Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Did you get a great deal? Let us know in the Values & Prices Paid section!
Meet your fellow owners in our Owners Clubs

Acura TSX vs. Mazda6 s Grand Touring

patpat Posts: 10,421
edited April 2014 in Acura
Let's compare these two similar sports sedans!
«13

Comments

  • baggs32baggs32 Posts: 3,229
    Call me crazy but didn't a TSX vs Mazda6 thread exist at one time? This comparison seems to be weighted heavily to the Mazda side in all categories but price IMO.
  • kronogoosekronogoose Posts: 116
    I think it's a valid comparison. I'm interested in and have researched both cars.

    There is a glaring difference in horsepower, but I would wager that a TSX Type-S isn't too far off in the future. If Acura can sell a turbocharged 4 cyl in the RDX, why not the TSX?
  • patpat Posts: 10,421
    Indeed we might have had a TSX/Mazda6 discussion, but the member who asked for this specifically wanted to talk about the 6 s Grand Touring agains the TSX. We can do that. :)
  • mz6greyghostmz6greyghost Posts: 1,230
    There is a glaring difference in horsepower, but I would wager that a TSX Type-S isn't too far off in the future. If Acura can sell a turbocharged 4 cyl in the RDX, why not the TSX?

    They could, but by the time they do, the '08 Mazda6 will be out, with a 260+HP V6, and it'll be much larger than the TSX.

    The TSX handles well, but a sedan like that shouldn't be revved past 6K RPM all the time just to keep it in the powerband. The 4-cyl, although technically amazing, is simply too weak. I drove both cars extensively, and ended up buying the 6. Despite the nicer interior of the TSX, and the 6-speed manual, I couldn't justify paying $4K MORE for the TSX for a less-powerful engine and smaller interior space.
  • baggs32baggs32 Posts: 3,229
    Indeed we might have had a TSX/Mazda6 discussion, but the member who asked for this specifically wanted to talk about the 6 s Grand Touring agains the TSX. We can do that.

    I think I have to take back what I originally typed. I linked to this from the MAZDASPEED6 thread and didn't take care in reading the title of this one. :blush: I assumed this was comparing the SPEED6 to the TSX which IS a lopsided comparison in every regard.

    Sorry for the confusion. Carry on! ;)
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    I would happen to agree with most of that. However, I do thing the current Mazda6 V6 is a bit underpowered compared to other V6's. Since we are not doing that in this thread, the Mazda6 does perform better then the TSX.

    The thing about i-VTEC engines is you have to rev them very high to get any power, 7,000 rpm to reach 205 hp. and only 165 tq. Who consistently drives their car at 7,000 rpm's? I wonder what the power is during normal driving around 3,000-4,000 rpm's.

    Don't misunderstand me and assume I am bad mouthing Honda technology, I'm not. I think this car would have benefited more and been more competitive with a V6 with 220-240 Hp. For a high line lux car, it is outclassed by most other lux cars.

    Interior refinement, fit and finnish are top notch on the TSX, that's about all I really like.
  • huskerdoohuskerdoo Posts: 11
    Well, its kind of like comparing juicy fruit to speriment gum. Yes they are similar in size, yes they are both chewable and yes that special taste lasts about the same time but it comes down to what flavore you really wanted. I bought the TSX because I wanted the reliability of the Honda Corp. and a more comfortable interior. I also wanted the improvement in the gas milage ( I was going from a 05 Jeep). If what you like to do is beat your car and race folks from stop light to stop light and do it more cost consciously, then something like the Mazda6 or Altima would be a much better choice. But, if you desire the luxurious interior with the economy of a 4cyl and dependability then the TSX is a valid choice. Now, haven driven both within the last 3 weeks, I find that the power difference for everyday driving is negligible. They handle very similar but I feel the road better in the TSX and its ride is smoother. It is still a more nimble car then even its big brother the TL or Accord.The Mazda is also a fun car to drive, quick, nice manual, decent interior but a little more noisy. Yes, the TSX is probably about 4 grand more than it should be but for what you get its not bad. Compared to the next level cars ie:BMW, Lexus, Infinity, its down right awesome. The mazda, however, IS a nice car and truely more stream lined to the general public. I already own a Grand Caravan so I didn't need the extra space afforded by the M6 or the TL. Interestingly enough I turned down the TL due to the gas milage. I get 30 in town now and 36-37 on the road. If you like and need the power of a v-6, or if you are used to that type of performance then you wont be happy with the TSX 4cyl. You will always be left with a "wheres the beef" feeling. But I don't think the people buying the car are out there on Friday and Saturday nights playing the fast and furious. :P
  • Some may complain about the 4k extra for the TSX but the s Grand Touring model (the only model that competes in features and amenities with the TSX) is the same price as the TSX. Let's keep these comparos to apples to apples. Let's think about the future here as well. If you plan on trading in after 3, 4, or 5 years; all things equal, you will get more for your TSX trade than your Mazda6 trade. I just think the raspy v6, difficult air vent configuration, american style bland gauges, and the fact that Ford had anything to do with the Mazda6 makes the TSX a better car.
  • baggs32baggs32 Posts: 3,229
    and the fact that Ford had anything to do with the Mazda6 makes the TSX a better car.

    Ahhh, another unbiased opinion from the Honda crowd. It's always so refreshing to read them. :sick:

    FYI, Ford had very little to do with the 6. The main component from them was the engine block, which BTW was developed jointly by Cosworth and Porsche not Ford, and the rest amounts to a few levers and switches for things like the turn signals and wipers. You can blame Mazda for the rest of the things you don't like.

    So you're OK with owning what is essentially sold as the Accord in other markets? Boy does Honda have you TSX owners snookered! :P
  • mz6greyghostmz6greyghost Posts: 1,230
    Some may complain about the 4k extra for the TSX but the s Grand Touring model (the only model that competes in features and amenities with the TSX) is the same price as the TSX. Let's keep these comparos to apples to apples.

    Trust me, I am. I'm talking the out-the-door price of the 6 versus the TSX, NOT sticker price. After going back and forth with the dealer, I bet I'd pay at least $4K less for a GT than the TSX, considering that when I bought my 6 (close to two years ago), the Mazda dealer had no problem haggling over the sticker price, while the Acura dealer wouldn't budge from sticker, at all.

    Let's think about the future here as well. If you plan on trading in after 3, 4, or 5 years; all things equal, you will get more for your TSX trade than your Mazda6 trade.

    Maybe, I'll give you that, but I keep cars longer than that usually, so trade-in means little (if anything) to me. Besides, I'd rather enjoy my car now, rather then when I trade it in.

    I just think the raspy v6, difficult air vent configuration, american style bland gauges, and the fact that Ford had anything to do with the Mazda6 makes the TSX a better car.

    And that's your opinion, which you're entitled to. The raspy V6 is a definite plus in my book, and the power advantages and throaty sound definitely outweigh the sluggishness and "quiet" 4-cyl. The "American style bland gauges" are not supposed to win art awards, they're simply supposed to convey information to the driver, which they do quite well, and I don't have to look twice to see the speed I'm cruising at. The HVAC system is simple and straight-foward to use, like the TSX, and works just as well as anything else out there.

    Oh, BTW, my family has owned at least a dozen different Ford products over the past twenty years, all without major problems and were very reliable from start to end, and my 6 has over 30K miles on it, with NO problems, no rattles, and hasn't failed me yet. This compares to a co-workers '04 Accord he bought new only a month after I bought my 6, and it's been at the dealer about 7 times now, three of them for a recurring problem.
  • mz6greyghostmz6greyghost Posts: 1,230
    So you're OK with owning what is essentially sold as the Accord in other markets? Boy does Honda have you TSX owners snookered!

    Very true, considering you could by an Accord with a V6, the 6-speed manual, and just about every option the TSX has, for about the same price, OTD. This is for a bigger, much more powerful car.
  • johnny420johnny420 Posts: 473
    Yes, you're right, we TSX owners are clueless, no doubt about it. Honda has us all bamboozled. We bit on the TSX when we could have had a more powerful version in the USDM Accord for thousands less. And none of us are aware that a similar version of the car is sold abroad as an Accord. What to do. It seems like ridiculous posts like these come in waves.

    Yes, the Accord is bigger, which many consider to be a bad thing. It is also softer, uglier and handles nowhere near as well as the TSX. Yes, it's more powerful and faster in a straight line. So what? It's nowhere near as fun to drive as the TSX.

    By your definition, bigger and faster in a straight line = better. Enthusiast drivers have different criteria.

    These USDM Accord/TSX arguements have grown more than tiresome. If you or the other poster had any idea what you were talking about, you would not be posting this drivel.

    As it stands, you're just parroting the same tired arguements that have been posted hundreds of times before. Doesn't change a thing. People who own TSX's know better. Nuff said. :shades:
  • mz6greyghostmz6greyghost Posts: 1,230
    Yes, the Accord is bigger, which many consider to be a bad thing. It is also softer, uglier and handles nowhere near as well as the TSX. Yes, it's more powerful and faster in a straight line. So what? It's nowhere near as fun to drive as the TSX.

    By your definition, bigger and faster in a straight line = better.


    I never said that the Accord was the better car. Check my post. I only said that your money buys a bigger, more powerful car when choosing the Accord over the TSX. If I truly believed what you just generalized, then I would've bought a Charger SRT-8. Plenty of straight-line there, it just can't corner to save it's life.

    Enthusiast drivers have different criteria.

    I absolutely agree with you, handling counts as much as power, if not more. That's why I avoided the SRT-8 and bought the 6, it's got plenty of both. Handling that for all intents and purposes MATCHES the TSX, both in road feel, stability, and control in curves (IMO), and power that, if not matches the Accord, at least doesn't trip over itself when merging with traffic on the highway. Why bother getting one or the other when you can have both? Hence the Mazda6.

    If you or the other poster had any idea what you were talking about, you would not be posting this drivel.

    No idea, huh? I've driven all three of these cars extensively before I bought the 6. The Accord was in fact too big and mushy for my tastes, and the power was nice, but I didn't have the satisfying feeling I had when piloting it through the twisties. The TSX handled without fault, cornered nicely, and the interior fit-and-finish and features were flawless, but I thought the 4-cyl was too overwhelmed for MY needs, and I didn't want to keep the tach north of 6K RPM all the time just to pass or merge with highway traffic. The 6 had handling that felt just as secure and confident, the interior was nicely done for my tastes, with great fit-and-finish as well, and the V6 was perfect for my driving style, and had a little extra behind it when I needed it. Not to mention saving a few extra bucks besides.
  • xplorx4xplorx4 Posts: 621
    Is this discussion about a fully-optioned V6 Mazda6 vs a TSX? If so, I would probably tip the scales in favor of the TSX. The two cars handle virtually the same, and have reasonably sufficient power to merge into traffic faster than most other cars can. I recently traded my '04 TSX for an '06 Mazdaspeed6. I would not have traded for a V6 Mazda6 (which I did test when I originally purchased the TSX.) The TSX interior fit-and-finish, auto-climate-control system, and NAV system are much more intuitive, straightforward, and easier to use than the Mazda. Does the TSX need to rev high to find its power? Sure, but you're probably spending less than 2% of your time in the car like that.

    You really get a lot of car for the money in a TSX. During the first week after I'd traded for the Speed6, parts of me missed the TSX features, nearly to the point of regret, but the extra HP of the Speed6 is the only thing that tells me I didn't make the wrong choice by not keeping the TSX.
  • johnny420johnny420 Posts: 473
    Mostly fair rebuttal.

    But the TSX "trips over itself when merging with traffic on the highway," and you need to "keep the tach north of 6K RPM all the time just to pass of merge with highway traffic?" Please. Either you didn't drive the 6MT version of the TSX or you really don't know what you're saying. Sorry, I'm not trying to insult you, I've just lived with the car for 2.5 years and I know what it can do.The AT I can't speak to, but I know many who can, and they, too, would pooh-pooh your claims.

    I've never had any issue with the TSX merging or passing on the freeway. In fact, I relish the thought of on-ramps and high-speed shifts/merges. Passing at freeway speeds is simply not an issue. The only time I head "north" of 6K on the tach is when I want to because it's fun. To assert that any of the above is not as I stated is ridiculous.

    I like the 6. I cross shopped the 6. I test drove the 6 4-5 times. I almost bought the 6. In the end, the TSX just scratched an itch the 6 couldn't. Like you, I found the car that satisfied my needs. Overall balance, solid drivetrain, sweet gearbox, smooth high-revving engine, sharp handling, classy interior, fun-to-drive factor. That's what sold me.

    FWIW, I found the 6's Duratec V6 to be more than a little underwhelming. It was one of the things that kept me from purchasing the car. It is far behind the offerings from Honda and Nissan, and Toyota for that matter. It's also thirsty.

    I am glad you like your 6. :shades:
  • baggs32baggs32 Posts: 3,229
    It is far behind the offerings from Honda and Nissan, and Toyota for that matter.

    Yes but it only requres good old regular unleaded to run and torque steer is non-existant (Nissan). Some versions of the other manufacturers competing engines, yes in their mainstream cars too, take premium.

    The next gen Mazda6 will most likely have a "Mazdafied" version of Ford's Duratec35 which produces 265 HP and 250 ft-lbs out of the box on regular 87. If Mazda give it a few tweaks, which I doubt they will without stepping on too many PAG toes, it will easily out power everything else.
  • mz6greyghostmz6greyghost Posts: 1,230
    I've never had any issue with the TSX merging or passing on the freeway. In fact, I relish the thought of on-ramps and high-speed shifts/merges. Passing at freeway speeds is simply not an issue.

    I'm glad that you found this to be true, But I don't think it's "rediculous" when it's someone else's opinion. I did drive the 6MT, through many different scenarios, and I felt that it didn't feel as confidence-inspiring when merging and passing as I liked, and this was trying different gears at different revs. Yes, I could get power, but what required two (or even three) downshifts to make a pass on the highway or two-lane took only one (if any) with the 6. I love shifting a manual as much as the next guy, but when making a pass quickly (such as on a two-lane with oncoming traffic), the less time I spent shifting, the better.

    I found the 6's Duratec V6 to be more than a little underwhelming. It was one of the things that kept me from purchasing the car. It is far behind the offerings from Honda and Nissan, and Toyota for that matter. It's also thirsty.

    As said before, The Duratec may not be the most powerful in it's class, but torque-steer is non-existent, unlike the Nissan Altima V6, which tugged the steering wheel even at half-throttle. The Honda motor was nice, but as I said before, both it and the Nissan couldn't hold a candle to the 6 in terms of cornering and control. I won't even touch Toyota, which couldn't build a sporty sedan to save it's life! As for thirst, I average 26 MPG in day-to-day driving, and I've hit 30 MPG twice on different road trips. I can't say it's too bad with only regular fuel.

    Overall balance, solid drivetrain, sweet gearbox, smooth high-revving engine, sharp handling, classy interior, fun-to-drive factor. That's what sold me.

    As I stated before, the 6 may not excel in any one category, but it does everything "just right" in the categories you mentioned for me. We may disagree on the details of each vehicle and how it relates to our driving styles, but at least we're not lowering ourselves to Toyotas! :)
  • mz6greyghostmz6greyghost Posts: 1,230
    The next gen Mazda6 will most likely have a "Mazdafied" version of Ford's Duratec35 which produces 265 HP and 250 ft-lbs out of the box on regular 87. If Mazda give it a few tweaks, which I doubt they will without stepping on too many PAG toes, it will easily out power everything else.

    Yes, it may, but in this dog-eat-dog world of the automobile biz, the HP title won't last, nor do I expect it to. If they keep the great balance, handling, control, and braking of the current 6, without tacking on too much weight with the new motor, then they'll have a winner.
  • baggs32baggs32 Posts: 3,229
    If they keep the great balance, handling, control, and braking of the current 6, without tacking on too much weight with the new motor, then they'll have a winner.

    The weight will probably rise too but not so much from the motor. Spy shots of the next gen 6 show that it will most likely be larger in all dimensions which I'm sure will add weight and make the higher HP and torque necessary. The Duratec35 doesn't weight much more than the Duratec30, about 100 lbs IIRC and it's the same size, so that's a start. For the rest you can probably look at the Fusion's weight and add the difference to the next 6.

    It's still going to be an awesome car I'm sure but I just wish they wouldn't try to make it so much like a Camry or Accord. I like the size it is now and the "rough edges" that come with it. Makes you feel like you're part of the car and, like you said, they need to preserve that in the next gen. If they don't they can go ahead and cancel the "Zoom Zoom" commercials. ;)
  • johnny420johnny420 Posts: 473
    Yes but it only requres good old regular unleaded to run and torque steer is non-existant (Nissan). Some versions of the other manufacturers competing engines, yes in their mainstream cars too, take premium.

    Careful here. Torque steer may not exist because the Duratec's torque is unimpressive. :D And Honda's excellent V6 takes regular fuel and makes much better torque, HP and fuel economy than the Duratec. It's also smoother. But that's neither here nor there. I think we're reaching the HP limit for FWD vehicles anyway.

    MZ6greyghost: The reason I said "ridiculous" above is because it's not my opinion that the TSX doesn't need to be kept above 6K to pass or merge, it's fact.

    If Mazda was to shore up their pedestrian interiors and address the engine issue I mentioned, I would revisit the marque in the future. I like what Mazda tries to do with their cars: they make cars that are entertaining to drive, and they look good to boot. I admit, the MazdaSpeed6 is an intriguing vehicle.

    :shades:
  • baggs32baggs32 Posts: 3,229
    Torque steer may not exist because the Duratec's torque is unimpressive.

    Hey, I'll be the first one to complain about the lack of torque in Mazda's version of the Duratec30 but since it's still enough to generate sub-seven second 0-60 times I'm not going to complain too much. ;)

    And Honda's excellent V6 takes regular fuel and makes much better torque, HP and fuel economy than the Duratec.

    Depends on which version you're talking about. IIRC the Acura versions all take 91 or higher.

    I think we're reaching the HP limit for FWD vehicles anyway.

    Ain't that the truth! And GM is trying to prove us right with every new SS badge they stick on their FWD beasts. :surprise:
  • mz6greyghostmz6greyghost Posts: 1,230
    The reason I said "ridiculous" above is because it's not my opinion that the TSX doesn't need to be kept above 6K to pass or merge, it's fact.

    Fact: ALL cars have the ability to pass or merge under 6K RPM. That's a given.

    Opinion: The TSX wasn't comfortable enough FOR ME to pass or merge at only 3-5K RPM, the rev band that the V6 in the 6 really kicks in. I simply didn't feel it, that's all.
  • tblazer503tblazer503 Posts: 620
    I don't much agree with this comparo (I4 vs V6), but okay.

    Anyways, IMO, since we are going to compare them, let's look at 5 year life.

    TCO on a Mazda 6 s Grand touring assuming a purchase price of 24k and some change is 42,950 over 5 years.

    TCO on a Acura TSX 5at with Navigation assuming a purchase price of 29.7k is 41,530 over 5 years.

    No navi on TSX? TCO drops to 39,930 over 5 years.

    Personally, I enjoy the TSX I have owned it for 2.5 years now, and have had no issues merging, enjoy the great handling, but hate the cost of tires. Yes I have driven a mazda 6, and the 4cyl is gutless IMO. the v6? I would be comparing it to a TL (TL w/ Navi TCO is 47,640 BTW) So I would say that if initial cost is your forte, then go for the 6, if long term is your goal, I would(have) personally go for the Acura, just depends on how much you want to pony up for the initial cost and monthly payments.

    Standard Features: pretty comprable, but I love my HID's if you want, you can buy for only an extra $1000(??) or so

    Crash tests (you know, cause the average person get's into an accident every 3-5 years).... IIHS specs.
    Acura TSX.. Front offset - good Side - Average
    Mazda 6.. Front offset - good Side - Poor
    To be fair, the Mazda 6 tested did not have side or curtain airbags....

    NHTSA specs -
    Same thing, frontal both 5 star, mazda 6 not equipped w/ SAB or curtains.

    when I bought the '04, the Camry, IS300, Mazda6, G35, C240, and a 530xi(?) were all compared for me and I made a happy medium decision for the TSX. Only car right now I would look at would be either a G35X or IS250AWD... :blush:
  • baggs32baggs32 Posts: 3,229
    Crash tests (you know, cause the average person get's into an accident every 3-5 years).... IIHS specs.
    Acura TSX.. Front offset - good Side - Average
    Mazda 6.. Front offset - good Side - Poor
    To be fair, the Mazda 6 tested did not have side or curtain airbags....


    Yeah, you really can't go by those scores for the 6 anymore as side curtains and side air bags are now standard. They were in fact optional when that test was administered as you said.
  • sglsgl Posts: 6
    I looked at both the Grand Sport and TSX for my son. Pricing on the Grand Sport was great. A new Mazda6 S Grand Sport for 22.4K is hard to beat. I compared it to the TSX w/o navigation. A 2006 demo with 5K miles for 25.4. Both were very nice cars, obviously one was 3K more expensive. What sold me was the feel of quality of the Acura. The Mazda was very nice and great for the money, but just didn't convey the feel of quality that the Acura did. I also suspect that someday at trade-in time, I might make up a lot of that 3 thousand dollar difference.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    The TSX is a lux car. It should feel like higher quality. If it does not, there would be a problem.
  • jg88jg88 Posts: 59
    Since I am driving a company car, it's an '06 Base Ford Taurus, last of the Taurus fleet, I have to drive vicariously thru friends and family. (Just bought a used '02 RSX/S for my 16 YO to drive and as a 3rd set of wheels for family use. Family ride is an '04 Ford Expy EB.)

    About 2 months ago, a very good friend decided he wanted a new commuter ride, wanted it to hold four comfortably, have great safety ratings, good gas mileage, an auto tranny for wife who doesn't drive stick, a high level of fun-to-drive and keep it under 30K all up and in. We narrowed it down to a TSX, an A-4 2.0, 325 and Mazda 6 (at my suggestion). The 330, A4 3.0, TL, G35 and IS were out of the price range.

    My friend, son and I went off on a Saturday to go test driving in the north Houston area. The three of us total about 535 pounds so with the car sales person, we would easily be able to put any car through it's paces performance wise. My son and I are 6"2 and 6'0' respectively and we were the oficial back seat testers. :)

    Drove all 4 cars in one day. All 4 are great rides and had many fine features. It was quickly evident that the 325 and A4 would be hard to price justify once we added the options that Jack (the friend) wanted the car to have even if they could be bought at dealer cost. It was going to come down to the 6 and TSX for reasons of cost even tho the BMW and A4 are great cars -- they definitely were too far out of the price range.

    We drove on I-45 for highway driving, and also on back roads with turns and stop and go driving.

    Handling - TSX
    Ride -- TSX
    Noise -- TSX
    Purchase Price -- 6
    Resale -- TSX
    TCO -- ?
    Front Seats -- TSX
    Back seat -- 6 and TSX both beat the a4 and 325 -- tie
    Overall interior -- TSX
    Controls, Climate etc -- TSX
    Sound System -- TSX
    Acceleration -- 6, TSX was no slouch tho even loaded w/4
    Steering -- TSX
    Projected Gas mileage and costs -- projected tie
    Tranny -- TSX for both auto and manu-matic modes
    Looks -- TSX (subjective, but we 3 were unaminous)

    Overall, we all liked the TSX best. This is no indictment of the 6, which I would prefer over an Accord EX. We had plenty of room in both and the trunk was fine for golf clubs. Jack and I liked the parchment/wood look interior best, son liked the quartz/aluminum look. Interestingly, I also drove the Mazda 3 sedan with a 5 speed manual that day -- GT/2.3 and was extremely impressed. I have to say that I would prefer the 3s with the 2.3 4 over the 6 with the auto/v6 for overall driving. My take is that it was more fun to drive.

    If I ever lose the company ride, I would be hard pressed not to pick a TSX myself. Very nice combination of sport and luxury and less than the cost of a comparable 3 or a4 by a lot. I'd take a perverse pleasure in drivng a car under the radar screen like a 6 or a TSX that I know has a much better price/performance ratio than the comparably sized German rides and also isn't sitting at every traffic light you come upon.

    OK, so what did Jack buy? He bought a brand new Toyota FJ in bright yellow. Why? To haul his new boat. He decided to update the family vehicle instead and keep an older vehicle for commuting.
  • xplorx4xplorx4 Posts: 621
    He made a good choice. I, too, would select a TSX over a Mazda6 (2.3L or 3.0L). The TSX is more refined.

    On the other hand, I opted to trade my '04 TSX in for an '06 MazdaSpeed6 (2.3L turbocharged motor), which edged out the TSX because of its incredible power.
  • zzzoom6zzzoom6 Posts: 425
    regarding crash tests, it's worth noting that the tests conducted for europe on the 6 did test it with side airbags and found the 6 to do better in side impacts than frontal. considering the frontal impacts by US groups were found to be very good, I was pleased to find these results. to be fair, the european test uses a lighter sled for side impacts than the tests in the US, which I think i remember hearing is designed to simulate an SUV.
  • zzzoom6zzzoom6 Posts: 425
    Most of the main issues have been covered reasonably fairly so far so I'll avoid going over this ground again. One aspect that was of some importance to me when buying was looking at utility. On occasion, my work requires me to haul some fairly large displays and in my time off I like to take my mountain bike and power tools. So flexible hauling capacity was of value to me which made the hatchback option on the 6 the deal sealer for me.

    Originally, I thought I was going to end up with a legacy gt wagon, but after seeing the styling on the 6 hatchback combined with the better braking and having less body roll than the legacy, it was just a matter of getting the right price. I've had the 6 now for almost a year and am finding it a very fun car to drive while having great flexibility in what I can take with me. And I'm happy I don't have to look like a "soccer mom" while driving it!
  • waygrabowwaygrabow Posts: 214
    I think that the TSX and Mazda6 are both good vehicles, so I occasionally 'tune in' to see how people are enjoying these cars. When we were buying a new ride for my wife, the finalists were the Mazda6, TSX and Audi A4. Our Audi has been flawless, but eventually it will be time to buy again. It's great to have many good alternatives to choose from.
  • Mazda is underrated as an innovator in car design. If Acura was so wonderful and the interior of the 6 has "american style bland guages." Why did Acura "knock off" the Mazda horizontal display band in both the TL and the TSX? Don't know, ask Honda! BTW the five pointed "semi-triangle" with the logo in the middle was also knocked off from mazda. Mazda started using it around 1999 or 1998 with the Protege and Millenias. The last generation TL's and TSX's copied that as well.
  • Test Drove Both when I bought my car. Both are great cares. I had my heart set on the Acura. Dollar For Dollar, I ended up with a 6s base trim. I liked it almost as much as the Acura. The Acura looks and feels more upscale. However, the Mazda was 24.5k msrp, with 3500 in incentives i got it for less than 20k. The Acura was therefore about 7k more than the 6 cyl 6s. I couldn't justify the additional money especially for a car that wasn't as fast and was no better handling. I bought the mazda 6. I love it.

    Its not the "s Grand Touring" like the post says, but i drove the Grand Touring and found it jittery with the 18" wheels. I liked the ride of the 17" wheels and the no spoiler look better. Thats the only difference.
  • fedlawmanfedlawman Posts: 3,118
    "Why did Acura "knock off" the Mazda horizontal display band in both the TL and the TSX?"

    Actually, the Mazda "horizontal display band" is a travesty with the clock, radio, and HVAC information presented in red LED's, all crowded next to each other with no association to the panel that controls that function.
    image

    Acura has individual, backlit displays for radio, clock, and HVAC information organized in an easy to read and logical manner.
    image

    Which do you think is more attractive and easier to read?

    Oh, by the way - this is the way Honda has been doing it since the 1991 Acura Legend.
    image

    Still looks modern even after 15 years!
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    Actually ,that is totally subjective. IMHO, all of the Mazda vehicle information, not related to the engine, is located in one, easy to read area. Your eyes do not have to search for information displays that distract you from what you are supposed to be paying attention to, which is DRIVING.

    The red digital (not LED) screen is better for your eyes to read, in all lighting conditions.
    That is scientifically proven.

    I really do not see any correlation between the 91 Legend and TSX interior, and no different then the Accord of that year. Really no different then any other [non-permissible content removed] car of that time, including the Mazda 626
  • fedlawmanfedlawman Posts: 3,118
    "Actually ,that is totally subjective."

    Yes, it is subjective. But here's why I disagree. If, for example, you want to know the temperature, what's easier to do? Look at the HVAC and read "72" or look at the center display, read "6:41!FM1 CH4 98.7! 89" and recognize that 89 is the temperature? No big deal, but it is my personal preference.

    "The red digital (not LED) screen is better for your eyes to read, in all lighting conditions. That is scientifically proven."

    No, you're wrong. Please do a little reading on "Purkinje Shift" and "Night Presbyopia" before you show me one of the scientific studies you reviewed.

    "I really do not see any correlation between the 91 Legend and TSX interior."

    Look at the center stack of the two Acura's again. The clock is at the top center by itself. The HVAC display is in the center next to the climate controls, and the radio display is beneath, next to the audio controls.
  • fedlawmanfedlawman Posts: 3,118
    "BTW the five pointed "semi-triangle" with the logo in the middle was also knocked off from mazda. Mazda started using it around 1999 or 1998 with the Protege and Millenias. The last generation TL's and TSX's copied that as well."

    You better check again and see who copied who...

    91 Mazda 929 (no hood emblem)
    image

    91 Acura Integra ("caliper" hood emblem)
    image

    92 Mazda 929 (hood emblem look familiar?)
    image

    06 Acura TSX (still "caliper" hood emblem)
    image

    Acura, like all car makes, evolves the style/appearance of the emblems periodically to keep up with evolving car designs. Acura started with the "caliper" and has kept with it to this day. Mazda started with no emblem at all and quickly jumped on the bandwagon, as illustrated in the pictures above. In 1999, Mazda changed to the current emblem design, in an attempt to give the brand a more upmarket appearance after the relative poor sales of the Millenia and, more importantly, the inability to create a luxury brand ("Amati") modeled after Honda's success with Acura (and Toyota's subsequent success with Lexus).

    Don't get me wrong - I love Mazda's. They make the sportiest, purest, most soulful Japanese cars out there. They have simply been challenged with marketing, production, cashflow, and quality issues while Honda and Toyota have simply enjoyed unchallenged global dominance. If I were a Mazda executive, I'd copy Honda/Acura too.
  • Don't get me wrong - I love Mazda's. They make the sportiest, purest, most soulful Japanese cars out there. They have simply been challenged with marketing, production, cashflow, and quality issues...

    I'll agree with the miserable marketing, but I've heard of no production issues since the fire at the Mazda3 plant. Cashflow isn't a problem, since they're pretty much the only car company that's both partly owned by Ford and MAKING money.

    If I were a Mazda executive, I'd copy Honda/Acura too.

    They did, in the early to mid '90s, and they lost marketshare and $$$, to the point where if Ford didn't step in, they would have left the US. Mazda has a good thing going with offering sporty, performance-oriented products at a reasonable price, instead of the plain vanilla offerings from Toyota and Honda. "BMW on a budget" is what I've heard more than once, and I agree.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    No, you're wrong. Please do a little reading on "Purkinje Shift" and "Night Presbyopia" before you show me one of the scientific studies you reviewed.

    Any one that needs corrected vision due to astigmatism, or similar conditions, has an easier time seeing red, rather then any shade of blue, if corrective eye ware is not being used. When I find that study, I'll post.
  • fedlawmanfedlawman Posts: 3,118
    "I've heard of no production issues since the fire at the Mazda3 plant."

    I actually didn't know about the fire. I was referring to their relatively small production numbers compared to Honda/Toyota. I think of Mazda as an almost "niche" builder - by Japanese standards.

    "the only car company that's both partly owned by Ford and MAKING money."

    Agreed, Their relationship with Ford has been a good deal for them.

    ""BMW on a budget"

    I'll agree with that too. The Miata and RX-8 are two of the finest sports cars on the market.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    The fire was over a year and a half ago. That fire also limited supply of the Mazda3 for 2005. What has hurt in 2007 inventory is the Cougar Ace vessel on a 90 degree list off of the coast of Alaska, with an abundance of Mazda3's and CX-7's on board.

    Mazda is just not as big as Honda/Toyota. They do not have the facilities to produce vehicles in the masses that Honda/Toyota do. Plus, they only have limited resources here in the U.S. Outside of the Mazda6, everything comes from Japan, where Honda/Toyota do a lot of production here.

    Even though the Tribute and B Series trucks are made here, they are more or less Ford clones.
  • fedlawmanfedlawman Posts: 3,118
    "Any one that needs corrected vision due to astigmatism, or similar conditions, has an easier time seeing red, rather then any shade of blue, if corrective eye ware is not being used."

    If you have astigmatism or another vision problem, then you shouldn't be driving without corrective eyewear. The reason why red is easier to see in this instance is because the eye is less sensitive to red, and an uncorrected astigmatism tends to "scatter" incoming light. This scattering would be minimized with red vs. blue light if the vision problem is left uncorrected.

    However, you are not correct in stating that red is better "in all lighting conditions" as you did in post #42.

    Here are some quotes from a couple of my old Army flight training manuals...

    TC 1-204: Night Flight Techniques and Procedures. "Presbyopia. This condition is part of the normal aging process, which causes the lens of the eye to harden...As presbyopia worsens, instruments, maps, and checklists become more difficult to read, especially with red illumination."

    FM 1-301: Aeromedical Training for Flight Personnel.
    "Aircrew members will not use red lighting or red-lens goggles when viewing inside or outside of the aircraft during flight. Red lighting is a longer nanometer, which is very fatiguing to the eyes."

    "Blue-green light falls naturally on the retinal wall and allows the eye to focus easily on maps, approach plates, and
    instruments; blue-green lighting results in less eye fatigue...When blue-green lighting is used properly, the decrease in light intensity and the ease of focusing make it more effective for night vision."
  • ""BMW on a budget"

    I'll agree with that too. The Miata and RX-8 are two of the finest sports cars on the market.


    I'm not sure I'd agree exactly with that. As fine as they are, neither the Miata nor the RX-8 are sedans, and neither offer the level of luxury or refinement that BMW's do, and I don't think they even try to. If you'd specifically mentioned the BMW Z series, then OK.

    Both are excellent sports cars in the strictest sense of the word. I guess I see this as more of a apples to oranges comparison, budget considerations or no.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    I believe he was referring to the fact that Mazda's resemble the appearance of BMW's, as well possessing handling characteristics you see in BMW's. I get this quite often from customers. Fit and finish are no where near BMW, but, that is to be expected.

    To be technical, the RX-8 is a sedan.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    Funny, I am a pilot as well, hence me name Avi...for aviation...however, I was never in the service. I was flying before I was driving....pilots license at 16.

    I'm still trying to locate where I read what I posted. I guess different studies give different results. Personally, I find red easier to read. But, thats just me.
  • fedlawmanfedlawman Posts: 3,118
    You must be younger than me Aviboy.

    I went to flight school when I was 23 and I didn't have any vision problems. Now that I'm 40, I still have 20/15 uncorrected vision in the daytime, but at night my vision is not what it used to be.

    And yes, the red instruments in my BMW are a little "fuzzy" to my eyes at night. I have to look and really concentrate on focusing to make them perfectly clear.

    I never thought it would happen to me.

    So what do you fly? I'm pretty much a helicopter guy (I fly an A-Star during the week), but I do have a couple hundred hours in SEL airplanes (Cessna 206 Soloy mostly).
  • I believe he was referring to the fact that Mazda's resemble the appearance of BMW's, as well possessing handling characteristics you see in BMW's. I get this quite often from customers. Fit and finish are no where near BMW, but, that is to be expected.

    To be technical, the RX-8 is a sedan


    Mazdas resemble BMW's? Sorry, not seeing it. Handling, OK, at least for the RX-8 and Miata.

    And the RX-8 may technically be a sedan, but it's rear seat comfort is marginal, and don't you have to open the front doors before you can open the rears? Not very sedan-like. Let's not split hairs, it's a sports car.

    I like Mazda's a lot, and would love to own a Miata someday. I just wasn't getting the BMW reference.
  • Mazdas resemble BMW's? Sorry, not seeing it.

    "BMW on a budget" simply refers to the great handling and control that pretty much all the Mazda sedans and sports cars have, at a fraction of the price of a BMW.

    Handling, OK, at least for the RX-8 and Miata.

    Right. Have you bothered to drive a Mazda6 or Mazda3, either the standard models or MazdaSpeed versions? If not, I HIGHLY suggest you do. The Mazda3 has decent power, and out-handles everything else in it's class, hands down. Excellent control, great steering and braking, and it's just fun to drive. The only thing better in this class is the MS3, with 263 HP and 280 lb/ft or torque.

    The Mazda6? I challenge you to find a "family sedan" that handles as well as a 6, within the same price range. Camry and Accord? Yeah right... Altima? Too nose-heavy, and the pre-'07 models with the V6 suffer from SEVERE torque steer (the '07's are supposed to quell that, but I haven't driven one yet to see for myself). Yeah, the V6 is underpowered compared to the rest of the class, but the '08 is looking to change all that, rumored to receive the new 3.5L with 260+ HP.

    The 3 and 6 are basically great cars for people that would LOVE the performance of a sports car, with the practicality of a 4-door (or 5-door) family sedan. In other words, BMW on a budget...
  • Dude, relax. I was responding to aviboy, who did say that Mazdas resemble BMW's. I've driven the 6, almost purchased one in fact. The TSX handles every bit as well as the standard 6, with a superior interior and better fit and finish, IMO.

    Nobody is dissing Mazdas, I was just replying to aviboys post. The MS 3 looks like a great car in particular. I've always enjoyed Mazdas, if only because the company has always been willing to think outside the box.
  • audia8qaudia8q Posts: 3,138
    avi....Service is a comparison that folks forget. Since we have Acura and Mazda dealerships let me share.. The entire Acura line is good quality stuff but no bargain to maintain and/or fix. I just pulled the year to date service numbers for our Acura and Mazda stores. The avg. repair order YTD at the Acura store is $980. (highest out of 5 franchises) The mazda dealership is $280.
This discussion has been closed.