I moved to the house I am in now in September 2004. For the time I lived 4 miles from work with lots of lights and traffic with the 3 (March-September 2004), I averaged 23.5 mpg. That is pretty close to the EPA city rating of 24 for the 2.3 auto. I did occassionally have a couple tanks around 19.5 mpg, but that was rare.
Before the 3, I never kept track of my mileage, so I can't answer that question
"For the same $21K as the Mazda 3s, you could get a Neon SRT-4 if you are so concerned about track times and so little concerned about fuel economy or crash safety. "
There are several Best picks for frontal including: Volkwagon New Beetle, Subaru Impressa, Toyota Corolla, Mazda 3, Suziki Aero, Honda Civic, Mini Cooper, Mitshubishi Lance, Volkswagon Jetta/Golf. And all but the last three had good rating on all aspects.
Mazda 3 and Civic are both good!. The SRT-4 is not part of this discussion.
I've seen the reports before and know about the frontal test, but the Mazda still gets "poor" on side impact tests. Better than getting "poor" all around, but not in the same category as the 2006 Honda sedan.
Many people have brought up the fact that you can buy an SI and a years worth of gas for the price of the 3, so I won't. Bottom line, $2400 is a big price gap. And the Civic comes pretty loaded already. As for the argument that you can delete the sunroof on the 3... the Civic EX comes standard with a sunroof. If you want to delete it on the 3, then price compare it with the Civic LX. It's not $1000 bucks difference. "
You really need to go research the pricing and features of both cars. Do we also delete the leather, Xenon, heated seats, ACC and trip computer that the 3 grand touring has? Not to mention the 17" 5 spoke alloys that you get with a 3s touring that would be the true comparison with the EX. As has been stated many times before, comparably equipped, the 3s Touring is a few hundred cheaper
Okay for $245 you can get side-air bags on any Mazda 3.
Which model of the Mazda 3 has the side curtain air bags and the driver and passenger active head rests to prevent whiplash that ALL 2006 Civics have ?
Sometimes the crash tests are still bad even with side airbags. There is no retest of a Mazda3 showing that the side airbags would solve the side impact problem.
MazdaUSA site says they have "Whiplash-reducing front seat headrests" in all models. I can't tell if they are active restraints, since it doesn't use that word
How do you know an all new model will be reliable? You may think so, but you don't have proof yet...
More reliable? I wouldn't say it to loud if you talk about the 8th gen civic. Go check their site (8th gen civic forum). Things (comments!) dont look that reliable (recall, TSB, customer disatisfaction...). IMO Mazda is doing pretty well in the reliability department for the size of its company (compared with bigger companies: Honda (Yes, Honda!), GM, Chrysler, FORD (Mazda ain't all Ford), Nissan, Huyndai, Renaud, Fiat...). I have a 2004 MZ3 with 48k on it, the same rear dusty breaks (work like new). It did have some TSB (CEL, a/c), but its repared. The car is also very fun to drive (that is a distinction from other brand), still now. I do however like Honda's motor fuel efficiency and the SI (looks and drive like a real sports car). As for fuel efficiency, Mazda is doing pretty good, like mazda's 2liter, 150hp, 5speed man. at 7,9liter/100km versus Honda's 1,8liter, 140hp, 6.8liter/100km. So just a little over a liter for 100 km. for a bigger and torquier engine. Thats not much for me. So I still prefer the MZ3. I do have the Hatch for its versatility. another reason to buy a Mazda...plus design...in and out!
Actually it does not compare at all when you consider that the Mazda 3 has an engine that is chain driven vs. belt and that the Mazda has a much bigger and better warranty than the Civic. Mazda does not charge for roadside assistance and Mazda gives you free rental car coverage for the life of the warranty. Honda is so proud of their second place car that they offer none of that.
The fact remains that side airbags do not fix poor results for every car and the Mazda3 was not retested. There are cars with side airbags that still didn't do well in side impact tests. The Mazda3 is not a Corolla. They will not retest unless the manufacturer pays for it. Toyota and Honda paid for retests and Mazda has not.
You can be sure Mazda conducts its own crash tests. And thus I am pretty sure why they did not provide a car, at their expense, with side bags to the IIHS for a re-test. (Hint: I don't think it was because the car did great on Mazda's own crash tests.)
Many people have brought up the fact that you can buy an SI and a years worth of gas for the price of the 3, so I won't.
I can assure you that a Civic is NOT cheaper than a comparably equiped 3. The car you are talking about had HID and leather. In fact, it was better equipped than many of the mid sizes. Why don't you price a base model 3S with moonroof and SAB/SAC and see how it compares to an EX in the real world.
Just one person's experience: We had a Civic EX AT sedan with the 127hp engine. Nice car, very reliable; confortable, well-organized interior. Drove it for many miles and got about 27-28 mpg. Underpowered for passing or the mountains; a lot of body lean on curvy roads. Now we have a Mazda3S MT (our first Mazda) for which we paid about $16K (about the same as the EX). We have driven it about 27K miles. Love the way it handles. This is one "economy car" which I wouldn't hesitate to drive across country in. It can handle mountains, highway passing, steady at high speed and in wind. Excellent cornering. We have been averaging 33-36 mpg (mainly open road). Weak points: the A/C was at first inadequate; after dealer service it has improved to "marginal". Also the OE tires are loud and wear out quickly. Lessons: Both are nice cars with their own strengths and weaknesses. I wouldn't rely too much on a difference in perceived price or fuel efficiency in making a choice.
I am at the crossroad of deciding between 2006 Civic EX and 2006 Mazda3 s-hatch. My consideration is long driving trips. I plan to drive across North America the coming summer. I like listening music while driving and comfort.
While I like Mazda3 s-hatch for its driving feel, ConsumerGuide puts Civic EX being better in ride and quieter. Can you please comment on comfort and noises with your Mazda3 during long drives?
I am at the crossroad of deciding between 2006 Civic EX and 2006 Mazda3 s-hatch. My consideration is long driving trips. I plan to drive across North America the coming summer. I like listening music while driving and comfort.
While I like Mazda3 s-hatch for its driving feel, ConsumerGuide puts Civic EX being better in ride and quieter. Can you please comment on comfort and noises with your Mazda3 during long drives?
If you can, try renting both. I rented a Mazda3 hatch at the dealer and found it to be the quietest 4 I have ever driven. The ride was firm but not harsh which I like but some may not. I can't speak for the Civic but will give one a go out of curiosity. If you value sound quality, I must admit that that the 3's audio was a let down, probably because of the fact it was a hatch. The trunk in the sedan acts as an enclosure.
Back in 90s, Hondas were benchmark of sporty compacts. These days however, AARP crowd is cross-shopping Accords and Civics with Buicks. Recently I had the good fortune of seeing a white 04 Accord with Tan fake-convertible roof at the local dealership– classick!
I saw a Nissan Maxima with one a month or so ago - the horrid image is still stuck in my brain. It was also lowered and had on what looked like 14 inch chrome wheels with white wall tires (not letters but a stripe).
I said to my wife - can you believe someone actually paid extra to make their car look like that! Some people just want to look different.
Perhaps you check out my previous post before you quote pricing differences. Here it is again-
Just to reiterate how closely priced comparably equipped Civic and Mazda3 models are, here are the numbers. Edmunds TMV price is showing full sticker on the Civic, but some folks in forums have gotten some discounts on them. The Mazda3 can be had for a lot less than Edmunds TMV. Two weeks ago, I bought my s 5-door Touring with a sticker of $18,175 for $16,500 OTD (not including tax because I bought out of state).
Civic EX 4-door AT- MSRP- $19,610, Edmunds TMV- $19,610 Mazda3 s Touring AT- MSRP- $20,015, Edmunds TMV- $19,226 *Mazda has 6CD changer which is required with sunroof
The cars sticker very close to each other, but the Mazda can definitely be bought for less similarly equipped. A lot of folks in the "Mazda3: Prices Paid/Buying Experience" forum have gotten their 3 for close to or even under invoice. So, despite Edmunds illogical use of the Grand Touring model, the Mazda3 actually costs less than Civic.
I suppose the upside for Honda is that they are able to get full sticker for the Civic, at least for now.
Has the Mazda3 been tested with the side airbags yet? I have looked online and can't find any tests of it. I just wonder what it does for the side impact ratings?
Has the Mazda3 been tested with the side airbags yet? I have looked online and can't find any tests of it. I just wonder what it does for the side impact ratings?
Thanks a lot guys! Now you've got me worried about side airbags. I was just getting used to dealing with terrorism, bird flu, west nile virus, sars, mad cow, killer storms from gloabal warming and now this! It's hard to believe I leave the house everyday to got work.
This discussion reminds me of the movie Demolition Man where the entire interior of the car gets full of foam upon impact.
I've actually been trolling the internet since I made that last post trying to find more info about side impact bags in the Mazda.
The best I could find was an Australian ANCAP (their version of NHTSA) test of the 3 with side impact airbags and it scored a 14.18 out of 16 on their test. Scanning the other cars on their site, it was better than some, not as good as others.
I just emailed Mazda from their website telling them they should provide a car to IIHS and NHTSA to retest with side impact airbags. Hopefully it'll happen.
Perhaps I don't care quite as much about safety as some people because I'm a single guy and don't have to worry about spouse or children in the car. I picked my 3 based mainly on driving feel and performance.
Another thought- are the Mazda3 and Volvo S40 structurally similar enough to expect them to have similar crash ratings?
The best I could find was an Australian ANCAP (their version of NHTSA) test of the 3 with side impact airbags and it scored a 14.18 out of 16 on their test. Scanning the other cars on their site, it was better than some, not as good as others.
I just emailed Mazda from their website telling them they should provide a car to IIHS and NHTSA to retest with side impact airbags. Hopefully it'll happen.
As a percentage that looks like a good score. I guess it's not a Pinto-like death trap after all. Maybe there is a waiting period at the IIHS for testing and Mazda has applied for a re-test. I do care about safety but try to rationalize likelyhood of occurances on a large scale of life. For instance, any smoker here that has expressed a concern about SAB's is just crazy to me. You have probably a 1000 times better chance of dying from a smoke induced illness than getting fatally t-boned.
Driving feel and performance are great reasons to buy a car, congrats on your 3.
The 8th Gen Honda Civic is Piggy #3 who made his house out of bricks and the big bad wolf (the car wrecking ambient environment, even after chewing his Hall's Mentholyptus, the occupants of the brick house (Honda Civic) were safe.
Okay the transalation = 8th Gen Honda Civic 5 star crash rating: front , side, passenger. Now do you get it ?
Who's afraid of the big bad wolf, except for big SUVS and 18 wheelers ?
you seem to focus in all your posts, on Honda's relability. Statistically, there will always be some cars that have failure. But to focus on the forums that specifically dicuss only those who have problems skews the real world. J.D. Powers, Consumer Reports, Auto Consumer Gudie and Edmunds all give the Honda Civic very high reliability rating.
Just curious, what do you drive that is more relaible than a Honda?
Compare the weight of a Volvo S40 with the 2.4L engine to the Mazda3
Volvo = 3,225 pounds Mazda = 2,762 pounds
If you look at the S40 you can see some Mazda3 in the size and shape - the chassis is the same.
But 460+ pounds must mean that the Volvo has more steel someplace. Not good for performance - but POSSIBLY very significant for safety.
Actually, what I've read suggests that heavier vehicles do tend to be safer when involved in a collision with another vehicle, but do WORSE when involved in accidents with immovable objects such as trees, cement barriers, etc as they have much more inertia than a lighter vehicle and therefore must absorb all of that inertia. Something to think about...
Consumer reports has an accident avoidance maneuver in their tests. When the next report comes out comparing the 3 and the civic, we will see what the true differences are. I am also curious about the Sentra and Corolla redesigns. The Civic and 3 and pushed the class!
So if you had to ram a tree would you rather be in a Pinto or a Lincoln Town car?
Some of that smaller is better comes from the SUV haters groups - so you need to be careful of the source.
But I would agree that weight is not everything - thats why I said POSSIBLY - if they weigh more because stronger material was used or more/stronger welds (in the right places) then it would help safety - if its just a big hood ornament then it would not do much.
My assumption is Volvo - who is known for building safe cars - put that extra weight to good use.
Or
Just because the Volvo S40 does good on a crash test does not automatically mean the Mazda3 will too.
Actually it does not compare at all when you consider that the Mazda 3 has an engine that is chain driven vs. belt and that the Mazda has a much bigger and better warranty than the Civic. Mazda does not charge for roadside assistance and Mazda gives you free rental car coverage for the life of the warranty. Honda is so proud of their second place car that they offer none of that.
The new Civic uses a timing CHAIN. Check your facts before posting, please. I'd rather have a shorter warranty and not need it at all than have a longer warranty and make frequent trips to the dealer for repairs, personally.
You quote the edmunds forum for problems on the Civic and in the meantime give an anecodte of how reliable your MZ3 is. If you do want to compare, please be consistent. Take a look at the M33 problems forum, you will see that there are a few people who are having problems with their MZ3.
So if you had to ram a tree would you rather be in a Pinto or a Lincoln Town car?
Well, at least give me something that was made before 30 years ago! Let me pick between my new Civic and my full sized Dodge van, and I'd pick the Civic. Which would you pick? Of course there are exceptions and plenty of propoganda circling around, but if you think about the simple physics of it all, it makes sense. Something that weighs 4,000 pounds going 40 miles per hour is going to impact (and thus have to ABSORB) a LOT more energy than a 2,500 pound object moving at the same speed.
Consumer reports has an accident avoidance maneuver in their tests. When the next report comes out comparing the 3 and the civic, we will see what the true differences are. I am also curious about the Sentra and Corolla redesigns. The Civic and 3 and pushed the class!
That's interesting. Do you know what the actual test involves? Also, do you know if it will be available to non-subscribers to their mag?
They don't compare coupes and sedans. Pretty sad how you want them to compare it to something that few people would cross shop the 3 with.
Let's sum the last week or so: Edmunds does a comparo where the 3 trounces the Civic. In their words, it wasn't even close. A nice bit of praise for the 3
The Honda owners, in some panicked defense mechanism offer these excuses:
But it costs more (no it doesn't) But we get better MPG (yes, everyone knows that. It's a tradeoff) But it's safer (yes, but M3 is still a safe car that brakes and handles better) But the Si would beat the 3 (2 different types of cars)
Just in case anyone coming here now didn't want to wade through the same agrguments repeated again and again for pages and pages...
Let's sum the last week or so: Edmunds does a comparo where the 3 trounces the Civic. In their words, it wasn't even close. A nice bit of praise for the 3
Okay, in which ways did they pronounce that it "trouces" the Civic again, exactly? Wasn't it PURELY in racetrack performance? A segment in which NEITHER car was made to compete in? If that is what your criteria is for buying an economy car, then I whole-heartedly recommend you buy a Mazda 3s.
The Honda owners, in some panicked defense mechanism offer these excuses:
But it costs more (no it doesn't)
Initial cost is one portion of the equation, right? What about total cost of ownership?
But we get better MPG (yes, everyone knows that. It's a tradeoff)
You could view it as a "tradeoff" if your ONLY criteria for selecting an economy car is to get the one that performs best at the racetrack. Otherwise, it would be a very distinct disadvantage for an economy car, and also one that would dramatically increase the cost of the car as well.
But it's safer (yes, but M3 is still a safe car that brakes and handles better)
Which economy sedan would you want your family in if you were going to be involved in an accident? You can trivialize this all you want and say that the Mazda is still "pretty safe", but this is a very important advantage for the Civic.
But the Si would beat the 3 (2 different types of cars)
Really? Since all the 3 owners seem to care about is the performance of their cars, I think that the Si and the 3 are quite relevant competitors with each other.
Just in case anyone coming here now didn't want to wade through the same agrguments repeated again and again for pages and pages...
And for those who only care about performance, please buy the Mazda 3. If you care about safety, fuel economy, comfort, and resale value, look no further than the Civic.
Okay, in which ways did they pronounce that it "trouces" the Civic again, exactly? Wasn't it PURELY in racetrack performance? A segment in which NEITHER car was made to compete in? If that is what your criteria is for buying an economy car, then I whole-heartedly recommend you buy a Mazda 3s.
Did you even read the article? I mean, did you? If you think they only saw the advantage at the track, you must have had your blinders on.
Here's some non-performance quotes:
From their summary: "Even so, the Mazda still outshines the newly redesigned Civic when it comes to interior materials and styling. Plus, the Mazda's dash is easier to use than the Civic's two-tiered speedometer/tachometer displays as are its stereo and heater-A/C controls."
And the "First Place" section: "Smart, pretty interior Intuitive design permeates the 3's heating/air conditioning and stereo controls which integrate nicely into the black-faced dash. Temperature and fan speed are on two large knobs which contain buttons for "auto" and "off" functions for climate control. It's an obvious system which is overridden by turning up the fan speed. The stereo has a center-mounted knob for volume control surrounded with buttons for radio presets and CD functions. Steering wheel-mounted buttons also control the stereo and cruise control.
Otherwise, the 3's interior is simply nicer than the Civic's. Leather seats with seat heaters are standard with the "S Grand Touring" trim level. The leather-wrapped steering wheel is relatively small in diameter and thick-rimmed which makes the 3 feel more like a sports car when you're beating WRXs through the slalom.
The instrument panel is dominated by a center-mounted speedometer surrounded by a tachometer on the left and fuel and coolant temperature gauges on the right. It's a conventional design which is as functional as it is attractive.
The Mazda's seats are firmer and more aggressively shaped than the Civic's, which makes them more comfortable for any kind of driving. And like the Civic, its rear seat is split 60/40 and folds flat easily to increase cargo space.
The passionate choice It's the little things that add up to give the 3 the victory. It does virtually nothing wrong and gets so much right. We prefer its interior design and functionality and we think it's a better-looking car than the Civic. Plus, it wins in any contest of performance. Bottom line, the 2006 Mazda 3 wins because it offers a driving experience far beyond our expectations and, more importantly, beyond its price tag. "
The "Second Place" Section: "Confused interior Honda traditionally produces superb interiors, which is why we are puzzled by the jump backward in heating-A/C controls. The last-generation Civic's three-knob, three-button design for temperature, fan speed and vent location was as elegant, intuitive and as efficient as any system ever built. Yet, with the 2006 Civic, Honda left simplicity in favor of more buttons (nine of them to be exact — and two knobs). It's not a deal breaker, but it's certainly not as easy to use as the old design.
Even so, the Civic's interior uses nice materials which feel like they're screwed together as well as the Mazda's. They're not as upscale or as elegant-looking as the 3's all-black treatment on the center stack, but Honda does have Mazda beat in the sound system department thanks to the portable music player (think iPod) input jack and the ability to play Windows Media Audio (WMA) files.
More than once we found ourselves checking to be sure the driver-side windows were all the way up at speed thanks to some unnerving wind noise. The sound was inconsistent enough that we never nailed down its source, but the windows were never down when we heard it.
The Civic's interior functionality is slightly better than the 3's. With multiple bins for cell phones, iPods and the ability to accommodate virtually any sized double latte Starbucks serves, it's well outfitted for the urban warrior. Plus all Civics come with standard side curtain (head) airbags and side (torso) airbags, while they're standard only on S trim-level Mazda 3 models.
It also has a slightly bigger trunk than the 3 (12 cubic feet vs. 11.4 cubic feet). But with less front and rear headroom and less rear legroom, overall interior space is a wash between the two. "
And one of their editors: "Senior Editor Scott Oldham says: Honda's designers made this an easy choice for me. The Civic's cab-forward profile, pug nose and gargantuan dashboard just ain't my thing. Although a tick tall and narrow, the Mazda's proportions are much more to my liking, and its interior is modern and upscale without feeling forced and contrived. Its leather-wrapped three-spoke steering wheel, for example, is so perfectly executed it should be the template for the device industry-wide.
Stack on the Mazda's stronger performance and the choice really gets easy. Although the softer-sprung Civic performs well for the class, the Mazda simply eats its lunch in any speed contest man can conceive. And that pace is managed without any sacrifice in comfort or utility, in fact, the more fun-to-drive Mazda is also available as a little wagon. The Civic is not.
But the clincher for me is the Civic's silly gauge placement, which puts only the tachometer where it should be; viewed through the steering wheel. Honda stuck the rest of the dials at the base of the windshield. Bad idea, people. Very bad. Ranks right up there with wicker furniture and the XFL.
Work another shift and buy the 3. I would. "
So they said it won in objectiove tests and subjective tests
Initial cost is one portion of the equation, right? What about total cost of ownership?
They don't have the TCO for the Civic yet, so we can't do a comparison yet. I think you'll be surprised at the retained value of the Mazda. It is holding up well
You could view it as a "tradeoff" if your ONLY criteria for selecting an economy car is to get the one that performs best at the racetrack. Otherwise, it would be a very distinct disadvantage for an economy car, and also one that would dramatically increase the cost of the car as well.
The 3 still gets good MPG, just not as good as the Civic. 3: Good economy, very good performance. Very good economy, good performance. It's all relative. Not black and white, like you seem to believe. It's not the ONLY criteria
Which economy sedan would you want your family in if you were going to be involved in an accident? You can trivialize this all you want and say that the Mazda is still "pretty safe", but this is a very important advantage for the Civic.
And you can trivialize better braking and better handling all you want. From what I take from your posts, you concentrate on getting into accidents and surviving them, I'll concentrate on not getting into them in the first place
"If performance is all that 3 buyers care about, why wouldn't they care about an Si? "
Who says performance is ALL 3 owners care about? That's a claim made here by Honda owners, it seems. It's well documented being praised by multiple publications as offering the whole package
Comments
Before the 3, I never kept track of my mileage, so I can't answer that question
Again with the crash safety......
Here ya go:
Insurance Institute for Highway Safety names MAZDA3 "best pick" for frontal crash protection
http://www.hwysafety.org/news/2004/iihs_news_121904.pdf
There are several Best picks for frontal including: Volkwagon New Beetle, Subaru Impressa, Toyota Corolla, Mazda 3, Suziki Aero, Honda Civic, Mini Cooper, Mitshubishi Lance, Volkswagon Jetta/Golf. And all but the last three had good rating on all aspects.
Mazda 3 and Civic are both good!. The SRT-4 is not part of this discussion.
Cheers,
MidCow
Better than getting "poor" all around, but not in the same category as the 2006 Honda sedan.
You really need to go research the pricing and features of both cars. Do we also delete the leather, Xenon, heated seats, ACC and trip computer that the 3 grand touring has? Not to mention the 17" 5 spoke alloys that you get with a 3s touring that would be the true comparison with the EX. As has been stated many times before, comparably equipped, the 3s Touring is a few hundred cheaper
Without side airbags. The cars we are discussing here have them standard (touring or Grand touring) and can be had for $245 on lower models
Okay for $245 you can get side-air bags on any Mazda 3.
Which model of the Mazda 3 has the side curtain air bags and the driver and passenger active head rests to prevent whiplash that ALL 2006 Civics have ?
Honda is safer and more reliable,
MidCow
How do you know an all new model will be reliable? You may think so, but you don't have proof yet...
And I bet most of the times they are much better after re-test
And I bet most of the times they are much better after re-test
Yes, the Corolla is a good example of this (went from Poor w/o SAB to Good w/SAB ((I think)) )
I do however like Honda's motor fuel efficiency and the SI (looks and drive like a real sports car). As for fuel efficiency, Mazda is doing pretty good, like mazda's 2liter, 150hp, 5speed man. at 7,9liter/100km versus Honda's 1,8liter, 140hp, 6.8liter/100km. So just a little over a liter for 100 km. for a bigger and torquier engine. Thats not much for me. So I still prefer the MZ3. I do have the Hatch for its versatility. another reason to buy a Mazda...plus design...in and out!
The Mazda3 is not a Corolla.
They will not retest unless the manufacturer pays for it. Toyota and Honda paid for retests and Mazda has not.
Paid for by their marketing departments.
He I'm going to Applebys tonight should I have a nice juicy steak or save 3 bucks and settle for a chicken sandwhich?
I can assure you that a Civic is NOT cheaper than a comparably equiped 3. The car you are talking about had HID and leather. In fact, it was better equipped than many of the mid sizes. Why don't you price a base model 3S with moonroof and SAB/SAC and see how it compares to an EX in the real world.
piggy #1 made their house out of straw, piggy #2 made their house out of sticks. get my point? :sick:
Now we have a Mazda3S MT (our first Mazda) for which we paid about $16K (about the same as the EX). We have driven it about 27K miles. Love the way it handles. This is one "economy car" which I wouldn't hesitate to drive across country in. It can handle mountains, highway passing, steady at high speed and in wind. Excellent cornering. We have been averaging 33-36 mpg (mainly open road). Weak points: the A/C was at first inadequate; after dealer service it has improved to "marginal". Also the OE tires are loud and wear out quickly.
Lessons: Both are nice cars with their own strengths and weaknesses. I wouldn't rely too much on a difference in perceived price or fuel efficiency in making a choice.
I am at the crossroad of deciding between 2006 Civic EX and 2006 Mazda3 s-hatch. My consideration is long driving trips. I plan to drive across North America the coming summer. I like listening music while driving and comfort.
While I like Mazda3 s-hatch for its driving feel, ConsumerGuide puts Civic EX being better in ride and quieter. Can you please comment on comfort and noises with your Mazda3 during long drives?
While I like Mazda3 s-hatch for its driving feel, ConsumerGuide puts Civic EX being better in ride and quieter. Can you please comment on comfort and noises with your Mazda3 during long drives?
If you can, try renting both. I rented a Mazda3 hatch at the dealer and found it to be the quietest 4 I have ever driven. The ride was firm but not harsh which I like but some may not. I can't speak for the Civic but will give one a go out of curiosity. If you value sound quality, I must admit that that the 3's audio was a let down, probably because of the fact it was a hatch. The trunk in the sedan acts as an enclosure.
These days however, AARP crowd is cross-shopping Accords and Civics with Buicks.
Recently I had the good fortune of seeing a white 04 Accord with Tan fake-convertible roof at the local dealership– classick!
I said to my wife - can you believe someone actually paid extra to make their car look like that! Some people just want to look different.
Just to reiterate how closely priced comparably equipped Civic and Mazda3 models are, here are the numbers. Edmunds TMV price is showing full sticker on the Civic, but some folks in forums have gotten some discounts on them. The Mazda3 can be had for a lot less than Edmunds TMV. Two weeks ago, I bought my s 5-door Touring with a sticker of $18,175 for $16,500 OTD (not including tax because I bought out of state).
Here are the prices-
Civic LX 4-door AT- MSRP- $17,860, Edmunds TMV- $17,860
Mazda3 i Touring AT- MSRP- $17,845, Edmunds TMV- $17,152
Civic EX 4-door AT- MSRP- $19,610, Edmunds TMV- $19,610
Mazda3 s Touring AT- MSRP- $20,015, Edmunds TMV- $19,226
*Mazda has 6CD changer which is required with sunroof
The cars sticker very close to each other, but the Mazda can definitely be bought for less similarly equipped. A lot of folks in the "Mazda3: Prices Paid/Buying Experience" forum have gotten their 3 for close to or even under invoice. So, despite Edmunds illogical use of the Grand Touring model, the Mazda3 actually costs less than Civic.
I suppose the upside for Honda is that they are able to get full sticker for the Civic, at least for now.
Thanks a lot guys! Now you've got me worried about side airbags. I was just getting used to dealing with terrorism, bird flu, west nile virus, sars, mad cow, killer storms from gloabal warming and now this! It's hard to believe I leave the house everyday to got work.
This discussion reminds me of the movie Demolition Man where the entire interior of the car gets full of foam upon impact.
The best I could find was an Australian ANCAP (their version of NHTSA) test of the 3 with side impact airbags and it scored a 14.18 out of 16 on their test. Scanning the other cars on their site, it was better than some, not as good as others.
I just emailed Mazda from their website telling them they should provide a car to IIHS and NHTSA to retest with side impact airbags. Hopefully it'll happen.
Perhaps I don't care quite as much about safety as some people because I'm a single guy and don't have to worry about spouse or children in the car. I picked my 3 based mainly on driving feel and performance.
Another thought- are the Mazda3 and Volvo S40 structurally similar enough to expect them to have similar crash ratings?
I just emailed Mazda from their website telling them they should provide a car to IIHS and NHTSA to retest with side impact airbags. Hopefully it'll happen.
As a percentage that looks like a good score. I guess it's not a Pinto-like death trap after all.
Maybe there is a waiting period at the IIHS for testing and Mazda has applied for a re-test.
I do care about safety but try to rationalize likelyhood of occurances on a large scale of life. For instance, any smoker here that has expressed a concern about SAB's is just crazy to me. You have probably a 1000 times better chance of dying from a smoke induced illness than getting fatally t-boned.
Driving feel and performance are great reasons to buy a car, congrats on your 3.
Okay the transalation = 8th Gen Honda Civic 5 star crash rating: front , side, passenger. Now do you get it ?
Who's afraid of the big bad wolf, except for big SUVS and 18 wheelers ?
MidCow
Just curious, what do you drive that is more relaible than a Honda?
Double sixes,
MidCow
Volvo = 3,225 pounds
Mazda = 2,762 pounds
If you look at the S40 you can see some Mazda3 in the size and shape - the chassis is the same.
But 460+ pounds must mean that the Volvo has more steel someplace. Not good for performance - but POSSIBLY very significant for safety.
Volvo = 3,225 pounds
Mazda = 2,762 pounds
If you look at the S40 you can see some Mazda3 in the size and shape - the chassis is the same.
But 460+ pounds must mean that the Volvo has more steel someplace. Not good for performance - but POSSIBLY very significant for safety.
Actually, what I've read suggests that heavier vehicles do tend to be safer when involved in a collision with another vehicle, but do WORSE when involved in accidents with immovable objects such as trees, cement barriers, etc as they have much more inertia than a lighter vehicle and therefore must absorb all of that inertia. Something to think about...
Warner
Some of that smaller is better comes from the SUV haters groups - so you need to be careful of the source.
But I would agree that weight is not everything - thats why I said POSSIBLY - if they weigh more because stronger material was used or more/stronger welds (in the right places) then it would help safety - if its just a big hood ornament then it would not do much.
My assumption is Volvo - who is known for building safe cars - put that extra weight to good use.
Or
Just because the Volvo S40 does good on a crash test does not automatically mean the Mazda3 will too.
The new Civic uses a timing CHAIN. Check your facts before posting, please. I'd rather have a shorter warranty and not need it at all than have a longer warranty and make frequent trips to the dealer for repairs, personally.
Warner
Well, at least give me something that was made before 30 years ago! Let me pick between my new Civic and my full sized Dodge van, and I'd pick the Civic. Which would you pick? Of course there are exceptions and plenty of propoganda circling around, but if you think about the simple physics of it all, it makes sense. Something that weighs 4,000 pounds going 40 miles per hour is going to impact (and thus have to ABSORB) a LOT more energy than a 2,500 pound object moving at the same speed.
Warner
That's interesting. Do you know what the actual test involves? Also, do you know if it will be available to non-subscribers to their mag?
Thanks,
Warner
Da-da-da-da-da,
I'm lovin' it!
Da-da-da-da-da,
I'm lovin' it!
Except crashing....I guess they forgot that part. Oh, and selling, too...let's see how it "moves" when the owner wants to sell it.
Warner
They don't compare coupes and sedans. Pretty sad how you want them to compare it to something that few people would cross shop the 3 with.
Let's sum the last week or so: Edmunds does a comparo where the 3 trounces the Civic. In their words, it wasn't even close. A nice bit of praise for the 3
The Honda owners, in some panicked defense mechanism offer these excuses:
But it costs more (no it doesn't)
But we get better MPG (yes, everyone knows that. It's a tradeoff)
But it's safer (yes, but M3 is still a safe car that brakes and handles better)
But the Si would beat the 3 (2 different types of cars)
Just in case anyone coming here now didn't want to wade through the same agrguments repeated again and again for pages and pages...
Okay, in which ways did they pronounce that it "trouces" the Civic again, exactly? Wasn't it PURELY in racetrack performance? A segment in which NEITHER car was made to compete in? If that is what your criteria is for buying an economy car, then I whole-heartedly recommend you buy a Mazda 3s.
The Honda owners, in some panicked defense mechanism offer these excuses:
But it costs more (no it doesn't)
Initial cost is one portion of the equation, right? What about total cost of ownership?
But we get better MPG (yes, everyone knows that. It's a tradeoff)
You could view it as a "tradeoff" if your ONLY criteria for selecting an economy car is to get the one that performs best at the racetrack. Otherwise, it would be a very distinct disadvantage for an economy car, and also one that would dramatically increase the cost of the car as well.
But it's safer (yes, but M3 is still a safe car that brakes and handles better)
Which economy sedan would you want your family in if you were going to be involved in an accident? You can trivialize this all you want and say that the Mazda is still "pretty safe", but this is a very important advantage for the Civic.
But the Si would beat the 3 (2 different types of cars)
Really? Since all the 3 owners seem to care about is the performance of their cars, I think that the Si and the 3 are quite relevant competitors with each other.
Just in case anyone coming here now didn't want to wade through the same agrguments repeated again and again for pages and pages...
And for those who only care about performance, please buy the Mazda 3. If you care about safety, fuel economy, comfort, and resale value, look no further than the Civic.
Warner
You really believe that people don't cross shop the Si and the 3? If performance is all that 3 buyers care about, why wouldn't they care about an Si?
Did you even read the article? I mean, did you? If you think they only saw the advantage at the track, you must have had your blinders on.
Here's some non-performance quotes:
From their summary:
"Even so, the Mazda still outshines the newly redesigned Civic when it comes to interior materials and styling. Plus, the Mazda's dash is easier to use than the Civic's two-tiered speedometer/tachometer displays as are its stereo and heater-A/C controls."
And the "First Place" section:
"Smart, pretty interior
Intuitive design permeates the 3's heating/air conditioning and stereo controls which integrate nicely into the black-faced dash. Temperature and fan speed are on two large knobs which contain buttons for "auto" and "off" functions for climate control. It's an obvious system which is overridden by turning up the fan speed. The stereo has a center-mounted knob for volume control surrounded with buttons for radio presets and CD functions. Steering wheel-mounted buttons also control the stereo and cruise control.
Otherwise, the 3's interior is simply nicer than the Civic's. Leather seats with seat heaters are standard with the "S Grand Touring" trim level. The leather-wrapped steering wheel is relatively small in diameter and thick-rimmed which makes the 3 feel more like a sports car when you're beating WRXs through the slalom.
The instrument panel is dominated by a center-mounted speedometer surrounded by a tachometer on the left and fuel and coolant temperature gauges on the right. It's a conventional design which is as functional as it is attractive.
The Mazda's seats are firmer and more aggressively shaped than the Civic's, which makes them more comfortable for any kind of driving. And like the Civic, its rear seat is split 60/40 and folds flat easily to increase cargo space.
The passionate choice
It's the little things that add up to give the 3 the victory. It does virtually nothing wrong and gets so much right. We prefer its interior design and functionality and we think it's a better-looking car than the Civic. Plus, it wins in any contest of performance. Bottom line, the 2006 Mazda 3 wins because it offers a driving experience far beyond our expectations and, more importantly, beyond its price tag.
"
The "Second Place" Section:
"Confused interior
Honda traditionally produces superb interiors, which is why we are puzzled by the jump backward in heating-A/C controls. The last-generation Civic's three-knob, three-button design for temperature, fan speed and vent location was as elegant, intuitive and as efficient as any system ever built. Yet, with the 2006 Civic, Honda left simplicity in favor of more buttons (nine of them to be exact — and two knobs). It's not a deal breaker, but it's certainly not as easy to use as the old design.
Even so, the Civic's interior uses nice materials which feel like they're screwed together as well as the Mazda's. They're not as upscale or as elegant-looking as the 3's all-black treatment on the center stack, but Honda does have Mazda beat in the sound system department thanks to the portable music player (think iPod) input jack and the ability to play Windows Media Audio (WMA) files.
More than once we found ourselves checking to be sure the driver-side windows were all the way up at speed thanks to some unnerving wind noise. The sound was inconsistent enough that we never nailed down its source, but the windows were never down when we heard it.
The Civic's interior functionality is slightly better than the 3's. With multiple bins for cell phones, iPods and the ability to accommodate virtually any sized double latte Starbucks serves, it's well outfitted for the urban warrior. Plus all Civics come with standard side curtain (head) airbags and side (torso) airbags, while they're standard only on S trim-level Mazda 3 models.
It also has a slightly bigger trunk than the 3 (12 cubic feet vs. 11.4 cubic feet). But with less front and rear headroom and less rear legroom, overall interior space is a wash between the two. "
And one of their editors:
"Senior Editor Scott Oldham says:
Honda's designers made this an easy choice for me. The Civic's cab-forward profile, pug nose and gargantuan dashboard just ain't my thing. Although a tick tall and narrow, the Mazda's proportions are much more to my liking, and its interior is modern and upscale without feeling forced and contrived. Its leather-wrapped three-spoke steering wheel, for example, is so perfectly executed it should be the template for the device industry-wide.
Stack on the Mazda's stronger performance and the choice really gets easy. Although the softer-sprung Civic performs well for the class, the Mazda simply eats its lunch in any speed contest man can conceive. And that pace is managed without any sacrifice in comfort or utility, in fact, the more fun-to-drive Mazda is also available as a little wagon. The Civic is not.
But the clincher for me is the Civic's silly gauge placement, which puts only the tachometer where it should be; viewed through the steering wheel. Honda stuck the rest of the dials at the base of the windshield. Bad idea, people. Very bad. Ranks right up there with wicker furniture and the XFL.
Work another shift and buy the 3. I would. "
So they said it won in objectiove tests and subjective tests
Initial cost is one portion of the equation, right? What about total cost of ownership?
They don't have the TCO for the Civic yet, so we can't do a comparison yet. I think you'll be surprised at the retained value of the Mazda. It is holding up well
You could view it as a "tradeoff" if your ONLY criteria for selecting an economy car is to get the one that performs best at the racetrack. Otherwise, it would be a very distinct disadvantage for an economy car, and also one that would dramatically increase the cost of the car as well.
The 3 still gets good MPG, just not as good as the Civic. 3: Good economy, very good performance. Very good economy, good performance. It's all relative. Not black and white, like you seem to believe. It's not the ONLY criteria
Which economy sedan would you want your family in if you were going to be involved in an accident? You can trivialize this all you want and say that the Mazda is still "pretty safe", but this is a very important advantage for the Civic.
And you can trivialize better braking and better handling all you want. From what I take from your posts, you concentrate on getting into accidents and surviving them, I'll concentrate on not getting into them in the first place
Who says performance is ALL 3 owners care about? That's a claim made here by Honda owners, it seems. It's well documented being praised by multiple publications as offering the whole package