages have gotten Mazda NA's attention and convinced them to not wait until next winter to introduce the hatch and wagon to NA!
~alpha
1. Passat. Why? There is just something about VW interiors. That's what it's all about for me. The front seats are very uncomfortable though, but the interior is the best of the lot, reminicent of an Audi, for thousands less. The power is pretty good, but they need to firm up the base suspension a little bit and reduce the body lean.
2. Altima: Nice power, nice ride, very roomy inside, nice comfortable seats. But KILL that cheap plastic interior! And those taillamps are hideous as well. Car also looks pretty large, and I don't like larger cars with bigger turning circles. They are a headache to park. View out the back isn't really perfect either.
3. Camry: It's a boring ride. So tranquil, so quiet, almost puts you to sleep. I can be put to sleep watching TV at home. I prefer to be kept alert, awake, aware, and having fun when driving. I also don't really care for the styling either. It looks like an Avalon that someone left in the dryer too long.
I can't wait to drive the Mazda6. I hope that it has driving dynamics like the Protege ES I used to have (Edmunds said it does). That was a good handling little car. I also hope the Duratec engine is more reliable than the one in the Taurus is. I read that there were alot of problems with the car when it first came out. Also, the last 2 cars that were introduced (Focus, Tribscape) by FoMoCo were riddled with recalls. I will wait to see how the records of the cars are before buying a first year model, since it looks like Ford can't be trusted.
But I tell you what, if they can mix the driving characteristics of the Protege ES with the interior quality/ambience of the Passat/Jetta and have decent power and no recalls, I will definitely be checking out one once the lease on my Jetta expires.
brand bias, however, still runs rampant
Closed Circuit to Vocus: If you find the seats of the Passat are uncomfortable, why would you even consider it? Sure, the interior is nice to look at and touch, but if your [non-permissible content removed] hurts from sitting in those rock hard, short bottomed seats, what's the point?
I have never heard anything bad about the duratech in the Taurus. Now if we are talking about the 3.8 (not in the duratech family) then I agree.
I know a number of people with very high mileage (150K+) cars, and a cousin that has a 2-year old Taurus SE that he's already put 75K miles on - absolutely flawless performance, and better highway mileage than my car at an average speed of 75mph (around 34 mpg).
Although I'm pretty certain I'd be happier with the lighter front-end (and associated improved handling dynamics) of the 4-cylinder Mazda 6, preferably in hatchback trim (if I can wait that long!)
Malt, do you (or does anyone else) know if the 4-cylinder will have something along the lines of a "Sport" package - larger, low profile wheels and tires (16" or more) and a tighter suspension?
I have heard of transmission problems in the Duratec Taurus, not engine. Sorry for the confusion.
BTW, I heard there are only two trim levels.
In my book - this would be a good thing, although if they use a Ford transmission for the 5-speed automatic (again, I understand the Tribscape and Taurus use a 4-speed auto, right) - then I might be worried.
I think the JATCO 5-spd is the AT for the 6cyl, same as that now available for the MPV, I think. I haven't driven one, but I hear from a reliable source that it's very good (right maltb?).
(3.0 Duratec and JATCO 5 speed auto transmission)
I am pleased with it so far.
Also I had done some research and found lot of
postitive reviews on duratec. It is considered
as one of the better engine designed.
According to some posts on MPV forum, the
same (may be with slight modifications) engine
is used in some Jaguar model as well.
Edmunds'MPV formus (some old posts) have good info about
the 2.5 and 3.0 lt engines.
JATCO (Japan Transmission Co ???) is reputed for
its transmission designs. Although I don't know
if this 5 speed in MPV/Mazda 6 is brand new design
or not.
03 Accord/03 Mazda6(Sedan)
Length: 189.5/186.8
Width: 71.5/70.1
Height: 57.1/56.7
Wheelbase: 107.9/105.3
F-Head Room: 38.3/38.7
F- Shoulder: 56.9/56.1
F-Leg: 42.6/42.3
R-Head Room: 36.8/37.1
R-Shoulder: 56.1/54.9
R- Leg Room: 36.8/36.5
Trunk: 14.0/15.2
The Mazda6 sedan and hatch pretty close in size. The hatch is a few inches shorter overall, with basically the same passenger volume.
I like the interior of the new Accord better, and have more confidence in Honda's reliability. The Mazda6 may be an interesting out-of-the-box alternative, however. I'm not buying for a while, so I have plenty of time to contemplate matters related to the Accord, TSX, and of course the Mazda6. I would predict something like the Mazda6 winning a Car and Driver comparison test, but the Accord being named a "10-Best".
~alpha
yeah, that's it
From carseverything.com: "The A5M transmission is used for leveraging the higher-torque engines, including the V-6 gasoline engine and the diesel variants. This five-speed manual transmission also features Mazda attention to detail for optimal shift quality."
Although that isn't an accurate or justifiable line of thought any more - I'm told the S-type feels like a Lincoln (LS V-8) these days. Pity, "Ford Killed the Jaguar Star" (Queen!)
I'll post more as soon as I get it.
These new 4-cyl engines (ranging from 1.8 through 2.3l IIRC) will form the basis of the drivetrains in all FoMoCo (that's Volvo, Ford, Mazda and others) cars over the next few years.
The V-6 will likely ultimately go faster, but the 4cyl. may end up being the better all around choice. We drove both 4cyl. and V-6 Accords before buying, and I found the 4cyl. to be better balanced with better steering. This is obviously due to the weight, or lack thereof, over the front axle between the 4cyl. and the V-6.
This is one reason I'm interested in comparing the Mazda6 to the Acura TSX, which will likely have only a high reving 4cyl power plant.
If anyone hasn't seen the CAR review, I'm planning on scanning it. Hope to have it up in a day or two...
Meade