> I work for VW and get tired of my co-workers bragging on the GTI
What will your reaction be when your co-workers start bragging about the R32? My advice: Relax, and don't let it get to you... They're only cars. It's not like we have unlimited speed limits here (don't I wish...)
We should be happy that there are more performance cars to choose from - and many paths to achieve that performance... :shades:
Actually it will be called the R36, seeing it will probably use the 3.6 liter engine. The R36 is in another category fitted with EVOS & Subies. The Mazdaspeed 3 fits right in with the GTI. Ive already made friends with my fast, so Im looking for a little accelerated zoom-zoom. :P
Oh how true with the exception of the Z06, because I dont even hear anything from the Cobalt. But I think its a blessing for the Mazda 3 to even be compared to the GTI.
think its a blessing for the Mazda 3 to even be compared to the GTI.
Why? The Mazda3 comes from the only Japanese company to make drivers' cars consistently. The 03 Protege ES I used to have was a much better handling car than my 01 Jetta 1.8T Wolfsburg. On a pure performance level, the Pro decimated my Jetta. On a reliability level, well the Pro was perfect...the Jetta, a joke.
The current Mazda3 has better chassis dynamics, roadfeel and handling than the 06 GTI. By a long shot. The GTi's got more power than a 3 right now but it's a good 5-6k more expensive. Once you add in the power promised by a Mazdaspeed3 2.3 turbo, well it won't even be close as the the Mazdaspeed3 will trump the GTI's handling, power, roadfeel and price.
The only thing the GTI will have on the Mazdaspeed3: that slick DSG (replacing VW's god-awful manuals).
I know what you mean, I had a 2001 protege before I bought my 3. Im just saying according to history the GTI started the pocket rocket genre and for Mazda to be compared to it means Mazda has come a long way. I have put Enkei 17x7.5 and 215/45 tires on my car and I think it does handle better than the GTI. ZOOM-ZOOM. :P
It's a bit hard and premature to do this comparison, without involving paper / arm-chair racing. Mazda generally is clearly more performance-oriented than the Golf/GTI. Concentrating on performance/handling, one would probably have to place the regular Mazda somewhere close to the GTI, and the Mazdaspeed between the GTI and the R32*.
In my opinion, the MkV GTI has closed the handling gap with the new rear suspension, but it still is a different package (more weighted toward long-distance driving, safety, and creature comforts). Enthusiasts are either installing the Euro springs or are lowering the suspension; and/or are adding a thicker rear sway bar - all indications that the OEM suspension still has room for improvement for hard-core drivers. The engine is very strong, though, not far from that of the Mazdaspeed (if in the US it indeed gets the turbo-charged 2.3 FSI engine, which is very similar in design to the GTI engine).
(*) While the new MkV R32 has been available in the rest of the world for some time now, it is not clear when and what the US will get. The most likely scenario would be Summer 2007, as a 2008 model, with either an upgraded 3.2 engine at about 250hp, or with the 3.6 FSI of the current Passat, at 280 to 300hp. The current R32 has received very good reviews, and has beaten a number of high-performance cars on the track (e.g., the RWD 1-series). And yes, there is no doubt it will be more expensive than the MazdaSpeed.
Better not count that Mazdaspeed horsepower till you get it on the dyno... anyone remember the RX8?
The MS6 has the same engine and tranny, and that gets 274 to the fly, and 230-240 to the wheels, one would think that a "over 250 hp" to the fly, as stated by the Mazdaspeed3 engineer, should be somewhere 220-230 to the wheels.
In refrence to the RX-8, that's a rotary, MS3 is not.
> It'll devour the GTI. No question. The Mazda3 was missing power.
I sense a pattern here. Kindly share with us the origin for your hatred of all things VW. Call it fascination, call it morbid curiosity. C'mon, share with us... :shades:
No hatred. The GTI was high on my list until I drove it. I believed Clarkson and the other "experts". In the end, after toying with the car I found its steering numb, suspension soft, body heavy and in general the car was not as exciting as I'd expected. It was neither nimble nor darty but rather lumbering and boarish.
The Mazda3 seems to me to have a better connection between the driver and the road. You can feel what's happening through the wheel. The much lighter weight and stiff, less spongy suspension convey a sense of immediacy through the Mazda's chassis. Point and shoot. Stiffening the suspension more and adding gobs more power and the LSD will transform a very adept little car into a stellar performer. Unfortunately, Mazda will probably gear the poor car as idiotically as they did the Mazdaspeed6, thus robbing the car of some potential. Thankfully, they didn't saddle the car with the Mazdaspeed6's lousy FWD-biased AWD system.
Really, Mazda feels to me like a Japanese BMW - same kind of purposeful fusion of the driver to the car. Should they ever really move upmarket with a RWD sports sedan, Mazda will be the challenger to BMW that Lexus, Audi, MB, Infiniti and Acura fail to be.
I agree with you that the lighter weight of the Mazda 3 and its more direct steering give it points in the fun factor area. If you look at the total package, the story is a bit different. There, most reviews have the GTI in front with respect to recent competitors (e.g., April R&T against the Si and the $31,000+ supercharged JCW Mini Cooper S).
I just read that issue on a flight last night. They gave the GTI points based on interior treatment and such. The Mazda3's interior is fine for what I like in a car...nothing fluffy, no wood, solid plastics, good seats. The GTI's got a nice interior (save for VW's absolutely idiotic knob seat adjustments!) but I'll take driving enjoyment over a nice interior without a bit of hesitation.
but I'll take driving enjoyment over a nice interior
Of course, that is your driving enjoyment, and I understand where you are coming from, but it may not always be shared by others. For example, the recent AWD test by R&T did not make the 3's bigger brother, the 6, look all that good.
I guess, what I am driving at is that what makes one car more fun than another may be quite subjective and may not bear out in any measured handling, skid pad, or acceleration numbers.
I grew up with RWD but never found it fun or exhilarating. To me, the rear drift always screamed "sorry, I am busy walking to the side right now, don't bother accelerating or expect anything else from me, right now". FWD cars are more challenging (more fun? - at least to me) to drive; but my heart will always be with AWD.
> Mazda feels to me like a Japanese BMW - same kind of purposeful fusion of the driver to the car.
Let's hope that Mazda does a better job of refinement for the Mazdaspeed 3 than they apparently did for the Mazdaspeed 6.
I've also noticed that after all these years, the Japanese automakers still aspire for their cars to be more European-like, rather than the other way around.
In the hot-hatch category, the target car is still the often-imitated GTI. Sure, there are cars that are faster, and cars that handle better, but the GTI does the best job of balancing performance, chassis dynamics, driving sensation, and refinement in one package - especially the European version.
0-60 times and skidpad numbers do not a hot hatch make...
My buddy just purchased a 2006 GTI and I was trying to find the exact 0-60 and 1/4 mile times on it with no luck. Wondering if you guys know? Also what are the times on the Mazda? He wants to race my 06 Mustang GT putting 370 HP to the flywheel which I think is a bit ridicules considering my best run has been 0-60 in 4.9 sec and the 1/4 in 12.8 but it would be fun to see.
If your buddy is stupid enough to buy a GTI for drag racing, he deserves to get dusted and completely humiliated - and the victor should rub his face in it at every opportunuty. In fact, he shouldn't be anywhere near a GTI, Mazdaspeed, or a skateboard for that matter...
The best times I have seen are 6.3 by R&T and 6.0 from C&D (Euro DSG version with launch control).
C&D got 14.7 sec @ 95 mph, which is pretty good considering the weight (~3100/3150lbs; manual/DSG) and the (low balled) advertised hp. But it's the versatility the GTI shines in, not straight line acceleration.
On the other hand, make the road snow-covered and the GTI will absolutely DUST the Mustang with a much wider margin than the Musting will dust the GTI on a dry road. I've seen firsthand how Mustangs operate on snow covered roads - NOT GOOD. Especially going up a slight incline covered with 1/2" of snow. :surprise:
Yeah I am sure my stang would drive pretty bad in snow, especially without snow tires. Though I will say if you check out on the mustang forums, some people up North (Main area) say they are having very good results with the traction control and high quality snow tires. I live in the South and don't have to worry about snow and rust, if I lived up North I may have not gone with the GT, maybe the Subaru Legacy GT.
Blueguydotcom is a Mazda product planner's wet dream. I've never seen anyone with such a hard-on for the Mazda brand.
I currently own a 2004 VW GTI, after owning a 2001 VW Jetta VR6, and there is no way a Mazda 3 compares kindly to my GTI. The Mazda 3 feels and looks more like a Korean car than a Japanese or European car.
Two months ago, I test drove a Mazdaspeed 6 and walked away unimpressed. The engine lacked low end grunt, the shifting was herky-jerky, and the interior quality was inferior to my VW.
The problem I see is that Mazda is trying to be like DaimlerChrysler with the Neon/Caliber SRT - big horsepower, stiff ride, but cheaply built. And safety is important - despite blueguydotcom's assertion that 3 stars is better than the 1970's Detroit boats we grew up in. If you understand anything about automotive design, a 3 star crash test car is much cheaper to design and build than a 5 star car. What's your life worth?
I like having an economical sports car that gets great gas mileage and will survive a run-in with an Excursion or Suburban. The GTI wins hands down. However, I will probably pass on both the new GTI or the Mazdaspeed 3 and get a more "grownup" car in November, like the new Passat 3.6 or Infiniti G35X sedan.
The Mazda 3 feels and looks more like a Korean car than a Japanese or European car.
Wow, that was the first I have ever heard that! Every reputable periodical has rated the Mazda3 as "best in class" or darn near the top. Also, rated as having really good build quality, and RELIABILITY, something European vehicles, including VW, have been know to be built without(reliability).
Are you saying the the Mazda3 looks like a Hyundai or a Kia??? WOW.
My brother owns a 2001 GTI 1.8T, and I can't begin to tell you how many times it has been in the shop for the same problems, mainly electrical, and the constant "crayon" smell?? The dealer saything this is very common, I guess.
Two months ago, I test drove a Mazdaspeed 6 and walked away unimpressed. The engine lacked low end grunt, the shifting was herky-jerky, and the interior quality was inferior to my VW.
Actually, the MS6 has a lot of low end power, and no turbo lag (as published by many reputable periodicals). Also, it smokes the Audi A4 2.0T Quattro (fancy VW), which is more expensive, also it handles way better the the Quattro as well. I will say Audi has a more advanced AWD system, but, in this application, it dose not perform like it. Also, the interior in the GT is better then average, which is NOT luxury. I would hardly call VW's interior first rate. Average better describes it.
You are entitled to your opinion, which I respect, but, have to also disagree with.
Hmm. That GTI is fun and feels good when sitting in the car. But when it comes to handling the 2.3 Mazda3 devours the competition in that 16-22k space. Make it a Mazdaspeed3 and ...
VW sets the bar for interiors. That's it. Their cars are not considered hard core performers in any segment.
The GTI is a fun car. Can it run with a MazdaSpeed3 on a road course? No way in hell. In terms of handling the straight GTI gives it up to the Mazda3 hatch. Now with power and an LSD the Mazdaspeed3 will devour a GTI on a road course - straights it'll take off and in the corners it'll do things a GTI simply can't achieve.
Mazda is the frugal-man's BMW if you really want to give them a title. No Japanese or American brand offers the same level of roadfeel and handling prowess across its line-up as Mazda.
Style is subjective and worthless. If you buy a car based on looks, well your priorities, in my view, are way out of whack.
First off, I've never owned a Mazda product in my life. So I'm a little unclear of just what "blind devotion" you are referring to. Second the only Ford products I've ever owned are a '93 Mustang LX5.0 and my current project, a '66 Mustang Fastback. If this makes me a "choad", so be it.
Wait a minute, why does defending ANY particular product line (be it Mazda or VW for that matter) make ANYONE a "choad"? If I defend Toyota because I like my Celica, does that make me a "choad"? Does defending Honda because my wife likes her Odyssey make me a "choad"? You defend VW because you like your GTI - does that make you a "choad"? Or is it simply your opinion that VW supporters are the "enlightened ones" while everyone ELSE is a "choad"?
Face the facts? What facts? All you are offering are your opinions. Personally, I don't give a rat's posterior for "brand appeal". I'm not an emblem sniffer, treating a 50-cent hunk of chromed plastic like some religious artifact. I'm much more interested in "vehicle appeal".
So rather than continue this mindless, pointless comparison of VW vs. Mazda, why not just talk about the GTI and the Speed3? Because if you INSIST on reverting to a comparison of brands, I can only draw the conclusion that you've given up on comparing the actual cars.
"Style is subjective and worthless. If you buy a car based on looks, well your priorities, in my view, are way out of whack."
That may be true if you need a car to get from point A to point B. I think even the people that just need to get from place to place care what their car looks like. Completely unrealistic remark. Especially considering you're talking about sporty cars.
I'm a huge Mazda fan. I love Mazda, they make affordable, sporty, and reliable cars. What more could you want. VW didn't even show up on my radar until I saw something about the GTI. They make nasty stuff like the Jetta and the Passat and are overpriced. The 6 and the 8 were the two top choices until I drove the GTI.
I bought a GTI knowing that VW has reliability problems over the 6 and 8 and everything else just because I liked the car so much. Aside from mileage in stop and go traffic, I can't say I'm disappointed. The GTI was exactly what I was looking for. To me, the MS3 and the GTI can be cross shopped but they offer different things. The MS3 all about value, power, and performance. The GTI is a bit more refined. That's what I wanted, something that was still sporty but that I wouldn't be banged up after driving it.
My main point was to counter the idea that style is worthless. That's a ridiculous remark. I'd agree that what other people think about styling *is* worthless.
Sorry rorr, I didn't "check your profile" to make a sarcastic reply to your post. But now that you put it out there, owning a Celica and Odyssey makes you a true performance car enthusiast. What's your favorite ice cream flavor? Vanilla?
To get back to the topic at hand as you requested, read the title of the message you replied to - I think the comparison is a joke. Cheap speed, sans build quality, ride comfort, style and five-star safety equals Dodge Caliber SRT. There's your comparison.
"To me, the MS3 and the GTI can be cross shopped but they offer different things. The MS3 all about value, power, and performance. The GTI is a bit more refined."
Exactly.
Of course these cars will be cross-shopped. And like virtually ALL cars that are cross-shopped, each car will have it's own strengths and weaknesses. We don't ALL have the same criteria (or perception of what these individual strengths/weaknesses may be) but for ANYBODY (be they pro-GTI or pro-Speed3) to simply dismiss them out of hand is (IMO) innane.
My 6-speed GTS has some of the best stock steering and braking responses in the segment (in some ways, comparable to the old ITR). Personally, I wanted to be a bit different from the other 10,000 Integra GSRs that were running around my neck of the woods when I bought it. And if one simply MUST buy a minivan, an enthusiast can do worse than an Odyssey.
Care to know anything about my '66 fastback?
Yes, I know you think the comparison is a joke. That is your opinion. But the only reasons you've put forward to substantiate this opinion is your standard fall-back (VW = near luxury and "brand appeal"; Mazda = cheap-VW wannabee).
Comments
What will your reaction be when your co-workers start bragging about the R32? My advice: Relax, and don't let it get to you... They're only cars. It's not like we have unlimited speed limits here (don't I wish...)
We should be happy that there are more performance cars to choose from - and many paths to achieve that performance... :shades:
P.S Im always relaxed
Besides, we now have an object lesson for any car company that becomes complacent nowadays - it's called GM... :P
P.S. Remember make friends with your fast.
Why? The Mazda3 comes from the only Japanese company to make drivers' cars consistently. The 03 Protege ES I used to have was a much better handling car than my 01 Jetta 1.8T Wolfsburg. On a pure performance level, the Pro decimated my Jetta. On a reliability level, well the Pro was perfect...the Jetta, a joke.
The current Mazda3 has better chassis dynamics, roadfeel and handling than the 06 GTI. By a long shot. The GTi's got more power than a 3 right now but it's a good 5-6k more expensive. Once you add in the power promised by a Mazdaspeed3 2.3 turbo, well it won't even be close as the the Mazdaspeed3 will trump the GTI's handling, power, roadfeel and price.
The only thing the GTI will have on the Mazdaspeed3: that slick DSG (replacing VW's god-awful manuals).
DL
Now that was a total supercar. Oh yes, the sheer excitement that was generated by the awesome 114-hp engine...
The first time I accelerated from 0-60, I nearly wet myself in fright.
Heh, heh, heh...
:P :P :P
:P
DL
Nothing on price or release date.
Any comments on how it compares with the GTI?
It's a bit hard and premature to do this comparison, without involving paper / arm-chair racing. Mazda generally is clearly more performance-oriented than the Golf/GTI. Concentrating on performance/handling, one would probably have to place the regular Mazda somewhere close to the GTI, and the Mazdaspeed between the GTI and the R32*.
In my opinion, the MkV GTI has closed the handling gap with the new rear suspension, but it still is a different package (more weighted toward long-distance driving, safety, and creature comforts). Enthusiasts are either installing the Euro springs or are lowering the suspension; and/or are adding a thicker rear sway bar - all indications that the OEM suspension still has room for improvement for hard-core drivers. The engine is very strong, though, not far from that of the Mazdaspeed (if in the US it indeed gets the turbo-charged 2.3 FSI engine, which is very similar in design to the GTI engine).
(*) While the new MkV R32 has been available in the rest of the world for some time now, it is not clear when and what the US will get. The most likely scenario would be Summer 2007, as a 2008 model, with either an upgraded 3.2 engine at about 250hp, or with the 3.6 FSI of the current Passat, at 280 to 300hp. The current R32 has received very good reviews, and has beaten a number of high-performance cars on the track (e.g., the RWD 1-series). And yes, there is no doubt it will be more expensive than the MazdaSpeed.
Drove a Mk5 GTI, not enough to make me trade my Mk4 VR6. Think I'll hold out the R36. VWOA, you listening??
The MS6 has the same engine and tranny, and that gets 274 to the fly, and 230-240 to the wheels, one would think that a "over 250 hp" to the fly, as stated by the Mazdaspeed3 engineer, should be somewhere 220-230 to the wheels.
In refrence to the RX-8, that's a rotary, MS3 is not.
DL
It's not. I really miss that car. It was fun, light, nimble, connected and reliable. I can only say my 330i is fun and connected. I miss my Protege.
Any comments on how it compares with the GTI?
It'll devour the GTI. No question. The Mazda3 was missing power.
I sense a pattern here. Kindly share with us the origin for your hatred of all things VW. Call it fascination, call it morbid curiosity. C'mon, share with us... :shades:
The Mazda3 seems to me to have a better connection between the driver and the road. You can feel what's happening through the wheel. The much lighter weight and stiff, less spongy suspension convey a sense of immediacy through the Mazda's chassis. Point and shoot. Stiffening the suspension more and adding gobs more power and the LSD will transform a very adept little car into a stellar performer. Unfortunately, Mazda will probably gear the poor car as idiotically as they did the Mazdaspeed6, thus robbing the car of some potential. Thankfully, they didn't saddle the car with the Mazdaspeed6's lousy FWD-biased AWD system.
Really, Mazda feels to me like a Japanese BMW - same kind of purposeful fusion of the driver to the car. Should they ever really move upmarket with a RWD sports sedan, Mazda will be the challenger to BMW that Lexus, Audi, MB, Infiniti and Acura fail to be.
Of course, that is your driving enjoyment, and I understand where you are coming from, but it may not always be shared by others. For example, the recent AWD test by R&T did not make the 3's bigger brother, the 6, look all that good.
I guess, what I am driving at is that what makes one car more fun than another may be quite subjective and may not bear out in any measured handling, skid pad, or acceleration numbers.
I grew up with RWD but never found it fun or exhilarating. To me, the rear drift always screamed "sorry, I am busy walking to the side right now, don't bother accelerating or expect anything else from me, right now". FWD cars are more challenging (more fun? - at least to me) to drive; but my heart will always be with AWD.
Let's hope that Mazda does a better job of refinement for the Mazdaspeed 3 than they apparently did for the Mazdaspeed 6.
I've also noticed that after all these years, the Japanese automakers still aspire for their cars to be more European-like, rather than the other way around.
In the hot-hatch category, the target car is still the often-imitated GTI. Sure, there are cars that are faster, and cars that handle better, but the GTI does the best job of balancing performance, chassis dynamics, driving sensation, and refinement in one package - especially the European version.
0-60 times and skidpad numbers do not a hot hatch make...
D
You will obliterate him.
The best times I have seen are 6.3 by R&T and 6.0 from C&D (Euro DSG version with launch control).
C&D got 14.7 sec @ 95 mph, which is pretty good considering the weight (~3100/3150lbs; manual/DSG) and the (low balled) advertised hp. But it's the versatility the GTI shines in, not straight line acceleration.
I currently own a 2004 VW GTI, after owning a 2001 VW Jetta VR6, and there is no way a Mazda 3 compares kindly to my GTI. The Mazda 3 feels and looks more like a Korean car than a Japanese or European car.
Two months ago, I test drove a Mazdaspeed 6 and walked away unimpressed. The engine lacked low end grunt, the shifting was herky-jerky, and the interior quality was inferior to my VW.
The problem I see is that Mazda is trying to be like DaimlerChrysler with the Neon/Caliber SRT - big horsepower, stiff ride, but cheaply built. And safety is important - despite blueguydotcom's assertion that 3 stars is better than the 1970's Detroit boats we grew up in. If you understand anything about automotive design, a 3 star crash test car is much cheaper to design and build than a 5 star car. What's your life worth?
I like having an economical sports car that gets great gas mileage and will survive a run-in with an Excursion or Suburban. The GTI wins hands down. However, I will probably pass on both the new GTI or the Mazdaspeed 3 and get a more "grownup" car in November, like the new Passat 3.6 or Infiniti G35X sedan.
Wow, that was the first I have ever heard that! Every reputable periodical has rated the Mazda3 as "best in class" or darn near the top. Also, rated as having really good build quality, and RELIABILITY, something European vehicles, including VW, have been know to be built without(reliability).
Are you saying the the Mazda3 looks like a Hyundai or a Kia??? WOW.
My brother owns a 2001 GTI 1.8T, and I can't begin to tell you how many times it has been in the shop for the same problems, mainly electrical, and the constant "crayon" smell?? The dealer saything this is very common, I guess.
Two months ago, I test drove a Mazdaspeed 6 and walked away unimpressed. The engine lacked low end grunt, the shifting was herky-jerky, and the interior quality was inferior to my VW.
Actually, the MS6 has a lot of low end power, and no turbo lag (as published by many reputable periodicals). Also, it smokes the Audi A4 2.0T Quattro (fancy VW), which is more expensive, also it handles way better the the Quattro as well. I will say Audi has a more advanced AWD system, but, in this application, it dose not perform like it. Also, the interior in the GT is better then average, which is NOT luxury. I would hardly call VW's interior first rate. Average better describes it.
You are entitled to your opinion, which I respect, but, have to also disagree with.
They never do.
I just checked your profile.
For someone who feels the Suburu B9 Tribeca looks "awesome", I'll take your opinions regarding style with a massize grain of salt....
To both of you - let's not make this personal.
The GTI is a fun car. Can it run with a MazdaSpeed3 on a road course? No way in hell. In terms of handling the straight GTI gives it up to the Mazda3 hatch. Now with power and an LSD the Mazdaspeed3 will devour a GTI on a road course - straights it'll take off and in the corners it'll do things a GTI simply can't achieve.
Mazda is the frugal-man's BMW if you really want to give them a title. No Japanese or American brand offers the same level of roadfeel and handling prowess across its line-up as Mazda.
Style is subjective and worthless. If you buy a car based on looks, well your priorities, in my view, are way out of whack.
Wait a minute, why does defending ANY particular product line (be it Mazda or VW for that matter) make ANYONE a "choad"? If I defend Toyota because I like my Celica, does that make me a "choad"? Does defending Honda because my wife likes her Odyssey make me a "choad"? You defend VW because you like your GTI - does that make you a "choad"? Or is it simply your opinion that VW supporters are the "enlightened ones" while everyone ELSE is a "choad"?
Face the facts? What facts? All you are offering are your opinions. Personally, I don't give a rat's posterior for "brand appeal". I'm not an emblem sniffer, treating a 50-cent hunk of chromed plastic like some religious artifact. I'm much more interested in "vehicle appeal".
So rather than continue this mindless, pointless comparison of VW vs. Mazda, why not just talk about the GTI and the Speed3? Because if you INSIST on reverting to a comparison of brands, I can only draw the conclusion that you've given up on comparing the actual cars.
That may be true if you need a car to get from point A to point B. I think even the people that just need to get from place to place care what their car looks like. Completely unrealistic remark. Especially considering you're talking about sporty cars.
I'm a huge Mazda fan. I love Mazda, they make affordable, sporty, and reliable cars. What more could you want. VW didn't even show up on my radar until I saw something about the GTI. They make nasty stuff like the Jetta and the Passat and are overpriced. The 6 and the 8 were the two top choices until I drove the GTI.
I bought a GTI knowing that VW has reliability problems over the 6 and 8 and everything else just because I liked the car so much. Aside from mileage in stop and go traffic, I can't say I'm disappointed. The GTI was exactly what I was looking for. To me, the MS3 and the GTI can be cross shopped but they offer different things. The MS3 all about value, power, and performance. The GTI is a bit more refined. That's what I wanted, something that was still sporty but that I wouldn't be banged up after driving it.
My main point was to counter the idea that style is worthless. That's a ridiculous remark.
To get back to the topic at hand as you requested, read the title of the message you replied to - I think the comparison is a joke. Cheap speed, sans build quality, ride comfort, style and five-star safety equals Dodge Caliber SRT. There's your comparison.
Exactly.
Of course these cars will be cross-shopped. And like virtually ALL cars that are cross-shopped, each car will have it's own strengths and weaknesses. We don't ALL have the same criteria (or perception of what these individual strengths/weaknesses may be) but for ANYBODY (be they pro-GTI or pro-Speed3) to simply dismiss them out of hand is (IMO) innane.
Enjoy your GTI...
My 6-speed GTS has some of the best stock steering and braking responses in the segment (in some ways, comparable to the old ITR). Personally, I wanted to be a bit different from the other 10,000 Integra GSRs that were running around my neck of the woods when I bought it. And if one simply MUST buy a minivan, an enthusiast can do worse than an Odyssey.
Care to know anything about my '66 fastback?
Yes, I know you think the comparison is a joke. That is your opinion. But the only reasons you've put forward to substantiate this opinion is your standard fall-back (VW = near luxury and "brand appeal"; Mazda = cheap-VW wannabee).
You know what they say about opinions.....