"High performance is such a small part of the decision people make when buying cars like this that the fact the the M3 performs better is almost a moot point."
"I guess you have to remember that these are supposed to be economy cars first."
No offense - but I don't think you could be more wrong with regard to typical buyer of the Mazda3. Those choosing the M3 over the others are that sector of the small-car buying public looking for performance over economy and I count myself as one of those.
The Mazda3 is meant to be a performance car first - the Civic an economy car first. There's nothing wrong with either approach - it's just aimed at different needs. These different priorities are exactly why I think Civic and Mazda3 owners clash so much as to which is the best car - they're looking at totally different factors that make it "best".
I do, however, think you've made an excellent point. The typical buyer of a small car is strictly looking at the economy factor. There's no denying that. My point was simply that the excellent economy of the Civic is exactly why it wins "best car for the money" contests in the media.
That, however, doesn't mean the Civic is a "better" car. It just means it conforms more to the wants of the populous.
I have absolutely no idea what you mean by "honestly Honda already has Mazda3 beating material on the shelf for later introduction if they need to."
I have absolutely no idea what you mean by "honestly Honda already has Mazda3 beating material on the shelf for later introduction if they need to."
They already have the 200hp 2.0 engine and suspension tuning in the SI and the Acura CSX, a Civic clone in Canada, has all of the higher end Mazda3 options. If Honda wanted to compete in the "performance car" realm, they have the resources to do so. They even have a five door high performance Civic in Europe. So I guess if they thought it would sell, they could go that route too. The CSX http://www.acura.ca/acura/csx_micro/en/csx-popup.html The 5-door http://paultan.org/archives/2005/07/26/2006-honda-civic/
I'm really not trying to argue the point here (well... okay - maybe a little...) - but that's just simply false logic. Name one "feature" that Honda has "on the shelf" for the Civic that Mazda3 doesn't already offer or Mazda has "on the shelf". That's like me saying Mazda already has Civic Si and Acura CSX beating material on the shelf in the way of the forthcoming MazdaSpeed3.
My main sticking point with this whole "Civic LX/EX -vs- Mazda3" debate is that they are really two entirely different animals aimed at two entirely different buyers. This disparity in target audience kind of renders the whole "-vs-" thing useless in my opinion.
For example, when I purchased my Mazda3s-GT I would have seriously looked at the Civic Si if the sedan version was out. As it stood though it was only available in a Coupe, only being sold at sticker and I had no choice in color AND was looking at a 10-12 week wait. Navigation is an option on the car but no dealer in my area could get one.
I drove the Civic EX Sedan with Navigation but there's no way I could live with its lack-luster drivetrain. That's just me - if its performance is suitable for someone, great! I just couldn't drive it every day no matter what its fuel efficiency is. The car is not made for someone looking for a performance oriented vehicle - it's made for someone looking to comfortably get from point "a" to point "b" while consuming as little gasoline as possible.
So, basically for me it came down to the Civic Si Coupe equipped like I wanted (and couldn't get...) at $24k or a Mazda3 GT Sedan (equipped exactly as I wanted...)at $22k and the Mazda3 has a ton of equipment, plus leather, that the Civic doesn't even offer. I could also get the Mazda in whatever color I wanted, etc. - it was a no brainer for me considering the reliability ratings are essentially the same on the two cars.
I don't know how it works in the Dodge, in the EU version of the Mazda3 the A/C cools the glovebox for bottles stored in it. It isn't available on North American models.
If I remember correctly, zero plusing tires does not change the speedo upwards. At 60MPH indicated you will be going an actual 58MPH, which is easy to live with.
To the other reader who says he doesn't understand why changing the tire brand and size would change the speedometer, if the tire is larger, diametrically, when mounted on the rim of course the speedometer will give a different TRUE reading. The whole wheel/rim is taller so the distanced traveled in 60 minutes will be different. In effect your speedo is no longer an accurate guage for speed anymore than your tach would be.
I'm thinking about replacing my Neon. The Mazda3 is at the top of my list, could any of you give me any feed back on your gas mileage with the 2.3 engine and a 5 speed. Thanks.
Plus sizing (0,1 or 2) the tire / wheel (if done correctly) does not change the speedo - or only changes it a VERY small amount (+or-).
A plus zero means you keep the same diameter wheel - but install a tire with a larger section width (wider tire) and a smaller aspect ratio
Plus 1 means you go up 1 inch in wheel diameter and install a tire with a larger section width and a smaller aspect ratio
Plus 2 - go up two inches in wheel diameter bla bla bla
In all of these cases the OVERALL diameter stays about the same as stock.
I made a comment that I did not understand why people get so concerned small changes in tire size because of the impact on your speedo - like going from a 205 50 17 to a 215 50 17 - which is a change of less than 2% - so when my speedo says 60 I am really going 61.5 - big deal - who cares.
If I purchase a Mazda through S-Plan (probably will next week), can the dealer still charge fees such as the doc fee or the regional assessment fee. In my area the regional fee is $200, and the delaer charges $55 for doc fee. Does S-Plan restrict these fees, or is it up to the dealer whether or not they want to charge the fees?
So I took a test drive of the M3 hatchback today. It was new, and so there was a lot of paperwork on the passenger-side rear window. Since that's right in my blind spot, I lowered the window.
What I noticed is that over 65, with the rear window all the way down, (and the front windows up) there was this rumbling coming from the back, and it got much worse up to 80 mph, to the point where it was unbearable. Opening both rear windows didn't help, either.
It started to happen with the window at about halfway down (with further experimentation)
So this one time, I was driving and it was icy. I stepped on the gas and the wheels spun, so I stepped harder on the gas and it dodn't do anything.
Sorry for the sarcasm, I couldn't resist.
Every car I've ever been in displays some degree of wind buffeting when both rear windows are down. It's just the result of a drop in pressure within the car the faster you go. When the air moving over the car travels by the oepn window, it gets sucked into the lower pressure but since there's nowhere for that air to go, it gets sucked back out. If there were no back window on the car, the air would get sucked into the car and forced out the back window and the buffeting would reduce substantially.
The problem was more extreme for that particular car, than for others I've driven. I'm not sure if it's a function of the styling, or what.
In this situation, it was bad enough to be giving me an earache, which, yes, confirms the idea to me that it's definitely an air-pressure problem.
Or maybe it's just that it's been so long since I've owned a car with four doors (21 years or so), that I've just never really had occasion to notice the problem before.
I concur with qddave - every 4-door car I've ever owned has done this to varying degrees.
Honestly though - I can't ever think of one time where I've been travelling at 80MPH and entertained the idea of just having the rear windows open.
For one thing - it's been pretty much proven that having your windows down increases drag enough to more than negate any gas mileage savings from having the A/C off. If anything - modern A/C units on and windows up will yield you better MPG than A/C off and windows down.
Oh poop....lol I am going in today to get the trade-in value for my 04 sedan, so as long as it is around what I am hoping for(per Terry), then I will have a 06 hatch by the weekend :shades:
Wind noise at 80 MPH with the rear windows down? That is a minor problem.
What about these!
If I keep it in first gear at 50 MPH the engine makes a high pitched whine - and the RPM is very high.
When I turn the heater on high with the windows rolled up on a 85 degree day the car gets hot inside.
If it is raining hard and I don't turn on the wipers its hard to see the road.
If I don't turn the stereo on I can't even hear the music.
If I put the front seat all the way back I can't reach the gas or brake pedal - but if I put the seat all the way forward the steering wheel it too close.
I can't believe Mazda does not have a TSB on these defects!
I totally agree that the CR ranking of the Civic is a given. When certain factors are ignored, it's very easy to skew results. I am reminded of a CR ranking of coffee makers a few years ago which did not include taste as a judging factor.
I'm not talking about wind noise, because, actually, at about 65 mph, the wind noise was pretty minimal. I'm talking about what turned out to be distinctly lowered air pressure, that was causing the trunk area cover to lift and fall considerably, and, in fact, hurt my ears.
As I said originally, it's been nearly 20 years since I've driven a 4-door car, and my Saab 99 wasn't a problem in that regard. And I only had the back window down so that I could make a lane change and check my blind spot without it being impaired by the price sticker.
I was just wondering if anyone else had noticed such a thing.
as the praise on the 3, that would be a valid argument. But the Civic has gotten just as much as if not more praise as the 3 did in it's first year. From what I remember, the 3 had it's share of teething problems for a while there. The big difference is that Honda has a much harder task considering they are building the Civic in a total of three factories onstead of 1.
"I was just wondering if anyone else had noticed such a thing."
I think the sarcasm was a result of the simple fact that in virtually ANY car sold today, you'll notice the exact same effect. In other words, this isn't a trait of JUST the Mazda3.
I have an opportunity to buy a friend's 2004 3s 2.3L hatchback with ABS and front-side airbags. It has 28K miles and one small dent on the hood and two scratches on the bumper. He want $13,300. I'm a little concerned about maintenance/gas costs. What's your experience? Is it a good buy?
IMO, even if it was the best deal for a 1000 mile radius, I wouldn't do it. I make a stand never to buy cars from friends. Something could go wrong with the car the next day...you feel you got cheated...he feels guilty...the friendship gets ruined...you end up on Judge Judy. Not worth it!
Howdy, I'm thinking of buying a 3 with the HID's. But, they want top dollar for it. Do any of you know if I can install the OEM HID later? That way I can buy the cheapest model and satisfy my jones without busting the bank.
Yes, there are plenty of aftermarket companies that make HIDs for the 3 Google 'forums for Mazda3' and you will definitely get plenty of options in the forums.
True, there are aftermarket HID's available for the 3; be aware, however, that they are ILLEGAL in every state and Canada for street use.
The illegality is due to most aftermarket systems utilizing the stock halogen reflectors. That means no cut-off like you have with the OEM HID's and that means blinding oncoming traffic. It's stupid, it's dangerous, and I freakin' scream my head off every time I see a moron coming at me with improperly installed aftermarket HID's. :mad:
The long and short of it is that the OEM Xenon HID's for the 3 are FAR SUPERIOR to any aftermarket HID you can buy. Plus, with the OEM's you've got a manual leveling device with in-cabin controls that allows you to level the cutoff.
The dealer can not put the OEM HID's in - they have to come from the factory installed. My advice - if you want HID's, bite the bullet and get the OEM ones installed from the factory.
I wound up getting an Elantra 5-door. The air pressure problem, probably because the design is less wagon-like, is far less pronounced. So if I decide I do want the nice breeze on my back, I don't have to worry blowing out my ear drums - or feeling like that's going to happen.
It was also at least $2k less than the base level M3 hatchback, and probably more when you start accessorizing.
Yes, I'm aware I got a heavier car with a lighter engine. I'm ok with that. I got a car I'm very happy with. I just wish we could go back to the days when you could get a hatchback as the lesser option to the sedan, instead of the higher-end option. Because, sadly, money *is* an object to me. A dear and precious one.
The GT is actually a pretty good deal - you get quite a bit more than just the Xenon HID's (which are auto on/off)in the package: heated leather seats, rain sensing wipers, trip computer, side/curtain airbags, tire pressure monitoring, etc.
Anyone heard anything about grounding the throttle body? My son claims he heard that doing this will improve smoothness in the drive by wire throttle. Any thoughts?
I see that you look to have gotten a different car than the mazda3. I thought I would just share this information, I noticed the same thing on my mazda3 and on prior dodge ram quad cab. The phenomenon is known as wind buffeting and is eliminated but craxking the other two windows usually. It all has to do with the air flow around the car or truck and drag:
"This is the noise and pulsating forces that accompany driving with windows open. While the frequency of the sound of the buffeting is often below the range that can be heard by human ears, it can still be felt as a pulsating wind force, a phenomenon that can be very fatiguing. "
"An unstable shear layer that is established at the forward edge of a window opening causes wind buffeting. These disturbances (swirling wind or currents of different speeds and directions) travel along the side of the vehicle and, when they reach the rear edge of the window opening, generate a pressure wave that propagates both inside and outside the passenger compartment."
Hi Folks: I've seen several pictures of 2006 Mazda 3's with a variety of parts and accessories that apparently are not available in the USA. I saw a Thule made roof rack that attaches to the roof rain gutters, as well as Door sill enhancements and nicer pedals. Does anyone know a source of these products other than ordering directly from Japan or Hong Kong ebay stores? I'm particularly interested in the dedicated roof rack. I know Thule they make a system that works with the 3, but the dedicated rack looks cleaner. Thanks for any input.
I know this has been posted somewhere, but it's been a long time. A lot had been said about pros and cons of a cold air intake system for the Mazda3. Well, I just installed one (K&N)a week ago and I wish I had done it a long time ago. The low end torque that's missing is much better than I would have thought. The noise increase is not there unless you really get on it. My family doesn't even know it's on and they can't tell the minor decibel difference. Mileage is a little better, 1-1.5 mpg, but the smooth and quicker acceleration is great. Horsepower is claimed to be 5.2 better, but it's the torque, not the HP that makes it worthwhile. Daryl
Yeah I have installed one in my Mazda3 Hatch, you can tell a small difference. I have always run a K&N though, just makes sense instead of paying out the rear end for paper filters. Just break out the K&N recarge kit and you are ready to go again...
I'm interested in the Mazda3 wagon as possibility for my next car. I more interested on owners' impression of the 3 on the highway.
1. How noisy does it get at say 70mph as compare to your previous car? 2. Does it have passing power at 70mph? 3. How does it do going up a slight grade? Is it easy to keep a steady 60mph? 4. Does anyone with a black interior feel the cabin gets too hot easily?
both my wife and i own 2005 Mazda3 hatchbacks...i have the MT w/ leather and she has AT w/ black cloth interior...
"1. How noisy does it get at say 70mph as compare to your previous car?" previous cars were 2004 Honda CR-V and 1999 Honda Civic EX...noise levels in the 3s seem to be comparable. about the same.
"2. Does it have passing power at 70mph?" has plenty of power in reserve...it's so easy to be cruising along at 70, step on the gas and next thing i know, i'm going over 90! the suspension is so good that the 3 feels very surefooted & stable even going over 100mph. my civic was lowered w/ eibach prokit springs & tokico struts and didn't feel as stable as the 3s. acceleration is definitely on par or better than our CR-V & absolutely better than my Civic.
"3. How does it do going up a slight grade? Is it easy to keep a steady 60mph?" no problem keeping a steady 60mph on slight grades. in fact accelerating up them is a breeze even without downshifting. really steep grades do require me to downshift to 4th.
"4. Does anyone with a black interior feel the cabin gets too hot easily?" the black leather can get pretty hot during summer...the fabric interior doesn't burn the skin, but does get pretty hot as well.
Thanks! Your input is greatly appreciated. The black cloth/leather interior is the only thing that would really stop me from getting the 3. Unfortunately, black is the only choice for the 5 door wagon.
Get the black fabric and then have the upholstery redone aftermarket with a different color leather. a friend did that with hers. plus she got high quality leather (much better than the stuff from the factory) and it was cheaper than Mazda's stock stuff.
It is smaller, but has a large interior volume. Handles great, and is just as quick as a Mazda 3s according to Edmunds reviews. It is also cheaper and gets better fuel economy. Its an amazing little car. You all should try it.
This is for the 5 speed manual. Now Edmunds typically lists 0-60 times slower than Car and Driver. Why? Drivers ability, etc. But when your comparing a 160 HP car to a 109 hp car, the difference is not great at all, maybe .4 seconds?
Exterior Length: 176.6 in. Width: 69.1 in. Height: 57.7 in. Wheel Base: 103.9 in. Ground Clearance: 5.7 in. Curb Weight: 2826 lbs. Interior Front Head Room: 39.1 in. Front Hip Room: 54.9 in. Front Shoulder Room: 54.9 in. Rear Head Room: 38.4 in. Rear Shoulder Room: 54 in. Rear Hip Room: 53.9 in. Front Leg Room: 41.9 in. Rear Leg Room: 36.3 in. Luggage Capacity: 17.1 cu. ft. Maximum Cargo Capacity: 31 cu. ft. Maximum Seating: 5
Performance Data
Performance Acceleration (0-60 mph): 9.13 sec. Braking Distance (60-0 mph): 120.75 ft. Base Number of Cylinders: 4 Base Engine Size: 2.3 liters Base Engine Type: Inline 4 Horsepower: 160 hp Max Horsepower: 6500 rpm Torque: 150 ft-lbs. Max Torque: 4500 rpm Drive Type: FWD Turning Circle: 34.1 ft.
both 0-60 times i referred to came from the same source, Edmunds road tests. the honda fit w/ MTX time was quoted from the full test article while the mazda 3 w/ ATX time was quoted from the civic vs. 3 comparison article so apparently the 160 hp vs the 109 hp makes a very significant difference. 0.7 secs even when comparing the fit w/ MTX vs a 3 w/ ATX.
Comments
"I guess you have to remember that these are supposed to be economy cars first."
No offense - but I don't think you could be more wrong with regard to typical buyer of the Mazda3. Those choosing the M3 over the others are that sector of the small-car buying public looking for performance over economy and I count myself as one of those.
The Mazda3 is meant to be a performance car first - the Civic an economy car first. There's nothing wrong with either approach - it's just aimed at different needs. These different priorities are exactly why I think Civic and Mazda3 owners clash so much as to which is the best car - they're looking at totally different factors that make it "best".
I do, however, think you've made an excellent point. The typical buyer of a small car is strictly looking at the economy factor. There's no denying that. My point was simply that the excellent economy of the Civic is exactly why it wins "best car for the money" contests in the media.
That, however, doesn't mean the Civic is a "better" car. It just means it conforms more to the wants of the populous.
I have absolutely no idea what you mean by "honestly Honda already has Mazda3 beating material on the shelf for later introduction if they need to."
They already have the 200hp 2.0 engine and suspension tuning in the SI and the Acura CSX, a Civic clone in Canada, has all of the higher end Mazda3 options. If Honda wanted to compete in the "performance car" realm, they have the resources to do so. They even have a five door high performance Civic in Europe. So I guess if they thought it would sell, they could go that route too.
The CSX
http://www.acura.ca/acura/csx_micro/en/csx-popup.html
The 5-door
http://paultan.org/archives/2005/07/26/2006-honda-civic/
My main sticking point with this whole "Civic LX/EX -vs- Mazda3" debate is that they are really two entirely different animals aimed at two entirely different buyers. This disparity in target audience kind of renders the whole "-vs-" thing useless in my opinion.
For example, when I purchased my Mazda3s-GT I would have seriously looked at the Civic Si if the sedan version was out. As it stood though it was only available in a Coupe, only being sold at sticker and I had no choice in color AND was looking at a 10-12 week wait. Navigation is an option on the car but no dealer in my area could get one.
I drove the Civic EX Sedan with Navigation but there's no way I could live with its lack-luster drivetrain. That's just me - if its performance is suitable for someone, great! I just couldn't drive it every day no matter what its fuel efficiency is. The car is not made for someone looking for a performance oriented vehicle - it's made for someone looking to comfortably get from point "a" to point "b" while consuming as little gasoline as possible.
So, basically for me it came down to the Civic Si Coupe equipped like I wanted (and couldn't get...) at $24k or a Mazda3 GT Sedan (equipped exactly as I wanted...)at $22k and the Mazda3 has a ton of equipment, plus leather, that the Civic doesn't even offer. I could also get the Mazda in whatever color I wanted, etc. - it was a no brainer for me considering the reliability ratings are essentially the same on the two cars.
If I remember correctly, zero plusing tires does not change the speedo upwards. At 60MPH indicated you will be going an actual 58MPH, which is easy to live with.
To the other reader who says he doesn't understand why changing the tire brand and size would change the speedometer, if the tire is larger, diametrically, when mounted on the rim of course the speedometer will give a different TRUE reading. The whole wheel/rim is taller so the distanced traveled in 60 minutes will be different. In effect your speedo is no longer an accurate guage for speed anymore than your tach would be.
Fowler3
A plus zero means you keep the same diameter wheel - but install a tire with a larger section width (wider tire) and
a smaller aspect ratio
Plus 1 means you go up 1 inch in wheel diameter and install a tire with a larger section width and
a smaller aspect ratio
Plus 2 - go up two inches in wheel diameter bla bla bla
In all of these cases the OVERALL diameter stays about the same as stock.
I made a comment that I did not understand why people get so concerned small changes in tire size because of the impact on your speedo - like going from a 205 50 17 to a 215 50 17 - which is a change of less than 2% - so when my speedo says 60 I am really going 61.5 - big deal - who cares.
http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/WebX/.ef8069f/190!make=Mazda&model=MAZDA3&ed_ma- keindex=.ef8069f
What I noticed is that over 65, with the rear window all the way down, (and the front windows up) there was this rumbling coming from the back, and it got much worse up to 80 mph, to the point where it was unbearable. Opening both rear windows didn't help, either.
It started to happen with the window at about halfway down (with further experimentation)
Is this something other people have noticed?
Sorry for the sarcasm, I couldn't resist.
Every car I've ever been in displays some degree of wind buffeting when both rear windows are down. It's just the result of a drop in pressure within the car the faster you go. When the air moving over the car travels by the oepn window, it gets sucked into the lower pressure but since there's nowhere for that air to go, it gets sucked back out. If there were no back window on the car, the air would get sucked into the car and forced out the back window and the buffeting would reduce substantially.
Dave
The problem was more extreme for that particular car, than for others I've driven. I'm not sure if it's a function of the styling, or what.
In this situation, it was bad enough to be giving me an earache, which, yes, confirms the idea to me that it's definitely an air-pressure problem.
Or maybe it's just that it's been so long since I've owned a car with four doors (21 years or so), that I've just never really had occasion to notice the problem before.
Honestly though - I can't ever think of one time where I've been travelling at 80MPH and entertained the idea of just having the rear windows open.
For one thing - it's been pretty much proven that having your windows down increases drag enough to more than negate any gas mileage savings from having the A/C off. If anything - modern A/C units on and windows up will yield you better MPG than A/C off and windows down.
no restrictions.
What about these!
If I keep it in first gear at 50 MPH the engine makes a high pitched whine - and the RPM is very high.
When I turn the heater on high with the windows rolled up on a 85 degree day the car gets hot inside.
If it is raining hard and I don't turn on the wipers its hard to see the road.
If I don't turn the stereo on I can't even hear the music.
If I put the front seat all the way back I can't reach the gas or brake pedal - but if I put the seat all the way forward the steering wheel it too close.
I can't believe Mazda does not have a TSB on these defects!
I got the trade-in value that I was looking for for my 04 sedan, so I will have a silver GT hatch by friday :shades:
It's just a different market.
As I said originally, it's been nearly 20 years since I've driven a 4-door car, and my Saab 99 wasn't a problem in that regard. And I only had the back window down so that I could make a lane change and check my blind spot without it being impaired by the price sticker.
I was just wondering if anyone else had noticed such a thing.
Sheesh.
I think the sarcasm was a result of the simple fact that in virtually ANY car sold today, you'll notice the exact same effect. In other words, this isn't a trait of JUST the Mazda3.
Dave
I'm thinking of buying a 3 with the HID's. But, they want top dollar for it. Do any of you know if I can install the OEM HID later? That way I can buy the cheapest model and satisfy my jones without busting the bank.
The illegality is due to most aftermarket systems utilizing the stock halogen reflectors. That means no cut-off like you have with the OEM HID's and that means blinding oncoming traffic. It's stupid, it's dangerous, and I freakin' scream my head off every time I see a moron coming at me with improperly installed aftermarket HID's. :mad:
The long and short of it is that the OEM Xenon HID's for the 3 are FAR SUPERIOR to any aftermarket HID you can buy. Plus, with the OEM's you've got a manual leveling device with in-cabin controls that allows you to level the cutoff.
This link may help you: OEM HID Discussion
The dealer can not put the OEM HID's in - they have to come from the factory installed. My advice - if you want HID's, bite the bullet and get the OEM ones installed from the factory.
The hosts here may delete that link since it is linking to a 'competing' forum
I wound up getting an Elantra 5-door. The air pressure problem, probably because the design is less wagon-like, is far less pronounced. So if I decide I do want the nice breeze on my back, I don't have to worry blowing out my ear drums - or feeling like that's going to happen.
It was also at least $2k less than the base level M3 hatchback, and probably more when you start accessorizing.
Yes, I'm aware I got a heavier car with a lighter engine. I'm ok with that. I got a car I'm very happy with. I just wish we could go back to the days when you could get a hatchback as the lesser option to the sedan, instead of the higher-end option. Because, sadly, money *is* an object to me. A dear and precious one.
Enjoy your new car. Hyundai has become a viable competitor and I think in 5 years or less they'll put out a worthy entry-lux competitor too.
06 GT manual
Search on google for mazda3 forums (can;t post the site name here), and you should see a site that can answer questions about this
"This is the noise and pulsating forces that accompany driving with windows open. While the frequency of the sound of the buffeting is often below the range that can be heard by human ears, it can still be felt as a pulsating wind force, a phenomenon that can be very fatiguing. "
"An unstable shear layer that is established at the forward edge of a window opening causes wind buffeting. These disturbances (swirling wind or currents of different speeds and directions) travel along the side of the vehicle and, when they reach the rear edge of the window opening, generate a pressure wave that propagates both inside and outside the passenger compartment."
Here is a little blurb I found on it
http://www.deskeng.com/Articles/Applications/Reducing-Wind-Fatigue-and-Summer-He- adaches-20041201213.html
Anyway, cool article. Thanks for the link.
I've seen several pictures of 2006 Mazda 3's with a variety of parts and accessories that apparently are not available in the USA. I saw a Thule made roof rack that attaches to the roof rain gutters, as well as Door sill enhancements and nicer pedals.
Does anyone know a source of these products other than ordering directly from Japan or Hong Kong ebay stores? I'm particularly interested in the dedicated roof rack. I know Thule they make a system that works with the 3, but the dedicated rack looks cleaner.
Thanks for any input.
Daryl
1. How noisy does it get at say 70mph as compare to your previous car?
2. Does it have passing power at 70mph?
3. How does it do going up a slight grade? Is it easy to keep a steady 60mph?
4. Does anyone with a black interior feel the cabin gets too hot easily?
Thanks in advance!
"1. How noisy does it get at say 70mph as compare to your previous car?"
previous cars were 2004 Honda CR-V and 1999 Honda Civic EX...noise levels in the 3s seem to be comparable. about the same.
"2. Does it have passing power at 70mph?"
has plenty of power in reserve...it's so easy to be cruising along at 70, step on the gas and next thing i know, i'm going over 90! the suspension is so good that the 3 feels very surefooted & stable even going over 100mph. my civic was lowered w/ eibach prokit springs & tokico struts and didn't feel as stable as the 3s. acceleration is definitely on par or better than our CR-V & absolutely better than my Civic.
"3. How does it do going up a slight grade? Is it easy to keep a steady 60mph?"
no problem keeping a steady 60mph on slight grades. in fact accelerating up them is a breeze even without downshifting. really steep grades do require me to downshift to 4th.
"4. Does anyone with a black interior feel the cabin gets too hot easily?"
the black leather can get pretty hot during summer...the fabric interior doesn't burn the skin, but does get pretty hot as well.
hope this helps.
i wouldn't go as far to say the Fit is as quick as the 3S...anyways i decided to check the Edmunds reviews again...
so according to Edmunds...
their 5spd MANUAL Fit did 0-60 in 9.3 secs and the 1/4 mile in 16.73 secs @ 80.82 mph
according the Edmunds comparison btwn the Civic & 3...
their 5spd AUTO TRANS 3S did 0-60 in 8.6 secs and the 1/4 mile in 16.4 secs @ 84.7 mph...
the 3 w/ the manual transmission is markedly quicker than the auto trans. i believe the 3S equipped w/ MT does 0-6 in approx 8 secs.
the 0-60 time for the Fit is about the same as that of my previous car, a 99 Civic EX, which felt substantially slower than the 3S.
Where Built: Japan
Dimensions
Exterior
Length: 176.6 in. Width: 69.1 in.
Height: 57.7 in. Wheel Base: 103.9 in.
Ground Clearance: 5.7 in. Curb Weight: 2826 lbs.
Interior
Front Head Room: 39.1 in. Front Hip Room: 54.9 in.
Front Shoulder Room: 54.9 in. Rear Head Room: 38.4 in.
Rear Shoulder Room: 54 in. Rear Hip Room: 53.9 in.
Front Leg Room: 41.9 in. Rear Leg Room: 36.3 in.
Luggage Capacity: 17.1 cu. ft. Maximum Cargo Capacity: 31 cu. ft.
Maximum Seating: 5
Performance Data
Performance
Acceleration (0-60 mph): 9.13 sec. Braking Distance (60-0 mph): 120.75 ft.
Base Number of Cylinders: 4 Base Engine Size: 2.3 liters
Base Engine Type: Inline 4 Horsepower: 160 hp
Max Horsepower: 6500 rpm Torque: 150 ft-lbs.
Max Torque: 4500 rpm Drive Type: FWD
Turning Circle: 34.1 ft.
Fuel Data
Fuel
Fuel Tank Capacity: 14.5 gal.
EPA Mileage Estimates: (City/Highway)
Manual: 25 mpg / 32 mpg Automatic: :