Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Mazdaspeed3 vs. VW V GTI vs. Civic Si
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
I think not. A 4 door Rabbit 2.5 w/ cloth interior 17" wheels, moon roof, 5-speed transmission without destination is $19,242.
A Mazda3 s Touring with cloth interior, moon roof/6CD package (17" wheels std.) is $19,215 less destination.
The Mazdaspeed3 Sport is $22,240 and the GT is $23,995. Both less destination. The GTI 4 door with 18" and cloth seats is $24,508, and with leather and 18" wheels is $27,668. The Mazdaspeed3 has 18"s standard. I tried to equip both vehicles the same. To me, it looks like the Mazdaspeed3 is a bit cheaper. Can we say "Mazdaspeed3 is the better buy"?? Maybe, maybe not.
Any way you look at it, comparably equipped, the Mazdaspeed3 is less expensive, faster, handles better. If you want to pay more the a little nicer interior, be my guest.
I dunno where you found a $3000 difference. It is not fair to compare different trim levels and then claim that the Rabbit is $3000 cheaper, therefore it is the better buy. You are not helping anyone here by doing that.
I've seen 4 doors for 18k w/alloys which is still cheaper than the 3 hatch, but the 3k difference must be a 2 door.
Even then, the 2 door at a meager 15-16k has a more upscale interior.
You can easily get a Mazda3 for $15,000 as well...
The Mazda Club Chat is on tonight. The chat room opens at 8:45PM ET Hope to see YOU there! Check out the schedule
The MSRP on the Mazda3 5-door sport is $17,680. Dest. is $595. Total is $18,275.
The MSRP on the base Rabbit 4-door is $17,110. Dest. is $640. Total is $17,750. Interesting that you compared the price of the base Mazda3 WITH destination vs. the price of the base Rabbit withOUT destination....
Edmunds TMV for these two vehicles is $17,178 for the Mazda3 and $16,946 for the Rabbit (a difference of $232).
B F D
Now, FOR CRYIN' OUT LOUD, can we STOP discussing base Rabbits and Mazda3 and Civics and Sentras and Corollas etc etc etc in a thread that is SUPPOSED to be about the HOTTEST versions available?
but...
The MSRP on the Mazda3 5-door sport is $17,680. Dest. is $595. Total is $18,275.
The MSRP on the base Rabbit 4-door is $17,110. Dest. is $640. Total is $17,750. Interesting that you compared the price of the base Mazda3 WITH destination vs. the price of the base Rabbit withOUT destination....
...even though he did do this, even with the destination factored in...its still techically cheaper.
and for the sake of the thread;
the si is wound up and poised
the gti is direct and smooth
the mazdaspeed is just nuts.
As for the hottest versions, same thing. The Mazdaspeed3 is great if you want hardcore driving. If you want luxury or refinement and something that feels like money, GTI.
Too early to tell what resale value will be.
Also, I'm generally not as much of a fan of coming across HID's on 2-lane backroads. They can make a real hassle of spotting (see: staying on) the road.
Just saying that all the bells and whistles might not be the best suit for everyone for all the situations they'll encounter.
That's a symptom of a few things:
1. Wrong tires
2. FWD
3. Heavy right foot
Also, I'm generally not as much of a fan of coming across HID's on 2-lane backroads. They can make a real hassle of spotting (see: staying on) the road.
I believe this is a personal thing. My fiancee, sister and others with blue eyes swear xenons hurt their eyes. I can stare directly at xenons and not have an issue. Ditto their love of auto-dimming mirrors while I totally hate them. To each his own.
Just saying that all the bells and whistles might not be the best suit for everyone for all the situations they'll encounter.
You may be the first person to ever hint that it's possible to have too much torque or too much power - with a car that's a manual and that you don't need to use all the power on.
These days most cars, and not only the Mazdaspeed3, would benefit from snow tires in colder climates. You're right it is one more hassle but winter tires extend the life of your summer tires.
The people I know in snowy climates tend to swap their tires no matter what. Winter = winter tires. Sort of the cost of car ownership.
I have a 1992 Mustang GT, and I don't drive it in the winter (well, right now I'm doing work to it, so I'm not driving it anyway).
Personally, i don't understand why you WOULDN"T want a heavy foot with a car like the ms3 with that much hp and tq. Kinda negates the whole purpose of it otherwise eh?
But NOT having an si does not mean not liking fun cars. How can you expect anyone to take what you say seriously if you are going to stay perched atop your si soap box?
I have come to the conclusion that carfanatic007 really is not worth responding to. His post's are not helpful to anyone, and are quite inaccurate most of the time. Personally, I believe he should be posting on civicsi.com, or, other boards where verbal nonsense is tolerated.
Although i wont deny that many people on vwvortex will diss hondas, (no torque, too much hp blah blah blah) and be rather eerily accepting towards reliability issues.
I think i'll ignore him from now on too.
I am open and respect everyones opinions on every car, and I may differ from time to time, but, I believe it is important to also have some useful body to what you post.
Let's move on, okay?
it seems like the jdm type r is one of the sharpest handling fwd cars ever made.
I'd take this over anything here. One thing is almost 100 hp per litre, but OVER 100hp per litre?!!! From an N/A 2.0? There is no denying that this is some incredible enginering, wether high redlines are your thing or not.
And if it was just 25k here? Thats just a tiny bit more than some mazdaspeeds and cheaper than a lot of gti's!
This thing is still on the low end of the torque spectrum, but still has more than a reg. mazda 3, which we all agree pulls nicely.
I was doing some thinking; the euro spec type r runs to 60 in about 6.5 seconds and this thing is more powerful and weighs exactly the same... an almost 6.0 0-60? Anyway you look at it, this is amazing.
To be able to say my 222 hp n/a is about as fast as your 263 turbo is pretty awesome. (and yet shameful!)
Well, 6.5 to 60 is very respectable, however, the Mazdaspeed3 has had times at 5.5. My guess is the Civic Type-R will do the 1/4 mile in near 14 sec flat. Very respectable as well.
According to many, the best handling FWD car ever built to this day is still the DC2 Integra Type-R. What a car for it's day.
as much as i love the jdm sedan, i must say that the inferior (performance wise) hatch in europe is still one mean looking car!
I cannot speak to the reliability, however I doubt most of you interested in this group place this first and foremost. For most of us we will move on in a while toward the next big thing that whets our appetite either in this class or another. I have had only minor problems with the Honda (O2 sensor and Catalytic Converter)and touch wood none with the VW.
As a side note I felt compelled to add to this discusion after a particularly insane session with the GTI that honestly would have upset the Honda's rear end...
“Viva la Fast”
If you're tracking often, the Speed3 is the easy choice. Mixed duty, the GTI is the easier car to live with on a daily basis.
There have been many tests that show the Si is not the "best handling by far". Check out the test done by this site, and the MS3 won.
Best resale is yet to be seen.
Most fun to drive is purely subjective, and each have their own opinion. There are some that may say a mini van is more fun to drive then any of the three.
Perhaps the si is more 'tossable'? that usually makes people feel their car handles well, or at least better than most. A lighter car will always feel like the better handler, even if the nubmers say otherwise.
True. That can be attributed to weight transfer. The lighter the car, the less weight to transfer and it feels as it handles better. Not always the case. It is an illusion some of the time.
That is why most smaller cars appear to handle better then larger sedans. It is true in many cases, but, not all.
... and ideally the car is well balanced in weight distribution (i.e. 50% equally over the front and rear tires). For many small cars, like the Mazda3 and the Honda Civic, lightening the car on the front end is one area for improvement. That's one reason I prefer the smaller 4 cylinder over a heavier 6 cylinder. Even a 4 cylinder with a turbo is preferable to a V6 in my books. But the ideal is a lighter engine. I'm looking forward to the day that light hybrids can do the work of a turbo 4 cylinder. F1 is planning to incorporate hybrids into their racing in the future.
Not Always. Also depends on the weight distribution. C&D boys felt RX-8 is lighter then Audi TT, but it wasn't.
Lots of stuff in here lately regarding the elusive term "handling".
"Handling" is more that a set of numbers. Hardcore suspension and fat tires may certainly give a better skidpad number, or lane change number, but NUMBERS are only part of the story.
One must also consider compliance (how little road imperfections may upset a chassis that otherwise gives great "numbers"), steering response (how precisely can the car be placed in corners and how easy is it to maintain a set path), slip angles (taken with steering feel, how well does the car communicate to the driver how close to the ragged edge he's getting), etc. etc. etc...
Some cars may give GREAT 'numbers' but are regard by some as being 'evil' handlers as they give their driver a massive case of white knuckles and sweaty palms trying to GET those 'numbers'.
In a sense, what constitutes good 'handling' is somewhat subjective. However, I would take the opinion of a professional driver/tester about which cars are the better 'handlers' over the opinion of a starry-eyed owner. Even then, I'd just as soon do my OWN test-drive and make my own judgment.
I read that comparo, and the RX-8 won. The Rx-8 was simply the most fun to drive, according to them. Also, the RX-8 has near 50/50 weight distribution, and the TT is not. The TT basically a GTI under the sheet metal, the 2.0T version, of course.
oh i completely agree! i was trying to discern carfan's relatively common comment of how his si seems to handle better than the mazdaspeed, and i figured it had to to with the lightness of the car...in turn you said;
In a sense, what constitutes good 'handling' is somewhat subjective. However, I would take the opinion of a professional driver/tester about which cars are the better 'handlers' over the opinion of a starry-eyed owner. Even then, I'd just as soon do my OWN test-drive and make my own judgment.
...which i totally agree with and think that that is the case her.
I don't doubt the si's handling, and would personally take a 4 door over the ms3.
Mazdaspeed who?
:shades:
Interesting that in order to better the Speed3, VW had to resort to a twin-turbo W-12 powering the rear wheels.
I wonder how hard it would be to take the drivetrain from a wrecked Speed3 and drop it into the rear hatch area of Speed3 making a twin-engined, AWD Speed3?
Nah. Tooo expensive and would put it into a different class...