You are here: Forums Sedans Toyota Corolla Toyota Corolla XRS vs Nissan Sentra SE-R SPEC V vs Mazda3

Toyota Corolla XRS vs Nissan Sentra SE-R SPEC V vs Mazda3

64 messages,  Last post on Oct 13, 2005 at 6:22 PM

You are in the Toyota Corolla Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens

What is this discussion about? Toyota Corolla, Nissan Sentra, Mazda MAZDA3, Sedan

Messages Page 5 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

#35 of 64 Re: My summary [biggus3] by cti Jul 17, 2005 (8:34 am)
Replying to: biggus3 (Jul 16, 2005 2:17 pm) Maybe 7-8 go-karts, but not much else. Besides which if you do the math .2 secs at 90 miles per hour is 26 feet. 2 car lengths maybe and the 3 is gaining ground. I have never denied that the XRS is a faster car. Im just saying that the 3 is close and has more useable power for everyday driving.   The cars don't average 90 mph in the 1/4 mile. That is just the final speed. A 1/4 mile time of 15.8 sec is an average speed of 56.96 MPH and a 16.0 sec time is an average speed of 56.25 MPH. The Mazda3 would be 16.5 ft behind the XRS.   Just being picky. Replies to this message: redacr (Jul 17, 2005 3:44 pm) enemay5tyle (Aug 28, 2005 11:21 am) mazda6s (Aug 29, 2005 8:06 am)
#36 of 64 Re: My summary [biggus3] by cti by z71bill Jul 17, 2005 (1:41 pm)
Think about it - if one car does the 1/4 in 15.8 seconds and is doing 90 MPH at the finish line and the second car does the 1/4 in 16 seconds and is also doing 90 (at the finish line) for the 0.2 of a second at the end of the race the second car travels how far?   The last 0.2 is not at the average speed - but at 90 MPH (or very close to it maybe 89.9) - so it does have 26.4 feet to go before it hits the finish line.   If you go to the races the car that has the lowest ET (Elapsed time) always wins - but the car that loses can be going faster at the finish line.   Say 15.8 ET 90 MPH VS 16 seconds at 91 MPH - the car that won just got up to speed faster - even though the car that lost finished stronger.
#37 of 64 Re: My summary [cti] by redacr Jul 17, 2005 (3:44 pm)
Replying to: cti (Jul 17, 2005 8:34 am) i bet you have never been to the track. a difference of 4-5 mph at the traps is a substantial difference in acceleration. in fact, it is worse the slower the two cars running are. .5 secs and 4 mph is HUGE. with every gear, the toyota would be pulling away. as the gears go up, the pulling gets worse, since the toyota would be in its power band much longer. also, high revving short geared cars fair much better than taller geared "torque monsters". the difference between these 2 cars is minimal with respect to around town driving. the weight difference cancels out the mazdas low end advantage which is a only a few lb feet anyway. Replies to this message: enemay5tyle (Aug 28, 2005 11:21 am) mazda6s (Aug 29, 2005 8:06 am)
#38 of 64 Hey my 2 centavos by enemay5tyle Aug 28, 2005 (11:21 am)
Replying to: redacr (Jul 17, 2005 3:44 pm) Hi guys, interesting thread.   Just want to make a few points ahem...   in five years of owner-ship according to Motor Trend as our friend Fa1 likes to qoute   it will cost you a total of $23,540 to own the XRS while   it will cost you a total of $26,542 to own the 3   Now keep in mind both comparisons are based on the base price not withstanding options/package. Anyway the obvious point is the XRS will actually run the owner less in the long run, so the point of the Mazda 3 being cheaper is a misconception.   One thought from this point is; Hmmm, I like premium gas. Included in the estimate is gas usage over those five years, considering the higher EPA rating of the XRS its pretty much ties it up in econo status, in my opinion. So the fact that the XRS requires premium should not a con, if compared to the 3.   I have to say Motor Trend is a reliable source; these numbers are not biased and are as scientific as they can possibly be.   Which brings us to something science cannot measure; personal taste. The truth is both cars have their pros and cons when compared.   The 3 (IMO) is better looking, by not so much, just a nudge. The XRS Being faster and maniacally fun to rev-up according to people who drove it. 3 Having a better feel for the road. XRS being a tad faster. 3 has the S trim so you can imagine it would be nice to go on a camping trip to load a handful of baggage on the back (I love hatchbacks). I understand both have nice standard stereo systems, XRS just being a little nicer. Both have nice interior, impressive for its class; 3 sporty and fun, XRS “baby Lexus” (ie. With leather interior). Overall cost bout the same, XRS forcasting a little bit better return on resale price. Performance, they both equal out despite of different areas of strength.   Finally I don’t have money to buy either car (I drive a 2000 Nissan Sentra, it’s fully loaded so don’t talk smack), I got about 3 more years before I trade in and buy a new one. Another thing these econo cars are real nice to drive generally they are light they don’t tire you out like driving an SUV on long trips, its so fun toss them around especially if you’re on a rental. People who usually buy these kinds of cars are daily commuters and spend about 2 hours in them so in time they draw a natural affinity to these faithful rides, not the same indulgent way Ferrari or Porsche owners do. I have to say I’m still pretty satisfied with my Sentra it’s going to be hard when I have to say bye to it. Well my point is when I think about which one I would choose, if I have the money the 3 or the XRS I don’t really know, I think it will just depend on the day I actually go down to the dealerships and test drive both cars and what side of the bed I woke up on. There’s a lot of fun to be had with a car that can zoom zoom and lots as well with a car that can scream going over 7000 RPMS : T   One thing though about the XRS is that its safety rating is well above the average for its class, where the 3 only ranked at fair, so that’s a thought if you and your carpool buddies care to live on a head on collision with a Ford Expedition? Just a thought Replies to this message: mazda6s (Aug 29, 2005 8:06 am)
#39 of 64 fair to compare xrs and the MZ3? by gib11 Aug 29, 2005 (7:14 am)
isn't the corolla XRS a special sport edition car from toyota? If so, wouldn't it be more fare to compare it with the mazdaspeed protege (before the mazdaspeed3 comes out) instead of the stock MZ3?   IMO... Has for the price. In Canada, the XRS is at least 2000.$ more than the the MZ3sport GT. By the way I really like the big 2.3liter MZ3 because i give ride to lots of people (often 4 people in the car) and there's lots of hills around my area (nice twisty roads also!). Drive the car in 5th, climb a really steep hill at 2000rpm (around 80km/h)...dont even need to change gears. Would that RXS be able to match that? Not sure. The torque is really low! I have seen the XRS and IMO its just plain fuggly. Conservative style while triing to look sporty. Yerk! No comparison with the MZ3 style wise, in an out.   On end note Replies to this message: giantkiller (Aug 30, 2005 2:46 pm)
#40 of 64 Re: Hey my 2 centavos [enemay5tyle] by mazda6s Aug 29, 2005 (8:06 am)
Replying to: enemay5tyle (Aug 28, 2005 11:21 am) "it will cost you a total of $23,540 to own the XRS while it will cost you a total of $26,542 to own the 3" That's $3000 for 5 years, $600/year, or $12/month. So, would you get the car you liked better if it cost you $12/month more? Or conversely, would you get a car you liked less if it saved you $12/month?
#41 of 64 Just wanted to make a point by enemay5tyle Aug 29, 2005 (11:04 am)
gib11 beauty is in the eye of the beholder, I personally think the Mazda 3 look better as well, I just dont think the XRS is Fuggly. It is fair to compare the S trim with the XRS because they have the same power range and bout the same price range as well. : ). The Thread is also about buying a new car for 2005, that leaves the Protoge out of the question.   Mazda6s I just wanted to point out that owning a Mazda 3 is actually more expensive to own in the long run. Someone in the forum claimed that the XRS is so much more expensive, and also a lot of people think so. Mazda 3 has great quality because its not cheap (I.E. like the Cobalt or the Peon..I mean Neon). No I wouldn't mind paying $12 more a month to own the car that I want vs. the runner-up. Although $3,000 could mean a lot for some people who buys these econo cars, a young family with average income definately wouldn't mind the extra gas or insurance money a year.   One other thought, now that I think about it if I was a family man with 2 kids I really cant see my self opting for the 3 considering the big difference in safety ratings. Anyway I'm not, I'm a 22 year old college boy so if I did have the money I would say there is a 55% chance I'll go for the Mazda3 vs. the XRS.   I specifically like this thread because for a while now I've been reading up on the econo batch. I personally feel its the most fun to read about because of the raw nature of the cars and the target audience for which they catter to. Anyway just wanted to trow my two cents in, I'm not telling anyone to buy either one. Who knows 2006 is right around the corner, so are we even talking about these trims anyway, I'm sure Toyota will come up with a nother G-mick to change Corolla's image, Mazda 3; maybe more muscle. All I know is the all new Civic is about to come out so I personally would hold off on buying a new ride, that is if I had the cash like our buddy Pat, whos considering XRS or the Spec-V (which I don't care to recommend). Replies to this message: jmann98 (Aug 29, 2005 8:57 pm)
#42 of 64 Re: My summary [biggus3] by jmann98 Aug 29, 2005 (8:47 pm)
Replying to: biggus3 (Jul 16, 2005 6:26 pm) I drove both the 3 hatch and XRS within a week of each other and was definitely more impressed with the 3. I haven't seen all the magazine numbers, but I know that the 3's slalom in one was that of the Acura sports coupe - type S! And it beat the tC's g force despite having narrower tires. What I found impressive about the 3 was the little enthusiast things: break feel, clutch feel, shifter feel, steering, balance, composure. And while the XRS may have more horsepower at 7k rpm, it looses to the 3 during most of the rpm band, which is to say, 99% of the time. I like my engine to have a peak, but too peaky is just stupid - look how Honda has totally backed off the too peaky thing. The lighter XRS may make up for some of that on paper, but it didn't feel this way to me. On a more subjective note, the matrix is, IMO, one of the ugliest cars on the road. All I can think is that some stodgy exec was trying to figure out was was hip, and missed. Toyotas are boring and ugly, with few exceptions. Driving the Matrix and XRS solidified my hatred of that big stupid company. The only reason I'd consider the XRS over the 3 hatch is because the XRS hatch holds more, and Toyota relibability. Driving wise, the 3 is more of an enthusiast car, while the XRS still feels like a boring, numb appliance to me. Oh, and the SE-R just doesn't have the reliability ratings, not to mention composure and refinement of the other two. Old school, but still fun. Plus its an eyesoar that Nissan needs to fix with the next model. -driving a modified '97 SE-R, and shopping for a 3 hatch to replace it. Replies to this message: giantkiller (Aug 30, 2005 4:01 pm)
#43 of 64 Re: Just wanted to make a point [enemay5tyle] by jmann98 Aug 29, 2005 (8:57 pm)
Replying to: enemay5tyle (Aug 29, 2005 11:04 am) I don't expect much from the new Civic, except maybe another well-built nerdmobile that's underpowered. Honda just keeps getting safer and more boring with most of their cars, both in performance and looks. They seem more focused on profitability than fun. The smaller Mazda company seems much more content finding an enthusiast nitch and succeeding within it. I used to love Honda, but now I'm starting to like Subaru more! Mazda's new line up is just fantastic though. Across their brand, they build the best suspensions in the world, dollar for dollar. Is it even debatable?
#44 of 64 Who's debating by enemay5tyle Aug 29, 2005 (9:26 pm)
Jmann98 we are talking about the Corolla XRS not the Matrix, big difference believe it or not, I agree the Matrix does look ugly, somthing I just cant say about the Corolla XRS.The exterior is not an eye sore (not as flashy as the 3), The interior looks and feels like a luxury vihicle (w/ leather trim). Toyota is not a boring company, they will burn Mazda in any race anytime!...Yeah I have to say m not really to Exited bout the Civic my self, but who knows right? Maybe their SIR version will pump out 180 HP's at major torque and claws the pavment more so than the 3.

Messages Page 5 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

You are here: Forums Sedans Toyota Corolla Toyota Corolla XRS vs Nissan Sentra SE-R SPEC V vs Mazda3