Mazdaspeed3 vs. VW V GTI vs. Civic Si

1181921232427

Comments

  • eldainoeldaino Member Posts: 1,618
    well off the line it may not be too bad, the mazda has more torque any way you slice it. But eventually the si's rev master of an engine will decimate it. When most people say 'power' they are reffering to initial torque.

    I like the way the si sounds though. The exhaust note is great. Does the 3 even have one? :P
  • stallionrestallionre Member Posts: 205
    I think my note is louder now on the 3 when I added the CAI.
  • eldainoeldaino Member Posts: 1,618
    well, i'm sure your engine sounds bigger and meaner, but the actual exhaust will remain unchanged.

    The si sounds vicious from both these aspects.

    I'm out guys. Have a good weekend everyone! :shades:
  • creakid1creakid1 Member Posts: 2,032
    & how many peak hp does an RX-8 have? Go drag race one from a stop light then get embarrased 9 out of 10 times! & after my test drive, that RX-8 sales manager was moron-ish enough tried to impress me by mentioning the peak hp in a bragging tone of voice. I didn't buy that.

    By the way, those of you who want a super handling that beats a GTI w/ a limo-soft ride that beats a Rabbit should get the base RX-8 auto w/ 16"s. :P
  • stallionrestallionre Member Posts: 205
    This is true. Is will be much louder when I add a new Muffler.
    Have a great weekend.
  • vvileyvviley Member Posts: 46
    New manual RX-8's have 232 hp (@8.5k), autos have 20 less. You have to drive the 8 just like you would an Si to get anything out of it. Rotaries aren't the best on the low end.
  • drfilldrfill Member Posts: 2,484
    The torque is the difference in the two cars, as the Mazda wins easily here.

    The Mazda whistles while it works.

    The Honda screams.

    If you look at recent tests, the Si is somewhere around seven seconds, 0-60. The Mazda is slightly behind that. I'll quickly trade a half-second for the polish it provides.

    DrFill
  • stallionrestallionre Member Posts: 205
    Yup. That is so true, that is why I didn't buy a Honda. Sounds likes the engine will scream right out of the engine compartment HEE HEE JK. ;)

    On the 0-60 test, that Mazda is half a second behind the Honda, that is nothing compared to the other advantages that you get with Mazda. ;):)
  • 600kgolfgt600kgolfgt Member Posts: 690
    The GTi uses a timing belt that has to be replaced at 60k - 80k miles.

    The only current VW engine which requires a timing belt is the 2.0T from the GTI. VW engines with 5 cylinders or more incorporate timing chains (including the 2.5L 5-cylinder in the Rabbit). I've noticed you have mentioned the GTI and Rabbit interchangeably.

    Is your comparison between a Mazda 3 and VW Rabbit 2.5 or is it between the Mazda 3 and the GTI?
  • vvileyvviley Member Posts: 46
    But with those advantages also comes some downers.

    Rotaries are bring along with them some interesting maintenance / operating issues that some people won't be able to cope with as well.

    I know quite a few people who have issues even getting them to run correctly when the weather drops below freezing.
  • carfanatic007carfanatic007 Member Posts: 267
    Similar power? LMAO! This is a joke right? The SI and 3S are leagues apart. The SI is much faster and better handling then the 3S. The 3S feels dog slow. Now if your comparing it to a regular Civic they are about the same. I have driven both and your review is nothing like I experienced, nor anyone else.
  • carfanatic007carfanatic007 Member Posts: 267
    "Yup. That is so true, that is why I didn't buy a Honda. Sounds likes the engine will scream right out of the engine compartment HEE HEE JK.

    On the 0-60 test, that Mazda is half a second behind the Honda, that is nothing compared to the other advantages that you get with Mazda"

    1/2 a second? Wrong: Consumer Reports (which is the slowest of the comparisons). Mazda 3S 0-60: 9.5 seconds.
    Civic SI: 7.0 seconds. That is 2.5 seconds faster which is not "a little" faster, it is "you just got smoked" faster! Get your facts straight before you come in here! :shades:
  • blueguydotcomblueguydotcom Member Posts: 6,257
    The Mazda3 2.3 is slow. Really slow. Painfully slow. The Si will slap it around like an ugly step child.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    I guess slow is relative these days. For an economy car with a price around $18k, the Mazda 3s is plenty quick, and terrific handler. The Civic Si is just quicker at the top end. Around town though, I'd think the 3s would be a little easier to live with and just as quick, until you get to where you can really wind out an engine.

    This, from the owner of 2 Hondas.
  • blueguydotcomblueguydotcom Member Posts: 6,257
    8 seconds is slow. No two ways around it. Around town the Mazda3 would be far easier to live with. On the freeway, daily life, heck in practically every way I'd say a Mazda3 is a better daily life car than a Civic Si.

    But in terms of performance, well the Mazda3 is laughably behind the Civic Si.

    FWIW, the Mazdaspeed3 may not be very livable on daily basis but it will trounce the living daylights out of the civic si, in my estimation.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    8 seconds is slow. No two ways around it. Around town the Mazda3 would be far easier to live with. On the freeway, daily life, heck in practically every way I'd say a Mazda3 is a better daily life car than a Civic Si.

    But in terms of performance, well the Mazda3 is laughably behind the Civic Si.

    The Civic Si ought to blow the doors off of a basic Mazda 3. It's the performance model of the Honda, vs. the basic model of the 3.

    But relative to the cars it competes with, it is quick. Quicker than the Civic, Elantra, Cobalt, Corolla, and Jetta, of comparable price and class. Last I checked, the Mazda 3s wasn't being compared to a Civic Si? And, at 7.3 seconds according to Car and Driver's comparison test (the 140 hp Civic got 7.7 sec), the Mazda 3 is ahead of the pack it runs with.

    Personally, having driven a 130 hp 4-speed Auto Accord which runs 0-60 in about ten seconds, for years, my 8.1 second Accord with 166 hp (Car and Driver) seems fast. It's all relative guys. I've never had a problem because I didn't have enough power in my 1996, so my 2006 is like bonus power considering it gets better mileage than that same 130 hp Accord.
  • eldainoeldaino Member Posts: 1,618
    its funny that you mentioned this grad, becaus for awhile, no one wanted to accept the fact that the mazda 3s was the highest level 3 and would HAVE to be compared to the si.

    For me the only civic that should be compared the the speed three is the type R, and now there are 2 versions in existence and the japanese version is rumored to come over here.

    Anyway, i'd have to agree with the 0-60 times; the si is quicker in general, whereas the 3 has a more relaxed torque curve, making it easier to drive on a daily basis; its a more 'normal' engine, as oppossed to the si's more quirky demeanor. But i do agree with grad in ref. to what blue guy said about 8 seconds being slow no matter what. We live in a world where some call the si sedans 0-60 time of 7ish seconds slow. 8 seconds may not be a blazing time, but for the class, is anything really fast? Even the mazda speed's 0-60 of 5.8 is slow compared to what a gallardo can acheive, but they are 2 different classes huh? Anything is fast when its realtive to its competition.

    I think the 3s is relatively quick for its class,...but when you look at how it only edges out the 140 hp civic lx by .04 seconds, is that really anything to brag about?

    No, it really isn't.

    In fact, the difference is so small, if you were going to do the classic 'from stop light to stop light' deal, (which im sure most of us wouldn't im just saying this for comparative reasons. :blush: )it would not be unheard of for the civic driver to come out on top.

    I myself have more than just nipped on a few mazda 3s heels when i had my ex. And being and ex, it weighed more and was an auto.

    Then again, all of this belongs in the "Mazda 3 vs Civic" forum, since none of it has anything to do with the si or mazdaspeed. Or the gti for that matter.
  • stallionrestallionre Member Posts: 205
    I still think that these numbers are bias. Anyway, what about the torque? Huh??

    I know that the 3 has great speed and torque for it's class. I really don't care about 0-60 range, unless if you are racing. In LA, 0-60 means nothing, because the freeways are mostly run at 40MPH. Damn traffic and congestion. :mad:

    I still think a 160HP engine is better than a 140HP. At least for the noise part. The Civic sounds like it screams, too much noise for me to like, However the 3 purrs along, nicely. SWEET!!!! :)
  • blueguydotcomblueguydotcom Member Posts: 6,257
    In LA, 0-60 means nothing, because the freeways are mostly run at 40MPH. Damn traffic and congestion.

    Couldn't disagree more. Freeway merging is where I want power. Lots of it. I despise people who mosey onto the freeway as I feel totally endangered by them - they refuse to match the flow of traffic and thus freeway traffic must slow for them or even worse I'm stuck behind them getting on the freeway. I've taken to hanging back and giving the other car a huge lead if I think it's a slow-merging/slow-thinking dullard in front of me. If they're slow, the gap will allow me to merge at a decent speed and get around them more easily.

    And I drive in LA all the time. It's freeway/hour dependent. I've been on the 405 at 5 in the morning and been forced to do 90 to keep up with traffic.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    156 hp (as the 3s has) is better than 140 hp. 26/35 MPG is better than 22/29 MPG as well.

    As for the engine note, that is subjective. I've got a friend with a 2004 3s (4-speed Auto) and it isn't particularly quiet, and you feel like you can feel every single tread block of the tires (stock wheels and tires). Again, subjective.

    0-60 is a HUGE deal here, where freeways typically run 75MPH all the time, and on-ramps vary in length. Top end power is a big deal to me, since typically, when I need it (I'll be pushing the pedal further) the engine jumps to max hp/high-rpm. When I don't need it (lightly pushing the pedal) the engine runs more economically than a torquier engine would.
  • eldainoeldaino Member Posts: 1,618
    it may 'scream' to you stal, but thats part of the character. The 3 you have is not the performance version of the 3. The si is the performance version of the civic. Honda wouldn't want complaints of a sedate si.

    160hp better than 140? Yeah in some ways. But you gotta realize that 160 hp isn't all that amazing for a 2.3. Honda had a 2.0 that put out the same amount. They have one that puts out 197... :blush:
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    We're all guilty of going off topic. We should move this to the "economy sedans" board if we're gonna keep it up. I'm just as guilty as you guys.
  • stallionrestallionre Member Posts: 205
    OUCH, OH, I feel your pain. the 405!!! Are you crazy? :cry: Sorry. I am in the same boat, try the 101 and 5? Double trouble. When I enter a freeway, I put the pedal the metal and merge, then of course you have to slow down till you 40MPH. :mad: :( Which sucks!!!

    You explain LA very well. ;)
  • stallionrestallionre Member Posts: 205
    I know, we are just trying to make lite of the situation and humor of course with the roads now a days. :surprise:
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Oh, I just meant the talk of the basic versions of these cars. A lot of people would be interested in what we've talked about between the 156 hp 3, 140 hp Civic, etc...I certainly am interested!

    Not trying to be a mommy/daddy to the forum, that's not my job. :)
  • stallionrestallionre Member Posts: 205
    Yup!! I hear you. No problem.
  • stallionrestallionre Member Posts: 205
    Yup!! I hear you. No problem.
  • eldainoeldaino Member Posts: 1,618
    dont worry grad you are right! Except the 3 may be difficult to discuss in the 'economy sedans' forum...remember what edmunds thought of it? :blush:
  • drfilldrfill Member Posts: 2,484
    The Civic was fast enough, but the torque deficit was noticable. Loved the seats, and the guages weren't an issue. Loved the look too. Have owned a 97 Integra and 95 Civic, so I was pulling for the Si, but it was WAY too loud!

    The Mazda was slightly slower, but was more relaxed about everything it did, and on wet, winding roads, it was swift, poised, and the interior was more cohesive.

    If you're 18, the Civic will excite. Anybody over 25 may tire of it's endless racket and unpretentious ways.

    Honda could've tried to quell noise a little bit. The Si is twice as loud as my Integra, and the 3 was half as noisy as that.

    The Scion tC was more quiet than either.

    The Si is not a Ferrari. Let's keep it real. The noise doesn't endear it. :sick:

    Mazda's torque negates enough of Civics high-end power to make it a close race, but the Mazda has smoothed out the rough edges.

    DrFill
  • stallionrestallionre Member Posts: 205
    Drfill,

    Thanks. Your write up was awesome. I really how the Mazda smooths out the rough edges, like you have stated. I took my car this weekend on the freeway going about 90 and it purred right along. Very low engine noise, unlike the Civic that I drove at 80. Even the Nissan SE-R sounds like that it was going to fall apart. They both screamed way to loud. :surprise:
  • eldainoeldaino Member Posts: 1,618
    dont get me wrong doc, i know enought about torque to know what you mean about the mazda's low end. But when the si has just so much top end that it bests its zero to 60 time by almost 2 seconds, thats pretty noticeable.
  • rorrrorr Member Posts: 3,630
    ....since when has this thread started comparing the Civic Si to the base Mazda3 2.3?

    Isn't there another thread comparing Civics to the Mazda3 (and the Rabbit for that matter)? Where in the heck is the discussion of the Speed3 vs. the Civic Si vs. the VW GTI?
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Been there, said that...
  • carfanatic007carfanatic007 Member Posts: 267
    There is no comparison between them. These two jumped in here and started comparing the 3S to the SI. 156 hp compared to 197. The torque difference is not that great. The SI blows the 3S out of the water, not even close. It (the 3S) is barely faster then the Civic with 140 hp. :sick:
  • eldainoeldaino Member Posts: 1,618
    i really dunno how we got on it, even i tried getting back on track...i just cant ignore some posts tho!
  • eldainoeldaino Member Posts: 1,618
    who do you mean by 'these two'? If you look back, several posters had something to say about stallionaires comments about the 3 compared to the si, not just 2 people. And it was only 1 person who brought it in in the first place. :blush:
  • stallionrestallionre Member Posts: 205
    I only brought it up, because someone brought it up first. I just wanted to tell people the experience that I felt in the si. That was all. I didn't mention it anymore and have moved on.
  • eldainoeldaino Member Posts: 1,618
    i hear ya stal, i'm just saying that it was unfair to pen it all on 2 people, when many participated.
  • stallionrestallionre Member Posts: 205
    ;) No problem. I can handle the pain. JK. I was at fault to not being totally on topic. ;)
  • andres3andres3 Southern CAMember Posts: 12,901
    How widely available is it?

    The VW GTI is a great all around car, if only VW has a better dealer and manufacturing background and reliability record. If they lengthened their warranties to Hyundai's levels that would help.
    '15 Audi Misano Red Pearl S4, '16 Audi TTS Daytona Gray Pearl, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
  • eldainoeldaino Member Posts: 1,618
    yeah it probably would, but you'd still have people going on on how 'they need that warranty', like you still see it with hyundai's even though they really are not bad at all either.

    Having said that, the vw warranty is longer than that of mazda or honda.
  • stallionrestallionre Member Posts: 205
    Yeah, but not by much. I wouldn't buy a car just for the warranty.
  • eldainoeldaino Member Posts: 1,618
    well, it certainly is a decisive factor for some, i wouldnt either, but it made me feel better about my vw.

    It is kinda by a bit tho stall. 36000 3 yrs compared to 4 years 60k. Thats a lot for some people. Even if it only takes you 2 year to get 36k, 2more years on top of that is a pretty long time!
  • stallionrestallionre Member Posts: 205
    I hear you in that sense, However, I don't drive my 3 much, since I have two other cars. I only drive my 3 on sunny days and will only put about 3,000 miles a year on the car, therefore, having a large warranty, doesnt warrant it in my situation.

    I live 1 mile from work.
  • eldainoeldaino Member Posts: 1,618
    geez. 3k a year. I've had my rabbit for seven months and i broke 16 k today!

    I live 16 miles from work. :sick:
  • stallionrestallionre Member Posts: 205
    Ouch, you drive everywhere then if you work is 16 miles, and you already have 16K miles in 7 months. Where do you drive to? :surprise:
    Great, how is the car? You like it? Any problems yet?
    Enjoy!! :)
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    It is kinda by a bit tho stall. 36000 3 yrs compared to 4 years 60k.

    Mazda has a 5-yr 60K engine power train warranty as well. VW has an advantage in bumper to bumper coverage, and Mazda has the advantage in engine power train coverage.
  • stallionrestallionre Member Posts: 205
    No matter how much the warranty is covered for, I still take the 3 hands down.
  • carfanatic007carfanatic007 Member Posts: 267
    The Rabbit had 150 HP and the Mazda 3S had 156. To me, the VW seemed quicker. Interior wise the VW was much higher quality than the Mazda. Ride was also smoother. Handling seemed about the same. I was amazed when I saw that the Rabbit was $3,000 cheaper! This is a no brainer! If you want a daily driver, get the Rabbit.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    This would be a great post for the Economy Sedans $16k-$20k forum...

    Did you test the GTI or Mazdaspeed 3?
This discussion has been closed.