Mazda Protegé

chikoo · February 2002

http://www.edmunds.com/ownership/techcenter/articles/43855/article.html

for more on suspensions.

newcar31 · February 2002

That's a good article, but there is no mention of torsion beam or twist beam suspension in it.

krotine · February 2002

I am looking to install an air/fuel guage in my car. The problem lies in the oxygen sensor:

1. There are four wires connected to it -- which wire is the high side?
2. What is the voltage -- 0-1 VDC or 0-5 VDC?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

dinu01 · February 2002

From my experience, let the engine REALLY cool down before touching that area if the engine. Can't answer your other questions though (:

dvsgel · February 2002

I just took a look at a Protege LX with under 15,000 miles on it. It is automatic, power everything, still under warranty, cdplayer. According to Edmunds, you should expect to pay around $8800.00 for this car to a private seller. The seller is asking $10,200.00 I've never driven a Protege before. If I can get him down to $9800 or $9900, is it worth it?

mdaffron · February 2002

I'll be getting a set of four Dunlop SP Sport A2s from TireRack installed on my 2000 ES 5-speed in about an hour. I can't wait! I'll probably be taking the "long way home" so I can do a little preliminary testing. Bye-bye, Poortenzas! No more slip-slidin' away ... (sorry Mr. Simon!)

Meade

shrique · February 2002

Back in the early 90's Honda had a problem with a new tire compound that they put on new Accords. Apparently the rolling of the tires built up one heckuva charge and when these poor people would try to pay the toll booth attendate ZZAAAAPPP they both would get nailed. (chuckle) It's funny that in the story I read the Toll booth attendants were the people complaining to Honda.

elec3 · February 2002

Thanks for the info. This is something I'm more curious about than serious about at the moment. I'm a college student looking at graduating a year from May so by the time I'd get around to it, warranty probably wouldn't be a concern. Of course by then I may be looking to replace the whole Pro and not just the engine.

narenji · February 2002

Larry,
I actually owned a 2001 Sentra SE for a while before trading it for a 02 Subaru WRX (I know I know, but turbo power was calling me). The Sentra handled pretty well, but ride was not good. It was worse than the WRX, which is a very sporting car. The beam suspension also allowed the rear to get unsettled on bumpy turns and freeway expansion joints. The effect gets worse the bigger the car gets. I got an Infiniti I35 as a loaner when my Protege was in the shop for some warranty work (door strips were weathered), and while everything else in the I35 was pure sweetness, the ride wasn't. It was worse than the Sentra on LA freeway ramps. The rear would do this bobble that you'd see trucks and SUVs do, and you could feel the rear end step out momentarily.

And Nissan didn't use the beam suspension in the Sentra for more room, cause it's extremely tight in the back- they used it because it was cheap. Like I said in a different post, the rest of the car was great- the durable SR20DE 2.0DOHC engine, the transmission, the brakes. The Protege has an amazing amount of room for a car with independent rear suspension.

IMHO, manufacturers are just trying to figure out ways to pad their pockets better. Even though the average car now costs more than $15k, they can't give you things like independent rear sus, 4 wheel disc brakes. They are sacrificing substance for overall style. Cars in the late 80s and early 90s from Japan had all these features for reasonable prices. I realize that Japanese imports have high tariffs, but what about Japanese models made here in the US? Even Civic EXs costing $17k don't get rear disc brakes! We have to cherish our well-made, well-priced Proteges with 4 wheel disc brakes and Indpendent rear sus. Now if I can get that JSpec engine into the engine bay and make it pass emissions...

alternator · February 2002

Another "shocking" solution is just to close your door by gently pushing on the window glass instead of the metal.

the_big_h · February 2002

thanks to Meade for first bringing up this tip, now when I get out of my Protege, before I put my foot on the ground, I make sure my hand is on a metal part of the door, now when I step out and close the door, no more shocks!!

Although shock therapy could be beneficial sometimes

browntrout1 · February 2002

I would add a Nissan NX2000 to your list of cars in that price range. I really wanted one but I couldn't find one with a 5 speed in Montreal. I looked for like 3 months and then test drove a Protege which I bought. Anyways, the NX was the best compact coupe you could by back then for the price. It comes with alloys and most of them had t-roofs + AC. Like a poor man's convertible. They were made from 1991-1993. Make sure you go for the nx2000, not the nx1600. The nx2000 has the sr20de engine when it had the 7500 RPM redline. The last 5 years, the sr20 engine was tamed down alot unfortunatly.

I read an article on it a while back. At the time, it was one of the 10 best handling cars...I think car and driver did this review. It was up there with porches! I think it has a limited slip differential as well. Jeez, I sound like a salesman. Anyways, I was willing to pay 4000-8000cdn for one a year and a half ago. I'm sure now you could find one in good condition for about 3500-7500. I'd love to get one as a second car to modify...but that's an expensive hobby when I'm still paying off a new(er) car.

Other cars you might want to consider are Ford probe (same guts as Mazda MX-6), Infiniti G20 (may be a little more pricey), or a Celica

fowler3 · February 2002

It was up there with porches!

Never heard of a car with porches,is that front or back, covered or screened in? Hey, maybe it's an air dam.

I know, it was a typo.

BT it's Porsches.

fowler3

meinrad · February 2002

I would highly 2nd browntrout1's recommendation of looking at the nx2000. I bought that car out of college and absolutely loved it. The t-tops were fun and the car handled fantastic. The engine had plenty of power for spirited driving. Oh man, I almost wish no one brought up that car, now I miss it again. At least I have the new Pro5 to take my mind off it!

timhonda · February 2002

Make sure you check with carfax.com for its history. You need a VIN to input.
I got a 2000 LX with 25K for 9300 dollars with a clean history from CARFAX.

dinu01 · February 2002

Thanx for the tips guys! NO NX2000 popped up in my searches so far, maybe it's the same problem here in T.O. like in Mtl: not many were bought I suppose.

As for the MX-3, I found a few in V6s with 5 spd, but almost none with the anemic 1.6 88hp engine. Why would I want that? More reliable as per different reports and less insurance $.

Update: The car will be bough late May/early June, as I figured out a way to acquire the cash for it. It's all legal, no worries and I will still take very good care of the PRO

Dinu

snagy1 · February 2002

do any of you have info regarding those inserts that go into the window channels (instead of the kind where you use double sided sticky tape) that can be used as a wind screen?. the tape kind always fall off and this other type seems better except maybe it would bind the window in its movement. thanks

krotine · February 2002

The "WeatherFlectors" on this site install into the window channels.

http://www.macneil.com/main.asp

krotine

zoomzoom79 · February 2002

fowler: My car has never seen more than 30MPG. I would be more accepting of the poor mileage if it offered a significant performance advantage over a Civic but it doesn't. In fact, the Civic's engine is smoother, gets better mileage, and equals (if not betters) the Protege in performance. The only bad thing about the Civic is that you can't get 4-wheel disc brakes on any Civic 96+ unless you buy an Si. The Protege does drive like it's on rails but so would a Civic if it had performance tires and 16" wheels.

dinu: We have had 4 Integras. A 90, 91, 92, and a 94. Never had a problem with any of them. We sold our Only thing you have to check for is the timing belt and the CV axles. They drive great and have plenty of power with the 1.8L 140HP engine. We sold the 92 to our neighbor with 140,000 miles on it and he has not treated it very well (it now has 2 different kinds of wheels and tires on it and he has wrecked it once) but the engine still runs great. I would also recommend the Accord. It's bigger than the Integra and just as reliable it just comes down to what you prefer in a car.

mazdafun · February 2002

It depends on how you drive and the fuel mixture (winter v. summer...winter fuel in temperate place has less energy/unit mass, resulting in lower mpg)

Recently, I've been averaging 24-26mpg in mostly local and spirited driving. If I drive more sanely, I average 28mpg. My mileage is more than 70/30 local/highway and a short 6.5mi commute (one of the big selling points to me of my current job). My last job involved a 50mi one-way commute that took me through downtown Dayton. Traffic could be a real bear in the afternoons, easily turning a 50-minute commute into a 90-minute (or more) commute.

I can get 34-36 mpg easily if I drive mostly freeway miles at a relaxed pace (about 65mph). However, I usually go at a faster pace and get about 31mpg on the freeway.

I have to admit my wife's Saturn gets better economy (about 33-34mpg) in this type of driving as it's geared higher and has larger-diameter wheels, the set-up best suited for high-speed cruising. We're funny that way, I drive hard and fast on local, twisty roads and more sedately on the freeway, while she takes it easy on the local twisties and moves at a good clip on the freeway.

tomciviletti · February 2002

although the pro is no fuel economy champ, it is not as bad as epa #'s suggest. If you look at mpg's from comparison tests [like consumers report or car and driver] you see that the civic and corolla epa #'s are inflated. I do think Mazda could do better, though. My '99es gets 24-28mpg in town and 30-34mpg's hiway.

In Portland, it is damp in winter and dry in summer. I get shocked wearing cotton jeans and t-shirt. It's the pro upholstery.

boggse · February 2002

I wouldn't be too quick to discount the V6 MX-3. I know several people who have over 150,000 miles on theirs and haven't had any problems. I also spoke with my service manager yesterday while I was picking up some touch-up paint. He said that there are no major problems with the V6. He also said that the 1.8L V6 was originally developed for the Miata, but it screwed up the 50:50 weight ratio, so they designed the MX-3 around the engine to fill the sporty hatchback niche. He recommended looking for a 1994 model GS if you want the V6. That was the last year they made the V6 version in the US. 1994 was also the first year the 4 banger went up to 105HP and 100ft-lbs. It may be different in Canada. If you get one with either engine, I will feel a twinge of jealousy. Good luck.

bjewett · February 2002

I talked to a Mazda rep at the Chicago auto show who said a protege sedan turbo will be out soon - in the next few months. If I remember correctly, he said it would be in the range of 170-180 hp, a limited run for the spring (a few thousand cars? better than only 1500 MP3s), with another run
this fall (with different colors).

Wish they'd extend that to the Pr5.

dsm6 · February 2002

IIRC, one poster who is a dealer (audi8q?) said around 190 hp, called the Mazdaspeed 3, or something like that. I agree that it'd be nice to have on the P5 as well.

zoomzoom79 · February 2002

tomciviletti: I have had a 1998 Civic and currently we have a 93 Civic. Both got 32-35MPG+ easily. My 99 Accord 4 cylinder 5-speed got 32-35 MPG and that's with a 2.3L engine. It may also help that you have the 1.8L engine instead of the 2.0L. The 2.0L seems to be geared for low-end driving and nothing else.

This Protege is also the first of my cars to shock me on a consistent basis so it's probably just the type of fabric they use on it.

shrique · February 2002

Come on release this aftermarket!!!!!!

yooper53 · February 2002

I've had it for 8 months now and its been pretty consistent at 30 mpg average hwy. There have been several times I've supposedly gotten 35-37 mpg but those I wrote off as being anomalous. The 30 mpg has just been too consistent for me to believe it.

A factory turbo Pro? I'd very likely get one, mpg notwithstanding and assuming of course they don't end up too Ford by the time I'm in the market.

chicagopro · February 2002

Just got back from a mini road trip...from Chicago to just over the Michigan border and back.

Roads through IN banked much better than near Chicago...could take curves at much higher speeds without feeling like I was going to end up in a ditch.

Very high winds, though...between wind speed and my speed (avg 80 mph), felt like I was going to take off! Sliding all over the dry road. Definitely a little more exciting than my daily commute.

newcar31 · February 2002

It isn't just the 16 inch wheels and "performance" tires (if you can call them that) that makes the Protege handle well. Believe it or not, the ES Protege's suspension is tuned more for sport than for ride unlike the Civic.

Regardless of fuel economy, exactly how does a Civic engine perform "equally, if not better than the Protege's"? They both have similiar hp ratings, but the Protege's engine has far more torque. I could be crazy, but it sounds like the Protege's engine performs better. To quote Oscar Jackson of Jackson Racing:

"Horsepower is what sells the product; torque is what actually moves it"

As we all know, torque is directly related to engine displacement and engine displacement is directly related to fuel economy. Could that possibly explain why the Protege, Sentra, Focus and Elantra (all with 2.0L engines) all get worse gas mileage than the Civic yet all have more torque? I'll tell you one thing, it isn't just the Civic's VTEC wizardry (chuckle) that makes the Civic get good gas mileage. All other things being equal, in a naturally aspirated gasoline engine more torque = more displacement = more gas, plain and simple.

vocus · February 2002

I used to average 24-26 mpg with my 2001 ES when I had it. That was with only 130hp. I have a 180-hp 2002 Jetta turbo now, and it averages the same while providing a LOT more power.

newcar31 · February 2002

Gee, could that be due to the 5 valve head and turbocharger? When I was talking about fuel economy and displacement did you notice the verbage "all things being equal" and "naturally aspirated"?

I think a more apples to apples comparison would be VW's 2.0L vs. the Protege's 2.0L.

vocus · February 2002

Number one, the 2.0 in the Jetta averages about the same or better as the Protege 2.0. I had a loaner 2.0 Jetta, I know.

And number two, I would expect a Protege with 130hp and no turbo to get better economy than a 180-hp turbo engine in anything. I just think the fuel economy in the Protege is kinda low for a car marketed as "economy".

newcar31 · February 2002

The fuel economy in the Protege isn't the greatest, but when you compare it to other 2.0L engines in it's class, it's about the same. If I wanted better mileage, I would have looked at echos, corollas, civics, and TDI Jettas. Um, no thanks, no thanks, no thanks, and no thanks.

As far as comparing the 1.8T vs. the 2.0L in the Protege, again, that's not a fair comparison.

#1 In order to get a 1.8T, you have to spend more money.

#2 The 1.8T has a 5 valve head

#3 The 1.8T is a more recently designed engine than the 2.0L Mazda.

#4 A turbo does not automatically mean dramatically lower gas mileage. Case in point: The naturally aspirated VW 1.8 in Europe gets similiar mileage to the turbo 1.8.

#5 You are still paying more money to keep fuel in your car because it requires premium.

I think you understand what I am getting at. Apples to apples is the only way to compare engines. In that respect, the 2.0L Mazda engine is arguably better than the VW 2.0L. It doesn't have a history of oil consumption either

zoomzoom79 · February 2002

newcar: Having a Civic and a Protege in the driveway I can tell you that if you put larger tires on the Civic it will handle just as well as tthe Protege.

The Civic is good for a 0-60 of 8.4 seconds while the Protege is good for 9.1 seconds all the while the Civic gets better gas mileage and it doesn't run out of power after 4000 RPM. Guess that Vtec "wizardry" is good for something after all. The engine gives you better fuel economy and it loves to rev whereas the Protege just buzzes louder the higher the revs get.

And if a larger engine always equals worse fuel economy how can a 5.7L Vette get 28MPG? An Acura 3.2CL Type S is goord for 28MPG as well. My Accord 2.3L was good for 32MPG as previously stated. Maybe the 2.0L in the Protege is improperly geared or tuned but it definitely seems like Mazda put minimal effort into the design of the engine whereas Honda themselves will tell you that they are primarily an engine company that happens to make exceptional cars.

sunbyrne · February 2002

The current Civic line of engines does indeed get better mileage, no question about it. It's newer and better engine technology. I'll be interested in seeing what happens with the new line of SVT engines Mazda has engineered. I find the Pro's mpg to be passable if not stellar. I'll believe that Honda is an engine company first--they certainly shouldn't be paying anyone real money for their styling. Sorry, couldn't resist.

But I think the difference in handling is NOT just the tires. My wife's 99 Pro LX doesn't have the performance Dunlops that the new P5 and ES's currently have. It has crappy Firestone Potenzas. But both my wife and I agreed when we test drove the Pro vs. the Civic that the Pro handled better, and IIRC correctly, C&D's slalom tests bears this out. I would attribute this at least in part to the TTL rear suspension in the Pro.

newcar31 · February 2002

You said the Civic's engine performs better. Regardless of gearing, weight, smoothness, etc., the Protege's engine produces more power. Whether that translates to 0-60 numbers is irrelevent because you said that the *engine* performs better. You say that the Civic doesn't run out of power after 4000 rpms. Well, it doesn't have any power UNTIL 4000 rpms. Around town here, I'd rather have the power before 4000 rpms. Believe me, I know what it's like, I had an Integra VTEC. No torque gets pretty tiring around town.

A 5.7L vette achieves those numbers with a feather light throttle foot, 1st to 4th gear shift, and an ultra tall 6th gear. Anything less than that and you will not get 28 mpg. I challenge anyone to drive a Vette with the purpose of getting good gas mileage. When driving down the interstate, this motor is barely running, which is why it can get those kinds of gas mileage numbers. This all takes us back to the point of "all things being equal". The Protege does not loaf down the freeway at 1300 rpm, you cannot perform 1st to 4th shifts, and it doesn't have 6 gears. If it did, it would get much better mileage than the Vette. If you ask me, GM cheated by doing that 1st to 4th shifting when figuring out gas mileage. Another thing: The GM small block we are talking about has been in development for over 40 years, I hope it's efficient.

boggse · February 2002

Both the current Civic and 1.8T VW(Audi)engines are great, high-tech engines. As a result, they suffer from 2 major failings: they cost more up front, and they will cost more to fix. While the Protege may not match in HP or MPG, the economy of the Protege becomes clear when it comes time to get service(Honda) or fill up with premium(VW). Has anyone seen the new VW commercials where they actually ADVERTISE that their piston/valve setup is interfering? I'm not sure who ever thought that this was a good idea to design an engine this way without a timing chain(instead of a belt), but I can imagine a painful repair bill to replace 12 intake valves when the belt goes. Civic engines are interfering as well. I do not know about the Protege's. Perhaps someone else does? Hondas also have to have their valve clearances checked every 5000 miles. Regular service on a Honda is outrageous, and most "weekend" mechanics will balk at working on them. Also, their "sulev" cars have a lot of emissions recalls which makes one wonder exactly how "green" they really are.

Don't get me wrong, Hondas and VWs are fine automobiles. I owned a 2000 Jetta GLX VR6 for over a year. It had a great, torquey engine and was almost as smooth as a Cadillac on the highway. On the down side, it handled like a Buick and was always in the shop for warranty work. The Civic was our second choice after the Protege. It might have been our first except for the 0% financing and pompous sales staff @ the Honda dealer. Insurance is cheaper too, at least in Durham, NC. In hindsight, I feel we made the right choice. My point is, overall, I think the Protege will cost us less money than the Civic, and I am positive that it will cost less and be more reliable than the VW.

protegenic · February 2002

You must drive like a bandit to have gotten that low of mpg figures in your Protege. Also, having had the A4 with the 1.8T, I can attest that it did not get anywhere near the same mpg as what I get in the Protege. I averaged 22-24 in the A4 where I get 28-30 in the Protege, with much more urban driving than I previously had with the A4. Again, the 1.8T is a great engine, but I think the Pro engine is getting a bad rap here. Is it the most fuel efficient? No. Is it the quietest on the highway? No. Does it do a good job of meeting the real world daily demands of most people? Yes, but you can't please everyone.

Good discussion on this BTW. Glad to see everyone is being civil!

dinu01 · February 2002

I believe: PRO will be cheapers to run in the long run (7yrs)
I know: I wouldn't buy a VW b/c of its many problems and costly repairs.

I don't know however what is better b/w the PRO and Civic, although I expect the PRO to be cheaper to maintain, but Mazda parts and svc. is one of the most expensive I see...

I know I LOVE the low-end torque of the PRO around town and HATE that I can;t go faster on the highway b/c the engine doesn't want you to, while the Civic is fine in the city and beter on the highway. Nevertheless, both are IMO the 2 best small cars out there. I chose the PRO b/c it's fun to drive and the $ numbers were right and not over-inflated like at Honda.

Boggse: Thanx for the update! I need all the help I can get in this one. It will be the only 10 yr old car I've had so far and while before the choice was easier with more $ available, I'm buying this one by myself 100%, so the 94 MX-3 might be a little pricey. I have to admit I would prefer it to a 92/93 Integra. We'll see. as for everyone else, say something on this issue

Dinu

newcar31 · February 2002

The reason why I think the Protege's engine perfroms better is because it's better suited for what it was meant to do. The Protege is much more relaxed when driving in traffic with 4 people. In contrast, a Civic feels strained. When I had my Integra, I would always get beat at stoplights by family cars and trucks unless I really wrung the little 1.8L out. Who drives above 4000 rpm all the time? Don't get me wrong, it was a fun little car, but it was gutless in everyday driving conditions. I can't imagine the Civic being any better, especially when it has passengers.

gandalf17 · February 2002

I hate to be the one to say it, but Mazda should have kept the 1.8L engine in the Protege rather than the 2.0L that was introduced in the 2001 model year. It would have been preferable to see Mazda work on increasing the HP and torque on the existing 1.8 than replace it in the Protege altogether. After all, this is not unheard of when you take into account the HP and Torque on the 1.8L in the Miata and also the J-spec.

My wife and I have a 2000 5spd, Protege LX (ES in Canada for that year) with the 1.8L and about 38,000km on it to date. She mainly drives the Protege and I drive my car. Sometimes we share....sometimes...
I have always loved Mazda's, with a few noted exceptions, and have extensively test driven the 2.0L engine in the sedans as well as the Protege 5. The old 1.8L is a very smooth, free-revving engine that encourages you to push it hard. More typical of a Honda engine really. There is also an extra torque push over 4000rpm all the way to 6000rpm. The 2.0L is a little quieter and lacks the growly snarl of the 1.8L. The 2.0L torque in the low band is better, but this engine simply does not like to rev like the 1.8. Even with the greater advertised HP and torque numbers, it does not feel as peppy and certainly sounds out of breath at about 4500RPM.
A good friend of mine has the 2002 5spd, Pro5 with the 2.0L. We have raced agianst each other quite a number of times. At start he is routinely ahead and then once the engines rev up the RPM band, i typically and quite convincingly pull well ahead as his car looses pulling power. I know a number of factors can acocunt for this, the extra weight of the Pro5, shifting skills et, all.... However, we have traded places in each other's cars too and I cannot beat my sedan if he is driving the Pro5. We are convinced the 1.8L is in fact the faster and simply more refined of the engines...... sorry for the long post.

newcar31 · February 2002

It's all what your preference is. I like relaxed around town cruising. I've had the high rpm screamer car before and now I really appreciate the low rpm torque. The 2.0L is tuned to produce more low rpm torque. It's torque peak is before it's horsepower peak, unlike ALL honda engines except for the new CRV's. This is why it seems to run out of power at 4000 rpms. In realitly, it produces it's power right away, instead of later. You can't just look at raw numbers when talking about an engine, you also have to look at the engine's usable powerband. This is where the 2.0L shines IMO. Even though it has 40 less hp than my old integra, it FEELS peppier around town because the power that it does have is easily accesible.

gandalf17 · February 2002

Quick thoughts on this topic.

I used to own a Civic SiR. Great car, great shifter (simply the best), great handling, great accelaration, simply great.

All this said, even my SiR didn't have the same cornering ability of the Protege ES. Taking corners hard the tires would complain and the back end felt a little unstable. And this is before Honda cutbacks that changed their sporty double wishboine suspension to the MacPherson layout. Now, you might say the tires weren't up to snuff, but alas, I had 16" Poortenza's on my SiR for summer driving. Hydroplaning risk and all. Yes, they are indeed horrible wet weather tires....... The new Honda's have an inferior suspension tuning and are now adjusted more like a Toyota. They have really removed the "sporty" and communicative feel of the Civics. They are now too quiet, too soft and the driver is far more insulated to the road.

The Protege is definately close to being sport tuned suspension wise and the tires just help add to this effect. Take a corner hard, just try and make the tires squeal. It is almost next to impossible unless you have a clear death wish. This is a clear indication that the suspension and tires on the Protege are well within toleration limits. Tire squeal is a direct result of car's inertia exceeding the limits of its suspension and tire surface contact and holding traction.

Sorry, the current Pro's are most definately a far superior handling vehicle to the current Civic's. The older Civic's with the wishbone suspension were almost close, but still did not handle as well. The Pro really is an exceptional car in the handling category and Mazda itself has a history in the particular endeavour.

thanks,

the_big_h · February 2002

I thought a flame war was about to start, good job keeping it civilized everyone.

ok now my 2 cents. The 1.8T is an execllent engine, I wish the Protege has a turbo too (it's coming though!). I rode in my cousin's A4 once, lots of power whenever he needs it. The VTEC on the Honda engine doesn't kick in until 6000 rpm I believe, anytime before that it basically is the same as a non-VTEC LX engine power-wise, i.e. a dog. When I test drove the EX, I didn't even have a chance to rev it up to VTEC territory to see what all the fuss is all about. I tested it in city street driving condition, where there's almost no chance to rev it up like that in most situations. For us city/suburb dwellers, why pay for a technology that you don't use anyway?

The biggest upside (also its biggest downside) of the Protege engine is the abundance of low-end torque when compared to the Honda VTEC engine. That's one of the reasons I felt it was a lot more fun than the Civic because the power is readily available right off the bat, much more accessible than the high-rpm VTEC. Of course, low-end torque comes at the cost of high-end power, but the truth is unless you're racing (not on public road of course), for most driving situations all that high-rpm power usually go unused.

Salesperson didn't let me toss the Civic around a corner, so can't compare handling

gandalf17 · February 2002

Yes, of course, it is indeed all about driving preferences. I happen to like high strung rev happy engines. My car, and sometimes the wife's.... is a WRX and the turbo is fun when you hit about 3,500rpm.

Anyway, the reason i prefer the Mazda 1.8L is that it still provides more than adequate low end torque as well. Yes, it is slightly less than the 2.0L now standard now, but not significantly. The powerband is simply more useable throughout on the 1.8L. Over 3000rpm, not high for a small displacement DOHC cam engine, you get the first surge of power. Then at 4000rpm the 1.8 valves are fully open and the engine just pulls you forward all the way to 6,000rpm.

The 2.0L in the current Protege's still gives you that surge at about 3,500rpm and then is dead and drowing for air by around 4,500rpm.

I'd rather have the edequate low end grunt with the option of more power than i would with the 2.0L slightly better low end and nothing left to give when you need to push it hard. The old Subie Impreza RS with around 165HP and 150torque used to be like this too. All the power was down low, but it was dead in the higher band. The turbo on the WRX corrects this.

Also, i know the 2.0L in the Protege is not the Ford Zetec 2.0L in the Focus, but these engines sound and react almost identical. Drive the Zx3 and then the Pro5 back to back and you will see what i mean..... I hate the fact Ford is involved with Mazda and they are changing the Pro platform....makes me sad.

zoomzoom79 · February 2002

newcar: The Protege's engine produces 3 more HP than the Civic. Granted it has more torque but they seem to have sacrificed any high-end power to get those numbers. The Civic on the other hand has 127HP and admittedly lower torque but it's still faster and gets better gas mileage. And yes, I did say that the Civic's engine performs better because it does.

No torque isn't tiring around town. Not to me at least. Also, the Civic has i-VTEC now which is different from the Vtec on your Integra. It allows you to use more of the torque throughout the rev-range. It seems that you would need the most power on the highway when you might want to drive higher speeds or might need to pass someone. The Protege already runs at 4000RPM on the highway .. coincidentally that's also the point where it seems to run out of power. The Civic on the other hand will pull strongly all the way to redline.

boggse: The Civic does have an interference engine. But all you have to do to avoid this is change the timing belt at 90-100,000 miles. $400 for that after that many miles is hardly anything to balk about. Also, what makes you think Hondas have to have their valves checked every 5000 miles. I had a 99 Accord with almost 40,000 and I think maybe I had the valves checked at the 30,000 mile service, in my 01 V6 I never had them done in the 14,000 miles I had the car and we've had our 93 Civic for 15,000 miles now and never had them checked. I think that it's recommended at every major service interval but definitely not every 5000 miles. I paid $250 for the 30,000 mile service on my Accord .. hardly outrageous.

As far as the insurance goes...my 01 Protege costs more to insure than my 01 Accord V6 Coupe did. Never understood that one.

dinu: I think that the Civic and the Protege would be equal if nothing else. I don't see any reason why the Civic would be any higher. VW is another story.

gandalf: I feel your friend's pain. My boyfriend consistently kick my [non-permissible content removed] with his 93 Civic EX 5-speed. I'm also with you when you say Mazda should have tweaked the 1.8 instead of putting this heavier 2.0L in it.

boggse · February 2002

What I find outrageous about Honda service is not the labor rates, but the amount of things that have to be done as regular service. I have found labor rates (~$70USD/hr) to be the same at almost every dealer (Mazda, VW, Jeep, Toyota, Honda) I have been to.

gandalf17 · February 2002

Boggse,

Honda has a reputation, at least at some dealers here in Canada, of performing service that is "dealer recommended" that is not actually a required "manufacturer's waranty service".

What i mean is that they often add a whole number of unecessary services and this greatly jacks up the price to you.... Check your owners manual for the maufacturers warranty service vs. the dealers. You can demand a price for simply the warranty services. Up to you.....

By the way, Honda is not the only dealer to do this, but they have built more of a reputation around this than most...

maltb · February 2002

The 99-00 1.8L was basically a de-stroked version of the 2.0L. Let's face it, in 99 when they went with the FS motor, it was intended moreso for an auto trans. In the 98 and prior years, the Pro ES had the same 1.8L BP engine that the Miata had. This motor was a high revving, low torque engine that was better suited for a manual trans. However, since more vehicles are sold with an auto trans, it only makes sense to make an engine that is better suited towards that.

Boris2 · February 2002

MPG is going to differe a lot on individual style of driving. My wife got a 2000 Pro ES. She usually gets around 30 mpg if she drives it most of the time. When I drive it, however, I get around 32 or so. We took a 600 mile trip last summer (Denver to Yellowstone) and averaged about 35 mpg (average speed was in 75-85 mpg range). When we were driving in Yellowstone, averaging 30 mph we got 42 mpg!!!

As far handling goes, I agree that ES can handle better than Civic, but I think that's primarily due to its tires. ES was the only model that came with v-rated tires in 2000 and dealer told me there is virtually no difference in suspension between ES and other models. They told me I can safely put S-rated tires on it if I want to. It can corner better than anything I drove before, but the price that you have to pay for that is VERY expensive tires with ABSOLUTELY NO warranty on them. I had to change all 4 of the Potenzas that Pro came with at about 12K mi and even though I changed them because of nails, they were not in the best condition at that time and we do NOT drive it hard. Additionally, if any of you drove v-rated anything on the snow, you'd probably agree that they slide better than skates :-)

Engine: 1.8 was the largest engine available in 2000 and even though it got enough torque to feel safe and confident, I think it can use a little more. IMO it feels underpowered from start but picks up pretty quickly.

Mazda Protegé

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles