Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Mazda6 Hatchback

1…91011121315»

Comments

  • moparbadmoparbad Member Posts: 3,870
    Very snowy this year in the Chicago area. Stock tires are very poor in the snow. Traction is less than average for an all season and as a result the car slide around more than expected. Snow tires are highly recommended.

    Here is an excerpt from a review on TireRack for the Michelin Pilot's "however these Michelin's have got to be the absolute worse tire I have ever driven on in rain, icy or snow. In the rain the tire just spins starting from a stop light even when it is lightly excellerated. I recently had a one inch snow fall and stopped in my driveway which has a very slight incline. When I stated again all the tires would do is spin. I had to back out of my driveway and get a running start to get it in the garage.
    Overall these tires are decent for dry weather and have low noise.
    However, beware if you drive in the midwest where rain, Icy and snow are common all year round. These tires are horrible and Michelin should be ashamed they ask the price they do for these tires.
    I can't wait to get rid of them even though they only have 5000 miles on them.".
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    I really don't think the tires are bad in the snow. We have had the worst winter in probably 30 yrs(since the 78-79 debacle) and I have not had any problem getting around. I have a slight incline in my driveway but any car/truck I have had I just couldn't stop halfway up and expect to get started without some spinning. It depends alot on what is under the snow or temperature as to how much you might spin if at all. I drove a S-10 with two wheel drive for 8 years around Chicago and never got stuck or didn't get where I wanted to go. A lot depends on how you drive I guess. Now would snow tires enhance traction in any of these situations. Heck yeah, but I choose not to bother with storing and changing them. My humble opinion is that in comparison to a lot of other cars, the Mazda6 with stock tires does pretty well in the snow. I have driven it everyday this winter and up to Minneapolis in some treacherous conditions a couple of times and it did well.
  • mz6greyghostmz6greyghost Member Posts: 1,230
    If you believe the 6 does well with the OEM all-seasons, you'll be amazed at how well it goes with a decent set of snow tires!

    I've driven just about every type of vehicle through the worst of what central New York can throw at you (including lake-effect snow that dumps up to 6 inches PER HOUR). This ranges from a 4WD SUV with snow tires, to an empty full-size van with bald all-seasons. In fall of '04, I thought I'd be able to get away with the OEM 17" all-seasons for one year, then get a set of snow tires after that. The first major snowstorm changed all that. The Michelins are terrible in ANY snow, let alone 4-6 inches worth. Even light acceleration turned on the TCS light, and after a few close calls when braking, even on slush, I called Tirerack.

    I'm currently on my 4th winter with the 16" snow tires (Michelin Pilot Alpin PA2s) and steelies, and I've never regretted my decision. I've never gotten stuck in a parking lot, or drifted off into a ditch, even on snow-packed interstates. The PA2s are considered "performance winter" tires, which mean they give up a slight amount of extreme snow traction for better handling and control in dry traction (without feeling "squirmy" like other winter tires do in dry weather, especially above 40 degrees F). Despite that, snow traction has never been an issue. I can pass SUVs on snow-covered highways with confidence, with the advantages that FWD and a lower center of gravity that the 6 enjoys, and still have some fun carving corners when the weather is dry and the snow begins to melt.

    To answer your question: The OEM tires are not very good in snow compared to other all-seasons, but they'll manage if you live in areas that only see snow once in a while. If you live where you get more than 8 feet of snow per year (which is only 1/3 of what some areas AVERAGE here upstate), get the snow tires.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    If you live where you get more than 8 feet of snow per year (which is only 1/3 of what some areas AVERAGE here upstate), get the snow tires.

    If I lived in that type of country I would honestly be driving a Suburu. I agree with you though that snow tires would be better but for Chicagoland winters and driving conditions the OEMs do an adequate job.
  • mz6greyghostmz6greyghost Member Posts: 1,230
    If I lived in that type of country I would honestly be driving a Suburu.

    Naahh, the supposed benefits of full-time AWD doesn't outweigh the 3-5 MPG penalty compared to FWD. That adds up quickly if you drive 25K+ miles per year.

    Snow tires and FWD works well for about 95% of winter driving. If it's REALLY bad, you probably shouldn't be out in it anyway. :)

    I'll agree, if Chicago roads are kept in decent shape, all-seasons will work.
  • moparbadmoparbad Member Posts: 3,870
    but for Chicagoland winters and driving conditions the OEMs do an adequate job.

    I strongly disagree. The OEM's are not adequate for Chicago winters.
    Good all season tires would be adequate, the Michelin's are poor for traction.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    Do you drive a Mazda6? Tires will handle a little differently on different cars. It could have something to do with how one drives as well. They may not be the greatest winter tire, but to say they are "inadequate" is, IMO, an exaggeration. The fact that I haven't been slipping and sliding all over the place in Chicago this year and haven't gotten stuck anywhere indicates they are at least adequate.

    I'm sure that there are other all-season tires that may be better and snow tires even better than that. However, my comment was only that I thought the tires were adequate based on my personal experience.
  • moparbadmoparbad Member Posts: 3,870
    Yes I do have a Mazda6. I'm not an aggressive driver.
    Do you have the OEM Michelin Pilot HX MXM4 tires?
    If you think I'm misrepresenting these tires in any way I suggest reading the horrible reviews contributed by other owners of this tire, I don't think it is the WORST tire I've ever driven in snow though others do, however, it is very poor.
    One of the reviews I particularly found interesting was where the owners were traveling in Chicago area during in snow and stopped and purchased new tires due to complete lack of confidence in the Michelins.
    My opinion is my opinion, however, having driven for over 20 years in snow and never had an accident I speak with some credibility.
    Right now I'm driving my truck until the potholes are under control.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    Just checked and, yes I do have the same tires. I have the I4 which I think helps in regard to less wheel spin at take-off possibly. The other vehicle I drive is a 2 wheel drive 03 Tundra getting close to needing new tires. Taking that out in the snow IS an adventure. I grew up in rural Michigan and have been driving in snow 41 years which I believe is twice as long as you so I guess I should be afforded some credibility as well. Regardless, I think it may come down to personal preference or how much sliding around you feel comfortable with. My adequate might be totally inadequate or even scary maybe to someone else. I still like to do dougnuts in empty parking lots sometimes in the snow.

    If so many people aren't comfortable with the tires, I guess I have admit that they aren't adequate for the average driver.
  • maltbmaltb Member Posts: 3,572
    >57 and still doing donuts? I can only hope that I have the same mentality when I get there. :shades:
  • moparbadmoparbad Member Posts: 3,870
    I also have the I4. It is a Grand Touring with automatic. I have no need nor use for the V6.
    I also learned to drive in rural area as I started driving at age 12 on the farm in Iowa.
    You certainly have more years on me and that counts for something.

    Sounds like the hatch will not be offered in 2009 for the new 6, that is a shame as it is the best 6.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    I don't have the 5-dr but can certainly appreciate the styling and practicality. I think aviboy mentioned that it's been Mazda MO to bring out just one or two body styles when a major revision takes place and then add body styles after the first year.

    Speaking of time on the farm. I spent a lot of my youth abusing the heck out of old black 57 Chevy PU in the cornfields right after harvest when the ground was hard and dry. Would love to have that PU today.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    I seem to have gotten used to these tires over time. I bought my Mazda6 at the end of last Jan, and thought the tires were particularly bad in snow then and the early part of this winter in Wisconsin. I had no confidence driving in snow or even when it was cold and wet. But, now the last few times I drove in snow, I felt more confident in the tires.

    Since our roads are plowed, I'm not willing to deal with the hassle of switching to snow tires, but when I do need new tires I'll be looking for something a bit more all-season-ish. There was no way I was going to buy the OEM tires at $200 each, anyway.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    Maybe I didn't mind the tires because I bought mine in August and just started out the winter with them. Maybe I've always had crappy "winter" tires and just didn't know it. Like I said though, they seem to get me where I'm going without getting stuck, sliding around too much or causing an accident.

    I know they handle real sporty and everything but why does Mazda use such an expensive tire when, IMO, the vast majority of people that buy the 6 would probably be happier with something, as you say, more all-seasonish?
  • mz6greyghostmz6greyghost Member Posts: 1,230
    I know they handle real sporty and everything but why does Mazda use such an expensive tire when, IMO, the vast majority of people that buy the 6 would probably be happier with something, as you say, more all-seasonish?

    Mazda uses an expensive tire for us, but not expensive for them.

    Michelin has a history of supplying tires to car manufacturers for a VERY low rate, which actually benefits Michelin in the long run. Not only do they get their name brand as OEM equipment for a car, but most consumers (not all, but most) mistakenly think that they need the EXACT make and model tire as replacements (which isn't the case 95% of the time). So consumers pay the close-to-$200 PER TIRE replacements (for the Mazda6) without even thinking, while there are plenty of alternative all-season tires that start, stop, and steer better, are quieter, and have a longer treadlife and a more comfortable ride for HALF the price (if that).
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    Thanks for the very informative info if I may be redundant. Do you (or anyone else listening) happen to know what OEM tires Hyundai uses on the Sonata? I know this is Mazda6 land but am curious.
  • moparbadmoparbad Member Posts: 3,870
    I'd prefer 16" tires/wheels instead of the 17"s.
    The minor improvement in handling is not worth the added tire expense, harsher ride and increased possibility of damage in potholes.
  • maltbmaltb Member Posts: 3,572
    Perhaps this forum would help: Sonata Tires and Wheels
  • exit123exit123 Member Posts: 136
    I found a red 2005 Mazda6 5-door MT for sale. It has 64000 miles and looks in good shape. I'm going back tomorrow to take another look. The dealer is asking $13999. I ran the CarFax report and it's a clean 1-owner car. What should I offer? What problems should I look for?
  • exit123exit123 Member Posts: 136
    Oh, I forgot to mention that it's a V6.
  • mz6greyghostmz6greyghost Member Posts: 1,230
    An '05 with 64K miles? I'd START bargaining at $10K, and wouldn't pay a cent above $12K, since some NEW '07 models can be had for $13999...
  • exit123exit123 Member Posts: 136
    How could you get a new 07 model for $13999?
  • PF_FlyerPF_Flyer Member Posts: 9,372
    It's Tuesday so that means it's Mazda chat time again! Stop in tonight and meet and greet some of your fellow CarSpace members. We'll talk anything and everything Mazda, automotive, and just plain have a good time.

    The Mazda Club Chat is on tonight. The chat room opens at 8:45PM ET Hope to see YOU there! Check out the schedule
  • dateachadateacha Member Posts: 13
    Well, I've finally gotten my car back from the dealer. They were 3 weeks getting and installing the headlights. I am not impressed. They gave me the lights at their cost, no charge for labor, which I guess is fair enough. However, they did not transfer the parking light bulbs to the new lights and used my old bulbs despite me asking them to put new silverstars in. I'm not sure they did an outstanding job of reinstalling the bumper, either since the gap at the leading edge of the hood seems a little bigger now.

    Anyways, on the subject of tires for winter driving -- I live in sort of snowy country, in that we have a lot of open time mixed with serious snowfalls in a typical winter. Slush is common. The terrain is hilly and the roads are not straight. I have found a set of winter tires very useful, starting with Blizzaks on an '85 Saab 900 T hatch several years ago. My 6 is running 17" wheels and Aurora tires which were apparently installed by the selling dealer to help move the car. They performed very nicely on ice, but will not pull the hill that is my driveway in more than a couple of inches of snow. Next winter, I'll have either Blizzaks or Michelin Arctic-Ice tires on it and all will be well. I mention the Arctic-Ice because I bought a set for the wife's LaCrosse and the car performs very well in most anything that nature has thrown at us this winter, including the latest 15" snowfall. When we wanted to go somewhere, it went. Granted, we did not have need to go anywhere when there was a level 2 snow emergency in effect, but I think we probably could have if the need arose.

    For winter, if your roads are not plowed, you need a fairly narrow tire with an open tread to disperse the slush and water from under the wheels. A wide tire is a disadvantage since your contact patch is wide but short, whereas a narrower tire has a longer and narrower contact patch. The front edge splashes the slop to the side and the back of the contact patch is running on fairly clear road. You guys that live in the city where the main means to deal with snow is to salt it mostly have slush to drive on when it gets white out.

    With plowed roads and hardpack, a tire with a lot of fine cuts or sipes in the tread surface will help a lot. Dedicated snow tires are a combination of both the above, plus many are made of a hydrophyllic compound that actually is attracted to the ice molecules. In addition, good winter tires have a low "glass transition" temperature, meaning the tread remains soft in lower temperatures, allowing it to deform around minor irregularities in the snow/ice surface, thus providing increased traction. Strict summer tires and many all seasons are designed for maximum tread wear and the compound gets pretty stiff when the temperatures get much below 20F.

    One other note on tires -- the OEM tires are pretty hard to find. I know, you can easily find the same size and name on the tire, but the ones commonly found at the tire store are not exactly the same tread compound and construction as the ones on the car originally. Read the fine print on the tires -- all the codes and numbers, and insist the dealer give you the exact same tire as the OEMs. Not just the same brand, model, and size. It does make a difference.

    My sources for the above information, for those of wondering why you should believe it, are as follows: My daughter and SIL, suspension and brake engineers in Detroit. Their neighbor, who tests tires for many Ford vehicles and determines which of the many suppliers are best able to tune their tires to match the suspensions of the vehicles as they are designed. In addition, I read a lot, and have been driving in Ohio and Michigan (50 miles north of Grand Rapids in the Lake Michigan snow belt) winters since 1962, when I was sent home from the driver license testing facility because the examiner decided it was too snowy and slippery to take the test -- never mind that I drove the 20 miles to and from the test site. :surprise:
  • car114car114 Member Posts: 3
    Would like opinions on a 2005 Mazda 6, 5 door, V6 S Sport, 6 Speed Automatic, Bose, moonroof, cloth interior, 28,500 miles for aprox. $12,500 with a salvage title. All repair work done to restore left front fender buy local body shop with Mazda parts. Good deal, poor deal, something to stay away from?
  • dateachadateacha Member Posts: 13
    The price is good for a car that hasn't been wrecked. Mine had about twice that on it and the dealer was asking about 2500 more that what you quoted.

    Personally, I would have concerns about things that were damaged by the impact that didn't show up when it was fixed. How severe was the impact? Was there damage to front suspension components or mounting points? Shock towers?
    Did the airbags deploy? If so, was the dash put back together properly? Did the seatbelts get used? They stretch when they function and should be replaced after a collision.

    There are just a lot little things that can show up after a car has been wrecked and fixed that can be problems later on. There might be nothing or there might a lot of little things or maybe even a big item or two that will fail later. Anything from switchgear to window tracks might have been weakened by the jolt. There could be a hairline crack in the transmission case or something that won't be evident until the weather changes or you hit a pothole, then you could have a problem. The factory warranty is probably out the window with the salvage title, so any drivetrain problems that might arise will be all yours. I would check with the dealer about the warranty before putting any money on the table.

    That salvage title will also make it hard for you to get a decent price for the car when you go to sell it. Check with your insurance company, too. They may not want to cover it.
  • cheapengineercheapengineer Member Posts: 36
    I know that this is a late response but I bought a 2005 5-door AT 4 cylinder with 21,000 yesterday. One owner, alloy wheels, power seats, cruise etc. I paid $13,700 which is more than I wanted but it was for my teenage daugher. The exterior was inmaculate.
  • ccd1ccd1 Member Posts: 140
    I just purchased the Mazda6 Grand Touring s Hatchback (6 cylinder w/ no nav). I was just looking around Edmunds and it was interesting how similar this car is to one of my favorite cars, the Audi A3 2.0T. Curb weight, horsepower, torque and storage capacity on these two cars is VERY similar. Both cars are fun to drive. The major differences are the interior (Audi has a much nicer interior), the dual clutch with paddle shifters on the Audi, and price (the Audi is MUCH more expensive). The major appeal of both cars, IMHO, is how much fun they are to drive. The appeal and specs on the cars is remarkably similar.
  • milkman1milkman1 Member Posts: 80
    In my own hunt I keep coming back to the A3 2.0T and honestly I can option it more toward what I want for less than the the grand touring. I only wish the 6 got better gas mileage and was a smidge bigger. I know the A3s is great from driving my friend's Jetta. I also realized that if I were patient I might get a crack at the Lancer hatchback which should have a ralliart edition. That car might be the car 6 hatchback fans out to be looking at down the road.
  • ccd1ccd1 Member Posts: 140
    Milkman1:

    Check the prices on the remaining Mazda6s on the lot. I got the V6 Grand Touring s for just slightly over $23,000. That is brand new! I love the A3, but an A3 with the same options as my Grand Touring would be north of $30,000! I also wish the Mazda6 had better gas mileage as well as more power. I would have thought the turbo-charged 4 cylinder engine in the CX-7 would have been a much better choice for the Mazda6 than the relatively anemic 6 cylinder that is presently in the car.

    I agree with you on the Mitsu. The Lancer HB looks great from the pics I've seen and the Ralliart Edition could very well be the car HB lovers are looking for since the 2009 Mazda6 will only be a sedan.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    If they are looking at cars the size of the Lancer, I'd think the Mazda3 could also be the car for the HB lovers.

    I am guessing that younger people are currently the main buyers of HBs, because it is only in the compact segment that they seem to be successful.
  • ccd1ccd1 Member Posts: 140
    JeffryScott:

    That is probably true as well, but it also points to the loss of the Mazda6 HB. This was a HB for "grown-ups." Unless you knew what to look for, I doubt anyone could tell difference between the Mazda6 HB and sedan. This car didn't look like all the hot hatches on the market. IMHO, that is a good thing. I much prefer the looks of the Mazda6 HB to the A3 or the A4 Avant. In terms of useable space, I'd guess the Mazda 6 HB has more storage space than the A3 and probably not much less than the A4 Avant. I can only hope that Mazda revisits its decision not to offer the HB in the US market with the new Mazda6. For me, the handling,the versatility of the HB, and the reasonable price were the big selling points for the car.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    Yes, but many "grown-ups" families already have a minivan, SUV, or cross-over in the fleet, so see no need for buying a HB over the sedan.
  • ccd1ccd1 Member Posts: 140
    Jeffy:

    Point taken, and I have a SUV as a second car. I only have a couple of hundred miles on the Mazda6, but a few things are becoming pretty clear. The Mazda outperforms my SUV in terms of acceleration, handling and gas mileage. The truck is bigger, but the Mazda can handle most hauling duties if it had to. The truck does have 4WD, but I need that 1-2 days a year and didn't need it at all this Winter. IOW, with a mid-size hatch, I don't need a SUV or a crossover. In a couple of years, we will be getting rid of the SUV and it will not be replaced with another SUV. If you look at the evolution of the SUV in recent years, from truck based bodies to car based bodies (CUVs), what advantages do most CUVs have over a well executed mid-size HB??? The question should not be: "I have a truck/CUV/crossover, so why do I need a HB." Rather, it should be I have a HB, so why would I want a CUV/crossover/SUV. In the real world, the way most people actually use these cars, the CUV/crossover/SUV has no advantages over a HB. Name one SUV/crossover/CUV that is as much fun as the Mazda6 without spending truly stupid amounts of money (ie Cayenne, FX45, etc)
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    Don't disagree with any of that.

    With regard to: The question should not be: "I have a truck/CUV/crossover, so why do I need a HB." Rather, it should be I have a HB, so why would I want a CUV/crossover/SUV. I do not think most Americans are thinking that way (yet).

    Also while that might work for us now because our 3 kids are grown, back when they were younger, we did want the minivan (at least we never got sucked into the over-priced SUV mania, though). We were fine with a hatch (Horizon) when there were only 2.
  • ccd1ccd1 Member Posts: 140
    Jeffy:

    Congrats on being realistic enough to realize that you (like most Americans) needed a minivan and got one instead of getting a SUV and using it like a minivan! I also agree that most of us are not at the point of preferring a HB to a CUV/SUV, but with gas rapidly approaching $4/gallon, I expect people to re-think this. SUV sales are already WAY down and I expect that trend to continue. The Mazda6 HB may end up being a case of a car that was just too far ahead of its time.

    I'm still on the honeymoon period with the Mazda 6 HB, but I continue to be impressed with the car. I was going to replace my SUV with a sedan, but I'm beginning to think a sports car would be more like it. The Mazda6 seems fully capable of performing the necessary SUV and sedan duties. In fact, while I was at the dealership getting sat radio installed, I was looking at the RX-8!
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    I have a 2005 hatch, and the struts no longer hold up the liftgate. It appears replacing them should be pretty simple. Has anyone done that?
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    OK, I answered my own question. Searched on the Internet for struts for my 2005 Mazda6i hatch. One thing I found out is, you have to be very careful to select the struts for the hatchback; some sites make it hard to tell if the struts are for the hatchback or wagon or sedan. I learned through my research that the "best" replacements are the Stabilus struts, which are apparently OEM quality and a perfect match. And I found that is in the case, indeed the old struts were Stabilus. I ordered part SG227008 (2 of them), and noticed there was no indication of Left or Right, although on the struts in my car they say L and R on them. There was a buyer comment on another site about the same part fitting both sides, and I hoped that was the case. Both struts including shipping was only $41.50, and they were delivered in 3 days.

    Replacing them turned out to be a snap, requiring only a small screwdriver and a few minutes. There were detailed instructions with the struts. And the struts were in fact made for either side, you just twist them to fit one side or the other (as is, they fit the Left side). The instructions said to NOT prop open the hatch, but I was alone and found that a heavy, wide snow shovel was the perfect prop rod.

    Now the hatch opens by itself after releasing the latch, just like new! :)
Sign In or Register to comment.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles