Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
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
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.
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.
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.)
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!
In the end..in real life... Mazda 3 and the US civic will be very similiar.
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.
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.
Why bold a point you label as fact which is actually a purely subjective statement?
You forgot to bold the "We think"
That's odviously subjective, their opinions are not facts.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
- Greg
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.
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.
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".
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.
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!
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.
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.
I think this statement pretty much sums it up....you're right.
Warner
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.
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...
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
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...)
Exactly, That is why I went with the Civic Si.
Cheers,
MidCow
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.
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
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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