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

Honda Civic vs Mazda3

2456726

Comments

  • gosteelerzgosteelerz Member Posts: 21
    "Maybe I'm missing something, but why are some people here under the assumption that the 3 doesn't have side airbags? They are standard on 3s Touring and Grand touring, and available on ANY model 3. Civic has them standard, and that's good, but anyone who wants side/head curtain airbags can get them on any model 3."

    Mazda Canada doesn't seem to think we need them here. I never gave it much thought until it was brought up on the Canadian Driver forum. We get heated mirrors and an external thermometer instead. We also do not get HID lights. Honda deleted the auxillary input for the radio up here for some strange reason as well.
  • mrblonde49mrblonde49 Member Posts: 626
    "Mazda Canada doesn't seem to think we need them here. "

    The side airbags aren't available at all in Canada?
  • gosteelerzgosteelerz Member Posts: 21
    The side airbags aren't available at all in Canada?

    No, but the cars are comparatively cheaper here too. Believe it or not the Focus costs more here than the 3.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    It's common for the auto mags (including Edmunds.com here as a "virtual" mag) to put performance above everything else in their reviews. So why is it surprising to some here that Edmunds.com did that in comparing the Civic and Mazda3? For example, the last time C/D did a big economy car comparo, they put the Protege (Mazda3's predecessor) first. One might ask why, when it was not the most economical in fuel consumption nor the least expensive. And it was not the most safe, based on crash tests. It was because it had the best handling of the bunch. In another recent comparo of economy sedans (I think it was in MT), the Mazda3 took first place; again, it wasn't the most economical, but had the best overall performance and "fun to drive" factor.

    As someone else said, if you want to read a review of economy cars in which performance is not Numero Uno, try Consumer Reports. Who knows, maybe the Civic will come out on top when they next test small cars. It was their top choice at one time, but the prior design was later topped in their ratings by the Focus, Mazda3, and Prius. Since CR puts strong value on safety and fuel economy as well as performance in their ratings, they should like the new Civic a lot. One thing for sure: the Civic will be more highly recommended by CR than is the Mazda3, because CR will give its top recommendation only to cars that have received decent scores in crash tests. (They recommend the Mazda3, but it's their "second tier" recommendation reserved for cars that haven't received a good score on all crash tests.)
  • xquxqu Member Posts: 55
    All I'm saying is 3i touring with comparable options (Sun roof and ABS/SAB...) are very close on price with Civic EX and Edmunds should've compare them, not a 3s with the 2.3L engine against 1.8L in the Civic.

    Yeah, the 2.0L in 3i is still faster than Civic's 1.8L but they are a closer match, price and performance wise.

    Or use the 3i w/o option compare to Civic LX!
  • herrkaleuherrkaleu Member Posts: 62
    If a manufacturere builds a car for one market only (like the US Civic) it only need s to optimize it for those crash tests. That's why French cars in Europe have good crash results... cause they only need to survive European tests. The 2006 civic is different from the european model... it only needed to survive the US tests. (differences are: Europe tests offset crash the car hitting a moveable barrier with only the right or left front side while US tests hit a permanent barrier frontal etc...). A car that is sold in both "worlds" has to be muchbetter designed cause it needs to give good results under more scenarios. If you buy a VW Jetta that scores 5 stars in Europe AND in the US you have a better car than a Civic that has never been tested under European crash test conditions. The same for the Mazda 3 that is sold in hte US and in europe.
    In the end..in real life... Mazda 3 and the US civic will be very similiar.
  • chidorochidoro Member Posts: 125
    Well, it's a victory, though we cant really say how large or small it is, but I think that YOU are missing the point if you don't include accident avoidence in the equation. It's a very big part of it


    Why would the Civic not also be able to avoid an accident as well or nearly as well (completely ignoring driver awareness which really shouldn't be)? Because it can only slalom through a course at 65 as opposed to 68 mph (just made those numbers up). It's not as if the new Civic is a floating, top-heavy, boat sailing around just asking for trouble.
  • gosteelerzgosteelerz Member Posts: 21
    It's common for the auto mags (including Edmunds.com here as a "virtual" mag) to put performance above everything else in their reviews. So why is it surprising to some here that Edmunds.com did that in comparing the Civic and Mazda3? For example, the last time C/D did a big economy car comparo, they put the Protege (Mazda3's predecessor) first. One might ask why, when it was not the most economical in fuel consumption nor the least expensive. And it was not the most safe, based on crash tests. It was because it had the best handling of the bunch. In another recent comparo of economy sedans (I think it was in MT), the Mazda3 took first place; again, it wasn't the most economical, but had the best overall performance and "fun to drive" factor.

    The Protege was WAY more fun to drive and was 4 stars instead of 5 in passenger side frontal collision. The Protege's superior brakes would negate the difference. My recollection was that the Protege had a roomier interior as well, especially in the back. Yeah it uses more fuel but that's the price you got to pay for a bit of torque. Thesw were precisely the 2 cars I had to choose from back in 2003 and only one of them put a smile on my face.

    I was hoping Honda was going to one-up the 3, which would have made it a killer car but that didn't really seem to happen.
  • chidorochidoro Member Posts: 125
    "We prefer its interior design and functionality and we think it's a better-looking car than the Civic. Plus, it wins in any contest of performance". Can't argue with facts can't you ?


    Why bold a point you label as fact which is actually a purely subjective statement?
  • ctalkctalk Member Posts: 646
    Edmunds review said about the Mazda3 - "We prefer its interior design and functionality and we think it's a better-looking car than the Civic. Plus, it wins in any contest of performance". Can't argue with facts can't you ?

    You forgot to bold the "We think" ;)
    That's odviously subjective, their opinions are not facts.
  • spinzerospinzero Member Posts: 91
    they can't just define what they like in a car when they are comparing cars that are designed for a particular purpose. Do you not agree?

    Warner, but the fact of the matter is that apparently there are A LOT of people that are interested in more than just the economy in an economy car. As someone pointed out, even the Civic to many is not the most economic choice. For a starter, it has been THE most expensive "economy" car of the market, until the 3 came along with available leather and HID. In fact, even the last gen Civic was priced right up at 18K range, which many criticized to be the domain of the midsize sedans.

    So why did you pay that extra to get the Civic? I guess it's because it had the things that you value in an economy car. (and you are the majority) But I'm pretty sure that many things you label as "economy-car-like" would not appeal to others. One can argue that a Moonroof does not inhance the economy of an economy car. So is the alloy rims, interior fit and finish, a good steering, and a revvy engine with 6800RPM redline.

    You criticized Edmunds as if it represented a ghost demographic that does not exist, but the FACT is that you are hearing from a lot of people on this board alone that agree with Edmunds. Along with the fact that 3 has been selling very well, I think it is incorrect for you to conclude that "no one" cares about fun in an economy car.

    As far as your comparison to high performance sports cars go, I bet that CR will pick a "sensible" one over the fastest one. That's just what they do. So if I was a performance enthusiast, I would not read CR to get advice on high performance cars. Same with the Inside Line. It's an online car mag, and even though it's a lot more CR-like that the off-line competitors like C&D and M/T, it's still a car mag, not a consumer mag. (nothing wrong with that)

    These guys spend time and resources to take these cars to the track and do all kinds of performance tests, just as a good car mag should. And again, as you see here, there are enough people that want to hear about it. So why is that so bad?
  • slamdunkslamdunk Member Posts: 1
    I agree that it was miss comparison test. If you want to compare 2.3 l. Mazda, compare it with Civic SI. Otherwise, compare 1.8 l. Civic with 2.0 l. Mazda.
    My conclusion (1.8 l. Civic vs 2.0 l. Mazda) :
    1. The look of interior and exterior are absolutely subjective things. I like it much better in Civic, especially interior.
    2. Performance very close. Nobody is going to race anyway (0.5 sec. or 0.7 sec, ha ha; whoever gets faster start from the light it wins). Who's gonna be driving through the curves 130 kmh. or more. One in 10.000 maybe. I also have Mazda Millenia S with 210 HP. The problem is that in 99.9 % of my driving time, I'm not able to utilize even 30 % of its capabilities. It's like you have a racing horse that you only walk around. So, once in a while I take Millenia out of the city to please myself. We are talking about economy class, performance not that important. Civic and Mazda3 are not performance vehicles.
    3. Civic is more refined and comfortable vehicle. I'm 6.6 and I had problem driving Mazda 3. The central console is too wide and I was rubbing my leg on it and on the steering wheel all the time which made me having a problem steering. Of course that I had to pool the seat back, but than only my eight old son was able to sit behind me. There is no way I could shift manual. Simply, no room for my leg. If I would lift the steering wheel, my driving position would be awkward. In the Civic I have absolutely perfect driving position, visibility and comfort.
    4. Fuel economy is clearly on Honda side.
    5. Cannot get better in safety than Civic.
    6. Five or ten years down the road when the replacement time comes, I would rather have Honda than Mazda ($$$).
    7. Breaking - Don't drive like an idiot and you wont have a problem stopping with either car.

    My choice was so obvious. All points were going in Honda's favor ( except 0.5 sec slower through the cones, ha, ha).
    So, two months ago I purchased the Civic LX five speed. It was my first Honda and I'm very happy.
  • spinzerospinzero Member Posts: 91
    I agree that it was miss comparison test. If you want to compare 2.3 l. Mazda, compare it with Civic SI. Otherwise, compare 1.8 l. Civic with 2.0

    I disagree. Si is clearly designed as a track car, a pocket rocket. It is a class above the rest of the Civic, and the 3.

    Regardless of how much money Honda loses on every Si sold, the competition for the Si would be the likes of SRT-4, Ion Redline, Cobalt SS, and WRX. Once the Mazdaspeed 3 shows up with D/I turbo and AWD, it will also be a direct competition to the Si.
  • kk2482kk2482 Member Posts: 33
    There isn't a Mazdaspeed3.
  • gosteelerzgosteelerz Member Posts: 21
    If you are driving enthusiast and want some fun in your ride then you must take the Edmund's comparison at face value.

    If your main concern is cost of ownership then you probably can't go wrong with the Civic.

    The irony is that the Civic of the 90's were fun driving machines which probably contributed to it's resale phenomenon it enjoys now. IMO the Mazda3 better personifies those dearly departed Civics than does the current Civic.
  • spinzerospinzero Member Posts: 91
    Yes, which is why I said once it shows up. Maybe they'll never make one, although I think they eventually will. But the lack of an all-out sporting version does not put the regular 3 in a place to fight against the Si. It'll be like comparing an Acura TL to an STI. THAT will be an unfair comparison.
  • spinzerospinzero Member Posts: 91
    but the 3 is not a death trap.

    Very true. After all, the C1 platform that the 3 uses was co-developed with Volvo and Ford Europe, and structurally it is one of the safest small car platform around.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_C1_Platform

    This is not to say that the 3 is as safe as its platform twin Volvo S40, but supposedly Mazda benefited a lot from Volvo's expertise in safety.

    http://www.iihs.org/brochures/ictl/ictl_4dr.html

    As you can see from here, the Mazda 3 actually has the second lowest injury claim rate among Japanese small cars, second only to the Impreza. Of course this does not tell you anything about the rate of severe injuries, but IIHS claims that those two are usually related.
  • kronogoosekronogoose Member Posts: 116
    Has anyone heard the rumor about the Si sedan? The Speed3 vs. the Si sedan...now that would be a comparison!

    - Greg
  • z71billz71bill Member Posts: 1,986
    If the most important things (to you) are low cost and good MPG then compare the models that cost the least and get the best MPG (Civic VS Mazda3 i).

    If performance is at the top of your list then compare the top performance model offered by each company. (Civic VS Mazad3 S)

    To say its more "fair" to compare the Civic with the Mazda3 i is wrong - I would say - sure if MPG and low cost are (the most) important things to you then this would be a better comparison.

    But if you are slanted to performance - then the Civic MUST be compared to the Mazda3s (2.3L) Fair or not.

    When & if Honda sells a Si type sedan (as long as its price is close to the Mazda3 s) then that would be a better comparison (if performance is your top priority).

    It is not Mazda's problem that Honda only offeres one engine in its sedan.

    If you bring a knife (1.8L / 140 HP) to a gun fight (2.3L 160 HP) you end up dead.
  • allfiredupallfiredup Member Posts: 736
    The fact that my Mazda3 was made in Japan wasn't a major factor in deciding to get it over the Civic, but it was another thing on the plus side for it.
  • allfiredupallfiredup Member Posts: 736
    Well, here's the problem with that logic....when you are reviewing an economy car, there are certain characteristics that an economy car is designed to excel at, the first of which would be....anyone? Yes, ECONOMY. Like I said in another post, what they did is akin to testing two high performance sports cars and then announcing that they chose the one that got the best fuel economy as the winner. That's NOT what high performance cars are designed to do, and nobody CARES how efficient they are. So as reviewers of automobiles, they DO have certain journalistic responsibilities to the readers...they can't just define what they like in a car when they are comparing cars that are designed for a particular purpose. Do you not agree? What if they did an off-road truck test and picked the truck that went through the slalom fastest or got the best skidpad performance, while ignoring the off-road ability or towing capacity? Who cares? It's not what those particular vehicles were designed to do well. That's the point.

    You are correct, no one would care about fuel economy on a high performance sports car. However, folks like me paying under $20k for a small sedan weigh both performance AND economy and buy the vehicle that meets our needs the best in each category. To make these two areas of performance mutually exclusive would be a disservice to readers. I'm willing to sacrifice 10mpg to get 20 more hp, faster acceleration and better handling.
  • allfiredupallfiredup Member Posts: 736
    While the pricing when you were shopping may have varied, the price disparity between a Scion tC and Mazda3 is much smaller than you have quoted (as I illustrated in an earlier post).

    It's great that you're happy with your Scion. The tC is sharp looking car and, being built by Toyota, it may very well last longer than my Mazda3.

    We all get to make our own choices and drive the car we like best. As Martha would say, "It's a good thing".
  • allfiredupallfiredup Member Posts: 736
    I have heard on the vtec.net forums as well as some other sites that the Si Sedan IS going to happen in the next 18 months. I can't wait to see/drive it. The Si Coupe is an amazing car.

    The Mazdaspeed3 looks equally interesting, whenever it finally shows up. I had the pleasure of driving a Mazdaspeed6 and fell in love. It totally transforms the car.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    If you bring a knife (160 hp and no 2-door sport model) to a gunfight (197 hp and front differential for 20k) you end up dead.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    At least there will be room to load the bodies in the back of the Mazda3s, especially the 5-door model--not so with the Civic Si and its kiddies-only rear seat.
  • z71billz71bill Member Posts: 1,986
    You understand my point!

    The best way (for Honda) to get the Mazda crowd to shut up about how the Mazda3 can stomp the Civic in performance - is - build a car that stomps the Mazda3 in performance.

    Competition is a good thing!
  • JBaumgartJBaumgart Member Posts: 890
    "If you bring a knife (160 hp and no 2-door sport model) to a gunfight (197 hp and front differential for 20k) you end up dead."

    I was surprised when I checked the specs. Straight-ahead acceleration is better in the Si, at least as compared to a Mazda 3 automatic, but according to Edmunds' tests, the Mazda has better skidpad and braking numbers. Pricing on the two is also very comparable, but the Mazda has more features/amenities. For enthusiasts who have no axe to grind, it's a close call on paper - the decision should be based on your own test driving experience and personal preferences.
  • theduke2theduke2 Member Posts: 8
    Regardless of how much one spends, I think every buyer wants to feel proud of his purchase, especially when making the payments on a car months down the road. The Honda and Mazda are both great cars and the differences in styling and performance/comfort are drastic enough to offer real choice to consumers. I don't think one could go wrong with either one of these.

    Personally, I've always been happy with the Mazdas I've had. We recently sold our 2002 Protege5 and I have to say that my wife and I truly loved that car. It wasn't the fastest, quietest, or most economical car in its class but it was really fun to drive and the five-door hatch design swallowed anything we ever tried to carry including furniture. We replaced it with a new Mazda5 which is a heavier and larger mini-minivan based on the 3 platform. The Mazda5 feels great to drive and it really makes me think that the 3, which shares the engine and tranny but weighs about 500 lbs less must be a great car. Only Mazda sells a family car this practical with a manual transmission in the U.S. Zoom Zoom. I never thought I'd be excited to drive a minivan, but the 5 just makes me smile.
  • warnerwarner Member Posts: 196
    Regardless of how much one spends, I think every buyer wants to feel proud of his purchase, especially when making the payments on a car months down the road. The Honda and Mazda are both great cars and the differences in styling and performance/comfort are drastic enough to offer real choice to consumers. I don't think one could go wrong with either one of these.

    I think this statement pretty much sums it up....you're right.

    Warner
  • irnmdnirnmdn Member Posts: 245
    Civic is getting blander with each generation. It is time they replace the [H] logo with [B]
  • spinzerospinzero Member Posts: 91
    Civic is getting blander with each generation. It is time they replace the [H] logo with [B]

    You mean, the current gen Civic is actually blander than the last gen? Have you driven it, or sat in one? I think this time the Civic is pretty darn exciting.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    IMO the '06 Civic is Honda's first move off the bland scale for the Civic in quite some time. For instance, notice how some people love the new exterior and interior and some people hate it. That is a sure sign of non-blandness.
  • allfiredupallfiredup Member Posts: 736
    Civic is getting blander with each generation. It is time they replace the [H] logo with [B]

    You mean, the current gen Civic is actually blander than the last gen? Have you driven it, or sat in one? I think this time the Civic is pretty darn exciting.


    I gotta defend the Civic on this one! The previous two generations of Civics, '96-'00 and '01-'05, have been more bland and boring than their predecessors. I do have a certain affection for the '92-'95 Civic, but even with that prejudice I think most would agree with me.

    The '06 is at the very least interesting in its exterior design and the interior is edgy and unusual. I'm not in love with the looks, but at least the design is bolder and riskier than previous iterations. Besides Toyota, Honda is the last company I'd expect to step that far out the box and take a risk, but it looks like it'll pay off. Makes me wonder how the next Accord will look...
  • 6spdtl6spdtl Member Posts: 30
    Although they are both the top of the line sedans, the mazda is a more expensive "performance" trim! Honda doesnt offer a civic performance sedan (yet, rumors have it of a Si sedan next year :D ). To make the comparison fair you should have compared it to the Si which is the performance model of the civic line. The SI costs the same as the 3 you tested but simply creams it performance-wise. Of course the mazda guys would complain that you were comparing a sedan to a coupe!!!! ;) Most of the handling and braking differences can be simply explained by the much more performance oriented wheel and tire combination of the Mazda! Thus in all reality the main difference is that the Mazda is faster at the expense of fuel efficiency. That is also true of the Civic si. Regarding reliability as they have weel pointed out, the Mazda, Volvo s40 and upcomming focus all share the same platform, hopefully for Mazda I hope they dont share reliability since the volvo has been particularly bad.
  • mrblonde49mrblonde49 Member Posts: 626
    Although they are both the top of the line sedans, the mazda is a more expensive "performance" trim! Honda doesnt offer a civic performance sedan (yet, rumors have it of a Si sedan next year ). To make the comparison fair you should have compared it to the Si which is the performance model of the civic line. The SI costs the same as the 3 you tested but simply creams it performance-wise. Of course the mazda guys would complain that you were comparing a sedan to a coupe!!!! Most of the handling and braking differences can be simply explained by the much more performance oriented wheel and tire combination of the Mazda! Thus in all reality the main difference is that the Mazda is faster at the expense of fuel efficiency. That is also true of the Civic si. Regarding reliability as they have weel pointed out, the Mazda, Volvo s40 and upcomming focus all share the same platform, hopefully for Mazda I hope they dont share reliability since the volvo has been particularly bad. "

    The 3s isn't the performance model - that will be the Mazdaspeed version coming in 12-18 months. It's just has a slightly bigger engine and 17" wheels over the base model -and some more availble features. Not much different. The real issue here is that they should have compared The Civic EX to a 3s Touring with moonroof and the features would have been about the same - as would the price. a Grand Touring adds way more features than the EX has for a bigger pricetag

    And let's not forget that the 3 was first to the market, ahead of the s40 by a year and has shown solid reliability. So the S40 issues shouldn't have a bearing
  • gib11gib11 Member Posts: 47
    "let's not forget that the 3 was first to the market, ahead of the s40 by a year and has shown solid reliability"

    Mazda's are made in japan with Mazda's technology, and volvo's s40 ara made with Volvo's technology. Ford Is involved with the motor casting of the 2.3 liter. Mazda's engeneer works the rest (head, crank...). Volvo's 2.5 5cilynder is made solely by volvo's engeneer (casting, head, crank...). Ford also provide electronics (e.g. electric window motors...). The frame is a parrtnership between Volvo "s40, s70"(stiffnest ans safety), Mazda "3, 5"(soldering techniques) and Ford "focus"(versatitity), and of course costs.

    The result is great as all reviewers says (solidity, rigidity, stiffnest...)
  • midnightcowboymidnightcowboy Member Posts: 1,978
    "Performance DOES matter to a lot of people shopping in this class. Just because we want a smaller vehicle or one that doesn't cost $30k doesn't mean we want to drive something slow, sloppy handling or boring. "

    Exactly, That is why I went with the Civic Si.

    Cheers,

    MidCow
  • spinzerospinzero Member Posts: 91
    Why is it unfair to compare a 3s to an EX? We bought our 3s for less than what an EX goes for, and it has very comparable equipment level as an EX, such as the moonroof, etc.

    Just because Edmunds happened to have picked one loaded with all the goodies, some of which are not offered by the Civic, does not mean that the 3s is a class above the EX.

    To me, trying to compare the Si to the 3s is just like comparing an Audi S4 to a 330i. Sure the 330i is sportier (and more expensive) than both the A4 and the 325i, but that does not mean that it should be compare to the all-out track edition of the competitor. Bring in an M3, or in our case a Mazdaspeed3, would make the battle fair.

    In short, an Si is not the kind of car my wife can drive everyday. (although I would love to) But she sure enjoys her 3s.
  • midnightcowboymidnightcowboy Member Posts: 1,978
    LOL

    If you bring a knife (1.8L / 140 HP) to a gun fight (2.3L 160 HP) you end up dead. "

    So then if I bring and atomic grenade launcher ( 2.0L 197 HP) then the person with only a gun is dead and I can drive the guy with the knife safely back home.

    Honda Civic Si rules!

    MidCow
  • mikusmikus Member Posts: 109
    Civic sedan does not look very original, especially from the back. Hatcback looks much nicer and stands out, but for some strange reason Honda decided not to sell it in the U.S. this time. Honda's lost is Mazda's (Mazda3) and Toyota's (Matrix) gain.
  • midnightcowboymidnightcowboy Member Posts: 1,978
    "In short, an Si is not the kind of car my wife can drive everyday. (although I would love to) But she sure enjoys her 3s. "

    Does that mena your wife only drives automatics? I would teach her to drive a manual.

    You are really limited to pretty dull cars (except for maybe an M5 or a E55) if all you ever buy is automatics.

    Your car comparsion analogy appears to have some incorrect models. The BMW 330i is sportier than an Audi S4 ( or even better a RS4) Maybe the BMW M3, but the BMW 330i is not considered more sporty than an Audi S4.

    By the way the Civic Si has the same mileage specs as Mazda 3 2.3L.

    double sixes,

    MidCow
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    There were some posts the other day in another discussion about cases where spouses (in this case wives, but it can work either way) either could not learn how to drive a stick (some physical issues) or would not learn how to drive a stick (attitude issues). Either way, the stick is a no-op. So don't assume that everyone has the option of teaching his/her spouse to drive a manual.

    Adding a responsive automatic to a good-handling car (like the Mazda3 for instance) doesn't make it dull. It is still possible to manually shift a car like the Mazda3, for example (but not the automatic Civic). I would say you are more "limited" driving a car like the Civic Si (room for only 2 adults, no cargo room to speak of) than driving a car like the Mazda3 with an automatic.
  • z71billz71bill Member Posts: 1,986
    I say - if you want to compare 0-60 times or any performance item - then you should use the model that has the MOST power. When someone says - you need to compare (performance)of the 2.0 L -Mazda3 i model to the Civic sedan because - it is more FAIR - I always think - what is this Kindergarten! No such thing as fair in a race.

    But I think it is better to compare cars that have the same number of doors - and the same tranny (auto or manual) - and are close in selling price (not MSRP)- not because of some fairness issue - but because if you want/need a 4 door, or auto or only have $xx,xxx to spend then to start comparing coupes with a manual tranny just does not seem valid.
  • gosteelerzgosteelerz Member Posts: 21
    If you bring a knife (1.8L / 140 HP) to a gun fight (2.3L 160 HP) you end up dead. "

    So then if I bring and atomic grenade launcher ( 2.0L 197 HP) then the person with only a gun is dead and I can drive the guy with the knife safely back home.

    Honda Civic Si rules!


    If buy the Si, you are basically joining the boy-racer tuner crowd. You're imediate competion will not be the 3, it will be cars like the Cobalt SS, SRT-4's, WRX etc. in which case you will suffer in humiliation. Oh, I also forgot the 17 year old kid in his mommy's new RAV 4, better watch for those too.

    It would make more sense to Compare an Si to a 6 cyl Mustang which is about it's level of practicality.
  • jaxs1jaxs1 Member Posts: 2,697
    The big problem with the comparison test is that they compared two cars that are supposed to be economy cars while being very dismissive and giving little weight to economy aspects of the cars.

    There is a big cost penalty for the added performance of the Mazda. Very substantial difference in fuel economy and MSRPs. You cannot ignore this and call it an economy sedan comparison.
    This is like comparing sports cars and giving the most weight in scoring to gas mileage and luggage space.
  • allfiredupallfiredup Member Posts: 736
    Consumer Reports and every other reliability ranking I've seen rates the Mazda3 as better than average to much better than average. If the Civic gets a 10 for reliability, the Mazda3 gets at least a 9.5.

    Also, comparing the low volume Si to the Mazda3 s doesn't really make much sense, it just hands a win to Honda. The Si will be limited in production, the 3 s is actually the higher volume model of the Mazda3 line. As someone said earlier, it isn't Mazda's fault that their top Civic Sedan only has 140hp.
  • allfiredupallfiredup Member Posts: 736
    When the Si Sedan comes out and has had a year or so for the initial hoopla and price gouging to die down, I'll definitely be considering it.

    I really do wish Honda would give us a 5-door Civic, but that just ain't gonna happen. Americans just don't like them enough to justify it. I'm amazed Mazda went to the trouble of offering one on the Mazda6 and Mazda3, but the wagon-like utility of the 3 5-door is a huge selling point.
  • spinzerospinzero Member Posts: 91
    Does that mena your wife only drives automatics? I would teach her to drive a manual.

    Nope, thankfully she drives manual. That's not to say that she's into performance driving, but she enjoys a good manual gearbox. Otherwise she wouldn't be able to drive my WRX at all. Which is GREAT for me, since I really don't like automatics of any kind.

    Your car comparison analogy appears to have some incorrect models. The BMW 330i is sportier than an Audi S4 ( or even better a RS4) Maybe the BMW M3, but the BMW 330i is not considered more sporty than an Audi S4.

    I'm not sure what you are trying to say. Are you saying that 330i is SPORTIER than an S4? If that's the case I'll have to disagree, the current V8 powered S4 is a very quick car, and certainly more track worthy than a 330i.

    What I was trying to say is, just because E90 M3 hasn't come out yet, I would not compare a 330i to an S4. 330i should be compared to an A4 3.0 quattro, and the M3 to the S4. Likewise, the Mazda 3s should be compared to the EX, (top of the line pedestrian models) and the Mazdaspeed3 (whenever it comes out) to the Si. ("tuner" focused performance models.) If we were to put the Si up against the 3s, then what Honda would you compare to the Mazdaspeed3?

    I really think majority of the people that look at the 3s would cross-shop with the EX, not the Si. The 3s is a bread and butter, and the Si is a low volume car.
  • mrblonde49mrblonde49 Member Posts: 626
    "There is a big cost penalty for the added performance of the Mazda. Very substantial difference in fuel economy and MSRPs."

    Comparably equipped, you can get a 3s cheaper than a Civic. Don't use the prices in this comparo - the Mazda has thousands of dollars in extras that aren't available in the Civic (leather, xenon, ACC, etc). The true comparison is 3 touring w/ moonroof package vs the EX. Real life prices are a few hundred less for the Mazda
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Or how about the 3i Touring with ABS and side bags vs. the Civic LX? There's only a few bucks difference in the list prices of those cars. I think that would have made a much more interesting comparo because the cars would have been closer in price, equipment, and fuel economy, making the differences in performance, driver and passenger comfort, controls/displays etc. more telling.
Sign In or Register to comment.