By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
They also question the car's ability to avoid torque steer, although noone has driven it so that really isn't fair, YET.
At $25,000+, the car will be more of a competitor with the VW GTI than the Civic Si b/c of the 25% higher price than the Civic Si.
Seems like a Mazda enthusiast ought to get busy starting a GTI vs. MazdaSpeed3 vs. Caliber Turbo (300 HP! for $23,000)
I wonder if this is pure speculation,, because Mazda has said the car will "have over 250hp". Price seems to be a bit off as well, but, I have heard no mention of price from Mazda. I have noticed many a discrepancy with these self proclaimed "auto experts" when all they ever do is get paid for what we talk about on here for free.
Seems like a Mazda enthusiast ought to get busy starting a GTI vs. MazdaSpeed3 vs. Caliber Turbo (300 HP! for $23,000)
There are already MS3 Vs. GTI discussions. Also, MS3 will always come back to bite the Honda enthusiast who claims that Honda offers more in the Si then Mazda3 does. Also, since there was a big comparo published recently with the GTI and Si, there is no reason why we can't throw the MS3 in there. Think about it.
Actually, I did think about it, right before posting, in fact. But, the problem I saw with it, is that the Civic they tested was what, $22k loaded w/NAV and summer tires? The VW was something on the order of $28k. That's a lot of money (27.2% if the numbers are right)in that bracket. You go from being in the pocket rocket class (Scion Tc, Cobalt SS) to the heavier hitters (Mustang GT, Subaru WRX, Mitsu Lancer RS), all which offer a lot of car for the money, seemingly more than VW.
That's the only personal reason I'd opt out of it; the large money difference in the $20k Honda and the $25k Mazda (again, 25% more money). Different people, different priorities.
There is no such law in Connecticut. The 3 day only applies to in home sales.
They haven't driven it, they were quoting Mazda. I'd bet it'd do it in under 6...I'd look for 5.8sec or so (around that of the RX-8).
And you're right, the 6 speed is very likely to be out this year (announced in euro specs)
I'm pretty sure there was, I could be wrong. I know once it is regestered, the deal is done, no matter what. But, if you are dealer-plated,I think you can return it.
If the dealer drove to the consumers home and executed the paperwork at the consumer home...this constitutes an in-home sale and the 3 day right of rescission law may apply...but there has never been such a law if the consumer does business at the dealers official place of business.
Coming home last night (2004 Mazda3 2.3L 4 speed automatic) - my RPM was just over 3,500 RPM at 80 MPH - so I guess my long term memory loss has started - to - ah - uh - hmm - what was I saying?
Its a good thing carpet321 (and others) caught this error - I mean if facts like these are not KEPT STRAIGHT people will stop believing everything they read on the internet! Where will all the yahoos go for their information?
I know first hand on a couple of new vehicles that were returned after papers had been signed, but, car not registered, and the dealer had to take it back. That dealer did not have a return policy, either. I also believe a lawyer was involved in one. This was in CT
Many times a business will look at a situation and say - its lose lose - but we will lose less if we just agree to take the car back - lets just guess and say $500 loss if they take back the vehicle - but by the time they hire an attorney bla bla bla - even if they "win" it will cost $2,000. So taking the car back saves them $1,500.
This happened to a friend of mine whom is a salesman, I don't think he knew the whole details of the situation. But, he was told that the his dealer "had to take it back" and there was two other instances at the dealership as well. That info I received from him. I have never been confronted with that situation in my dealership. I guess there is also a lot of "unwritten assumed" laws that are thrown out there that don't really exist, like this one.
Cheers,
MidCow
Oh yes the Honda that runs 4,210 RPM is louder , but I think it is the Invidia exhaust that causes the loudness not the RPMs.
Tough statement to make. Also, that is mostly an opinion, which everyone here is entitled to. In this forum, I have seen more evidence to suggest the Mazda3 is a better car then the Honda Civic. You have to take it car by car. But, I would say the total Honda line is a little better then the whole Mazda line.
Honda's do not have the quality they once had, and have had some shaky tranny's these past few years.
They both have certain colors that are just Girlie. But as a whole the Mazda 3 wins on looks.
I just test drove both. Mazda3 Manual 5 speed with Moonroof FTW. I'm going to trade in my Ford 150. I'll be saving serious Gas $$. 13-15 mpg to 28-34 mpg?? RawR
I'd like to post my concerns, and see what others think.
Mazda: interior fit and finish--I am underwhelmed. It seems ok but kinda cheap on the inside, lots of mold flash visible (on door handles). the seat fabric seems subpar and rather homely.
Civic: that's a heck of a dash. my main reservation is that I would become transfixed by it's shear size and end up crunched against the back of an Escalade. also, I'm a little concerned with visibility at such sharp glass angles (esp. for snow).
These are my main sticking points. I firmly believe that the Mazda is more fun to drive, but not quite as nicely built. I'd appreciate any thoughts. :shades:
That is the first I have heard that. Many sites, magazines, and owners have indicated otherwise. If you saw the fabric in the Mazda3 i model, that is not has nice as the fabric in the Mazda3 s model. I have seen both interiors, and I disagree with the "cheap" statement, but, thats my thought. Also, the Mazda3 does not "loosen-up", as many cars do, after many miles have been put on. MY friend owns one with 40K on it now, and it drives like it had 2 miles on it.
Civic: that's a heck of a dash. my main reservation is that I would become transfixed by it's shear size and end up crunched against the back of an Escalade. also, I'm a little concerned with visibility at such sharp glass angles (esp. for snow).
Personally, I do not like the dash in the Civic. I thought the digital speedometer was a GM thing of the 1980's. Other then that, the build quality is pretty good. I would say its no better or no worse then the Mazda. As for glass angle, I have not driven the Civic in snow, or anything like that, and the angles in normal weather driving did not bother me.
Ultimately, it's your call. Both are very good vehicles that will last beyond 100K miles. You are a winner either way you go. If I were to choose, I would buy a Mazda3.
The Civic's dash is great if you have no problem adjusting to the speedometer. It has the best visibility and the least "eyes off the road" time when checking speed and fuel. The Mazda's design is good, just different than the Civic.
The interior in the Mazda 3 felt about like the 6; like an economy car. Today's economy cars are much better than those of 10 years ago, and nothing felt "abnormally cheap" in the 3s Wagon I sat in at the Auto Show. The 6, while similar in feel to the 3, should have felt better, given that it is a different class of car with a higher price (5-door hatch was what I sat in).
I don't think you'll go wrong with either, but if I were to choose between the 2, i'd be in the Civic, for better economy and resale value.
In case you hadn't notice the 2006 Civics , both sedan and coupe are much more stylish!
And what does that make the Mazda3 , a sophisticated cartoon car where the alltime caroon standard has to be the Suzuki Aero :P
Cheers,
MidCow
The Civic does have better fuel economy, but, I think it is premature to guess on re-sale value. I think they may be close.
At auctions, it is impossible to purchase a Mazda3 at book value. In the North East, we use Galves. I have not seen one under $1500 to $2000 OVER Glaves value at an auction. In some cases, there have been higher. I would say this is pretty good re-sale value.
Now, if you are talking terms of private sale, or trade in value, that we will have to wait until the 2006 Civic's are sold used. I do not think there is a Galves value on 06's just yet. I cannot check because my Galves books are at work.
am struggling heavily deciding...
Both are sharp looking, the Tib looks better on the outside but the new Civic interior/dash is top notch.
The Civic gets about 10mpg more.
The Tib has a kick [non-permissible content removed] warranty.
They are both comforatble, the Tib steering wheel hits my inner right leg where as the Civ's Exmergency brake pokes me in my
knee.
I've driven them both, even though the civic seems to have a nudge more get up and go, the Tin handles the road better...
The prices are near identical, after reading these forums it seems like both vehicles have little compaints except "noises"
that never can get fixed right...
I would love to get opinions from owners for both camps as I am looking to purchase in the next 2 days (new job, need
something very reliable)...
I appreciate your time
Many people have not heard of Galves, most are familiar with Kelley Blue Book, however, where I live, the North East, no dealer or wholesales person uses Kelley BB. They may use it to estimate a retail value of a vehicle, but, not trade in or whole sale. KBB is a publisher, and often offer inaccurate trade values. Galves, however, you have to pay for their information. You cannot obtain their car values for free.
Ask your gf's father about Galves, I'm sure he has heard of it. But, I do not know if where you are located Galves is used. Dealer's very rarely use KBB as a reference. If he does not use Galves, he may use NADA.
first, when you sell it the 10 year powertrain warranty doesn't carry over. That prevents you from getting a good price. Second, they only repair what is literally broken (if covered at all). I used to have a Hyundai Getz back in germany where it comes with 3 year b-b warranty (which is good there... VW only gives 2 years in germany), anyway..
The transmission was funny after 10,000 miles, the 2nd gear went in with some force only.
the remote for the door entry opened the locks when I even only touched the key (not hte button!). Sometimes I walked by my car with the keys in the pocket and it would open the locks (of course, the locks close after a minute when you don't open the doors). The dealer switched the remote receiver and a key... nothing helped. Then they said, it still wrks (since it still opens the door) and ALL Hyundai remote entrys would be that way, therefore it is not faulty and can't get fixed. Same with the transmission, it still shifts, so it is not broken.
Oh yeah, the deale rsaid they fix such problems in the successing model :-) Not for me.... no more hyundai.
good I sold it before "warranty" was over. And the Getz came on the market in 2002.. so it is not even one of the old bad Hyundais....
On the other hand, I once drove an old VW Golf IV Wagon with 110 hp TDi engine and 150,000 miles on it and it shiftet like a new car...like a hot knife going through butter.. that tranny lives forever (don't wanna know about the hyundai one :-)
I don't believe in Hyundai/Kia before I see 20 year old ones running on the street. I see 20 year old Hondas, Mazdas, Toyotas... when you take good care they live forever. But no old Hyundais that still run.
The warranty is worthless.... I need a car that runs even w/o warranty.
not sure if warranty issues are here the same as with Hyundai Germany, but it was not literally broken... I suspect the Hyundai shop here would say the same...
Stay away from cheap cars.... if the price is the only thing you like, you won't love it for long....
I took an extended drive in an '06 3S, courtesy of my sister in-law, and I was impressed with the handling. But since our other car is an RSX, I'm not really sure we need another "fun" car. I am surprised by the difference in what people say about the 6 and the 3, considering they are fairly similar--cons for the 6 are listed as "low rent interior" and "physchotic buzzing" of the engine, things that are both true of the 3 as well.
I have driven two EX civics, one auto sedan (yuck) one manual coupe (fun). But since I'm restricting myself to 4 door cars, I'm having second thoughts. I'm concerned the driving would be less spirited in the manual sedan, since the coupe and sedan have different wheelbases and suspensions.
I suppose I am simply putting too much thought into it, because what I would really like is the concept Volvo c30 (?) or a 2008 Corolla, but I'm not prepared to wait through another winter in my '94 Tercel.
I think it will simply come down to price between a MT grand touring 3S and a MT EX Civic. It seems that MT Civics close to invoice are scarce, and I have no intention of paying MSRP.
the mazda does transmit more road noise but i believe that might be by design for it to feel more like a drivers car. other than the noise, i felt the mazda was a superior driving experience so i am now happily driving a mazda 3s HB w/ MT.
Giddyup!
Good Luck,
MidCow
P.S.- Best TCO is a manual shift Corolla
Last I saw, there were a few more "very relaible" car companies then just Honda/Acura and Toyota/Lexus. Subaru, Nissan/Infiniti and Mazda have been known to be "very reliable".
Another reason to get the Honda instead of the Mazda, RELIABILITY!!!
MidCow
I practice what I preach Current Cars: Honda(2), Lexus(1), Toyota(1)
I've never seen someone so devoted to a brand as you are concerning Honda...
Anyhow... to the point of my post...
The Mazda3 and Civic are virtually identical in regards to reliability ratings in Consumer Reports - you need to back up your pro-Honda rhetoric with some proof. Take a look at the "problems and solutions" thread here for the '06 Civic and I'm willing to bet that the Civic takes a beating in the reliability category next year.
Honda/Acura is not nearly are reliable as they once were. Take a look at Consumer Reports and their rating on V6 Honda transmissions. Lot's of black dots in recent years. The Honda Ridgeline has also been riddled with problems from what I have been reading from people who own them. The 06 Civic has also numerous complaints, and a major recall to date. (accelerator recall)
Toyota/Lexus are better cars then Honda/Acura. Toyota has been having engine sludge problems in many of their engines.
Mazda has had very reliable vehicles as well, at least ones with no Ford influence. The Mazda3, Protege, MX-5 Miata, 626, Mazda6 i, are all or have been very reliable vehicles. Consumer Reports backs that up, if that is what you are using to gauge "very reliable" vehicles.
I think given this, the Mazda looks really impressive.
I test drove the 5spd 3i touring yesterday and was really impressed. I have not yet driven a Civic.
I think that's overstating it a bit. Subaru doesn't get enough credit lately, even though their reliability ratings are up there with Honda's. Nissan is good, but not great, and even the Koreans are catching up.
Reliability isn't about the good and bad as much anymore. It's the great and the greater (domestics mostly excluded here).
I bought the Mazda3 over the Civic because it is about 1,000 times more fun to drive (that was the 2004 Civic - so maybe it is only 992 times more fun then the 2006 Civic)
Mazda customer service is horrible - I know this for a fact - so save your breath - I have first hand - real life experience with the folks at 1-800 Mazda - they are about as bad as it gets. It would actually be better if they would just tell you to BUZZ off and hang up on you - rather than say how sorry they are to hear your car does not work correctly - but not so sorry that they would actually DO ANYTHING about it.
I had 3 other vehicles to drive - so the 16 dealer visits in 20 months did not leave me walking - Mazda also has a loaner car program - but thats another story.
If you want a fun car - buy the Mazda3 - but if you really need a reliable car - I would get the Honda -
But I really think the folks that come to thread and declare the Mazda to be hands down the better car need to read their own forums a bit more. Since the 3 has been introduced I have read about problems related to airbag warning light, a transmission reflash and poor shifting, squealing breaks (loud), grooved rear rotors, stalling, not starting, a clock that fails to keep accurate time, a seat problem, air conditioning, air conditioning and air conditioning, loud moonroof when it is open, crappy dealerships, paint chips, a non maitenance free battery (are you kidding), various rattles and squeaks, etc. The rental three that I had took 2 attempts to start.....each time! There are many other issues that I didn't even list. The interior on the 3i's in this neighborhood haven't held up well (3s seems to have a much better interior).
The first year bugs you see with the Civic have been relatively minor compared to most first year models. It has swept virtually every award it was eligable for and has drawn praise from a wide variety of sources. It is safer than the 3 and if you read the real world gas mileage posts, I think you will see that it gets better mileage.
I can't say which is best....that is subjective. But I don't think the average Civic owner is as likely to scan this board and most of the enthusiasts hang out at temple of vtec. When you read about a problem, it represents a smaller proportion of owners because so many more civics are sold each year. So, I think we have to take some of the 3 propaganda with a grain of salt.
J.D. Powers and other surveys that are more statistically accurate, rahter than testimonial are a better predictor of the actual population set, in this case car relability.
Mazda is reliable just not as reliable as Honda/Acura/Lexus/Toyota. Subaru the best, H'mm.
Cheers,
MidCow
I bought the Mazda3 over the Civic because it is about 1,000 times more fun to drive (that was the 2004 Civic - so maybe it is only 992 times more fun then the 2006 Civic)
Mazda customer service is horrible - I know this for a fact - so save your breath - I have first hand - real life experience with the folks at 1-800 Mazda - they are about as bad as it gets. It would actually be better if they would just tell you to BUZZ off and hang up on you - rather than say how sorry they are to hear your car does not work correctly - but not so sorry that they would actually DO ANYTHING about it.
I had 3 other vehicles to drive - so the 16 dealer visits in 20 months did not leave me walking - Mazda also has a loaner car program - but thats another story.
If you want a fun car - buy the Mazda3 - but if you really need a reliable car - I would get the Honda - "
2004 Mazda, right? First year model? Well, we all know about those, from EVERY company (see 06 Civic). I came from an 03 9-3 because it had big time troubles (1st year model). They are now much improved My 06 MZ3 has been flawless. 2 trips to the dealer for regular interval maintenance, that's it
You are only partly correct. Consumer's buys cars as well. I quoted this from their website. "CR buys cars at dealerships and tests at our own track. We believe you deserve nothing less than the whole truth about reliability, safety, performance, and price."
Out of all the new cars I have purchased, I have never received anything wanting to know my satisfaction with a vehicle other then the manufacturer themselves.
As for JD Power's, I really do not hold them in high regard. For the 2005 model year, they rated Chevrolet the most over all reliable brand, and the Malibu the best family sedan. They also rated GM as the best in initial quality. I really do not know what the significance of "initial quality" is anyway's. Isn't reliability determined by the long haul? I could be wrong, but, maybe JD Powers is on GM's payroll. Just my thought.