-June 2024 Special Lease Deals-
2024 Chevy Blazer EV lease from Bayway Auto Group Click here
2024 Jeep Grand Cherokee lease from Mark Dodge Click here
2025 Ram 1500 Factory Order Discounts from Mark Dodge Click here
2024 Chevy Blazer EV lease from Bayway Auto Group Click here
2024 Jeep Grand Cherokee lease from Mark Dodge Click here
2025 Ram 1500 Factory Order Discounts from Mark Dodge Click here
Options
Comments
Such a nice reliable car too.
So the question is, how did the Focus score above the Mazda3i in CR's rankings of small cars? The Mazda3i even cost less, as tested. Note however that the score of the Mazda3i with a stick shift was at least as high as the Focus' (with automatic).
When they test cars, they rank them solely on how they perform, without taking reliability into account...
Then, if the reliability is at least average, they will recommend the car..
So, reliability is not a criteria for the ranking, only for the recommendation...
You really have to subsribe and read the articles.. It is much clearer then...
regards,
kyfdx
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
Consumer Reports recommends the 2005 Mazda3 in both manual and automatic transmissions. The tested model was the "i". The Mazda3 is at the top of the list of small cars with manual transmissions and is second for small cars with automatic transmissions. CR rates both with the highest reliability on par with Toyota and Honda.
CR notes the following positive comments for the Mazda3: Handling, fuel economy, interior quality, turning circle and for the manual it adds slick manual shifter. On the negative side, CR points to: road noise and small trunk.
In the section dealing with Used Cars, the 2004 Mazda3 has an impeccable record except for Brakes. Since CR rates used cars over many years based on a large survey (over 810 thousand survey responses!) this provides one of the best pictures of product reliability known. The auto industry covets these ratings (as shown by industry experts on Autoline Detroit).
By way of comparison, the Mazda6 has fared very poorly recently and is not recommended by CR.
Every product has problems; CR provides a way for minimizing the risk of being stuck with a lemon. Personally, I have found their ratings very helpful.
The title “Mazda3 loses top rank in CR” is only true, as you point out, if we refer to the manual transmission. Since the Mazda3 is rated best in small cars with automatic transmissions, the title “Mazda3 receives top rank in CR” is both equally true and inaccurate.
Under the rubric of "loses top rank", others started citing potential deficiencies of the M3 (Ford has a higher feature level) and various problems (M3 has a/c problems ) as causes for the supposed slide in ratings. It’s important to point out that CR did not show these in their findings. CR rated “low” the Focus ZX4 SES interior quality. The a/c problem that some owners have experienced was not reported by the CR survey as a common problem. This is not meant to discount the pain of the owners without proper a/c but rather to accurately show what CR found.
By listing Mazda3’s superior fuel economy, reliability and owner satisfaction under the banner of “Mazda3 loses rank” some may question the credibility of CR and what was said after all?
What I think is plain is that Mazda3 is rated highly by CR. We both agree on that and it is worth putting out as a clear message.
And now I'll get off the soapbox.
People can draw their own conclusions about CR's credibility.
Actually, as long as we are pulling out the super-sized Nit Picks today, "Mazda3 loses top rank in CR" is true in reference to the automatic transmission car--which I pointed out.
Personally I don't see where providing a short title to a post and then providing details within the post is a problem. If we provided all the details on titles, we would have really long titles, wouldn't we.
Number 2 ain't bad, especially when #2 is the base model and #1 is an uplevel version of a very similar chassis.
Actually, I expect the chassis had little to do with the rankings. I'll bet it had more to do with the "small trunk" and road noise on the 3i. CR likes their cars to be quiet and have big trunks--like on the Ford Five Hundred they rated highly. Oh wait... they top-rated the Honda Accord Hybrid too, and that car has a small trunk and they complained about its road noise. Never mind.
The 'Top Pick' goes to the highest scoring vehicle, provided a minimum 'Average' Predicted Reliability and decent crash scores.
Also, someone mentioned that the Focus SES is the highest trim Focus- its actually not. Thats the 2.3L ST.
In any case, theres no way I'd buy the Focus over the 3, even with its better ride. Its not as stylish (subjective), or reliable (objective based on CR tests), nor as fuel efficient (objective based on CR tests). Additionally, the 3's top notch interior materials and fit and finish seal the deal, at least for me.
~alpha
I can't wait to see the May CR issue to see how they actually scored the Focus. Because CR noted that the Mazda3i was one of the few cars it has tested that scored either Very Good or Excellent in all five major ratings categories. The Focus did not. What that tells me is that there must be some non-major categories where the Focus edged ahead of the Mazda3i. I would think interior space and ride quality would be considered major categories, but we'll have to see what the May issue says.
CR could have easily given its "top pick" to the Mazda3i, or maybe both the Focus and Mazda3i, since the Mazda3i was its top pick for manual transmission small cars and scored as well overall (looking at the bar graphs) as did the Focus. Maybe they figure more people will buy cars with automatic transmissions than sticks.
I wouldn't buy the Focus over the Mazda3 either, for the reasons you mentioned plus the superior stick shift and driver's seat on the Mazda3. Also the bumper-to-bumper warranty is longer on the Mazda3.
I don't know I haven't gotten the current issue of CR yet but I think the reasons why Cr doesn't reccomend Mazda's is for their following reasons-Tribute-CR in their last issue rated it above average in reliability but could not reccomend it due it tipping up in government rollover tests. Miata-CR didn't reccomend but pending CR's current issue but it still was above average in reliability. 6-could understand first year bugs but Mazda still doesn't have the bugs worked out of this car yet? Dang! Is the 6's reliability or just under average? I can't believe it the 626 used to be a reliable car that was made in the same plant in Flat Rock, Michigan. Apparently that reliability didn't carryover to the 6. MPV-tranny problems I believe keep CR from reccomending it. RX-8- I don't know what happened there either. Its made in Japan too. Usually Mazda's that are made in Japan have as good reliability as Honda, Toyota, and Nissan but not this Mazda apparently.
I'm very dissatisfied with Mazda's quality control of late. I can understand but the 6 and the MPV? I don't get it. Mazda has to straighten out quality control problems faster in my opinion.
The Focus's reliability CR showed a red market for Model years 03 and 04 which means above average reliability. CR also rated the for model years 01 and 02 model years showed a dash which means average reliability. Finally, for the 00 model year CR gives the Focus an X which indicates under average or poor reliability. I know for 05 Ford did some revisions for the Focus. Did these revisions lead to bad reliability for the 05 Focus because you are saying in your post that the Focus is not there in reliability? Remember I don't have the current issue of CR in front of me. I have the last one though.
The biggest reason for CR not recommending other Mazdas is lower-than-average predicted reliability (MPV, RX-8, and 6). I suspect the reason they don't recommend the B-series is because they haven't tested it lately. Same with the Miata. They don't recommend the Tribute (or the Escape) because of "a tip-up in the government rollover test."
~alpha
The following CR reliability suvey was conducted between the dates of April 1, 2003, through March 31st 2004 so maybe the A/C problem hasn't shown up on CR's radar rate. I mean March 31st, 2004 the 3 was only out for like 3 or 4 months. I;m just making a statement on the particular dates that CR's reliability data was taken. I;m not trying to cause any beefs with 3 owners on this board just in case somebody thinks I am. For example it took CR 2 or 3 issues to get a hold of the brake problem with the 03 Honda Accord and that car is like 2 years old.
I thought the Mazda3 was out in late 2003 but even if that is true you're right that it is a very short test period and problems may have surfaced since then that will affect it's rating in the future.
On the other hand, the Protege, the predecessor to the Mazda3, has an impeccable record of reliability. Both were produced in Japan. Which makes me wonder about the role of the production source in the reliability of the Protege/Mazda3 in comparison to the Mazda6 which is built in the USA. Is the quality control superior in the parent factory? If so, how to account for the poor reliability of the RX8 also built in Hiroshima? Is the RX8 just too new to be reliable, is that Wankel just too much of a headache for most owners?
My 3 year old Protege5 which continues to hum effortlessly in this cold Canadian clime makes for one happy driver.
Exactly.
"On the other hand, the Protege, the predecessor to the Mazda3, has an impeccable record of reliability." Both were produced in Japan."
All three generations of Protege's have great reliability records.
Which makes me wonder about the role of the production source in the reliability of the Protege/Mazda3 in comparison to the Mazda6 which is built in the USA."
Remember I said 04 models in CR were about 6 months old so I don't think an 04 6 its reliability would be up to date currently. I mean we are in 05 now(March) and the last reliability taken for the 04 6 was taken about a year ago. The 6 yes had a bad first year of reliability but like I said in one of my postings before it was a brand spankin new design and Ford Motor Co. is notorious for having bad reliability with first year models(00 Focus, 00 LS, 01 Tribute/Escape, 02 Explorer.)The 6 is we all know is built out of a a Ford plant. In their second year of reliability all these cars were rated average with the exception of the Focus CR has now downgraded the 01 Focus from average reliability to below average in their current issue. However, The current Expedition and Lincoln Navigator are below average in reliability even in their second year of bodystyle. As a matter of fact, the current Navigator was tied for the most problems with the 04 Nissan Quest for most problems(49 problems per 100 cars.)Again, the current issue of CR is not very up to date with 04 models so Ford could have the kinks worked out of the Navigator, and Expedition by now. The 4wd F-150(anothe first year model)also had a worse than averge reliability record. The 2wd F-150 they rated average reliability. CR did change the reliability for the following models: 02 Explorer from below average to average reliability, 02 Nissan Altima: downgraded from average reliability to below average reliability, 03 Nissa Altima: above average reliability to average reliability, and 99 Mazda 626 downgraded from above average reliability to average reliability. CR did however rate 98,00, 01, and 02 626's above average in reliability. They also rated the 97 626 which as part of the 93-97 626 generation average reliability.
"Is the quality control superior in the parent factory?"
Yes I think it could be a little but not that much better but its hard to say. The 98-02 626 generation like I said before has above average reliability with the exception of the 99 model which was average reliability. The 93-97 626 thats a catch 22 since that Ford tranny put a dagger in the reliability record for that generation of 626. The 88-92 626 was made in Flat Rock also and was a pretty reliable car back in its day.
"If so, how to account for the poor reliability of the RX8 also built in Hiroshima? Is the RX8 just too new to be reliable, is that Wankel just too much of a headache for most owners?"
Yes it could be a combonation of both the wankel motor and its a very new model as well. The MPV which is also made in Japan had a good reliability record from the 00-02 model years. CR downgraded the 02 MPV's reliability(above average) to average reliability due to the Fuel recall that Mazda had. For 03 and 04 MPV owners reported to CR about numerous tranny problems and now the MPV's reliability is worse than average.
I should note I have been noticing a popularity of the Mazda 3 in Jersey in the past few months particulary. Mazda hit the bullseye on this car. I'm curious how that problem with the A/c on the 04 3 will play out in CR's future reliability ratings.
Consumer Reports removes Ford Focus as Top Pick for small cars
Six other vehicles no longer recommended because of crash test results.
Consumer Reports has removed the Ford Focus as its Top Pick for small cars because it performed poorly in insurance industry crash tests that were announced on Sunday.
Two other small cars that received favorable ratings in Consumer Reports' April Auto Issue, the Hyundai Elantra and Mazda3, also are no longer recommended by the magazine because of poor performance in the new side-impact crash tests, conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.
Here's the link, on the CR website, that all can access- http://cdn.consumerreports.org/static/0504pic2_f.html
Also, hopefully, it will kick Mazda in the [non-permissible content removed] to get the 3 tested with Side Impact Airbags- the structure is decent-rated acceptable- so I dont know why they are preventing a re-test. Same goes for Nissan and the Altima.
Backy, you called this first, didnt you?! Wow.
~alpha
everfeb
Chevy and Toyota PAID to have the Cobalt and Corolla re-tested WITH the SAB. Sorry...from my experiences with Mazda I just can't see them doing this. They just seem to be very "penny wise and pound foolish".
everfeb
How is that misleading? This is simply not a test that cars pass without side airbags. The frontal offset is NOT passable without airbags either, though it is not misleading.
Simply putting side airbags and curtains on all cars would not result in passing scores, as the test also highlights the importance of a strong safety cage.
(The Hyundai Elantra, Kia Spectra, Suzuki Aerio, and Saturn ION all received POOR ratings even with side airbags.)
This is the same type of cycle/reaction that occured with the original frontal offsets that nearly all makes pass with flying colors nowadays. Its just that in this case, the airbags arent standard as they were for the frontal offsets in 1995.
~alpha
See: //cdn.consumerreports.org/static/0504pic2_f.html
I think we all know that, but buy them anyhow.
You pays your money and you takes your chances.
fowler3
everfeb
Maybe because GM and Toyota have alot more money than Mazda does. I think Mazda will have to retest though. After all the 3 is the only Mazda product CR reccomends.
The current generation Elantra before this current issue of CR came out could not previously reccomend the Elantra because of poor offset crash test. Now, CR can't reccomend the Elantra because of poor side impact crash tests. This car just don't catch a break as far as crash tests go.
I guess with alot of cars faling this crash test we can all draw the conclusion the government is making these crash tests tougher. After all you want a vehicle that can handle a high impact crash but at the same time it damages automakers cars in terms of reputation.
I heard on the news Honda will put alot of optional safety equipment for when the Civic gets its side-impact crash test.
Actually, Chris, that's not a correct deduction since the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety is not part of government but rather an industry sponsored body.
In general, I support this type of involvement by both the industry and government as it promotes safety for everyone and reduces overall costs in the long run.
I am getting the willies. After a flip over crash in Jan 05 ,I bought a Mazda 3 sp. I did test drive (3 times) but after putting only 12 miles on the car, the beauty sits in my driveway. I thought that I just had to get over the feelings. I thought that my research was done, but now I feel like I am looking at a BIG mistake. Comments on the actual FEEL of safety?
I totaled a car about three years ago.. While it was certainly less traumatic than flipping over, I did blow the airbags (and a crockpot of chili all over the backseat).
I found that for a few months, I was jumpy, and had a hard time making left turns out of parking lots onto busy streets... there just never seemed to be enough time or room to get out...
I also made my young son stop playing "punch-buggy", as I was jumping out of my skin, every time he spotted a Beetle..
Gradually, I relaxed and everything went back to normal.. There is nothing wrong with being cautious, but I would suggest not obsessing over it while you aren't in the car..
It is true what they say... Time heals all wounds.. Don't let an isolated incident control your life.. learn from it and move on..
regards,
kyfdx
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
Thanks
In any case, all the "safety" options come in one options package. If you, like me, would never buy a car without ABS then you automatically get the other safety features (side air bags, side curtain air bags, and electronic brakeforce distribution) along with it.
Update: Found the crash test scores from the NHTSA. **** frontal driver/passenger
*** side front/rear
**** rollover
Side airbags were not tested, but they typically add one star to side impact ratings.
PLUS, the Mazda 3's good handling and great brakes make it less likely that you will get into an accident in the first place.
Jason
Sue
But following this horror experience I drove from Virginia to California and back solo, but that's another story. Heh
About buy a Mazda3 considering the CR report:
1) Is it anything you didn't already know?
2) Aren't all compact cars on the road eqaully at risk?
3) Do you expect compact owners to just park their cars and never drive them again?
NO!
Buckle your belts! Buckle your alertness!
fowler3
Car dealers do. Then maybe you'll trade it in on a shiny new Escape or RAV4. See, they make more money on compact SUVs then they do compact cars.
On a serious note...I personally love safety items but some folks don't. We see people who would prefer a lower price than an airbag. Some car makers give the consumer that choice..others don't. The car makers who give consumers choices will get hammered by the media/IIHS for not including those things as standard, notice I didn't say free. Remember, media/IIHS does not think consumers are smart enough to make this decision on their own.
My guess is that a vehicles accident avoidance ability saves more lives and more money than all the other safety items combined...if the IIHS would come up with that test the results would be scary. I would say that most of us test this feature almost everyday...
Life is all about choices.
Yeah, people, and especially the safety-gadget development industry, seem to forget that the best way to survive an accident is to avoid one. But I guess if they told people that then they wouldn't sell as many airbags or ABS systems, etc. Although personally I like ABS, since it helps me to AVOID accidents.
Looks like even CR is getting more toward surviving being hit then avoiding being hit. You know, it wouldn't be as much of a problem if they actually TESTED drivers skills on a regualr basis instead of giving out licences in vending machines.
I think we should go to a system like those used in Europe and Japan where drivers are rated to handle vehicles in more-finely defined vehicle segments. C'mon, a regular license allows the same person to drive a compact car, an extended club wagon, a U-Haul truck or a 3-ton SUV? They handle so differently.
About people questioning the 3 and its safety. This is not exclusively a Mazda problem. I mean the Corolla and Cobalt would have failed without the SAB. So I guess nobody should buy a Corolla without the SAB. The Altima failed. Thats Nissan's pride and gold right there.
Finally, the guy from IIHS(Robert Lund)said he wasn't surprised that most of these compact cars falied the said impact crash test. He said back in 1997 when cars were tested for frontal crash tests most of the cars failed too. Now most cars pass the frontal crash tests(hence car makers making frontal air bags standard equipment.)
The Elantra has comparable crash test ratings to these other cars (except the Corolla did better on the IIHS side impact test), plus standard SABs whereas they are optional on all the other cars. So I feel quite safe in it, thank you!