Last post on Jun 09, 2012 at 11:01 PM
You are in the Mazda Protege
What is this discussion about?
Mazda Protege, Sedan
Feb 13, 2002 (9:52 am)
Regardless of whether the engine is a version of the 1.8 or the 626's engine they should've stayed with the 1.8. It had only 5 less HP and it's times are better than the 2.0L. By putting the pwoer down low Mazda has shown that the Protege is a commuter car not a sporty car. But obviously Mazda isn't too concerned about making sports cars because they axed the RX-7 and the MP3 was the "sport" version of the Protege and it only had 140HP. It just doesn't make sense to have the 2.0L engine in a car that they want to market as sporty. The drive is sporty but the engine isn't.
Whether you consider the Civic an appliance or not obviously Honda has no problem selling their appliances. I have a Protege too, that means that it was the right car at the time for me. However, that doesn't mean that the Civic doesn't have it's own virtues or that I'm blind. It's faster, gets better gas mileage, and has a reliability record that surpasses anything Mazda has built to date.
And darnit, the fact that my fiance's $3000 1993 Civic can kick my butt just ticks me off.
Feb 13, 2002 (10:01 am)
195/55-15 or 16 performance tires certainly do improve hanling vs. what comes on civics and corollas, but I think the exemplary pro es handling is mainly attributable to 2 other features.
the pro chassis is a cut down version of the Japanese capella [like 626]. As in the vw series [beetle, golf, jetta] based on the same chassis, the lighter version [beetle] has much superior handling to the heavier version [jetta, esp. the v-6].
The second reason is the pro rear suspension. the driver can feel the passive rear steering kick in during hard cornering. It's why the car mags raed the mp-3 handling over most sportscars.
#8112 of 24043 protege insurance premium...
Feb 13, 2002 (10:05 am)
I remember talking to a Geico insurance agent on the phone one day when I was getting a quote for my Protege. When she gave me the number, I was like 'Why is it so much more expensive than the other one?' she said, 'because it's a sportier car.'
SPORTIER? you're damn right it is!!!
btw the other car was a corolla I believe. This was back in 2000.
#8113 of 24043 P5 Insurance
Feb 13, 2002 (10:23 am)
Just to add my experience with Protege insurance, when I added my Protege5 couple of months ago to our insurance policy, I was shocked to find out that it's more expensive than my ML320 and slightly cheaper than my X5 4.4i. When I asked the insurance agent, she replied less safety features and younger owners contribute to higher insurance premium even if the car is much cheaper. I'm still in shock.
#8115 of 24043 gandalf17
Feb 13, 2002 (10:33 am)
Anything is going to be beter than v-rated potenzas' on any surface other than dry pavement. As far as snow handling, I've never seen a car that would perform decent on snow with stock tires (with the exception of some SUVs). We had several new cars in our family: Prizm, Corolla, Camry, Altima... and all of them had to get new tires (snow tires) for the winter.
I don't have any problems with Pro during winter once I put a set of studded WinterKings on it. If you don't corner too fast and don't overrev the car, it performs quite decent. Our Pro doesn't have ABS and even my wife, who is far not the greatest driver, don't have too many problems driving it on snow days.
>Anyway, I disagree with you, the Pro is a far superior handling car to the Civic.
The lates Civic I drove was '96 on 14" tires so it's very hard to compare them. I don't know what the comparison would revial if you put similar tires on Civic. Most likely Pro would still out-handle Civic but I don't know by how much. Don't forget that it got bigger engine as well. The reason I said tires could contribute a lot to Pro's handling is because when we were buying our ES we tried DX as well. My dealer told me there is virtually no difference in suspension. However DX had regular s-rated tires on (I think they were 14" though) and it cornered significantly worse. It had smaller engine though.
Corolla is not the createst "corner-eater" and never tried to claim that title. I had '98 Prizm for almost 3 years (sold in '01) and when we got our Pro I saw a significant difference. That's considering the fact that I had upgraded tires on my Prizm.
Feb 13, 2002 (10:35 am)
Thank you folks for explaining the difference between the beam suspension in the 2003 Toyota Corolla and the independent suspension in the 1999 thu 2002 Mazda Protege's.
I really enjoyed the give and take on the Civic vs. Protege preferences. With out a doubt this discussion board is one of more informative and entertaining here at Town Hall.
#8117 of 24043 Zoomzoom
Feb 13, 2002 (10:44 am)
for $3k I can buy a few cars that will kic your civic's and protege's butt. So what?
#8118 of 24043 Passionate too....
Feb 13, 2002 (10:49 am)
...at least when it comes to our cars.
Can't wait to see the turbo Pro. Doesn't make much sense for them NOT to offer an engine upgrade for the P5, as that body style appeals to a different crowd from the 3-box folks. Someone in Mazda NA must be tinkering with the idea, I think (OK, hope).
Wish they were bringing the RX-8 to the Cincinnati car show, but it's a smaller event, so likely won't be coming here. Doubt even a 6 will be there.
Feb 13, 2002 (11:16 am)
Exactly. I could go out and get an old "5.0L" mustang real cheap. Who needs gas mileage? 16 mpg is good isn't it?