Toyota Corolla vs. Mazda3 vs. Volkswagen Jetta vs. Chevrolet Cobalt

tpulak

I am looking for a replacement for a 1997 Toyota Camry. Though people say Toyota Camry's use less gas, mine is giving horrific numbers(20 miles per gallon in highway, and less in the city). Also, the Camry was a kind of bland looking car, with a very mushy ride. Also, for the money, it doesn't have much features: this car was $20,500 new, and didn't even have a CD player.(who plays cassettes anymore?!!) So know I lowered my choices to Toyota Corolla , Mazda 3 , Volkswaggen Jetta, and Chevrolet Cobalt. I want the best choice of these 3 cars, that give me good fuel economy, decent power, some style, features for the money, a good amount of interior room, and reliability. Any suggestions?

dchev

Hello tpulak,
If you can wait until February 11, 2007, I would recommend 2009 Toyota Corolla.
It will be new generation Corolla with good fuel economy and many standard options. Unless, you want the 9th generation Corolla, which is also good (I have it and love it, so far).
If you can not wait, Mazda 3, Honda Civic, or Hyundai Elantra are good choices.
Or maybe Scion xD.......I like Mazda 3, but many people say that it has low fuel economy.
Go test drive them and see for yourself, but Honda and Scion (Toyota Corolla) will have the best fuel economy, style and reliability.
Also check www.fitzmall.com, and you can find excellent prices for any of these cars.
Good Luck

aviboy97

I like Mazda 3, but many people say that it has low fuel economy.

The Mazda3 i has good fuel economy, only a couple MPG's behind Honda and Toyota, but, it has more power. Mazda3 s has lower fuel economy, but, by far the most power.

Honda and Scion (Toyota Corolla) will have the best fuel economy, style and reliability.

All are very reliable. Will not go wrong with any. Style is totally subjective.

Go test drive them and see for yourself

Best advise. Need to drive them to see what fits you best.

jtk152

It depends what features you need to have. IMO, you can't beat a Cobalt LS for most bang for the buck. A basic Cobalt will be your least expensive, followed by the Corolla. The Mazda 3 and Jetta are a step up as far as features, sportiness, looks, etc.. The Corolla will feel the least powerful, but will yield the best fuel economy, The Cobalt has more power than the Corolla and a few less MPGs The 5cyl engine in the Jetta is a whole different class of engine IMO and not that great economy wise. The Mazda 3 and Jetta will be thousands of dollars more than a Cobalt or Corolla.

Joel

autonomous

I lowered my choices to Toyota Corolla , Mazda 3 , Volkswaggen Jetta, and Chevrolet Cobalt.
I would not say that this is lowering your choices but rather checking a segment segment than the Toyota Camry. Some of us think small is beautiful. On the other hand, you may find these cars are too small for your needs. The good news is that the new Toyota Camry is fuel efficient and no longer bland.

cars, that give me good fuel economy, decent power, some style, features for the money, a good amount of interior room, and reliability.
You may want to use the extensive research of Consumer Reports that compiles information from millions of drivers annually. CR rates the Toyota Corolla, Mazda3 and Honda Civic highly in terms of features, price and reliability. The VW and the Cobalt are another story. Test drive the ones that seem interesting to see which is best for you. Best of luck.

lostwrench

Feb. 11, 2008.

backy

CR doesn't rate the price of cars. So the fact that, for example, one compact costs $2000 less than another doesn't factor into its rankings. As for features, CR does rate the Civic (EX and Hybrid specifically) and Mazda3 highly, but it actually ranks the Jetta (also the previous-gen Focus and the Elantra) above the Corolla. The Cobalt is above only the Ion and Forenza in CR's rankings. As far as reliability, it ranks the Civic Hybrid and Corolla highest in this class in reliability, with the Civic EX, Mazda3, and Impreza above-average in reliability also. (As of last October CR didn't have enough data to rate the Elantra, Lancer, Sentra, and Forenza in reliability.)

dchev

I am not sure about Mazda 3 fuel economy :confuse:
I have read about 20-24 MPG fuel economy with 2.3 litter engine.
Now, this is very low fuel economy!!!!! V6 engines even top this fuel economy. For example, I used to have 2005 Toyota Solara SLE with 3.3l engine, and I usually could get 26MPG average fuel economy.
Now, If Mazda 3 could get on average 30MPG, wow it will be the perfect car for me.
I love Mazda 3 design; I believe Mazda 3 HB is the best looking vehicle, but fuel economy is poor for me!!! This is only my opinion. It depends what you want!
However, if we talk about fuel economy at 20-26 MPG, there are good choices in Mazda 3 price range. You can buy Toyota Camry, Honda Accord, Nissan Altima.....and all these cars have fuel economy in 25-28 MPG!!!
It is a personal choice, and it is a good idea to go and test drive all vehicles you like, and then choose the best one that fits your budget!
Personally, I made my choice with 2007 Toyota Corolla, and I like it. I know it is not a Lexus, but it gives me comfortable ride and good fuel economy - average 30-32MPG.
Good luck!

lostwrench

2008 Mazda 3
Manual 5 speed - 2L engine - 24/32 mpg
Automatic 4 speed - 2L engine - 23/31 mpg
Manual 5 speed - 2.3L engine - 22/29 mpg
Automatic 5 speed - 2.3L engine - 22/29 mpg

autonomous

CR doesn't rate the price of cars. So the fact that, for example, one compact costs $2000 less than another doesn't factor into its rankings.
True.

CR ... ranks the Jetta ... above the Corolla.
Hmmm, let's check that Oct. 2007 issue of CR again. CR makes clear that in addition to the ranking score, the vehicle's reliability is key to getting a recommendation. Only vehicles with good reliability are recommended. Since the Jetta has only "fair" reliability, CR does not recommend it. This is not new, the Jetta has a long history of poor reliability and has not been recommended by CR for quite a while. CR does recommend the Corolla as well as the Mazda3, Honda Civic, Ford Focus and Subaru Impreza.

The Cobalt is above only the Ion and Forenza in CR's rankings.
Same here, the Cobalt is not a recommended vehicle.

backy

You are confusing CR's rankings of cars with their recommendations. First, they rank cars in order of how they perform in their road tests. Then they decide which cars to recommend. To be recommended, the car must score acceptably in its tests, must have good overall crash test scores, and must have at least average predicted reliability. (There is a "top" level recommendation also, with more stringent criteria.)

So it is true that CR ranks the Jetta above the Corolla. But the Corolla is recommended, while the Jetta is not because the reliability of the 2.5L models has been below average. (That means, technically, CR could recommend the turbo and diesel versions of the Jetta, which have average reliability, but CR doesn't get that fine-grained in its recommendations.)

autonomous

You are confusing CR's rankings of cars with their recommendations.
Well, let's say that the rank means little without the recommendation.

backy

Why is that? What if someone wants to buy a new model that CR has tested, it's done well in their tests, but there's not enough reliability data for CR to recommended it yet. Are you saying that no one should buy that car until CR's surveys cough up enough data to let CR give it a predicted reliability score? :confuse:

tpulak

By far, which is(overall) the most......

expensive:
least expensive:
most powerful:
least powerful:
most mpg:
least mpg:
most reliable:
least reliable:
I need to see it in this format.

backy

As you wish, my Master [insert wheezing sound ala Darth Vader]:

expensive: too close to call between Jetta and Mazdaspeed3
least expensive: Cobalt, especially looking at real-world prices
most powerful: Mazdaspeed3 in a run-away
least powerful: Corolla
most mpg: Corolla
least mpg: Mazdaspeed3(?)
most reliable: Corolla (per CR surveys)
least reliable: (tie) Cobalt and Jetta 2.5 (per CR surveys)

poncho167

Remember this is CR you are refering to which should not be taken too seriously.

jtk152

IMO, the only two in this list that somewhat compare are the Corolla and the Cobalt. They are both small, basic cars with a 4cyl engine and choice of 5spd or auto. As said again and again, the Cobalt will be more 'fun' to drive and feel more powerful, but wont be put together as well as the Corolla. If you want basic, no frills, non exciting, fuel efficient transportation, go with the Corolla. Who knows, you might like one over the other. The reason I bought my 2007 Cobalt LS, 4dr, auto, was there was nothing else on the market back in the spring of '07 that gave me more bang for the buck. I couldn't get a Hyundai or Kia for the out the door price I paid. (~$12100)

Joel

backy

The Mazda3i is also a pretty basic, 4-cylinder car with a choice of a 5 speed or automatic. In fact, I think the Mazda3i is the most well-rounded car in this bunch. It has good power (over 150 hp), great handling, good fuel economy (esp. with the 2.0L and 5-speed), good reliability, is reasonably priced (especially for a car made in Japan), and is good looking inside and out (subjective). The Mazda3i will be more fun to drive than either the Corolla or Cobalt. It's possible to get a Cobalt or even a Corolla for less money than the Mazda3i, but IMO they are not nearly the car that the Mazda3i is.

If price is THE object, one option to consider is the Spectra--starts at around $11k in real-world pricing and is at least as good as the Corolla and better than the Cobalt, IMO.

aviboy97

You get what you pay for....it's as simple as that. Cobalt, Spectra are priced pretty low, but you don't get much in terms of options or quality. Although, the Spectra is turning out to be a decent car. Mazda3 is more of a car then both, hence, it costs more plus it has been reliable.

jtk152

You have to bump up to the Spectra EX to get standard A/C. If you add AT, you are close to $15K. For a [lower end] Kia? C'mon. A Mazda3 will be thousands more than a Cobalt LS. Again, I think we are getting into an apples to oranges comparison. IMO, if you intend to spend $15K+ on a small vehicle, why even consider a Cobalt??

Joel

backy

Did the Cobalt LS AT you bought for $12,100 have a list price of $12,100, or did you buy it for $12,100? (I noticed a 2008 Cobalt LS base model with AT lists for $15.5k.) Likewise, just because a Spectra with AC and AT lists for close to $15k doesn't mean that's what the negotiated price, with rebates, is.

I agree though, if you are going to spend $15k for a vehicle, there are much better options than a Cobalt.

jtk152

The sticker on my 2007 LS 4dr,AT, was $14640. I qualified for a $2000 rebate and a $500 "conquest" rebate.14640 - 2500= 12140. Which was the cash price. To complicate matters, I traded in our 2005 Trailblazer, which I owed some money on, but came out ahead in the trade in. All said and done, I got the Cobalt for just over $8K. I financed and put nothing down.

Joel

poncho167

I think you made the correct choice. The Mazda maybe the most stylish of the group but the Cobalt is very well rounded and will get better mileage than a Mazda which is probably the lowest in the group. The Cobalt has so many nice standard features and options that to me it stands out in the overall value catagory.

tpulak

Whoooa!!! Standard A/C?? I mean, how many cars come without A/C!! I need A/C here, especially because of all these heat blazes in the summer. Also, I need to know which of these cars come standard with power windows, and power locks, in base trim.

tpulak

Yeah, the Mazda is quite a pit pricier. I got a price quote the other day, on a Mazda 3i, that had leather seats, and alloys, that costed me $17,490 final. But with a corolla, with was loaded with nothing(the plastic wheel covers where cheep looking!!), I got a deal of $15,380 final. I noticed, that the Toyota's options were so expensive! Like when I tried to opt for the alloy wheels, they said the price would have been around the 16,000 's. I did,'t want to go that far(with a toyota). I am still waiting for the prices of a chevy Cobalt, and , finally, for the Jetta, its outta mind. The only reason-- it costs tooo much for a compact sedan. I got a price on it for $19,855 final. So far , what do you people think of these prices?

backy

Why does it matter whether features like A/C and power windows/locks come standard in base trim, if they are readily available as options? It's common for low-end cars like these (although Jetta is not really a "low-end car" compared to others) to be offered in a bare-bones "price leader" trim so that the automaker can advertise a low starting price. Then you have some low-end cars that don't offer standard A/C and/or power windows/locks on the base trim, but do offer important safety features like six airbags and even ABS as standard on all trims. Again, what is the big deal as long as the equipment you want is readily available?

backy

A final price for a Mazda3i with alloys and leather of $17.5k seems pretty reasonable (although it must have been custom leather, since the 3i doesn't offer leather as an option). The Jetta can be pretty reasonable if you get the base model with no options, but even that car is pretty well equipped for this class. I don't know what trim you were quoted on the Jetta for $20k, but it must have been an up-level trim. The base Jetta 2.5 S 6AT starts at around $18k invoice, add about $400 for 16" alloys. That Jetta quoted for $20k must be pretty well equipped!

dispencer2

I would look for a certified 2007 Impala with the 3.5 litre 6. I had a 2006 model and it consistantly got around 20 mpg in the city and 30-32 on the road. Why put up with a small 4cyl compact car when you can be more comfortable, get the same or better gas mileage and hold more people and luggage in an Impala for less money. A new Impala is throwing money down the drain considering that it depriciates 50% in the first year. Buying a 5-10k mile one for about $15k is worthwhile. Paying $23k for a new one like I did is stupid.

jtk152

I agree, a late model, low mileage Chevy Imp is an awesome buy. You get a lot of car for the money. We've got a few in the family. Problem is- you are not going to average ~30mpg per tank with an Impala unless it's nothing but a long steady hywy run. You'll average say 30mpg with a Cobalt and 25mpg per tank with an Imp. It adds up with gasoline the price it is.

Joel

tpulak

The Jetta was kinda equipped, with leather seats as well as alloys, but somehow, from the distance, it seemed like wheel covers.I really don't wanna spend 20k on a Jetta. Its not worth it. I also found a totally base Mazda 3i(it came with power windows, and locks, though i am not sure that's an option) for $14,500 total. But I saw a fully equipped used Mazda for $11,355 , and it only had 13,500 miles. The owner was a private guy, and he had no intention to make money. Everything was in good shape, with the exception of a small 1/2 inch scratch in the back fender. Sure it had plastic wheel covers, and fur seats, but it was better of than the corolla. Which deal is better? The Chevy a good deal, but I noticed some loose plastic trim pieces. And the plastic pieces were cheap too. Though this is a compact sedan, I would still want some quality stuff. For some reason, Mazda's trim pieces felt more quality.The gaps were so tight, I don't think a penny could go through the gaps. The corolla's quality was good too, but I noticed some inconsistent gaps, and some rough edges. In fact, I'm wearing a bandage now, as I am typing this sentence. I am surprised with the Jetta's build quality too. The materials were even better than the Mazda, but it had inconsistent gaps more than the Corolla had. I have a question: does the Mazda 3(in any trim) come with wood trim. I personally prefer wood trim (even fake) to metallic trim(the metallic trim is fake anyway). I own an Acura MDX, that has woodtrim, so I like the grand feel. I mean its kind of weird that the Corolla comes with fake woodtrim in LE, and that leads to a luxury like feel.

backy

Power windows/locks are an option to the 3i, or part of a trim package like the Touring package.

If you can wait awhile to buy, the 3 is getting a Touring VE package (kinda like that on the 6) in January. It's supposed to be like the Touring "plus" with 17" alloys, and I think standard safety package (side bags, ABS) plus some other goodies. If it's anything like the VE package on the 6, it will be quite a bargain.

The 2008 3i is supposed to have "zebra-pattern" wood trim standard--doesn't it? I recall it's a very dark grained plood, not your traditional orangeish plood. Looked quite tasteful (for plod).

dispencer2

I used to average at least 30 on the road in the Impala on trips from Clovis NM to Dallas. There were small towns and 2 lane and 4 lane roads. I normally went 70-72 except for 35 in the small towns and there was often heavy traffic and several lights between Jacksboro and I-820 in Ft. Worth. On steady freeway travel I would usually average 30-32. In town it was normally 19-22. I felt that a smoother ride and enough horsepower to pass someone as well as comfortable seating for 5 and plenty of luggage space outweighed the small difference in gas mileage. The Chevy Impala is a good all-around car. A Corolla isn't. It is simply too small. Another thing to factor in is the ridiculous dealer charge for the "15,000 mile checkup" and so on on Toyotas and Nissans. With the Chevy all that is done is to change the oil periodically. I did it at 3,000 miles - the book calls for 7500 as I recall. If you follow the book on Japanese car services it will cost much more than an American car will, out -weighing the gas savings.

flpcguy

I bought a Corolla CE with NO options, not even floor mats (about $50) and I find it well equipped. With HEPA filtered A/C, full instrumentation including tach, two trip gauges, and outside temp reading, remote control mirrors, rear defogger, ample interior lights, a CD player and push button AM/FM, trunk and hood lights, cable trunk and gas filler door release, large padded arm rest/storage, pockets in the doors, locking glove box, lumbar adjustable reclining bucket seats, lightly tinted glass, seven inch wide steel rims with 15" tires, and more even a CE comes well appointed.

The only option I even considered getting was the $550 power window and remote door lock upgrade pkg. but then I realized I could just reach the passenger door lock from the driver's seat. These are strictly convenience features. ABS brakes have gone up from $75 to $300 [different system?] and side airbags remain $660. Stability control compensates for those who steer the wrong way in a skid. You might need some or all of these safety options. I switched from a loaded Chrysler LHS and except for lack of a graphic sound equalizer find little difference in comfort or convenience. Despite the size difference, I have never felt crowded, quite the opposite, these seats are more supportive and comfortable (just not leather).

Competing models like the Kia Optima S are also well equipped. Mazda 3i's come loaded from Japan so you can't really compare them with low end Corollas, especially late in the calendar year. There were very few 5-speed 3i's in the SE US when I was buying last Dec. The closest price I could get was about $800 more for a non-touring Mazda 3i. It feels and drives like a mini BMW 3-Series, well worth the price if performance is an issue. If economy and reliability are priorities, you can't beat the Corolla for long term reliability, parts availability, and total cost of ownership. The best feature of the Corolla is that it cruises the interstate at 70, under 3,000 RPMs. I really do average nearly 40 MPG in suburban driving. After 5 years of refinements including roller bearing shifter and simplified rear shelf light in 2006, you can expect zero design defects on your new Corolla.

tpulak

The new chevy impala might be good. But I had bad experiences with it. Loose trim pieces falling apart, EGR valve replacement at only 5,000 miles(I don't know what this thingamajig even does, but the dealers said I had to replace it, and I had to never replace this thing in my camry) , spark plug replacement at only 15,000 miles, and a terrifying depreciation rate.(bought an impala 2006, for $26,250, sold it just over $17,000, with 15,670 miles). I mean in the gas part, its pretty good, but for the price, I might as well get a Honda, which gets more mpg, and a better reliability record.

tpulak

oh man. I liked the traditional real wood looking textures, that are reddish, to orange. I really don't like the dark grained textured thing, like my Acura TL S has. I'd rather have metallic trim.

jlawrence01

The problem with the new Impala (as opposed to the previous model -pre 2006) is that the gas mileage is a lot lower. We were averaging 28 mpg on the 2004 model vs. 24.5 on the 2007 model with the SAME driving mix.

lostwrench

So true. My Impala gets 32 mpg hwy consistently. (3.4L).

lostwrench

Ok, but do they have the same engine size? My 2004 has the smaller 3.4L.

jlawrence01

Both have 3.4L engines.

lostwrench

Chevy did not put any 3.4L engines in the 2007 Impala. Perhaps you bought yours used and the original engine was swapped?

aviboy97

...the Mazda3gets the same fuel economy as the Honda Civic EX. Mazda3 gets 30 overall vs the Honda at 31 overall. This is on their list of "Top 12 Gas Savers". Surprisingly, they Toyota Corolla is not on this list.

backy

That is odd. CR got 28 mpg for the Civic EX AT they most recently tested, but 29 mpg for the Corolla LE AT. So putting the Civic on the "top 12 gas savers" list but not the Corolla is very strange, especially since the AT versions are the most popular.

Actually, in CR's tests the Mazda3i got better overall FE than the Civic EX. The Mazda3i got 30 mpg overall with the AT and 33 mpg with the MT. The Civic EX got 28 mpg overall with the AT and 31 mpg with the MT.

tpulak

I heard some people in the Mazda 3 forum complaining about tranny problems, at 70k miles. Is this true? Are there more problems?

nsbio1

Brand-new 2008 Mazda3i, real-world mileage, 2nd tank (1-st refueling after the dealer-filled tank), 29.1mpg in mixed driving. Mileage might even improve with mileage (pardon the pun), after the car is fully broken in.

flpcguy

BTW the new 2009 Corolla abandons the great power train with higher drive ratio for Scion or Matrix parts so mileage drops considerably even after they detuned the new engine firmware. Revs are up a lot. Red light racing is improved at the expense of cruising (no more cruising I-95 at 3000 rpm to do 75), engine life is reduced, noise increased, and fuel economy way down. The 2009 is just like all the clones. I hope it is a lot cheaper to build (fewer, cheaper parts) and the savings are used to hold the line on pricing not increase profit margins. Also, the new nose is ugly and looks cheap.
http://www.autoblog.com/photos/2008-toyota-corolla/466914/

My advice, buy a 2008 CE 5-speed while you can, especially while the factory to dealer $1500 incentive applies. Otherwise, the basic Mazda 3i 5-speed (non-touring) is the clear choice over the 2009 Corolla, even for economy minded drivers like me.

aviboy97

I heard some people in the Mazda 3 forum complaining about tranny problems, at 70k miles. Is this true? Are there more problems?

If there are a select few that are complaining, then obviously those individuals have had issues. According to most every source that rates reliability, the Mazda3 is a consensus pick.

Is the Mazda3 perfect? No. Do you stand a chance with something going wrong? Yes. Name a vehicle that has been perfect? Can't think of any? Thats right, there are none. I know a few of you might say Corolla or Civic, but, there is no hiding the fact that they have had their issues, especially the 2006+ Civic.

poncho167

If styling is most important to you I agree the Mazda is probably the easiest on the eyes but Mazda have never been known for having good mileage cars so that appears to be their only downfall. When I used to sell Mazda's 20-years-ago they had their smallest compact (don't remember the name) that only got low 20 mpg highway and was priced at a ridiculous $20,000 at that time.

aviboy97

Mazda have never been known for having good mileage cars so that appears to be their only downfall.

I would disagree. I see older Mazdas, and newer ones, in our service shop that have very high mileage and are just in for routine maintenance. The Miata, Protege, and 626 have been vehicles that have been reliable. Out of Mazdas newer product, they all have been reliable as well.

When I used to sell Mazda's 20-years-ago they had their smallest compact (don't remember the name) that only got low 20 mpg highway and was priced at a ridiculous $20,000 at that time.

Back then I believe it was the Mazda 323 GLX 4x4.

backy

Twenty years ago isn't now. The Mazda3i gets very good fuel economy, e.g. the Mazda3i AT actually got better overall fuel economy (30 mpg vs. 29) than the Corolla AT in CR's road tests, even though the Mazda has a larger, more powerful engine.

m_gosh

I'd looked for a stylish small car for the last four years. I drove the Civic, Corolla, Mazda and Cobalt - over and over again. AND I checked all specs, customer satisfaction and RESALE value (can only have a great resale if people like it). I have to admit, I really wanted to buy the Cobalt because it's a Chevy, but a close friend and a family member had some quality problems after one year. I decided against it. I've liked the Mazda3 for years. Style-wize, it's a definite win for me. What I didn't expect was that it was definitely the most fun to drive and it has an awesome resale value. That pretty much sums it up. The resale wouldn't be so great if the auto wasn't in demand (because PEOPLE FIND IT A GOOD BUY). I bought one this year and it drives tight, concise and gets GREAT gas mileage for the size and fun it offers.