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

Mazda3 2.3 vs. '07 VW Rabbit

245678

Comments

  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    also keep in mind that the mazda 3 hatch would have been even more expensive than the rabbit

    The Mazda3 5-door is the same price as the Mazda3 sedan when equipped with the same equipment.
  • eldainoeldaino Member Posts: 1,618
    yes it would. Just checked it myself. Dunno why they didn't use it then, typicall cd. But then again if the only bodystyle that vw offers to compete with these cars, so be it.
  • eldainoeldaino Member Posts: 1,618
    sorry i meant to say that if the only body style that vw offers in this segment is a hatch, so be it.
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    In technical jargon, is it not true that a hatchback can be technically a sedan, since the technical criteria for a sedan classification is not so much body-style, but rear-seat passenger volume, or such similar measurement? Hence you can have a "2-door sedan", or "4-door sedan". Whether it has a trunk, or a hatch is just more permutations.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    How about the Jetta? It is a sedan and its price starts well under $18k, which was the cutoff for C/D's comparo.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Whether or not a car is a hatchback has nothing to do with rear seat legroom. It has to do with whether the car has a hatch on the back, vs. a trunk (or boot).
  • d_hyperd_hyper Member Posts: 130
    The statement: "is it not true that a hatchback can be technically a sedan, since the technical criteria for a sedan classification is not so much body-style, but rear-seat passenger volume, or such similar measurement?" not only contradicts itself but also questions itself.
    :shades:
    Please, clarify. If you implied sedan could be a hatchback, then on a very broad scale it is true because it used to be called hatchback sedan (could be liftback sedan - but that's different), but usually people, especially professionals, make a distinction to point out the differences.
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    "Whether or not a car is a hatchback has nothing to do with rear seat legroom"

    That's right. But that wasn't my point. My point was the technical classification for a sedan does not depend on the number of doors, or a trunk, or a hatch. It's a function of measured volume. (At least as far as I recall).
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    "...not only contradicts itself but also questions itself."

    Huh? :confuse: It's my turn to say, please clarify.

    "...but usually people, especially professionals, make a distinction to point out the differences."

    Please note that I'm not disagreeing that the distinction should be made as you stated, I'm just saying that a hatchback may, technically, be a sedan. Playing devil's advocate, if you will.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Would that make the Ford Five Hundred, which has huge interior volume, moreso than cars like the Mazda3s "hatchback", a hatchback too? Not in my view.
  • d_hyperd_hyper Member Posts: 130
    From WIKIPEDIA: A sedan car, American English terminology (saloon in British English), is one of the most common body styles of the modern automobile. At its most basic, the sedan is a passenger car with a separate hood (bonnet in British English), covering the engine in the front, and a separate trunk (boot in British English), for luggage at the rear—the archetypical "3-box" notchback car.

    Historically, the usage of the term sedan has changed over time. Several versions of the body style exist, including four-door, two-door and fastback models.
  • d_hyperd_hyper Member Posts: 130
    No problem. Nevermind :)
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    I don't think you understand what the point I was trying to make. I think you kind of got it [non-permissible content removed]-backwards. I was't saying interior volume defines a hatchback. But rather, it defines what can be classified as a sedan.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Either way, I don't agree with you.
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    Well...too bad!
  • eldainoeldaino Member Posts: 1,618
    well, maybe a stripper version of the jetta (what vw calls the value edition) starts just a tad (not WELL UNDER 18 thou), could have been compared but then it would have not done very well given that it doesnt come with certain things that the other cars were offering (ie alloy wheels)

    But thats completely beside the point. Volkswagen does not make the jetta to really to compete with these cars. Vw calls the jetta a midsize sedan. Ever see the 'how the rabbit stacks up against the civic' ads from volkswagen? That is thier inteded target with this car, the jetta is for a different demographic, kind of a wierd one, but thats just how it is.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    A Jetta with alloys is stil several hundred bucks under $18k, and includes features not found on some of the tested cars such as ABS (not on the Corolla) and traction control (not on most of the cars).

    A mid-sized car that is the size of a compact? Well, if that's how VW wants to play it... I guess it has the fuel economy of a mid-sized car at least.
  • steven39steven39 Member Posts: 636
    the toyota corolla should not even be mentioned in the same breath as the rabbit or jetta.i test drove a corolla before deciding on the rabbit and there is no comparison really.the rabbit blows the doors off of the corolla in all categories.power,handleing,build quaility,and safety features,as well as overall features for the buck.
  • autonomousautonomous Member Posts: 1,769
    the rabbit blows the doors off of the corolla in all categories.
    With the possible exception of reliability. Which may explain in part why the Corolla is more popular. By the way have you heard of the Auris, the Corolla's presumed successor?
    See: http://www.autobloggreen.com/2006/11/07/sleek-toyota-auris-hatchback-diesel-and-- petrol-coming-to-europ/
  • eldainoeldaino Member Posts: 1,618
    you cant judge the current rabbits reliability vs. the corollas. Personally i think that anyone who picks solely on reliability is missing out, especially when you consider how much more personality the rabbit has. Besides, hasn't the corolla been recalled recently along with the prius for various things including power steering issues? Don't quote me, i don't feel like looking for it, but as far as what stevo says he's right; give the reliabilty to the corolla, and give everything else he mentioned to the rabbit ;) Although i agree its a much better vehicle, i still think that the corolla does belong in this comparo, as ancient as its become.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    You cannot forget you are comparing the brand spankin' new Rabbit to an outgoing, dated Corolla. Of course the Rabbit is going to have superior features, and handling.

    Look at comparisons between the 2005 Mazda3 s and the 2005 Honda Civic EX, not even close! The Honda Civic is like a go-cart with doors compared to that year of Mazda3. Now, look at what Honda did to maintain competitive.

    Yes, the Corolla in this comparison, does not stack up well against the competition, but, let's do this comparo again after Toyota comes out with something new. I'm sure they are aware that their little Corolla is in need of a serious makeover.

    On a side note, it's way to early to see if the VW will be reliable. Their history points in the other direction, and right now, that's all we have to go on.
  • eldainoeldaino Member Posts: 1,618
    Traction control is available as an option and it barely puts it under 18. My rabbit 2 door was a low 17 and came with it standard Plus despite what the vw's website shows, the value edition jetta is without alloys, i've seen it myself, and the broucher at dealers shoud disclose that as well; and any rate since vw does not believe it competes, thats why the rabbit exists. It certainly wouldn't work the other way around...
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Look again; ABS with traction control is standard on the 2007 Jetta, which starts at about $16.5k. 16" alloys add $400.
  • eldainoeldaino Member Posts: 1,618
    i just built one on vw.com and the 16500 jetta you are talking about is the value edition. The 16 inch 400 dollar alloys you are speaking of are not an option unless you move up the the 2.5 trim, which starts at about 150 less than 18 with no alloys and before the destination. So much for 'hundreds less than 18" huh? :P
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Tirerack.com
  • steven39steven39 Member Posts: 636
    i agree with daino,in that you can't choose a car based on reliability alone,otherwise you are missing the boat.i test drove and compared the following vehicles before deciding on my 07 rabbit 4dr....corolla,accord,camry,and prius just to name a few.while these cars have a very good track record as far as reliability and dependability are concerned i bought the rabbit because i felt it offered the most features for the money.and it also drives very nice,handles very well,and doesn't look as boreing as the other cars.as far as how well the rabbit will hold up over time remains to be seen.but,my initial impressions of the rabbit thus far with only 1,000 miles on it so far is that it is a very solid, well built car that has a lot of safety and convience features for the price,is fun to drive,looks great,and is a real value.these were the things that i could not find with the other cars i test drove.just my opinion here though.
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    some small, and some not-so-small details puts the Rabbit above the other entry-level cars that it is often cross-shopped against, such as the Civic, Fit, Corolla, etc.

    Things like a available 6-speed automatic, traction/stability control, the quality of the seat material, a gas strut instead of a prop-rod for the hood, standard factory alarm system, etc.

    As I said, some people could care less ahout those items, but to me, they mean something.
  • steven39steven39 Member Posts: 636
    just a follow up here to my previous post.i traded in a 06 honda civix ex 2dr for my 07 rabbit 4dr.the reason i traded it in was because my g/f is going to have a baby and we need a 4dr car.anyway,i said to my self that it was going to take one hell of a car to pull me out of my honda civic.well,the rabbit was that car.while the civic got better gas milaege than the rabbit the rabbit is more spacious,faster,and came in a very close 2nd to the civics handleing which was very good.the interior materials in the rabbit was way better than in my civic's.and finally,my rabbit just feels much more solid than my civic ever did.i don't miss my civic at all except maybe for the better gas milaege.but the tradeoff in haveing more space,faster performance,and a more solid feeling car is worth it in my opinion.
  • steven39steven39 Member Posts: 636
    it's funny that you should mention prop rod.one of the cars i looked at before getting the rabbit was a 07 mercury milan.it drove nice and handled well,but when i opened the hood to see the engine compartment and noticed a prop rod instead of a gas strut this turned the deal sour and i walked away.i know this may seem silly,but in this day and age of gas struts on most cars the prop rod on the milan turned me off.
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    Yes, I get ridiculed from time to time about the prop rod issue. But to me, those things belong on a Flintstone-mobile. I mean, how crude is using a stick to prop up the hood! Why should anyone need both hands just to open and close the hood?

    Some of the cars that still use a prop rod totally floors me, given their prices -- Nissan Z, Infiniti G, Mustang Selby, Pathfinder, Honda Pilot, to name a few.

    I wouldn't go so far as to say a prop rod, alone, is a deal-breaker for me, but it definitely has been a contributing factor in my eliminating some cars from my shopping list.
  • audia8qaudia8q Member Posts: 3,138
    That is the nuttiest thing I have ever heard outside of politics...LOL. Wouldn't you prefer they spend the extra money on something of value? Lets say they saved $15. per car and they build 100,000 Fusions/Milans this year they saved $1.5 million dollars that could be used to make product better...based on the most recent Consumer Reports the Fusion/Milan Ford did something right. maybe that $1.5 million savings by not using gas struts that add cost and weight helped to get that top quality rating....

    Don't sweat it, buy exactly what you want and like...I'm just poking a little fun.
  • steven39steven39 Member Posts: 636
    just for the record here folks,the rabbit's hood is opened with a gas strut, not a prop rod.i just feel that prop rods belong on under $10,000 kia's and hyundai's not on 20,000.00+ cars.it's tasteless as far as iam concerned.
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    I'm not sure it would even cost them as much as $15/car to install one gas strut in place of the rod. Based on 100,000+ cars, it probably costs them $1.95 per. But lets say it does. I'm sure they could increase the price of the car by $15 and no one would notice. And they would end up selling a few more cars to people like me and steven39! ;)
  • moparbadmoparbad Member Posts: 3,870
    I've never had to replace a prop rod.
    Gas struts and coil springs on hoods have both caused me a problem or two on cars over that past 30 years.
    I prefer a prop rod.

    Redline Tuning offers gas strut kits for many makes and models of vehicles for those who prefer gas struts on their hoods.
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    I've never had to replace a gas strut either, even those on rear hatches that gets opened and closed several times a day. For the hood, which if I'm lucky, might need to be opened once every 3 months or more :P , so, IMO, the hood struts should last a lifetime, or longer. ;)
  • killerbunnykillerbunny Member Posts: 141
    Long story short, the ex-VW owners tell me they will never touch one again, and the current VW owners are all saying that their next car will NOT be a VW, no matter what. Not exactly a recommendation.

    Back in the 60s, VW had almost 50% of US import car market share, by far the largest. Right now? They barely exist. I guess most VW owners never returned, indeed.

    Back in the 90s, VW had almost 50% of Chinese car market share, by far the largest. Right now? They are down to 20%. Coincidence? History repeating itself?

    IMO, a car is "cheap" if it fails to deliver the service expected. VW's have been "cheap" for quite some time.
  • killerbunnykillerbunny Member Posts: 141
    06 Golf had higher quality rating (fewer problems per vehicle)than Mazda 3 as rated by JD Power. It is expected that the Rabbit will have better quality than the Golf based on actual quality improvements seen in Europe when Golf IV model switched to Golf V model (Golf V = Rabbit).

    Bottom line, reliability goes to VW Rabbit compared to Mazda 3.

    Do you know what is quality and what is reliability?

    If it's 2006 data and from JD Power, then it must be the IQS (initial quality study). It's about whether the buyer likes the car or not for the first 90 days of ownership.

    In case you don't know, JD Power also conduct a relaibility study that documents the ownership experience for a period of time at 3 years or longer.

    Better yet, Consumer Report has typically 10 years of study for reliability.

    And if can guess right, according to both JDP and CR, VW Golfs/Beetles are about THE least reliable cars in this segment. :lemon:
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    Your analysis is flawed.

    Diminished market share in the scenario you described did not necessarily mean diminished product quality.

    In both cases, it was simply the result of gradual infusion of other import brands.

    Especially with the Chinese market. One cannot simply walk into the Chinese market. The government there can and will make you go through all kinds of hoops. And you have to know that, until relatively recently, the Chinese was not friendly to Japanese products, cars included.

    Even if VW had improved quality, more competition would have resulted in reduced market share.

    "...a car is "cheap" if it fails to deliver the service expected"

    I also don't agree with that statement. Cheap and reliability, or lack of, are 2 distinctly different issues. Jags and MB do not particularly have good reliability records. But I doubt you would hear anyone refer to them as cheap.

    And for the record, I know plenty of repeat, in some cases, life-long, VW customers.
  • eldainoeldaino Member Posts: 1,618
    Man i hear ya stevo. I feel like the civic handled just a TAD bit better, no doubt to its lower height and weight. i"m plannin on slapping some 17's on my rabbit and that should balance things out a bit. I miss the milage too, but not terrible; the performance trade off is excellent. I've had mine for almost 4000 miles (we got it at the beggining of oct.) and it has been great.
  • steven39steven39 Member Posts: 636
    the 2dr rabbit with manual tranny is probably the best value out there right now.i tried to find one down here in ft. lauderdale,fla and was unable to.the msrp is 14,995.00 plus destination and for that money and features content,you are getting a car that drives like you spent twice as much for it.
  • nedzelnedzel Member Posts: 787
    I sold my 2000 GTI GLX after 40,000 miles. The extreme lack of reliability and the very poor quality of the dealer service combined to make it a nightmare. I can't remember everything that needed to be fixed on that car, but it included:

    - rear struts and strut top mounts twice (and they needed to be replaced again when I sold the car)
    - starter motor
    - spark plugs and plug wires
    - mass air flow sensor
    - ignition coil pack
    - ac compressor
    - thermostat
    - rear brakes
    - headlight bulbs multiple times
    - all the taillight bulbs multiple times
    - turn signal stalk

    thankfully, I never suffered from the failing window regulators. But I did have 2nd gear grind.

    My GTI's interior was beautiful. The gauges were crisp, clear, and very easy to read. Although a little soft, I liked the way it drove.

    What surprises me about the Golf 5 is how overweight it is. I thought my GTI was a porker at 2900+ lbs. The Golf 5 is now over 3300 lbs! So it is no surprise that the Golf 5 has crummy fuel economy.

    It's too bad, because I like VW exterior and interior styling. VWOA recognizes that they've got major problems and they are working on it. Whether they've gotten where they need to be yet is the big question.

    In June, VWOA executive Adrian Hallmark was quoted as saying "The current customer satisfaction and dealer experience is as bad as it gets!"
  • moparbadmoparbad Member Posts: 3,870
    While I would choose a Mazda 3 over a Rabbit, I would not place any bets on a prediction that Mazda 3 would have higher reliability than Rabbit.

    Do you know what is quality and what is reliability?

    Yes.

    If it's 2006 data and from JD Power, then it must be the IQS (initial quality study). It's about whether the buyer likes the car or not for the first 90 days of ownership.

    It is incorrect to summarize the IQS as "whether the buyer likes the car or not".

    Either you are confused or simply did not know that the APEAL study is the measure of (in your words) "whether the buyer likes the car or not".

    quote-
    APEAL is designed to complement the J.D. Power and Associates Initial Quality StudySM (IQS), which focuses on problems experienced by owners during the first 90 days of ownership. APEAL measures how gratifying a new vehicle is to own and drive. While the redesigned Initial Quality Study included a new measurement for design quality, the APEAL Study finds almost no relationship between a model’s overall APEAL score and its IQS design score.
    -end

    quote-
    IQS measures a broad range of quality problems, heavily weighted toward defects and malfunctions, quality of workmanship, drivability, human factors in engineering (i.e. ease of use) and safety-related problems. Among these categories, the area that accounts for the greatest product improvement since 1998 are defects and malfunctions.
    -end

    In case you don't know, JD Power also conduct a relaibility study that documents the ownership experience for a period of time at 3 years or longer.

    Actually, it is problems experienced during 12 months for 3 year old vehicles.

    quote-
    Long-Term Dependability

    The Vehicle Dependability Study (VDS) evaluates vehicle quality after three years of ownership. Owners rate vehicles based on problems experienced during the previous 12 months. Results are summarized with a problems-per-100-vehicles (PP100) designation.
    -end

    Better yet, Consumer Report has typically 10 years of study for reliability.

    If you prefer a flawed method of choosing the population (only Conumer Reports Subscribers are sampled :sick: ) that is sampled, then CR is "better yet".

    And if can guess right, according to both JDP and CR, VW Golfs/Beetles are about THE least reliable cars in this segment.

    You guessed wrong. Chevrolet Cobalt is the correct answer.
  • steven39steven39 Member Posts: 636
    i test drove a mazda 3itouring sedan among many other cars before deciding on the rabbit.i just felt that in my opinion the rabbit drove better,had more safety and convienence features for the money than the mazda 3 did,and also had a better warranty than the mazda 3.despite the better reliability rateing that the mazda 3 has,i just felt that the rabbit was a much better overall value.the mazda 3 drove a little rough for my tastes,while the rabbit had a much better ride and still handled very well.i think that the rabbit has a great balance of ride and handleing.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    While I would choose a Mazda 3 over a Rabbit, I would not place any bets on a prediction that Mazda 3 would have higher reliability than Rabbit.


    I would have to disagree with the end of your statement. If you look at Consumer Reports, which I have found to have quite accurate long term reliability ratings, that have the Mazda3 rated "reliable" and is a "Recommended Buy". I would say it is a bit early to say that the Rabbit is unreliable, however, their assessment of it's predecessor, the Golf, they rated that as having poor reliability, and Volkswagen rated next to last in long term reliability s a company.

    I really do not see VW pulling a 180 in terms of reliability in the Rabbit (which it's only called in NA, still the Golf in Germany) in the matter of 1 MY.
  • moparbadmoparbad Member Posts: 3,870
    I really do not see VW pulling a 180 in terms of reliability in the Rabbit (which it's only called in NA, still the Golf in Germany) in the matter of 1 MY. :surprise:

    1 model year? Are you aware of how long the Golf (Rabbit) has been in production?
    The current Rabbit (Golf Mk5) was introduced in 2003.
    There are 3 years of reliability history for the current model Golf and the data is very good.

    The new model Rabbit (Golf) is expected to debut as a 2008 model. Current Rabbit is going to have a short run in the US.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    I have not seen any data stating that the Golf has very good reliability.
  • steven39steven39 Member Posts: 636
    vw and the word reliability do not go hand in hand.infact,vw and the word reliability should not even be mentioned in the same breath.i don't think there is any vw car be it the jetta,rabbit,passat,ect that has been given any kind of positive reliability review in recent years and the golf is no exception.there are many current and former vw owners that will agree with me.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    I have also seen that the Rabbit is made in Germany, not Mexico or Brazil like the previous Golf. I have also heard, believe it or not, that the Germany plant put's out less reliable vehicles then the Mexican plant.

    One thing I have heard numerous times from almost every VW owner. Usually, they get one that lasts forever, and then the get one that is nothing but a rat trap. Total unconsistancy.
  • moparbadmoparbad Member Posts: 3,870
    I have not seen any data stating that the Golf has very good reliability.

    What data have you seen aviboy?

    What are the differences in expected reliability or differences in past reliability of German VW Golfs and Mazda3?

    Both vehicles have been on the market for several years so there is data for both past and current (initial) reliability.
  • moparbadmoparbad Member Posts: 3,870
    I have also seen that the Rabbit is made in Germany, not Mexico or Brazil like the previous Golf. I have also heard, believe it or not, that the Germany plant put's out less reliable vehicles then the Mexican plant.

    I've heard that the cow jumped over the moon, does that make it believable?

    Do you have data to demonstrate the difference in reliability of the Rabbit vs. Mazda3? Other than anecdotal or hearsay?
This discussion has been closed.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles