Mazda - Does it have a good future in US?

stickguy

based on recent discoveries, and the ET hour, maybe you should have Neil Young moderate ;-)

Someone will figure out what this means eventually I assume.

regfootball

a friend at work, they just bought an elantra, i tried like hell to get them hooked on the protege and they almost bit but at the last minute after almost signing on the protege, they went with the elantra GT sedan, a bit cheaper and std. leather. And a bit larger inside. I think the Korean cars do undermine some of the Mazda sales a bit.

nippononly

undermine EVERYBODY a bit...this person was shopping for a Pro5? I was over looking around at the Mazda dealer the other day, and they have lots of Pro5s sitting around now. Love the look of that car, but at this particular dealer, every single one with a manual had chromed wheels! Like alloys, DON'T like chrome rims.

The elantra GT may have leather, but the Pro5 is a MUCH better drive...just one opinion. Also, 4/50 standard warranty now.

guest

I do like the Elantra but the Pro 5 is an another world though. I would definately take a Pro 5 over an Elantra.

regfootball

yeah, well so would i but to some I guess a 500-1000 difference in purchase price made them go hyundai. I woulda sucked it up and went protege.

hjr2

Editors' Most Wanted Vehicles for 2003
 

Most Wanted Sedan Under $15,000

 Winner: Hyundai Elantra

There are still bargains to be had in the automotive world, and the Elantra is proof. For a starting price of less than 13 grand, you get a roomy economy car with high-quality materials and switchgear, as well as a long list of standard features that includes thoughtful amenities like side airbags, a height-adjustable driver seat and power windows, mirrors and locks. The Elantra makes an excellent commuter car, as it supplies a comfortable ride and light, easy handling. And despite concerns about Hyundai's overstated horsepower, our experience has shown that its 135-hp four-cylinder engine has plenty of pep.

Back to 2003 Most Wanted List

Honorable Mention: Mazda Protegé

The Protegé has been a favorite around these offices since the current generation debuted in 1999. This car is downright entertaining to drive, and is one of the best-looking economy sedans on the market — inside and out. Overall, the Protegé exhibits more class than a car in this price range has a right to. Our chief complaint about it has always been the inequity between its modest horsepower and high handling thresholds. For 2003, Mazda has addressed this with the new 170-hp turbocharged Mazdaspeed Protegé.

Back to 2003 Most Wanted List

add to the above list only One Mazda dealership in a 90 mile radius of where I live, versus 6 Hyundai dealerships..

They are dropping the 5,BTW, for the better looking Mazda 3(and 5 door hatches), and a 4 door sedan, down the road.
Like I said, I like Mazda, but given the choice of going 35 miles versus 90, for maintainence....

Also, the Protege that I looked at 2 years back, Loaded to the gills(minus leather,The Protege did not have it....this is at the dealership that went out of business, and now it is Hyundai sales only there)they wanted 18,000+ MSRP, and they would not budge!
Nice Ride, but not at that price. We got a 2001 Tiburon, on sale(clearance) for $14,599, minus leather and no ABS(like the Protege, 01 model).

That is more than 500-1000 dollars. The one I looked was loaded.
It was nice. I liked the seating /steering column postioning the best out of any car other than Focus(it had telescopic steering column).
Still...
 for the 3,401 dollars we saved , add 7.4% interest rate, and taxes saved, etc.... you are talking, seriously, a total savings of nearly 5K!
500 dollars is one thing, about 5000 is another.( for evry 3000 loaned, at that rate, for 60 months, that added 1000 dollars extra to the cost, or somewhere in that area, so for the extra 3,401, add about 1,000, give or take a hundred or two dollars more, and then taxes, adds about another 200 onto that 3,401, we saved about $4.601-$4,801...approx. More than enough for me).
I think it was $80 a month that we had saved on payments.
That extra $80 per month pays for the gas for the month.

I do not dislike Mazda Protege, nor does Edmunds, it appears.
Same for Elantra.
If I am alive in 2-3 years from now, may buy another Hyundai(got 2 in the driveway, and very happy) or may buy something else.

dinu01

The PRO ES can be had for much less than the $18K you said. Factor in rebates, 0% financing and it could be very close.

Now that you only had one Mazda vs 6 Hyundai dealerships where you live, this seems to be an issue in the US.

Good luck with the Tib!

Dinu

hjr2

there were No Zero percent financing(Summer of 2001). Rates were anywhere from 6.5-9%, depending on your credit, and /or how long of a loan you required.
Also, No Rebates back in Summer of 2001, that I can recall(not like nowadays).

We have had the Tib for 2 1/2 years/75K.
It's doing fine.

Uh, yeah, in USA, there seems to be (in SW Ohio) only 3 dealerships in about 125 radius of us, versus 12 Hyundai dealerships(not kidding) and about 5 Kia dealerships.
One palce sold Dodge/Mazda and Hyudnai since 1992.
The man who owned it sold the dealerships(the dodge was across the street from the Hyudnai/Mazda dealership).
One guy bought the Dodge dealership only.
Another guy purchased the Hyundai group, and sold off all the remaining 2002 Mazda's a year ago.

So, that leaves the rest of them at about 90-120 miles away.
Mitsubishi closed a dealership that they had, just 6 months ago. It was opne for a good decade or so.

Now, there's one mitsu place within 90 0or 100 miles.

It just appears that the more shops (closer to the city) the more sales these companies make.
The less shops, the less sales?

nippononly

were showing $2500 rebates from Mazda on all Pro5's, as well as $2500 more off sticker at the two dealers advertising them. $5000 below sticker should make these cars cheaper than comparable Elantras even. Heck of a deal. I am sure they are trying to clear lots of all these cars before the new 3 arrives in a few months. Kinda wish I were looking for a new car right now...

PF_Flyer

Don't miss the newest addition to our live chat events here in Town Hall. Join us every Tuesday from 6-7pm PT/9-10pm ET for our Mazda Mania Chat!

Whether you own a Mazda, would like to own a Mazda, or just like going ZOOM ZOOM ZOOM... be sure to stop by and meet and greet your fellow Town Hall users!

/direct/view/.ef1b553

PF Flyer
Host
Pickups & News & Views Message Boards

regfootball

Most Proteges right now can be had for around 13 grand or even less.

A hyundai Elantra to me is a car you settle for. You don't buy it out of desire. One look at the thin body panels and the smell inside. Good car, yes. Desirable....not quite.

Protege is the small car that doesn not penalize you for going small.

Can't wait to sample the 3.

tomj5

That is one neat little car. It fits the urban car role perfectly...
After owning a 03 MPV (best car I ever owned and best engine/Transaxle) We are going to buy the 04 Mazda 3 Hatch... Mazda quality is impressive... Honda and Toy are overpriced. Koreans are poor quality
Yes Mazda will do fine in the USA...... The competition is dying...

nippononly

that fact is not reflected in sales numbers...the Koreans especially are coming on strong. Not that I disagree with your assertions, although I think Hyundai's quality in particular is improving quite rapidly.

On a different note, I can't understand why hatches aren't more popular than they are in the US - hatches are great, and the most versatile of any design, not to mention the best looking! The 3 should sell well, I think.

hjr2

My mother in law has a 97 DX Protege. She likes it, but now has"Suv" brain(IE, "American badges" suv, like "Tracker").
Anyhow, I talked her into buying it!Yes,me, Mr Hyundai fan.
She did not want to buy a Hyundai(nervous about quality issues, which my 105,000+ miles Sonata and 75,000+ miles Tibby have proven to be unfounded these days)so, at thatMazda/Hyundai dealership in which I spoke of in some above post(s) had a nice 97 Protege.

She slid in the car(she used to drive a 92 chevy cavalier) during one winter snow, and said"this car does not handle like my cavalier; I hate it"
What is ironic is that she then also got a Tracker for safer driving, and last winter, she spun around , in the middle of the road, 2x's!!

She said"good thing I was on a country road, or I wouldhave possiby been killed in an accident(yet, she does Not bash that vehicle as "being bad", since she chose it).

She is getting older, and although she is a safe driver, she gets rattled easily in bad conditions.
Don't tell her that, though.

Sorry to digress...

I am wanting to look at the Mazda 3(the 3 door hatch) when it arrives.
It sounds to be the length of our 2001 Tiburon.
(171 or so inches total length).
Of course, I also am curious about the next generation VW Golf(late next year). Seems the AP heaps praise upon it.

And, we also have a "SMART" car coming over, but it may not be the one people want. It may be an "SUV" thing, and from replies on other car sites, people want the forfour instead.

I am a car fan, so I try to find good in most vehicles(hey, have owned chevy, nissan,hyundai, and driven about everything else for a week or more, like toyota truck,ford escort, neon,buicks,etc...).

hey, here's a sale. 3 months back, Hyundai
 got rid of their "old" xg350 models by selling them for 15-17 grand(a car that sells for 23-25MSRP grand,usually). Nice 5 speed automanual, 108.3" wheelbase,V6,etc, for 17K.
The looks may be more of old Buick, but the price was about the range of most today's loaded up 4 cylinders.

guest

I wouldn't buy it. Its has a bad reliability rating. Nice resales value but what good is the resale value if the car isn't reliable?

The Mazda 3 I would wait 2 years to buy that. The 3 will have 60% component sharing from Ford which worries me and brings me to memory's of the 94 626 with the Ford Tranny. The 03 Protege I wouldn't hesitate to buy. The parts sharing from Ford isn't alot and Protege's have good reliability.

dinu01

Is it true?

"Mazda posted a 52-percent sales gain on the strength of the RX-8, Mazda6, and revitalized Tribute sales, though."

Dinu

dinu01

"Affected vehicles are the 2002 CR-V SUV, the 1997-99 Acura CL and 1999 Acura TL sedans, the 1999 Odyssey minivan and the 1998-99 Accord sedan and coupe. A total of 651,989 vehicles are involved in the recall.

Honda says consumers should use the parking brake until the company repairs the vehicles.

This is the second time in a year that Honda has recalled the 2002 CR-V. In July, Honda recalled 247,019 CR-Vs because excessive corrosion was preventing the automatic transmission from shifting into park. "

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/wire/sns-ap-honda-- recall,0,4547773.story?coll=sns-ap-nation-headlines

Not sure where to post it. It just shows no car company is perfect.

Dinu

ashutoshsm

I think I'd rather have silly (IMnsHO) barely-there corrosion in my door channels.

newcar31

Not me. Any sign of corrosion (RUST) on the body of a 5 month old car isn't a good sign, especially in Minnesota. Rust doesn't sleep here.

I'd trade my rust for 4 bad ignition coils, a bad trannsmission, and broken window regulators anyday. Heck, throw in some interior rattles and weird mechanical noises too. You can fix that stuff.

ashutoshsm

I put far greater weightage on mechanical reliability and would prefer to avoid shoddy build of engine and interior components than the structure. But that's just me.

And I'm also currently in that elated fram of mind that I usually stay in for (at least) an hour after driving my 6. I just got back from work.

Zoom, Zoom - indeed.

Be patient my friend, and enjoy owning and driving one of the best automobiles on the road!

ashutoshsm

... perhaps the Jetta board beckons you, and you can't help yourself but respond to the call? <shudder>

nippononly

where'd you read that?

I can believe it - Tribute has sold very well, and after the slow start the 6 has picked up too.

Now imagine what will happen when the 3 hits our shores - they really seem to have done that one right, they better just build enough hatches to meet the demand!

I read in MT that they have officially nixed the idea of producing a shorter RX-8 to be the next RX7 - too bad. :-(

Now they need to work on that dealer network. (And maybe get a bigger SUV too? And NOT a rebadged explorer!)

dinu01

http://www.thecarconnection.com/index.asp?n=156,175&sid=175&a- mp;article=6579

It's at the bottom of the page. They mention how Ford's brands aren't doing too well and they have this one sentence on Mazda.

Can anyone verify this?

Dinu

the_big_h

is "Mazda posted a 52-percent sales gain on the strength of the RX-8, Mazda6, and revitalized Tribute sales, though."

just in case people thought it was a negative sentence and didn't bother reading the article :-)

treehumpindog

mazda cars are made for japanese drivers, who have to deal with traffic congestion, high fuel prices, narrow streets, short travel distances, etc. this translates well into europe, but here in gigantic north america, we need cars with torque, not just horsepower. ALL of mazda's cars have measly torque ratings, making you work annoyingly hard when you just want to cruise, and forcing you to wind it up when you just want to turn on the power switch. I blame Mazda's narrow-minded and miserly engineers and product planners for this inadequacy. i don't know why they always insist on tuning their engines for linear power delivery. at least give the driver the seat-of-the-pants feeling that he has some power under the hood by building in a decent power curve with some exciting surges/spikes. all in all, mazda make good-handling underpowered cars with safe styling and no balls whatsoever.

dinu01

The 1.8L, 2.0L (current), new 2.0L and 2.3L engines are/should NOT (be) lacking torque.

When you add an AT to Mazdas though, you have a different car.

What Mazda did you have? What engine and tranny?

I'm very happy with our 01 Protege ES 2.0L even with AT it's still a blast to drive compared to the Maxima that outpaces the Pro in straight line acceleration and cruises at 3000RPM or less at 140km/h but it's NOT a fun drive by any means. The steering is "lose", the brakes are all discs w/ABS and new but still stop worse than the rear drums-equipped PRO, and on and on...

If you want a highway cruiser that isolates you, I doubt a Mazda is for you. Do check out the new Mazda3 - I think it will surprise many people.

Dinu

hjr2

but no dealerships around us for about 65 miles.

no knocking Mazda3, but this "editors most wanted for 04" is odd, The 3 has JUST been introduced, and it made"#1"? How?
And Titan is not out yet, Amanti is not out yet, AVEO is not out yet, and BMW5 just came out; these are all 04's.

I thought the judging was every march, after ALL cars were tested by Edmunds, and all 04's(or whatever year) models were out.
????

I dunno.
Take care

qbrozen

we don't "need" torque, we "want" torque. And, obviously, it is not just Mazda who designs them with lower torque than horsepower. Although I have no idea what you are referring to when you mention "measly torque" since every mazda i can think of aside from the RX8 has nearly as much torque as hp. Hmmmm... come to think of it, I can name quite a few American cars that have less torque than horsepower too. So just what the heck IS the complaint??

frankman

I think to be linked with "FORD" is really the problem. I am seriously considering to get a MPV because of its size and prices. But, its engine from Ford really concerns me and stops me from making the decision. I have been trying to read postings from this forum and thinking that might clear the cloud. But, I am still not conviced that there won't be reliability issues. IMHO, Ford can have whatever percentage of Mazda company. But, they have to try to separate these two companies. The image of Ford can only harm Mazda. You can put Mazda engines or parts in Ford cars, but, please, don't do it the other way arround.

Frank, Chicago

nvbanker

Which engine does the MPV have in it? I'm not positive, but I'm pretty sure there's nothing from Ford in that car but perhaps the radio. Seems in the last MPV I rented, (which was a very nice little van, BTW), it had a small V-6, that was not in the Ford stable.

Anyway, Mazda is different, but it's not Ford that creates the problems if there are any. Hell, most of the new Ford cars are going to be built on the Mazda 6 platform in the next 3 years!

stickguy

uses the 3.0l Duratech V6. In '00 and '01, they used the 2.5l version. This is generally regarded to be a very good engine, and has never shown any notable problems.

treehumpindog

i don't think it's just a matter of wanting more torque, i think Mazda vehicles NEED more torque throughout the vehicle lineup. if you have a Protege 5, for example, with a kayak or mattress tied to the roof, or two full-suspension downhill mountain bikes on a rear mounted rack, or ten cans of paint in the hatch, torque ratings should ideally be substantially higher, not just equal to the specific horsepower ratings to do any kind of meaningful work. the pro 5 for example, is not rated to tow anything, not even 500 lbs! i know, i know, you don't buy a protege to tow things, BUT, it goes to show how potentially weak and delicate (read fragile) mazda engines and transmissions are because their operating tolerances are so low that they are not designed to withstand any kind of duress. this makes for meticulous engineering, but not very sturdy driving. i compare Mazda vehicles to an athlete like Vince Carter--great at practice sessions(Mazda's own R&D facilites), all-star games(controlled testing sessions-Autoweek, Motoring 2003, Road and Track, magazine shootouts and comparos) and high flying when all is well, but an athlete who cannot stay healthy over a gruelling regular season schedule full of daily bumping and grinding, not to mention the playoffs when everyone is playing with pain(accumulated years of day-in day-out everyday driving, traffic, commuting, hauling, towing, crashing, missed service intervals...) i'm not saying that mazda doesn't build good vehicles, i just think they should beef up their engines and transmissions. in other words, quit being so cheap and OVERBUILD parts for a change instead of just building everything to the acceptable minimum. as for the way the Mazda engines deliver power, they are very uninspiring. again, handling dynamics are excellent, but where is the instant surge of power down low, at lower revs, off the line, carrying a load, carrying a full set of passengers? Every Mazda vehicle in my humble opinion, underperforms in real life driving situations because they lack sufficient torque to do meaningful work. in the new RX8, you get, what, 158 ftlb of torque with a manual tranny and 165 with an auto? During the filming of X2(the sequel to the film X-Men) the crew working on the scene that showcased the (lovely) special edition RX8 commented that the car couldn't accelerate away fast enough for the director's liking because the car was weighed down with four adult passengers in it, so they had to speed up the scene in post production. that makes the new RX8 about as useless on the street as the Honda S2000. around these parts, i see quite a few S2000s for sale because, as i can imagine, the driver soon gets tired from having to rev and hear himself revving to 5000 just to pull ahead of a public transit bus. Do you really want a car that only gives you one choice, one way to drive day in and day out? I think an Infiniti G35 Coupe makes more sense because at least you have enough hp AND torque to choose between taking it easy and cruising when you want, or flipping the instant power switch when you want. Even the PT Cruiser Turbo gives you 240-245 ftlbs of torque. Or compare output ratings for the Accord vs the Mazda 6. Mazda is ALWAYS underpowered compared to it's competitors. Mazda doesn't understand the North American market. Now, bring on the wrath ha ha!

dinu01

about the NA market that wants power and size and ignores everything else. That's why I like Mazdas for their fun to drive characteristics, styling and overall good reliability.

If you want power, get a Nissan and that'll be all. If you want to enjoy driving the car, get a Mazda.

Dinu

guest

The current MPV is as reliable as the Odessy or Sienna. The Ford Engine should be very reliable. The plant in Hiroshima is as good as producing a reliable car as Cadillac's plant in Michigan and is probably is just as good as Toyota's Lexus's plant in Japan. The MPV should prove to be reliable even with the Ford Engine. Consumer Reports rates the MPV's reliability as above average.

As far as Mazda putting more torgue in their cars Honda is the #1 engine maker in the world so to compare Mazda engines with Honda engine's is a little of an unfair comparison. I mean Nissan's engines do produce alot of torque put that torque comes at a price: torque steer.

nippononly

and just be forgetting right now, but I saw a new MPV on the road today, and my goodness! FINALLY, they have made an MPV that doesn't like it is about to fall over! The wheels are big enough for the proportion of the vehicle, and the overall look is really good.

The fun with smaller-engines Japanese cars is you can drive 'em around town and get fantastic gas mileage, or you can get out on the road and rev 'em to the stratosphere and get pushed back in your seat and feel like a race car driver. That is the magic of the Honda VTECs, now the Toyota VVTLi's, and most particularly the marvelous Mazda rotaries (most recently the RX8, and are they really going to do a rotary-powered Miata or what?)

So yes, the torque ratings are often low, but this pays you back in spades at the gas pump, and you still have all the power you could want if you keep the engine on boil.

windowphobe6

It should also be pointed out that Mazdas tend to carry around less mass than their competitors: the MPV is the only minivan under two tons, and the 626 weighed in at under 3000 lb unless you ordered both the V6 and the automatic, easily a 200-lb advantage over everyone else in the class. (The 6 isn't quite so lithe.) And lightness is a distinct advantage in the 99.9995 percent of driving that does not involve running headon into a sport-utility vehicle.

treehumpindog

Let me now reveal myself--No, No, not that way, you see, my real name is Sam Soichiro, and i am the son of the sister of the fourth mistress of the slightly-soft-in-the-head half cousin of the founder of this great company, the honourable Mr. Miata Matsuda (Mazda). As I am sixty-ninth in line to the Mazda family fortune, I felt it was my duty to test your loyalty to our nameplate, and i am proud to announce that you have all passed this devilish test with courage and dignity. As a reward, I welcome you all to my castle where my personal collection of fine Mazda automobiles await your washing. Again, congratulations!

saber86

you may not care but mazda cares greatly how well their vehicles sell in NA market. I think you are rather naive to say that and fail to see the bigger picture. Mazda wants to take on the two top dogs toyo and honda and not end up like subaru and isuzu both insignificant little niche players.

guest

Yes and No. On the Yes part does Mazda want to be as successful as Honda or Toyota? Sure.

On the No Part of it Mazda tried to be like Honda and Toyota and make cars that were styled along the same lines as Honda and Toyota with the 95 Protege and 98 626. They were quality cars but the exterior styling wasn't there for those 2 cars to sell well.

Lastly, As far as Subaru is concerned they are doing good now with the WRX and I'm anticipating when the Legacy comes out. The one that is made now doesn't really stand out on the exterior.

qbrozen

compare the 6 to the accord? ok.
mazda6: 160hp@6Krpms/155ft.lbs.@4Krpms
accord: 160hp@5500rpms/161ft.lbs.@4500rpms

looks like a REAL tight race there. Accord has an imperceptible torque advantage, but at 500 more rpms.

oh, did you mean the V6 comparison? ok.
mazda6: 220hp@6300rpms/192ft.lbs.@5Krpms
accord: 240hp@6250rpms/212ft.lbs.@5Krpms

so, let's see here, the accord wins out in both categories, granted, but only by about 10% more power and torque out of an engine that is 17% larger.

Oh, and since you want "torque substantially higher than horsepower" than you obviously don't want ANY Japanese manufactured car. You are looking for the Chevy/Ford/Chryco V8 boards. Make a left at the Overweight Amercian Steel board, turn right at the Typically Unreliable Crowd, and go straight past the Plummeting Resale Value discussion and you'll run right into it. Thanks for stopping by.

graphicguy

You're "dead-on". Good summation regarding the torque/hp issue.

nippononly

how about the weight issue? And the tire/suspension issue? OK, now how about the V-6/manual combo issue? :-)

graphicguy

I'm not certain which car you're referring to. I've only driven the Mazda 6 once, and it was only briefly. To my butt, I didn't miss, nor notice the so-called lack of torque.

I used to believe in the old adage "ain't no replacement for displacement". That's when I drove "muscle cars" in my youth, however.

Now, I'm more appreciative of cars that have refinement, roadability and the performance capabilities offered by high revers that are light on their feet. Honda and Mazda seem to have that recipe down pat.

Every time I get into heavier, bigger engined cars, I feel like they have to be manhandled to get them to do what I want them to do....that includes some pretty highly regarded machines.

qbrozen

actually, nippononly is a mazda supporter (and especially the "low torque" RX8). i believe you are looking for treehumpindog.

nippononly

I like most of the current mazda flock, and I think they and Nissan are the only ones building seriously fun, sporty midsize sedans right now. Most particularly, I was happy to see that for '04 Mazda has the manual V-6 availability problem licked, in a visit to the dealer this weekend. More than half of all the V-6 Mazda6's they had on the lot were manuals. I believe they are a bit lighter than their Accord peers, and certainly 200+ pounds lighter than the Camry V-6, and the only one of the three to offer a manual with the bigger engine. And they have a better handling package as well - most of the ones I saw were equipped with the 17s...

treehumpindog

are all missing the point. i like japanese cars, including mazdas, that's why i take the time to post here, but as i said before, MAZDA does not understand the North American market. that is why they haven't been as successful as their competitors up til now. when i was in japan, i was able to witness firsthand how many versions of each North American model in the Mazda lineup had higher output ratings and much better styling. so why does Mazda insist on changing their cars ONLY for the NA buyer? Ask yourself WHY? Take, for example, the new Mazda 3--in my opinion, a very nice package for the money and way better styling inside and out than its competitors. oh yeah, i meant the version of the Mazda 3 that goes to europe, australia, new zealand, etc. why did Mazda feel the need to change the front grill design, front foglight design, centre console options, and rear light housing design for the US and (more so) Canadian buyer? don't tell me its federal regulations, because beside side markers, all of the nissan products and most of the honda and toyota vehicles that make it over here look like their japanese counterparts. While the mazda int'l engine specs are similiar (we are spared the smaller engine option) don't you prefer the look of the car that the rest of the world is getting? why does Mazda feel the need to establish a North American family look to their cars? Because the people who run Mazda in North America and the people who run Mazda in Japan do not understand the NA market. people here do a lot of cross-shopping, and while there is some brand loyalty, usually if a competitor's product offers more bang for the buck, the buyer will take a serious look elsewhere. but mazda continues to think like a niche player (which i think is good, btw) which is unfortunately not the way to join the upper echelons in sales figures. to respond to that, mazda would have to make their cars a little wider and more powerful, and increase their robust hauling capacity. and gbrozen, 10% increase in horsepower and torque IS a big difference. if mazda well and truly wants to do battle with toyota and honda and nissan, they will have to offer more for the same money, which means they really should have boosted their output ratings on the lighter mazda 6 by at least 10 hp and 10 ftlb. see toyota with the new sienna, they benchmarked the honda oddyssey, offering 230 hp to honda's 245, but they offered increased value elsewhere in the total package to remain competitive. mazda on the other hand used the bmw 3 series as their benchmark for the mazda 6, which goes to show again that Mazda does not really have a vision yet as a north american automobile company. in terms of its product, design, and marketing. like mitsubishi, it's all over the map and confused as to whom its target audience is. if mazda wants to be the japanese bmw, then it cannot expect to be the north american toyota. in other words, mazda is still searching for its identity as a company, something which honda and toyota are not. mazda seems to be either indifferent or ignorant of the world's largest car market. if they were, they would find that most NA buyers and car enthusiasts are well-informed, sophisticated. mazda gives us what they think we want, but they underestimate our tastes. lately though, i see the beginning of positive changes with recent models like the 3, but with the "modifications" they are always making to the vehicles we get, i still think overall they don't see the big picture here.

graphicguy

nippononly....sorry, I did mean treehumper.

treehumper....hey, the "stream of conciousness" approach to posting here makes it hard to ascertain what you are trying to say. Please use complete sentences and paragraph breaks. Not meant to inflame, I just don't think we can make much sense in what you're saying.

I'll give it a shot, though. All manufacturers fine tune their offerings for different global markets because different market requirements demand it. For example, in Europe, where gas prices are 2X-4X what they are here in the U.S., diesel cars are more appropriate. There's not much of a market for those "burners" in the states, however.

While most, if not all manufacturers may use a global platform for their offerings throughout the world, differences in safety requirements, emmissions rules, fuel economy, etc, dictate what each manufacturer offers to each different country.

Regarding Mazda's competitiveness, they have never been a company that was shooting for the Camcord market. Ford tried to push them in that direction a few years ago, but was relatively unsuccessful. Mazda is now known for good performing cars (in some instances like the RX8, very unique cars) that put a premium on handling, refinement and finneses as opposed to all out straight line performance (which is still dominated by good old fashioned american muscle).

qbrozen

so first you complain of lack of torque. You must have agreed that Mazda has about the same torque to hp ratio of comparable japanese manufacturers, so you dropped that argument and went with "but honda has more power" argument. Showing you that the 4-cylinders are equal and that the accord v6 needs 17% more engine to get 10% more power, you have now turned to complaining about styling. Once you realize styling is completely subjective, what will you turn to now? How about radio reception? or maybe turn signal visibility in foggy conditions would be more to your liking?

Oh, and, by the way, did you know that even American manufacturers offer us different vehicles in both style and engine than they do overseas? So if our domestic builders won't do it, why should we expect foreign manufacturers to do so?

guest

Toyota's are not what what I'm looking for. The average Toyota Buyer is 47 years old. Young people do not look at Toyota's. They look at VW's, Honda's, Mazda's and sometimes Hyundai's. I would not compare Mazda to Toyota because their totally different companies.

As far as Nissan is concerned their styling is hit and miss and the torque steer scares me. The Q45, Altima, 350-Z, and Murano I do like on the exterior. Their distinctive lookng cars but not hideous looking. The M45 and 04 Sentra are not very good looking.

The issue with Mazda yes I'll agree I don't like the family look. Each car in a manufacturer's line-up should look distinctive from one another. Even with that said the 3 still looks alot better than the Civic, Corolla, and Sentra.

As far as using the BMW 3 Series for a benchmark there is nothing wrong with that. The 6 is supposed to be a fun to drive car not a Camry.

I wouldn't compare Mazda to Mitsubishi. Mistsubishi is having an idenity crisis with their exterior styling and trying to be Pontiac. Mazda knows what it wants to do and they do have a styling direction mitsu does not. Next month Mazda will probably pass Mitsubishi in total sales.

Mazda wants to go for buyer of all ages something they are doing successfully.

Lastly as far as benchmarking is concerned the V-6 in the 6 is 220 hp. The Accord and Altima have about 240Hpin their V-6's. Its not like Mazda V-6 engines are like 180hp.

treehumpindog

i'm in the market for a new hatchback or wagon. so far, my short list includes (in order of interest):

1. 2005 subaru legacy gt (might go with normally aspirated version cuz turbos scare me due to future servicing nightmares--heat, wear, and$$$)

2. 2005 dodge magnum (3.5L or hemi, but gas guzzling, reliability, and resale problems!)

3. 2005 mazda 6 wagon (v6 maybe awd, but really prefer sleeker styling of legacy)

4. 2004 mazda 3 sport (fully loaded, good value at lower price pt. but with aftermarket custom leather, [non-permissible content removed]-spec front grill and clear/smoke rear light housing adding extra cost)

5. honda element (waiting for monocolour version and iffy about poor performance)

6. 2005 saab 9-2 (if it's a subie with cool styling and not too dear, sounds good)

happy driving everyone!