Mazdaspeed3 vs. VW V GTI vs. Civic Si
We've got only 9 months before either of these hot-hatches make their appearance in the US. Let's start the comparison.
Considerations:
- Power (the 3 is rumored to have 220hp while the GTI has 200hp) and low-end torque
- Handling, chuckability, 60-0 (more important than power?)
- Reliability
- Space (a 3-door or a 5-door?)
- Standard Features (a full-size spare? heated mirrors?)
- Fuel Economy
- Safety
- Oh, yeah: Price
Anecdotally, I had a terrible experience with the reliability of my 1999.5 (Type IV) Jetta. Has VW improved its quality?
Your thoughts?
Considerations:
- Power (the 3 is rumored to have 220hp while the GTI has 200hp) and low-end torque
- Handling, chuckability, 60-0 (more important than power?)
- Reliability
- Space (a 3-door or a 5-door?)
- Standard Features (a full-size spare? heated mirrors?)
- Fuel Economy
- Safety
- Oh, yeah: Price
Anecdotally, I had a terrible experience with the reliability of my 1999.5 (Type IV) Jetta. Has VW improved its quality?
Your thoughts?
Tagged:
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
And try not to fly off the handle during an enjoyable debate.
More popcorn, sushi or sauerbraten, anyone?
:shades:
Meade
1. Is it even feasible to make a MS3 with AWD? If so, they may use the same motor, though slightly detuned (240 hp?).
2. If they had to stick to FWD (AWD cost prohibitive?), would they go with a 2.0L-turbo?
Nope!
http://www.detnews.com/2004/autosinsider/0407/04/autos-198392.htm
Take note of the rankings in the blue-shaded box. Mazda is just below average; VW is down with the bottom-feeders. Of course, this is a survey of new-vehicle quality, not long-term reliability. Want long-term reliability?
http://money.cnn.com/2004/11/08/pf/autos/cr_auto_reliability/
Again, look at the blue boxes (two of them, one for small cars and one for sedans). The Mazda3's in the "most reliable" category along with the Corolla and Civic; VW takes the entire "least reliable" small car list with three of its cars. VW also has a car on the sedans "least reliable" list.
Wow. Seems like a no-brainer choice for reliability.
Meade
Case in point:
1975 VW Scirocco - 250,000 miles
1987 VW Golf GT - 624,000 miles
1997 VW Jetta Trek (still own) - 135K miles
2003 VW Jetta Wolfsburg Edition - 47K miles.
My secret? I have REGULAR maintenance done on them, either by myself or my mechanic. Coming from an aircraft maintenance background (in the US Air Force),
I learned the importance of proper maintenance which I applied to every vehicle and power equipment I've owned since.
VW's reliabilty ratings (on only a handful of items - whether it's the coil-related issue, oil burning (bad rings), etc), are a result of bad suppliers (65%), self-inflicted manufacturing issues (i.e. falling window regulators) (15%), and poor/inattentive drivers who do not properly maintain their vehicles (20%).
Most people with their busy lifestyles nowadays usually don't take the time to make sure their vehicles are in good operating condition - with the worst culprits being those who lease their cars (which is why I make sure I buy my cars brand new - so I know the history of how they are driven) - these are the drivers who are most likely to neglect maintaining their vehicle (just jump in, turn the key, and drive), and the first to blame the manufacturer when something goes wrong. A recalled item due to a manufacturer's defect is one thing, but neglect is another thing entirely.
For example, the sludge issue on VW's 1.8T engine was completely avoidable, even before the TSBs were issued requiring synthetic oil (which, IMHO, should have been the standard oil used in ANY turbocharged engine - If VW used it for the TDI's (diesels), they should have used it for all of their turbocharged engines right from the get-go).
The issue of sludging in turbocharged engines has been around for a long time (case in point, the Chrysler 2.2 Liter 4-cylinder turbocharged engines of the 1980's were notorious for turbocharger failures due to oil sludging and coking in the critical turbocharger bearing area - resulting in excessive wear and their early demise).
The fact of the matter is - the majority of people do not know how to operate a turbocharged vehicle - Here's a couple of guidelines to back up my argument:
1) Before shutting off the engine after a high-speed drive, the engine should idle for about two minutes to allow the oil temperature to stabilize and cool down the turbo's bearing. If I had $10 for every person that didn't do this (about 90% of the turbo-driving public), I would be on the Forbes richest billionaires list.
2) Do not exceed the manufacturer's guidelines for oil changes - if they recommend changing the oil at 5000 mile intervals, get it changed at or before 5000 miles, not 100, 200, or 1000 miles over the interval. Once again, If I had $10...(see item #1).
As for the "street-car racing" set, these individuals seem to be good at installing lowered suspensions, loud exhausts, fancy engine mods, wings, spoilers, etc., but jugding by the amount of "slammed" vehicles on the roads these days, they don't seem to be good at performing basic automotive maintenance. As I cruise by these stranded vehicles driving one of my "unreliable" VW's, I shake my head and say to myself "That car may have broken down, but at least it looks cool..." But I digress....
Bottom line - with any vehicle, you get out of it what you put into it. If people take the time to have the proper maintenance performed on their vehicles on a regular basis, more often than not (save for factory recalls), the vehicle will be reliable.
And that logic applies whether you're driving VW's, Mazdas, Fords, Chevy's, Hondas, Toyotas, Lawn Tractors, etc....
I agree with you in part, Tony. You're right about proper maintenance. But, if that's the case, then your argument seems to imply that most consumers of VWs seem to be less diligent than most consumers of Toyotas, otherwise why are VWs less reliable than Toyotas? In other words, why do some cars, like VW, happen to have customers, except for you, with such poor maintenance habits? I think we as consumers share some of the responsibility. As computer users we should install firewalls and diligently avoid spyware but that does not mean that Microsoft is not required to properly test their software before releasing it on the market for the public to use; otherwise, all those lapses in testing and consequent security holes will create endless headaches for their users. Are the users then to blame for poorly maintaining their software? Some automanufacturers appear to have made choices that have lowered the reliability and consequently the desirability of their wares.
So as you can see, there is enough guilt to go around!
I also believe that based on the driving habits of people I've observed these days (and I've seen plenty of them in my lifetime), I can safely say that there is a higher percentage of people who are less diligent in maintaining their cars (of ANY manufacturer, make or model) than those who are. Many factors play into this - busier lifestyles, longer working hours/commutes, compressed schedules. That being said, I've also observed many of these drivers talking on cell phones, putting on makeup, reading the paper, shaving - totally oblivious to what's going on. So if these drivers demonstrate the aforementioned traits I've just described, than I can conclude that regular preventive maintenance is not exactly high on their list of priorities. Therefore, when something goes wrong, they are quick to blame the dealer/manufacturer for all of their automotive-related problems instead of also taking into account whether their lack of personal responsibility also had a role (oops, I forgot that personal responsibility is not in vogue in today's age of litigation, my bad...).
I guess I'm one of those rarities who strongly believes in personal responsibility. I take personal responsibility in making sure my vehicle is properly maintained. I'm on a first-name basis with every service manager and private mechanic that I deal with. They know I will take the necessary steps to make sure my vehicle is maintained, and they know what I expect of them - I expect integrity, high standards and results, not excuses. My clients expect the same of me in my professional life, and I deliver - otherwise I will be on the unemployment line. If I were the CEO of some of these automotive manufacturers, heads would definitely roll. But again, I digress....
If people make an honest effort to maintain their vehicle and it still gives them problems, it's on the dealer/manufacturer. That being said, the biggest mistake I've seen drivers make time and again is (in their quest to feed their egos by being the first kid on the block to have the latest and greatest ) buying their car during their first one or two years of production. By doing so, these unfortunate people have volunteered to become beta testers for the automotive industry. I buy my cars during the last year or two of production (another one of my secrets to automotive longevity) - by that time most of the bugs have been worked out.
BTW - Automotive maintenance and collective guilt is a pretty good discussion. Thanks one and all...
I'd be interested in hearing what you think of the long term reliability ratings given by Consumer Reports to various VW products. It seems that products by VW and its relative Audi suffer from electrical issues; has that been your experience? According to CR, owners of these cars have reported problems in over 14.8% of the cases based on their latest survey. These defects are considered so important that CR classes the cars as unreliable. For a Passat or Audi TT, two of my favorite cars, this rating seems astounding to me. These are not lowly carts but near luxury class vehicles. Compare this to the humble Mazda 3 and its predecessor Protege, both of which are rated highly in almost every category. I"d be interested to hear how you square that circle.
That being said - the Mazda has definitely been more reliable than VW as a whole. But I don't choose my cars on reliability alone. I chose my 2003 VW Wolfsburg Jetta based on styling, fit and finish, driving dynamics, road feel (which the Mazda doesn't have - and I've test driven the 3), the smoothness, power, and low-end torque of the 1.8T (peak torque starts at 1950 rpm as opposed to 3000+ rpm for the Mazda). And on top of that, the Mazda 3 and 6 (among other makes) have emulated the styling ques from the 4th-generation Jetta from the sleek, somewhat rounded shape right down to the roof mounted antenna (which VW pioneered 19 years ago with the 1986 Scirocco 16V). Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
It's the same theme - the Germans have the role of automotive pioneers - introducing new innovations to market, and the Japanese have benefitted by learning from the German's mistakes, emulating and improving upon these innovations - and if you don't believe me, ask Mazda where the original patent on the rotary (Wankel - which is a name of German origin) engine came from - it's from NSU in Germany. The diesel engine is also a German innovation brought to market by Rudolf Diesel.
So Mazda may have the edge on reliability, but definitely not on originality.
The circle is complete....
As far as styling, fit and finish, driving dynamics, and road feel, I have yet to read a bad review in any of these categories for the Mazda3. What I have heard however are complaints about the Jetta having a sloppy shifter and boring handling. The only real advantage of the Jetta is the extra power. That leaves a personal question as to if the extra price of the Jetta rationalizes that increase in power. So either there are lots of crazy people running around thinking the Mazda3 is a fun car to drive, or maybe you are just the crazy one.
Lastly, dont blame Japanese manufacturers for improving on European designs. There is just as much need for improving a design as there is in the original design. Case in point, if you think that Wankel was the first person to dream up a rotary engine, you're crazy. The fact of the matter is there were numerous previous attempts to develop a rotary motor, Wankel just fixed the problem of keeping the gas sealed to enable compression (read about Swiss manufacturer Bernard Maillard if you dont believe me).
If you really want to go there about the Germans being automotive pioneers, lets look at that. You could make a case about Americans being automotive pioneers. After all, they were the first to mass produce the automobile and developed the automatic transmission. You could call the Japanese automotive pioneers for developing feasible hybrid vehicles. So before you claim the Germans as the high and mighty in the automotive world, maybe you should do some homework.
The fact that Germans usually play the role of automotive pioneers is undeniable (whether you want to admit it or not. Second, I'm not blaming the Japanese for improving a European product (I would do the same thing myself if I were in their shoes) - I'm just stating a fact. I've been driving (and fixing) cars since the 1970's - and I've seen the trends, so I have a pretty good idea of what I am talking about.
Third, autonomous and I were having a friendly, civil discussion and have basically agreed to disagree about certain issues. If you would like to join the discussion in a calm, non-reactionary manner, you're more than welcome to do so. Reactionary discussions will only serve to alienate your intended audience.
Fourth, as far as an overall automotive package, you seem to favor the Mazda, and I seem to favor the Jetta. No one is "crazy" for making a choice that seems to fit their needs. That's why there are hundreds of different makes and models of automobiles. If we all had to drive the same car - things would definitely be beyond boring....
BTW - I have done my homework, and it's a fact that the Japanese manufacturers over the years have identified the BMW's, Audi's, Porches, Mercedes Benz's and yes, even the VW's as their competitive targets and design aspirations - and in many ways have either matched, closed the gap, or surpassed, and in other ways, the Germans keep raising the bar. It's called competition - one side comes up with something good, the other side comes up with something even better, and the process repeats itself again and again. It's good for the consumer.
>What I have heard however are complaints about the Jetta having a sloppy shifter and boring handling.
So that means since you have heard about it, I can assume you haven't actually driven one. I have driven Mazdas - including the 3 and the 6, and I like the driving dynamics. But, like most Japanese vehicles, you have to wind the engine to keep it in the fat part of the torque curve. Now that's my impression - don't take it personal (unless you are a key shareholder of Ford/Mazda).
One more thing - if you've read the road tests on the upcoming 2006 VW GTI, the general consensus is that "VW has once again raised the bar" - which the original GTI did back in 1976. The GTI is the ORIGINAL pocket rocket which provided the inspiration for the genre all the way to the present day pocket rockets. And that's a fact....
Some of the dire business reports about VW (e.g. major loss of sales in 2004, poor showing of the Phaeton, poor reliability ratings esp. the Touareg, offshore quality concerns, etc.) make me wonder about its future.
Furthermore, I wasn't trying to deny that the Germans have created quality automobiles over the last few decades. I was pointing out however that stating that Germans are automotive pioneers and Japanese brands merely improve on German designs is a tad bit short sighted. You can make a great case any of the 3 countries playing "the role of automotive pioneers" for the reasons cited in the previous post.
Lastly, I will concede that the GTI seems like a drastic improvement over the previous generation and will be fun to drive. I do however believe that if the Mazdaspeed3 gets the rumored 220 hp turbocharged 2.3L, it will definitely give the GTI a run for its money. But we will just have to wait for that battle.
Sorry for "taking the argument a bit too personal"
The Japanese, European and Korean automakers are prime examples of an engineering-oriented corporate culture (most of their top managers come from engineering backgrounds) - so we can expect the bulk of innovation to come from these circles. So I expect Mazda and VW (despite its current problems) will be in the game for years to come.
The bean-counting, marketing-oriented corporate culture of the Big Three has somewhat stifled their innovation by focusing on high profit pickup trucks and SUVs (especially in the case of GM) and ceding the rest of the car market to the Europeans, Japanese and Koreans - resulting in the lessening interest in their products and slowly dwindling market share. Therefore, I prefer to buy my automobiles from companies (and/or countries) with an engineering-oriented philosophy.
biggus3: You can make a great case any of the 3 countries playing "the role of automotive pioneers" for the reasons cited in the previous post. The reality is that auto manufactures are no longer national, and hence do not represent a particular "country". We all know it's not unusual for an auto manufacturer to have headquarters in Japan, designers from Italy, assembly in Kentucky and a world salesforce to be called a global firm. The result: incredible machines brought out by the best from each area. Its an F1 world.
600kgolfgt: The bean-counting, marketing-oriented corporate culture of the Big Three has somewhat stifled their innovation by focusing on high profit pickup trucks and SUVs (especially in the case of GM) and ceding the rest of the car market to the Europeans, Japanese and Koreans - resulting in the lessening interest in their products and slowly dwindling market share.
I'm glad you added "somewhat" above as I think GM's skateboard is an amazing feat of engineering. Also, their venture into fuel cell technology, in effect leap frogging hybrid technology, leaves me salivating for some practical applications. The problem with GM seems to be that not enough baby steps are preceding this giant leap, so a lot is riding on the vision. The Honda Accord Hybrid proves that a large firm can create a more fuel efficent and more powerful machine accessible to a wide audience that is more than insight. Let's all hope GM pulls it off.
Is there anyone considering either the MazdaSpeed3 or 2006 GTI?
Do you think they'll take a similar styling approach as they did with the MS6? Specifically, leave out the gaping hood scoop and tall spoiler? I hope they do, and make it look better than the MS6 with its disproportionately large front end.
Speaking of styling, are there any spy photos or artists' rendering of the MS3?
Weird that edmunds says sub 6 second 0-60. Uh, the car weighs 2800 lbs. Even if AWD is 400 lbs, why would it be so slow? My porky 235 hp 330i gets to 60 in under 6 seconds. Weird.
I really do hope it's AWD. If it is, this shoots to the top of my list. small, nimble, quick sports wagon? only downside is no convertible (could hold off and get a used miata a year or two later then).
Re: FWD, I've read that the 3 MPS will be FWD in part to differentiate it from the 6 MPS as well as to compete on "price and performance." IMO (since this is all subjective) I'm hoping for FWD; better fuel economy, better acceleration and slightly lighter hence more chuckable.
Not to mention FWD cars handle like garbage when really pressed. Yeah the Mazda3 is fun but when push comes to pull, in a corner I'd rather push out of it than understeer and pull away.
Don't like the weight of AWD but I'd accept that it if meant I could stomp on the car and not have it tug left or right.
But the MkV drives nothing like the MkI, Britain's AUTOCAR, etc. pointed out the MkV got no real steering feel along w/ lack of comfy ride.
No wonder I got to spend a fortune duplicating the MkI (w/ a trunk & wide rear glass for lane change ease):
/WebX?viewUserProfile@@.ef6c2da/25!vuserName=creakid1
You can laugh at VW's steering feel all you want these days, but my '90 Protege & manual-steering '84 Jetta both beat the Mazda3 & American Focus in this area.
It's like you can get the E46 Beemer w/ sport suspension, but the older E36 w/ lower-g-force std suspension is still more fun due to more steering feel. IMO.
"While 200 horsepower is entry-level these days for a decent pocket-rocket, in this light, lithe and sleek hatchback, it feels like the right number, making for a well-balanced car. You can throw the car into a tight turn, downshift to second, and get even, strong power from the turbo four, with virtually no lag and with a crisp, rorty exhaust note that could be a tad louder. It's uncanny how smooth this turbo engine is, certainly the smoothest four-cylinder of its kind. VW estimates a 7.2-second 0-to-62-mph time, and it feels a bit quicker. But, like the original 110-horsepower GTI launched in Europe in 1976, the car isn't all about power; it's about graceful use of power. Think of that first GTI versus a big sled of a 1964 GTO, and you'll understand. The GTI will make you feel good about turning and braking as well as going straight, where the VW shows its European bias--estimated top-speed is about 146 mph."
The GTI's 7.2-second 0-62mph time equates to a sub 7-second 0-60 time. The fact that the GTI does it with 56 less horses than the upcoming Mazda 3 tells me that you really have to wind the Mazda engine to get to its peak torque - while the GTI's peak torque starts at 1850 rpm. A prime example of "less is more".
Bottom line: There is more to a "hot hatch" than 0-60 times, horsepower ratings and skidpad ratings - the key to the GTI is its overall balance...
Will the Mk V sold in the U.S. be German built (I thought I read somewhere that all Golfs would be but could be wrong)? Also, will we get the 146 MPH top speed, or will the US version be electronically emasculated like the BMWs sold here? 130 perhaps? I think (going back to the 60 Minutes Audi sudden acceleration fiasco and before) the technically precise Germans have little respect for American drivers, with their poor lane discipline, cell phones to ear and their coffee slopping around the car, and will do anything to avoid litigation in this market.
600k: the blurb i read about 7+ seconds to 60 for the mazda was on edmunds site. regardless, with 250 hp and 2800 lbs, the car would have to sprint to 60 faster than 7 seconds...my old jetta turbo could do it in a little over 7. Something's not right with those numbers.
Oh and considering how dialed in the Mz3 is now it's safe to assume the mazdaspeed version will cut corners like a monster. haven't driven a new gti yet - look forward to it - but my experience with the last gen VW gti doesn't have me confident the car will be tuned like the euro one. Maybe VW is finally willing to give us decent handling again.
I don't think lack of Euro tuning was a problem with the previous GTI(s). Except for the RS32, lately they just were heavy with mediocre performance and outdated suspension.
"Maybe VW is finally willing to give us decent handling again."
All (international) reviews I have read indicate that the completely redesigned suspension (and finally, independent rear), increased rigidity, and the torquey TFSI make a convincing package.
Now all I have to decide between is a 4-door GTI (if available in the US), a Golf with the TFSI and sport suspension, or the A3 (if available with quattro and TFSI). I would also seriously consider a 140-170hp TDI.
Yeah, there will be a 4-door GTI, but it will be the GLI.
Thank you, but no thank you. I like hatches and wagons. Rumors from a source close to VWoA have it that there will be a 4-door GTI this time in the US (like in Europe) - probably a higher chance than the regular Golf getting the 2.0 TFSI engine as an option.
A beefy (140-170hp) TDI would be nice, too, especially with AWD.
I would have to see both of them in person; the GTI looks sharp, but I don't want the boy-racer look. Also, I am concerned with ground clearance where I live, although my daily route with 1/2 the drive through the twisties would make a sport suspension fun.
This is why the Forester XT (perhaps lowered and with stronger rear sway bar) is also still in the running for me.
http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/u/r0a9f0811324f75a7t/previews/56439/vw_golf_gt_fsi_4motion.ht- ml
Oops, not sure if it'll make it here.
FWIW, I have read more than 10 reviews of the new electro-mechanical steering in the A3/ Golf/GTI/Jetta, and have yet to come by one that is not decidedly enthusiastic about it.
See your nearest Audi/VW dealer for a test drive.
Now on to the MAZDASPEED3. Mazda has the potential to provide a car that can whipe the street with the competition. I mean the total package. Looks, performance, reliability, economy, safety, you name it. I hope they don't drop the ball here though. The ultimate test for Mazda is to stuff a [non-permissible content removed] ton of horsepower in this car and also design a drive train and suspension to harness it. Thats the key. Straight line, cornering, the whole nine yards. They are going to have to do their homework in order to make it affordable too. I am confident they can get it done. And when they do you can kiss your WRX's (which are the ugliest cars with a Porsche engine on the planet), Golfs, 'yota's, and whatever else good bye.
I know some of you are saying "there is no market for a pocket rocket" and "Mazda needs to build a solid reputation again before going out on a limb with the Speed3 by focusing on where the markets lie" blah blah blah......Well here is Mazda's chance to break the mold and set trends.
This car is already setting trends, though. Note the headlight bezels on the new toyota camrys. The front end of the new Acura's (I dont know the models off hand but you can picture them). You get my drift. Wait and see......this is THE next compact.
1975 VW Scirocco - 250,000 miles
After how many engine swaps?? My bud owns a jetta. He just puked an engine....and he drives it really gentle like......I dont know for sure but I'm guessing he had under 100K on it. It was cracked up in the nose, he did the cosmetics on it......got it really cheap. Now he knows why.
Also VW's are just average. Mazda's are above average.
zoom-zoom
Bring on the MZ-Speed3!
zoom-zoom
You dont think Mazda knows this?? We shall see what tomorrow brings. I have a feeling though that the GTI is going to take a back seat to the trend setting MZ3 about to knock the Golf off balance and off the charts...
Just a side note. I work with a guy who has a VR32 or whatever that GTI Golf clown car is. It pushes 250 Hp with the intake and chip (6 speed manual, 18" dubs, all that jazz and some rear suspension mods). He said in a straight line its pissa' but the RX8 eats it up in the corners (his wife has an RX8). I know, different classes of cars but a testament to Mazda's overall handling characteristics. Also a really short wheelbased Golf with suspension mods should be somewhat comparable to a larger wheelbased RX8, dont 'cha find??
The next get one comes with an IRS and it's far lighter than thr MkIV.
I'm actually quite interested in the GTI 2.0 DSG as it's a sub 3000 lbs car and it's got one of the best engines around (I actually prefer that 2.0 to my 330i's inline 6). And that DSG is sensational. I've only driven an A3 DSG but even that car had me excited and delighted.
Imagining that same engine on a much lighter, lower, more nimble GTI...yummy. And the tuners out there always can tweak Veedub turbos for more power. Great handling, awesome engine, super gas mileage, uncannily smooth DSG and of course an exceptional VW cockpit all grab my attention.
We'll see what the info is coming out for the Mazdaspeed3. I'm not totally sold on the interior v. VW. And the engine and its economy worry me too as my Protege ES Mt5) can slurp gas when I'm really flogging the little beast. On the flip side, mazdas are bulletproof (in my 15 years of experience with them) and VWs are prone to major breakdowns (experience and the record).
I won't declare one has me over the other but I must say on paper the DSG equipped GTI has me more interested now. Reliability be damned.
No way! After being educated by the "all you can test drive" in the two MazdaRevItUp events, I'd stay away from heavy front overhang, especially Audi designs & even the 6-cyl Mazda6. You'll be surprised how the light-nose RX-8 beats even the Beemer in ride/handling compromise. Go test drive a base 16"-wheel RX-8 automatic. It'll leave you scratching your head & wonder, "Why does it ride smoother over bumps than the 3i & still out handle the 3S by a huge margin?"
If Ford can adopt the Volvo platform for the Five Hundred, then the RX-8 chassis should be donated as Ford/Mazda's next Lexus-IS-&-Beemer-beater roomy sedan. So far, only the next Miata shares that chassis.
1987 Golf GT - 1 engine/transmission swap at 429,000 miles.
Any questions?
Contrary to the majority of drivers today - I actually MAINTAIN my vehicle. All of these drivers in their "tuned" cars know everything about adding on the latest turbos, suspensions, spoilers, etc., but know little about properly maintaining their cars for the long haul.
Drive whatever you want, dude - and have fun with your zoom-zoom. All I know is I have the background and experience (in mechanics and engineering) to make your own car last longer than the average driver will . My record speaks for itself (4 cars in 25+ years of driving)... :shades:
B.T.W. - I left the "my car is better than your car" argument back in the schoolyard many years ago.... What may be good for me may not be good for you - and vice-versa.
Enjoy!
Again, as I said before, a testament to Mazda's handling charactaristics.
Also I would hardly call a Golf heavy. You brought up Audi, I was talking VW Jiblets.
Thats what warantees are for Einstein. If it pukes, they'll fix it.
Long nose, yes, but the nose will be empty & "airbag" light, so won't hurt the handling. Check out my profile & see why my empty rear overhang (spare tire located far forward) allows each oversteer be brought back instantly.
/WebX?viewUserProfile@@.ef6c2da/45!vuserName=creakid1
Again, as I said before, a testament to Mazda's handling charactaristics."
I was saying FWD cars usually need to place the engine-weight ahead of the front axle in order to keep the traction when going up hill on slippery surface, hence hurts the handling. So neither the Golf nor the Mazda3 can match a RWD RX-8's handling, especially w/ a light rotary located way aft. Why do you think the RX-8 has to drive the rear wheels? Obviously its weak-toque engine can't jack-rabbit launch the car forward w/ the rear wheels spinning.
What's with the personal attacks and arrogance? I'm trying to participate in a mature, rational dialogue, and you resort to personal attacks. If you want to have a discussion like an adult, then I'll be more than happy to continue. If not, then I don't see any point in continuing the discussion...
Enjoy feeding your ego with your Mazda, dude...
Can you imagine dropping a heavily modded 16v engine or 1.8T in a 1800lb chassis would do for its performance? The car would go as if it were shot out of a cannon. :shades: :shades: :shades: