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

Mazdaspeed3 vs. VW V GTI vs. Civic Si

1…34689…27

Comments

  • bman33bman33 Member Posts: 85
    I'd love to learn more about your Pony car. Do you have trouble finding leaded gas? I bet it's pretty fast. Have you ever run a 10 second quarter-mile with it? Have you ever done a track day with it and seen 175 mph? I road to work today on my 2004 Kawasaki ZX-10R. There isn't a car on the road that will hang with it. Unless you have one fast Pony car.

    Regardless of the spec sheet, I will never mistake a cheap, hopped up Protege' wagon as a "BMW for the masses". Why not buy a real German people's car - a VW GTI?
  • dc_driverdc_driver Member Posts: 712
    bman33,

    I suggest you wait until the Speed3 is released to the general public before you comment on its performance, styling, and overall fit and finish.

    As an owner of both a VW (99.5 Jetta VR6) and a Mazda (06 Mazda3), I can attest that there is not that much difference in fit and finish between the Mazda and the VW. VW's interior quality is SLIGHTLY better than Mazda, but their reliability is definitely questionable. I have owned two VW's and four Mazda's and my personal experience regarding reliability is that my Mazda vehicles are very reliable and my VW vehicles have been very problematic.

    I researched and drove nearly every car in the 16-20K range and I would definitely not consider the 3 to be a cheap looking or feeling car. Nor would any of the countless professional and consumer reviews I read.

    Personally, I will wait to pass judgment on the Speed3 after I see and drive one...
  • blueguydotcomblueguydotcom Member Posts: 6,249
    That may be true if you need a car to get from point A to point B. I think even the people that just need to get from place to place care what their car looks like. Completely unrealistic remark. Especially considering you're talking about sporty cars.

    Hmm, really? I don't think so. I think if you're a true fan of driving you buy for how the car feels and communicates with you. How it looks on the outside isn't relevant. I've owned a variety of cars I think are bland (01 Jetta 1.8T WE, 03 Protege ES, 03 330i ZHP) to downright ugly (06 330i). The drive mattered more than the sheetmetal in every case.

    To me, the MS3 and the GTI can be cross shopped but they offer different things. The MS3 all about value, power, and performance. The GTI is a bit more refined. That's what I wanted, something that was still sporty but that I wouldn't be banged up after driving it.

    That's where we differ. I loathe my 330i sport package expressly becuase it's so refined and bland. Toss it into a 35 mph corner at 80 and the car doesn't flinch. Snooze. At 140 the car's stable, quiet and coma-inducing (I spent weeks driving it in europe before having it sent here). The 06 GTI was fun but in the corners I felt way too much body lean. The understeer was too prevalent for me to really enjoy the car. I want oversteer - even with a FWD car.

    My main point was to counter the idea that style is worthless. That's a ridiculous remark. =) I'd agree that what other people think about styling *is* worthless.

    To each his own. I hear someone say they bought a car for how it looks, I pretty much write them off as someone who wants to floss rather than drive.
  • rorrrorr Member Posts: 3,630
    Thought you'd never ask.

    No, it runs fine on unleaded (when I had the 289 built, I had hardened valve-seats installed. It dyno'd 349hp at 6000 on 93 octane. I haven't had it on a chassis dyno but I'm estimating around 300-310 at the wheels. It's actually very mild-mannered for a 289.)

    I don't give a rip about 1/4 mile. The car is set up for the street with occasional open-track use. The front A-arms were lowered, cut Boss302 front-springs installed, Mid-eye 5leaf rear springs, Koni shocks all around, upgraded front roll bar, rear panhard rod (no rear sway bar), poly bushings throughout, 4 wheel disk brakes installed, subframe connectors, export brace and front strut bar.

    The rear-end was all new from Currie Enterprises and is built around a prepped Ford 9" rear, Strange Engineering axles, and a 4.11:1 gear-set (which is WAY too agressive and I'm thinking about changing out for a 3.73 set. First gear is essentially useless right now). I'm using a T5 unit out of a late-model and it's holding up okay so far.

    The car looks very stock (except for a slightly lowered stance. Even the 15" Torque-Thrust D rims look period correct). I even kept the stock GT exhaust trumpets out of the rear valence even though I'm sure they cost me a few hp. And the stock seats suck on open-track days. And no, my favorite ice-cream isn't vanilla.

    Yes, I've done track days. I was invited by my cousin (who vintage races a real '66 Shelby GT350H). His car was built to vintage specs by Walt Hane (look it up) and he is making better than 450hp out of his 289. I've seen some of his in-car video of him catching and passing C5 Z06 Corvettes (in stock street trim) on the front straight at TWS. I have no idea what his favorite ice cream is.

    BTW - this is the group he races in:

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3735931758305693787&q=CVAR

    All of which proves.....absolutely nothing. I'm sure your ZX-10R is really special. Really. Although I'm not sure how the ability to "beat" a 40-year old Ford pony car with a 2-year old Super Bike is anything to write home about.

    Actually, the real German people's car was a Bug, not a Golf. Regardless, I don't WANT a real German people's car.

    I'm glad you like the refinement and 'near-luxury' of your GTI. Have fun carressing your dash and upholstery while the taillights of that Speed3 receed into the distance...

    edit: my cousin's blue w/ white stripes GT350 goes by the camera car at about the 5:40 mark in that video... :shades:
  • blueguydotcomblueguydotcom Member Posts: 6,249
    Regardless of the spec sheet, I will never mistake a cheap, hopped up Protege' wagon as a "BMW for the masses". Why not buy a real German people's car - a VW GTI?

    There's nothing remotely BMW-ish about the GTI. Save for the lousy engineering of the electrical components. The GTI's not in the same league in regard to roadfeel, driving dynamics, etc.

    I've owned two late model BMWs and a VW. I've beat the hell out of an 06 GTI and trust me, it's not in the same league as BMW or Mazda. Too soft, too muted, too much body roll.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    Seriously, Ford appreciates your blind devotion to its poor man's Japanese brand.

    Face the facts, Mazda's "brand appeal" is weak. They wish they could be VW. Meanwhile, VW continues to set the bar for near-luxury, bang for the buck style and performance.

    Last I looked, VW is NOT doing so good. Their new products are not selling, except for the new Passat. The Jetta has been a HUGE flop! VW better hope that the Rabbit does well, or they are in big trouble. Where as Mazda in 2005 had their greatest sales year, EVER. And, so far, for 2006, they are already 8% ahead of last year.

    Also, Mazda is ranked 5th in the world in regards to RELIABILITY and QUALITY according to CR. I believe VW was next to LAST, right above the sinking Titanic called Mercedes-Benz. So much for German engineering.

    According to Mazda, they are creating their own market of the young, active lifestyle buyer. No where do they every mention trying to mimic VW, and why would they? VW does not have a good reputation. They have never been powerful, always amongst the slowest and weakest powered in every segment. Their handling has been par for the course, and among the most expensive. Also, when it comes to service them, try finding a local mechanic that wants to touch it, outside of a VW dealer.

    VW had it's heyday in the late 90's, early 00's with the Jetta, Passat, and New Beetle. Their new product is not selling like those did. Where as Mazda is steadily growing.

    Also, what's the big deal with the Ford association? Ford has little to do with Mazda engineering, and Ford provides them with the extra money they are looking for to expand their ever so popular vehicle line.

    Now that I am done, my future posts will only be about the topic at hand, which is the Mazdaspeed3 Vs. the GTI, not VW Vs. Mazda.
  • patpat Member Posts: 10,421
    is indeed the topic here.

    Let's stick to it, okay? Thanks.
  • z71billz71bill Member Posts: 1,986
    How a car LOOKS VS how it DRIVES

    I would not buy a car unless I like the way it looks.

    I would not buy a car unless I like the way it drives.

    I just looked up the GTI - I could not recall what it looks like - looks like it borrowed styling clues from the 1974 Gremlin - but after looking at a few more pictures - that would be too kind.

    I would never even test drive a GTI - let alone buy one - is this one of those - so ugly that some think its "cute"?
  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Member Posts: 1,798
    Once it's out there, we can get some real comparisons between it and the GTI. Maybe Edmunds will oblidge us with a 3-way comparison of the Mazda, VW, and Honda's SI.

    As for personal experience, the Mazda 323 I got when it was first introduced as the "Great Little Car" was apparently assembled on a pilot line, and proved a total :lemon: Hopefully Mazda will be more careful this time around.
  • blueguydotcomblueguydotcom Member Posts: 6,249
    Mazda 323? Way to get in the waaaaaay back machine.
  • jaesee75edmundjaesee75edmund Member Posts: 39
    regardless of brand appeal, you can't drive a car if it spends as much time at the dealer as it does on the road. i had an 02 jetta vr6 that spent literally every other month in the shop. i drove around with 4 cylinders instead of the 6 i paid for, no radio, powerless window, etc, etc, for nearly 2 months while waiting for the parts to come in because the jetta/gti/golf are completely unreliable, even today. i took a loss not a year and a half later to trade it for a toyota. the m3 i currently drive has been completely satisfying, even with its 4 cylinders. i paid alot less for it, and the handling is much better than the vr6. i wouldn't buy another vw if they paid me.
  • dc_driverdc_driver Member Posts: 712
    Go look at the comparison test here at Edmunds:
    http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=109825
    The VW GTI lost head-to-head against the Honda Civic Si.. Look at the reasons why (handling, cornering, overall driving characteristics).

    I have no doubt that a Mazdaspeed3 will not be able to blow the GTI or the Civic Si away at the track (but I guess we will have to see).
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    As for personal experience, the Mazda 323 I got when it was first introduced as the "Great Little Car" was apparently assembled on a pilot line, and proved a total Hopefully Mazda will be more careful this time around.

    Not to down play your Mazda ownership experience of a 323, but, that is like me saying my Beetle Bug (not New Beetle) was a lemon. Both companies have jumped leaps and bounds since then.
  • bman33bman33 Member Posts: 85
    The VW GTI lost head-to-head against the Honda Civic Si.. Look at the reasons why (handling, cornering, overall driving characteristics).

    Car & Driver did a comparison test with the Civic Si and declared the VW GTI the winner. I don't value a magazine or Edmunds.com writer's opinion any more than the people who post here. If anything, I like the real world feedback one gets on a forum vs. a review based solely on a short term test.

    Also, Mazda is ranked 5th in the world in regards to RELIABILITY and QUALITY according to CR. I believe VW was next to LAST, right above the sinking Titanic called Mercedes-Benz. So much for German engineering.

    As for reliability, my 2004 VW GTI has been trouble-free for 28,000 miles. Not one warranty claim! Mazda's have issues, too - just take a look at the following forum - Mazda3: Problems & Solutions

    I didn't make up the part about the Mazdaspeed 3 being a wannabe GTI - "At our test-drive near Mount Fuji, Chief Engineer Tatsuo Maeda pulled no punches when he said that his team's benchmark during the Axela MPS's development was the GTI"

    Aside from the ride quality and fit & finish isssues, another knock I have against the Mazdaspeed3 is I have never been a fan of five door mini-station wagons. This sentiment extends to the Audi A3, which design-wise I don't care for either.

    I realize everyone is entitled to an opinion and if the Mazdaspeed3 floats your boat, that's cool. I just don't agree.">link title
  • dc_driverdc_driver Member Posts: 712
    "Car & Driver did a comparison test with the Civic Si and declared the VW GTI the winner."

    Can you provide a link? I checked out their website and the last comparison test I saw between the Civic Si and VW GTI was from 2002.. The 06 Civic Si is drastically different...

    "As for reliability, my 2004 VW GTI has been trouble-free for 28,000 miles. Not one warranty claim! Mazda's have issues, too - just take a look at the following forum - Mazda3: Problems & Solutions"

    I do not disagree with you there, but VW is more prone to having major issues than the Mazda3. If you start digging through Mazda3 problem boards you definitely need to dig through VW GTI/Golf boards as well...

    I do not think that Mazda using the VW GTI as the benchmark is the same as Mazda trying to "be like" VW. I think they used the GTI as a benchmark to surpass, not equal..
  • bman33bman33 Member Posts: 85
    Sorry, the comparison article was in Road & Track, not C&D. Here is the link:

    GTI vs. Civic Si vs. Mini Cooper S

    It is telling when one manufacturer specifically mentions another make as "the benchmark". In truth, there is no greater compliment that can be paid.

    ">link title
  • rorrrorr Member Posts: 3,630
    "In truth, there is no greater compliment that can be paid. "

    You are correct.

    So the only question that remains: did Mazda meet their goals? Afterall, in the auto biz, one doesn't hold up another car as the 'benchmark' without the intention to beat it.

    I mean, you might have an argument if Mazda had stated their benchmark was the Civic Si which, in your opinion, falls short of the GTI. But Mazda wasn't aiming at the Civic, they've stated they were aiming squarely at the GTI. You appear to take it on faith that they fell short.

    It would appear from a glance at the stats of these two cars (substantially better power and torque/weight advantage, an advanced front LSD to better put the power to the ground, substantial suspension improvements over the Mazda3) that, from a performance standpoint, the new Speed3 should have a definite advantage. I anticipate the fit/finish to be close but the advantage going to the GTI. Reliability, based on historical data, I would have to give to the Mazda. Price may be a tossup. Perhaps it comes down to personal preferences of 2-doors vs. 4.

    Yes, I know that SUBJECTIVELY you feel the GTI to be a better car. But viewed objectively......?
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    As for reliability, my 2004 VW GTI has been trouble-free for 28,000 miles. Not one warranty claim! Mazda's have issues, too - just take a look at the following forum - Mazda3: Problems & Solutions


    Not doubting your luck with your VW, but, the VW GTI has had more problems, historically, then the Mazda3.

    Every brand made has problems, no car is perfect, not even Lexus/Toyota, which is considered by many to be the most reliable car company.

    On a side note, a friend of mine had a 1994 Chevy Cavalier with 225K on it with NO problems before the engine block finally cracked, and it "pissed" all sorts of engine fluids all over my driveway. :D :sick: And we all know where Chevy's reputation for quality and reliability are..."flush"... ;)
  • bman33bman33 Member Posts: 85
    I admit it is premature to make an objective assessment of the Mazdaspeed3's performance. Does anyone have an arrival date for Mazdaspeed3 on US soil? There is a dealer near my house that carries Mazda and VW - it'll make a back-to-back comparison easy!

    My criticism of the Mazdaspeed3 is based on hands-on experience in a Mazda 3 and Mazdaspeed6. I'll be honest, I was super excited when I read the spec sheet and "First Look" articles in the car mags on the Mazdaspeed 6. I visited my local Mazda dealership in March with the intent of trading in the GTI and buying a Mazdaspeed6. After my test drive, I didn't think it was worth the extra monthly payment.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    Sport.............................................$22,800
    Grand Touring.....................................$24,515
    Grand Touring w/SIRIUS radio......................$24,945

    Prices include $560 destination (Mazda)

    VW GTI cloth interior w/ 18" rims.................$23,370
    VW GTI leather interior w/18" rims/SIRIUS radio...$26,530

    Prices include $630 destination (VW)

    All models are with manual transmissions

    I placed two of the prices in bold text so you can see the price difference between the Mazdaspeed3 and GTI loaded. Big difference.
  • rorrrorr Member Posts: 3,630
    "I visited my local Mazda dealership in March with the intent of trading in the GTI and buying a Mazdaspeed6. After my test drive, I didn't think it was worth the extra monthly payment."

    Out of curiousity, what was it you were expecting and did not find after your test drive of the Speed6?
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    Out of curiousity, what was it you were expecting and did not find after your test drive of the Speed6?

    I guess un-matched handling, comfort, cutting edge design, AWD, and lots of power for $30K was not enough!
  • bman33bman33 Member Posts: 85
    I don't want to get too off topic, but the things I didn't like in the Mazdaspeed6 were some missing standard interior options(like memory seat, aux audio input, heated seats) the cheaper feel of the interior touch surfaces, the ride quality on rough roads and low end torque. I know the Mazda has direct injection and loads of HP and Torque, but the engine felt sluggish off the bottom. I've been told that the difference between my 1.8T turbocharger and the Mazdaspeed6 turbo is that VW uses a variable vane design, but I don't know enough about the two to confirm this. Perhaps someone with more engine knowledge can do a compare/contrast on the 2 motors and turbos?

    After test driving almost every AWD sports sedan, my favorites are the Subaru Legacy GT, Infiniti G35x and Passat 3.6. I'm looking to move to one of those in October or November.
  • rorrrorr Member Posts: 3,630
    From what I understand, the Speed3 will have heated seats and aux audio input. No memory seat. I can't attest to the interior plastics since I've not sat in a VW.

    I'll await driving impressions of the U.S. spec Speed3 before commenting on ride quality. But IMO ride quality is one of those highly subjective traits.

    The only problem I'm aware of with regards to torque and the Speed3 is the fact that there may be too MUCH of it. The fact that peak torque may be a bit higher in the rpm band may be a benefit. You also seem to overlook the fact that the Speed3 has SUBSTANTIALLY more peak torque than the GTI in a lighter vehicle.

    I know you were testing the Speed6. Were you inferring that the Speed3 would also feel 'sluggish' off the bottom?
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    don't want to get too off topic, but the things I didn't like in the Mazdaspeed6 were some missing standard interior options(like memory seat, aux audio input, heated seats) the cheaper feel of the interior touch surfaces

    The GT trim level has heated seats and is actually quite nice to the touch.

    My brothers GTI has the trim surfaces pealing apart, especially around the power window controls, door handles and many other places. This started to occur at 10K miles. Not to mention the constant "melted crayon" smell. He has never had crayons in the car, or any little kids.
  • bman33bman33 Member Posts: 85
    One thing I wish they included in the car mag and online comparison articles is an actual torque and horsepower curve chart. On the motorcycle side, every comparison article lays out the bikes torque and HP curves and it shows remarkable differences between bikes with almost identical top end power.

    Perhaps that would explain my perception of the Mazdaspeed6 feeling a little sluggish of the line.

    With its lighter weight, I'm sure the Mazdaspeed3 will be more comparable to the "get up" I feel with my '04 GTI.

    Regarding the torque and HP differences, the final Mazdaspeed3 SAE numbers have not been released, so we have to wait and see. But I know that for $600, a 10 minute APR reprogram of the 2006 GTI 2.0T ECU will net you 252HP/303ft/lbs of torque! Here is the link
    APR GTI upgrade
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    Wow, thats quite a bit of power for $600. Isn't is crazy how a computer can control an engine that much?

    As for SAE numbers on the Mazdaspeed3, you are right, numbers are not out yet, however, on www.mazdausa.com, they are stating "over 250hp" and 280 ft lb's of torque. Really, the only thing that bug's me is the restricted power in gears 1-3. I guess a test drive is the only way to tell. We will have to wait until September/October for that.
  • bman33bman33 Member Posts: 85
    280 ft./lbs of torque on a FWD? Holy crap! No wonder they need a "super duty" limited slip differential.

    The VW ecu reprogram is great bang for the buck, but without a true limited slip diff (which my '04 GTI lacks) and grippy tires, the torque steer is insane and on anything but dry pavement, you spin the tires bad.
  • baggs32baggs32 Member Posts: 3,229
    Perhaps that would explain my perception of the Mazdaspeed6 feeling a little sluggish of the line.

    FWIW several folks over on the SPEED6 threads have reported dealers filling the tanks with 87 octane (91 or 93 is required for max HP and torque and the engine does sense it and adjusts accordingly) which does have a dramatic effect on performance. I'm not saying your dealer did this but it's not out of the realm of possibility either.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    Actually, I need to retract my comment about this vehicle being here in September/ October. It actually is looking like it will be here late November/ December. Our first allocation, which I placed last month, is not scheduled to start production until 8-31-06. Then it has the long boat ride across the pond, through the Panama Canal, along the coast up to NJ.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    FWIW several folks over on the SPEED6 threads have reported dealers filling the tanks with 87 octane

    I hate to say it, but, our lot attendant did the same thing with our first shipment of speed6's
  • rorrrorr Member Posts: 3,630
    "280 ft./lbs of torque on a FWD? Holy crap! No wonder they need a "super duty" limited slip differential. "

    I'm sorry; I thought you already knew about the torque the Speed3 would be generating. That's why I was kinda surprised at your comment regarding the perceived 'sluggishness' of the Speed6 off the line.

    Yes, the Speed3 has it's peak torque point higher (at 3k rpm vs. the roughly 2k rpm point on the GTI). However, given the substantially higher torque number (280 vs. 207), I'd be willing to bet the Speed3 would be generating more torque than the GTI even at the GTI peak.

    Besides, when compared to your '04 GTI, it gets even uglier, since your car (stock) was making 'only' 173 ftlbs.

    Can you chip your GTI? Sure, but as you've noted, torque steer becomes a real issue. So I guess you need to figure the cost of a 'super duty' limited slip added to the chip upgrade........or maybe just get a Speed3 instead. ;)

    As more and more Mazdas become equipped with the 2.3DISI Turbo (Speed6, Speed3, CX-7...), I wonder what chip potential there may be in a couple of years..... :surprise:
  • bman33bman33 Member Posts: 85
    Again, there is so much more to a car than pure performance. I get my speed kicks from my motorcycle, so I don't care if a Mazdaspeed3 beats a GTI by a tenth in the quater-mile. I appreciate automotive design that is not cookie-cutter, both externally and internally. I appreciate safety. I appreciate quality materials. I appreciate usable, real world power (first to third gears, typically under 80 mph), rather than simply a high horsepower number. I appreciate sporty handling that doesn't sacrifice ride quality over bumpy roads. I appreciate interior creature comforts that make my 30 minute commute more enjoyable. In my opinion, the 5-door Mazda3 does not meet that criteria as well as the GTI Mk V. It feels cheaper than the VW. So does the Volvo V50, for that matter. Others will obviously disagree, but if you don't test drive a VW, you're doing yourself a disservice.
  • rorrrorr Member Posts: 3,630
    "In my opinion, the 5-door Mazda3 does not meet that criteria as well as the GTI Mk V."

    And there's nothing wrong with that opinion; because according to YOUR criteria (and perhaps built-in perceptions given your extensive VW ownership history), the Speed3 won't measure up to the GTI Mk V.

    The only reason I was harping on this was due to YOUR assertion that Mazda in general, and the Speed3 in particular, was simply a "VW wannabe". I suppose that if one were to re-chip their GTI to gain a bunch of hp and torque, would that make them a "Speed3 wannabe"? Why do I get the impression that such a claim would bring massive derision from the VW camp? In that light, could we just agree to DROP any "wannabe" language?

    "Again, there is so much more to a car than pure performance."

    Absolutely. And if the Speed3 were simply a Yugo on massive steroids, you might have a point. But the relative DIFFERENCES (in safety, quality of materials, ride/handling, creature comforts) are small (IMO of course).

    Real world power? Ummm, without having driven (obviously) a Speed3, you might want to withhold judgement regarding your supposed assumption that the GTI would hold ANY kind of an edge in this regard.
  • killerbunnykillerbunny Member Posts: 141
    Sorry, the comparison article was in Road & Track, not C&D. Here is the link:

    GTI vs. Civic Si vs. Mini Cooper S

    It is telling when one manufacturer specifically mentions another make as "the benchmark". In truth, there is no greater compliment that can be paid.

    It's a joke.

    The GTI is $7000 more expensive, and beats the Si by only 2.2 points out of 570...

    Really, the GTI has an advantage of 4.5 points in interior styling. For someone who likes the Si's interior better, it's immediately reversed. :surprise:
  • riposteriposte Member Posts: 160
    Consumer Reports liked the GTI better than the Si, too.
  • rorrrorr Member Posts: 3,630
    "Consumer Reports liked the GTI better than the Si, too."

    You're dragging CR into a discussion regarding performance cars? That's funny. They probably found the GTI to be more useful due to it's hatchback design.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    You're dragging CR into a discussion regarding performance cars? That's funny. They probably found the GTI to be more useful due to it's hatchback design.

    CR is all about function, build quality and long term reliability, and are very particular to Toyota.

    I find their reliability ratings to be accurate. Thats about it.
  • rorrrorr Member Posts: 3,630
    "CR is all about function, build quality and long term reliability...."

    Not disagreeing with you, but I find it interesting that, given their penchant for build quality/long term reliability, they gave the nod to the GTI over the Civic Si?

    Either the GTI had a HUGE advantage in funtionality (which I don't doubt compared to the Si) or they loved the torque of the GTI compared to the relatively low grunt of the Honda.

    I'm REALLY looking forward to a Speed3 test drive..... :shades:
  • blueguydotcomblueguydotcom Member Posts: 6,249
    Yes their reliability ratings are accurate...but their reviews of cars are so far off-base they're laughable. The jokers at CR will call the ride of the Mazdaspeed3 rough or complain about the engine noise. Good data but the most worthless reviews on the planet.
  • autonomousautonomous Member Posts: 1,769
    Good data but the most worthless reviews on the planet
    I can't agree; CR appears to be writing for a general consumer audience not for afficionados. Since my preference (and perhaps yours) is for a ride stiffer than the average driver I tend to see their comments about "stiff" ride as a positive characteristic. :)
  • riposteriposte Member Posts: 160
    Sure, why not?

    They loved the S2000.

    They also love the Subaru Impreza WRX.

    Those are performance cars, right?
  • riposteriposte Member Posts: 160
    "Not disagreeing with you, but I find it interesting that, given their penchant for build quality/long term reliability, they gave the nod to the GTI over the Civic Si?"

    They liked the GTI better than the Si, but would not give it a "RECOMMENDED" rating due to past reliability issues. That seems eminently fair, in my book.

    Interestingly, AutoWeek is doing a long-term test of the Audi A3, which is on the same platform as the GTI, and they've had no problems after 6 months. AutoWeek A3 Long Term Test
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    Interestingly, AutoWeek is doing a long-term test of the Audi A3, which is on the same platform as the GTI, and they've had no problems after 6 months

    I would not base reliability on a 6 month assesment. I'm sure they are going to be assessing that car for quite some time, but, I think it's still premature to consider it "reliable".

    JD Powers rates cars on a 90 day assessment. They call it "initial quality". Personally, I think thats a joke.
  • riposteriposte Member Posts: 160
    I totally agree that 6 months is insufficient time to declare it "Reliable". It is, however, at least a start.

    Re: JD Powers, I don't think there is any realy problem with measuring a car at 90 day's period of ownership, but it's only one datapoint of many, and probably the least important, unless it's been shown that cars with lots of problems within the first 90 days subsequently go on to have lots of problems after 90 days. I don't know if that's the case, or not.
  • gputzgputz Member Posts: 49
    I totally agree that 6 months is insufficient time to declare it "Reliable". It is, however, at least a start.

    I think people are really hoping VW/Audi gets their reliability act together so ANY positive is held up as a sign. Six months is really nothing.

    We simply won't know for several YEARS if there has been a fundamental change in their reliability. It took a long time for them to get where they are and it will take years of positive reviews to turn me around. That probably goes for most other people who swore off VW/Audi after getting burned. They will have to work VERY hard to get me away from Japanese cars. The experience for me was like night and day.
  • riposteriposte Member Posts: 160
    Agreed on all points. It'll take YEARS of proven reliability before I'll buy a VW. It'll be measured one day at a time.

    OTOH, I've been reading about (apparently) quite a few problems with the new 2007 Toyota Camry. It's always hard to judge whether it's a few people making a lot of noise, or actually a large problem, but it's still strange to have that much complaining.
  • datdudedatdude Member Posts: 5
    Let's not forget that infamous December 2003 Consumer Reports issue (pages 60-67) :confuse: that rated the Ford SVT Focus (not a bad car within it's class) No. 1 in a lineup that included Subaru Impreza WRX STi (2), Mazda RX-8 (3), Subaru Impreza WRX (4), Toyota Celica GT-S (5), Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution (6), Mini Cooper (7), VW Beetle Turbo S (8), Honda Civic Si (9), Acura RSX Type-S (10), Nissan 350Z (11), Chrysler Crossfire (12), Hyundai Tiburon GT (13), Mitsu Eclipse GT (14). [THE EVO RANKED 6TH!?!?! BEHIND, NOT ONLY THE FOCUS, BUT THE CELICA!?!?! THE 350Z RANKED 11!?!?!]

    In this ludicrous article :lemon: , CR criticized the WRX STi for "ride, noise," the Mazda RX-8 for "fuel econ," the Mitsu Evo for "ride, noise, turning circle, no sixth gear or cruise," the Nissan 350Z for "ride, noise, visibility, trunk capacity, no air-bag cutoff switch," the Chry Crossfire for "ride, steering feel and response, shifter, controls, visibility, interior room."

    CR clearly showed that they are NOT the source for sports car evaluations. There should have been resignations at CR following the printing of this tabloid story. :mad: They haven't a clue regarding real sports car strengths/weaknesses criteria. Minivans, family sedans, sure, refer to CR all day long. And BTW, if the vehicle has a turning circle greater than 40 ft., look out! :surprise: CR will dutifully report it (as they did with the Mitsu Evo above)!!!

    Just so you know, I am a CR subscriber and do value CR for consumer product evaluations. But CR really blew it when they tried to rate these fine sports cars, and people should understand this about CR. :)
  • audia8qaudia8q Member Posts: 3,138
    Are you certain that CR does the exact same testing/review in 2006 as they did in 2003?
  • lex_koltlex_kolt Member Posts: 17
    There are people that want to drive and there are people that want to be driven. Of course it's not really black and white, rather different levels of grey.

    Mazda will give you more control over the car, and with MazdaSpeed you'll have the power to match that.

    Interior quality is definatly better on VW as Audi is trendsetter in that segment.

    For me VW will never be on my list due to quality problems their cars are known for. Although my sister owns Passat with over 140k on it, but that looks like an exception rather then a rule.
This discussion has been closed.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles