Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Most popular vehicles
Popular New Cars
- New Acura MDX
- New Acura RDX
- New Audi Q5
- New BMW 3 Series
- New BMW X3
- New Buick Enclave
- New Cadillac Escalade
- New Chevrolet Equinox
- New Chrysler 300
- New Dodge Challenger
- New Ford Edge
- New Ford Escape
- New Ford Expedition
- New Ford Explorer
- New Ford F-150
- New Ford Focus
- New Ford Mustang
- New Honda Accord
- New Honda Civic
- New Honda CR-V
- New Honda Fit
- New Honda Odyssey
- New Honda Pilot
- New Hyundai Elantra
- New Hyundai Santa Fe
- New Hyundai Sonata
- New Hyundai Tucson
- New Jeep Compass
- New Jeep Grand Cherokee
- New Jeep Wrangler
- New Mazda 3
- New Mazda 6
- New Mazda CX-5
- New Nissan Altima
- New Nissan Maxima
- New Nissan Rogue
- New Porsche Cayenne
- New Ram 1500
- New Subaru Crosstrek
- New Subaru Forester
- New Subaru Impreza
- New Subaru Outback
- New Tesla Model S
- New Tesla Model X
- New Toyota 4Runner
- New Toyota Camry
- New Toyota Corolla
- New Toyota Highlander
- New Toyota Prius
- New Toyota RAV4
- New Toyota Sienna
- New Toyota Tacoma
- New Volkswagen Jetta
- New Volvo XC60
- New Volvo XC90
Popular Used Sedans
- Used BMW 5 Series
- Used Chevrolet Impala
- Used Chevrolet Malibu
- Used Chrysler 200
- Used Dodge Charger
- Used Ford Fusion
- Used Ford Taurus
- Used Honda Accord
- Used Honda Civic
- Used Hyundai Elantra
- Used Hyundai Sonata
- Used Tesla Model S
- Used Toyota Camry
- Used Toyota Corolla
- Used Volkswagen Jetta
Popular Used SUVs
- Used Acura MDX
- Used Acura RDX
- Used Ford Edge
- Used Ford Explorer
- Used Honda CR-V
- Used Honda Pilot
- Used Hyundai Santa Fe
- Used Jeep Compass
- Used Lincoln Navigator
- Used Mazda CX-5
- Used Nissan Rogue
- Used Subaru Crosstrek
- Used Subaru Forester
- Used Tesla Model X
- Used Volvo XC90
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
According to Edmunds, the base Sonata with automatic is $18,945 with destination charges. The base Mazda3 is $15,290 with destination. That's a difference of $3,655. However, the Mazda doesn't come with A/C. Adding that option, the difference is $2,775. I think that people can negotiate more on a Hyundai than a Mazda3 (partially because Mazda3 is so popular). And Hyundai often offers larger rebates than Mazda. Both of these factors bring the Sonata very close to the Mazda.
Of course, it's still a strange comparison between the Mazda3 and Sonata. But people make strange comparisons all the time when car shopping.
Every reliabilty study involves a sample of cars, not all the owners of a certain model/make.
The question is whether the sample taken is large enough and whether it is biased in any way.
For Consumer's Reports, some have argued that the sample is biased because the sample comes only from their subscribers. Many ask, why would you subscribe to a magazine that doesn't go along with any of your real world experiences? thus, many who buy the magazine are going to buy what the magazine likes. these subscribers may be more likely to be lenient on their own purchase when reporting reliability. Also, makes with bad ratings will have smaller sample sizes, and thus, will be more susceptible to random factors skewing results.
my pros and cons of consumer's reports
pro:
Receives no money from the auto industry
Rates different models separately, also rates different types of problems
Cons:
surveys only from subscribers (bias?)
may not be diligent in checking to make sure that reporters actually own cars and are actually experiencing what they report.
Overall, I would say Consumer's reports is pretty thorough, detailed in their reporting. There may be some skewing towards their 'favorite' brands, and I suspect changes in quality will take a long time before they are reflected in ratings change.
In regards to Warranty survey, I posted what I think are the pros and cons of their survey. Their sample might have a similar bias, but in this case, makes with better reliability reputation would have a smaller sample size (people are less likely to buy extended warranty). thus, makes with good rep, would be more susceptible to random skewing, year to year. However, most makes with good rep don't change in standings year to year. Honda and Mazda both top the standings every year.
Are there any other reasons to believe the Warranty survey has some bias in their sample?
things I've heard people, including yourself, imply: nobody buys extended warranties? I would never buy one. Who is buying this? Are these people idiots? Well, apparently at least 450,000 people bought warranties from this company (otherwise they wouldnt be in business and couldn't put out a reliability survey).
Because only fools and idiots buy these warranties, this makes the survey biased in which way?
Maybe if you buy an extended warranty and buy a Honda or Mazda you are an exceptional kind of idiot to the point where you forget that you bought the warranty in the first place, thus leading to a decrease in reporting? :confuse:
At that price, A/C is included.
You are the second person to drag Consumer Reports into my comments. I didn't say anything at all about their surveys and am not going to now.
My only point was that to study only those car owners who choose to buy one specific extended warranty from one specific company seems to me to skew the data regardless of the numbers involved. If you believe that is not the case, that's fine, you are certainly entitled to your viewpoint - as am I.
But let's not call people idiots, please.
We don't need to continue to go around this block. My opinion is what it is; others' opinions are what they are and that's all there is to it.
It's past time we move on, I do believe.
http://www.forbes.com/home/2007/02/16/vehicle-recall-safety-forbeslife-cx_dl_021- 9recall.html
Honda Civic Coupe And Sedan
Base Price: $14,810
Number Of 2006-Model Recalls: 4
Recalls concerned:
--Faulty frontal airbags
--Incorrect NHTSA contact info in owner's manuals
--Gas pedals that may come loose
--Improperly attached rear glass
--Incorrect NHTSA contact info in owner's manuals
--Gas pedals that may come loose
--Improperly attached rear glass "
Hey, those are no big deal. :surprise:
I also didn't bring CR into the discussion thinking you approved of their methods. I brought CR into the discussion as an example of a survey that might have a bias. I believe that if you believe that CR has a sample bias, you are justified (because CR only surveys subscribers).
I mentioned CR because it stands in contrast to the warranty survey which has no observable bias. I haven't seen a decent argument for the sample bias in the warranty survey. Your reason implies that the owners who buy one specific extended warranty are somehow biased in some way. For example, people who are blue are more likely to buy an extended warranty from that specific company. Blue people are less likely to fix their Hondas than their Fords.
What about these people that buy extended warranties skews the data?
Elsewhere, you mention that the survey simply shows how many people used their warranties. But, is there a reason why Ford owners would use their warranties much more than Honda owners? The only compelling reason is that Honda cars don't require the owners to use their warranties more. Otherwise, you are left with... Honda owners are more forgetful? they are imcompetent car owners? (hence the idiot comments: are owners of a specific make are somehow mentally deficient?).
You are certainly entitled to your opinions, but I'm entitled to criticize your opinions as well. I criticize them mostly because Ive seen many people make similar statments to yours, and I would like to either dispell what I believe is a common myth or have someone make a convincing argument about why there is a sample bias.
To pay that much for an unreliable and plug ugly vehicle shows possible mental deficiency! And Honda Elements, too! Whew...U.G.L.Y.
Sorry, I'm at work and needed the silly diversion!!
Loving my M3S today. A cute chick said "nice car" in an honest way. That NEVER happened with my cougar or Santa Fe!
But it seems no comparison on carspace would be complete without the reliabilty/quality/jdpowers/consumer reports war!
The fact of the matter is that people will always base how they feel about thier cars from their past experiene. Its the reason why the vw buff will alway love his tdi with a million miles on it, and the guy with the 2001 jetta will curse them forever. See? As valid as some reports are some people just wont care and sometimes its those people who will attest to the exceptional reliabilty of their car.
In example, i own a vw rabbit and since i dont subscribe to consumer reports, ill never get to let everyone know how good shes been. You really gotta thing about the validity of this forum and of ratings from people like jd power, cr and pretty much everything else that people has quoted here.
I'm not about to bash honda, everyone knows i'm a honda buff, but just to prove my point, the civic has gotten better marks from cr even over the mazda 3, despite all the problems posted on this forum.
Both cars have thier issues. I'll stress again what i've already said. People who love thier cars will love them regardless. And past experience has a lot to do with it and its what makes us buyist. My wifes protege 5 has suspesion and transmission trouble, and both my civics (01 ex coupe and 06 ex sedan) where driven to the ground with nothing major at all.
She says she will never buy a mazda again. Its either a mini, vw or honda for her and for myself.
Everything being said is not completlely invalid i don't want anyone to think that, but the whole: 'well look what they said!' and 'but look what they said!' is getting REALLY old. :sick:
I am a practical guy so I got the Mazda3 for functionality, resale, reliability, gas mileage, etc. But the kid in me will always want a good old Cadillac!! If my grandfather were still alive, he'd probably want a Beetle (drove his for 250k until it was held together with duct tape and he still loved it)!! LOL!!!
Had to push your buttons, buddy!
(shh.....get a honda
The Sandman
2.) 2006 Honda Accord EX Sedan, 5-Speed Auto, 4-cylinder
The 1996 has 171k miles now, while the new one has 17k.
Actually about your 96, aside from the tl that we talked about ealier, that is another big consideration. (i know i said i wanted to stay away from a 4 cyl civic, but the accords had like 2.2 so it would be doable) Hows the gas mileage on her? Run ok? I know this is probably not the place for it but i figured i ask!
Thanks man and nice wheels!
My 1996 has 171k miles, and has generally needed about $300 a year since 2004. I figure that's not too bad for a daily driver that has 150k+ miles. Since I've had the car (2002, 115k miles when I got it from my grandmother) I have put front brakes on it (the originals were still on after 130k miles! - lots of highway), a radiator fan motor ($320), a brake master cylinder ($300), done a transmission service (dont remember how much $). Just replaced an Oxygen sensor that was covered in a recall/warranty to 150k miles - my dealer goodwilled it even though I was 20k over miles. The timing belt was replaced when due (90k), and I will have it done again at 180k.
The A/C is still pretty cold in 97 degree humid summer heat (in Alabama here). Transmission shifts firmly, but always has. Definitely better on mid-range torque than top end power (non-VTEC). Similar power to the current 140 hp Civic, but I actually felt that my old Accord had a little better first gear punch - the Civic wins when revved up though, chalk it up to better breathing from VTEC.
Although mileage is highly dependent on driving style and conditions, I feel confident a typical driver (one who revs to 3,000 or so when accelerating normally and revs to 4k regularly to merge - not much racing around though) will get numbers near EPA. I average 27 MPG in my suburban/urban commute, that consists of 7 miles at 70 MPH interstate, and 7 miles of 30 MPH speeds and stop signs. The engine isn't buttery at idle, but what 4-cylinder is? It is definitely smoother than many of today's 4-cylinders from GM and Ford (heard a Cobalt in the parking deck, almost sounded like a diesel in comparison). It has a better exhaust note than my 2.4L Accord (the 2.4L is silky but turbine like, the 2.2L growls a bit when pushed).
The one big highway trip I ever took delivered 30 MPG at 75 MPH, and 33 MPG at 65 MPH. I don't do trips in it any more (leave that for my 2006 2.4L Accord).
Ok. That is one poorly laid out post, but I'm a bit wiped after giving blood, so I hope it makes sense. If you have any questions at all about the car, I'll be happy to help as best I can. I love that baby! Here's looking at 200,000 miles!
Graduate: Thanks for all the info man! The mileage sounds great, and the power is wonderful. I think i'm more accustomed to torque now anyway so thats no prob!
Ok pat i'm really done now.
The corrected EPA procedures show the Civic getting 25/36 in the Auto, 26/34 in the manual. Sounds about right to me! My dad was averaging low 30s when my parents moved two weeks ago.
Since this is a comparison thread, the numbers for the 3 are:
2.0L Auto: 23/31
2.0 Manual: 24/32
2.3L Auto: 22/29
2.3L Manual: 22/30
The mazdas numbers don't make me feel so bad about my rabbits mileage. (even though know the rabbit is rated at 19/28! :sick: )
Consumer Reports does state overall mpg for Mazda3(auto) is 27; new EPA has 23/31 for avg of 27 & Mazda tested average.
Looks like Mazda's mpg numbers are more 'real world' versus Hondas optimistic ones. For real world, Honda has a slight 1 mpg advantage - no big whup.
for the 2.0 engine though. The 2.3 is a different and less 'efficient' story.
has 25/36 for avg of 30.5. Honda overall tested 28 is 2.5 mpg lower than the avg of the newly revised EPA figures. Honda originally had mpg 30/40 !!!
those new epa averages are done by people who post their milage on the site. Their numbers could vary depending on their driving habits. ( i looked at alot of them and most were driving mostly city. And again that average is only an estimate...not really real world.)
I averaged 38mpg on the highway on my civic. And 27 in the city.
EPA numbers are one thing, but I still want to point out Consumer Reports overall mpg for Honda is only 1 mpg better than Mazda's 2.0 - in my mind that's a tight race.
I also drove both cars back to back with the AT & the Mazda 2.0 seemed to have more midrange vs wringing the heck out of the Honda 1.8, especially while merging on the highway.
"The i sedans are OK around town but lack midrange punch, especially with automatic transmission."
*Consumer Guide, on the 2007 Mazda 3i
With Mazda's power peak being 6,500 RPM, it sounds like it needs wringing out too to have much fun with it. With an extra 8 horsepower and 7 lb-ft of torque aren't much to write home about with a transmission geared wider will not be as quick as the 5-speed Auto Honda I'd bet. The Civic has its power peaks at lower RPMs than the Mazda Both are acceptable, I'm sure, so the point is likely moot.
The Mazda3 2.0 does only come with a 4-speed tranny, where the Honda Civic does have the 5-speed.
My 1991 Honda Accord with the 2.2L never got more then 24-25mpg average. Granted, this was before VTEC and the advanced engine technology we have today.
My old 1.6L Celica only got 26-27mpg average as well.
This was a time when the best seller Ford Taurus had a 2.5L 4-cylinder with 105 horsepower and a 3-speed Automatic and got 21/27 MPG. The Accord had 130 hp and got something like 24/30 MPG I believe (22/28 with Automatic).
I'm getting really off topic here though, I apologize.
Honda NEVER overestimates its mpg; the epa does.
The 2.0 mazda 3 is said to get 23/31 according to the new epa. The civic gets 25/36. Maybe on par in the city, but five miles to the gallon more on the highway is a heck of a lot. My numbers with my civic were on par with the old AND new numbers. I regularly averaged 26-28 in the city and 38 on the highway.
those relatively small increases in power usuall mean it 'feels' faster, but acually isn't. (i.e. the mazda 2.0 'feels' better merging onto the freeway than the civic, even if you are only going fractions of a second quiker.)
i never had any problems merging. Its fun to wring the engine. Not that you have to do it to get the same perfomance out of it to be on par with the 2.0. Besides its in high rpms that the civic gets nice.
(shh shh...if I want boring I'll be sure to pick up an Accord)
Seriously, why make a post like that? Just like to find a post and knock it, regardless if it fits in the conversation or not? :confuse:
The substance of your message was that Honda reliability trumps Mazda. I brought up stats that are contrary to your "anecdata". The purpose of the post seems plain enough.
The substance of your message was that Honda reliability trumps Mazda
The substance of my message was that Honda reliability was good in my case. I said nothing of Mazdas merits, either good or bad.
I asked, jokingly at the time, in the context of people being tired of reliability ratings, that "what should I get if I want the most reliable car?" Someone said "get a Honda" to which I responded "I did."
I said nothing of Mazda, so don't imply that I did please.
I'm not sure why I'm bothering posting my reasons, since you didn't bother to look at what I actually said in the first place. The post you replied to had where I spoke of my Honda success stories, and I stress once again, nothing of Mazdas.
And no...the "shh" thing wasn't between you and the other person, because it was a part of a public forum. So it was actually between you, and him, and the hundreds of others that read this forum. Hardly private.
Let's drop the personal stuff and get back to the two cars in the subject, not Honda and Mazda in general.
At the time, June of '05, it won between the new Jetta that we almost purchased. But now we're ready to cut it from the herd. We'll have to keep it though another 2 years until after the older girls finish college. Shame though, as it's lost it's excitement factor for us. But I know that we'll never buy Mazda again.
The Sandman