Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Sedans Honda Civic Honda Civic vs Mazda3
1333 messages, Last post on Jun 06, 2008 at 5:37 PM
You are in the Honda Civic Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens
|
|
|---|---|
|
Ah, well, everyone has their own opinion especially when it comes to cars. I don't have to commute to school, so I don't have to worry about the "screaming" on the highway. And I hate light interior. So the dark isn't an issue for me. I was just saying in general the Mazda is more fun than the Civic, which is probably a little more practical. And I think when the comparison was written (I saw a lot of people complaining) it was written from the POV of people who would be looking for a more fun, sporty-er car. I mean I see kids around campus with these giant trucks and I'm wondering how anyone would squeeze those into the tiny parking spaces, but hey, i guess that's their thing.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: zoomzoomnole (Jun 09, 2007 6:40 pm) I KNOW! I live in Alabama, and commute to UAB (Alabama at B'ham) which is downtown, so parking is quite limited, yet the number of large SUVs and pickups never ceases to amaze me. As I re-read something in your post, I can't help but make this point regarding the Mazda. It is MORE practical in the "room" department. More headroom and legroom due to the overall shape of the vehicle. The sleek Civic means I can't ride in the back seat without slouching, and when I slouch, my limited legroom shrinks even more (although I've only ridden in the EX model with a sunroof, it probably wouldn't be any problem in an LX wihtout a sunroof). So, props to Mazda in that regard. I hope it wasn't taken that I was slamming the Mazda around for its "conventional" looks. I drive one of the most conventional things on the road, but if I were shopping for a smaller car, I'd likely pick the Civic because of characteristics mentioned previously...the same characteristics my car shares (sporty, but not too firm for me, and quieter than its sportier competitor as well, with the nicer interior in my opnion - all of this is subjective though, so take what I say with a grain of salt!  )
|
|
|
Replying to: thegraduate (Jun 09, 2007 10:36 pm) a split dash desing and star wars styling just makes me scratch my head when people liken it to their dads taurus?  to zoomzoomnole; the reason a lot of folks complained about the mazda 3/civic comparo was because of the articles misleading nature; it was supposed to be about economy cars, and the civic should have won in that regard; it was well built, quality materials, nice ride and got 7 mpg better than the 3. Yet all of this was mentioned as an after thought. Then to top it off, they tested a 3 that was A LOT more expensive than the civic, decked out with leather and the like, and then commented on how the civics interior was not as nice, and then said it to just mentally delete the added cost of all the options and you have a comparably priced car. Do i like a sporty drive? yes i sure do. And the 3 is great at that! But why not compare it to the si if thats where your true priorities lie? The reason is simple; the si is a faster, better handling car than the 3 and just as funcional. Ofcourse, after the si sedan debuted, the mazdaspeed 3 came out, AND THEN it was ok to throw the si into the mix.  and another .
|
|
|
Replying to: eldaino (Jun 11, 2007 7:41 am) But, maybe you are focusing on the interior, which def is less conventional. As for the original article: Edmunds used the title of economy because that's the traditional name for cars branded with the Civic/corolla nameplate. But, neither the Civic or 3 are really 'economy' cars anymore. Their quality and size are comparable or exceed those of midsize cars from less than a decade ago. Their price also is closer to 20,000 than 15,000. If you want true economy these days, there's a whole new B segment of cars. Also, I believe when the comparo was done, there was no Civic Si sedan (only coupe). So, it wouldn't have been a apples to apples comparison. As you mentioned, soon after the Si sedan was introduced to the states, Mazda introduced the Speed3. So, there wasn't really a time when the top 4 door vehicles from either company in this segment was the Si sedan and 3s.
|
|
|
And agree with some of the comments...but not all. Funny though, I drive the Civic and the wife drive the 3s. She likes the "zoom zoom" and I prefer the economy and the split dash. We've been Toyota and Nissan folks before this, but we're both quite happy with our current rides. The Sandman
|
|
|
Replying to: socal2006 (Jun 11, 2007 2:42 pm) Sometimes people associate bland with seeing a car often, and you probably do see slightly more civics than 3's...but that still doesn't change the civics unorthodox design. true, there was only an si coupe, but there was probably enough time to do a comparo before the speed 3 came along. I just knew it wasn't going to happen. Just like testing the civic type r sedan wont happen, a car that while maybe not as quick 0-60 would pretty much obliterate the mazda with regards to driving purity and handling. (a civic that laps faster than an s2k? yeah, amazing.) if there is a whole slew of b-segment cars that are the new 'economy' cars, then the title was still a bit on the tricky side. And REGARDLESS of the title, the civic DOES pack more 'economy' and frugality than the 3. |
|
|
|
|
I've been driving Honda for many years, but now I am ready to trade in my Accord and I want to go with a sporty compact sedan with some power and on budget.... I test drove the Mazda 3 and its nice. It has a European feel to it, almost like a BMA 3 Series but $10-$15 cheaper. I do like the Mazda look better than the Civic, but as a long time Honda fan, I still have the love for a Honda. What do you think? Please to convince me which one to get! Thanks in advance |
|
|
The Civic from a purely mpg standpoint. But it is fun to drive. The slower power from the 1.8 engine is a tradeoff I can live with. For pure driving excitement, the 3s is fantastic in this regard. Lower mpg's, but that's the trade off. For fit & finish, I'll have to give the nod to Honda. Too much black in our 3s and the seats aren't as comfortable. Both great cars, as evidenced by our garage. Will be quite interested in the next generation Corolla though. I think Toyota needs to hit a grand slam with it, as the competition has gotten that good. Hopefully they'll get the driving position just right. The Corolla we rented last year had an awkward feel when driving...just couldn't get a comfortable fit with the steering wheel...something just wasn't right. I've read others have felt the same thing. Great time to buy this class of car though. Endless choices at different price levels. The Sandman
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: sandman46 (Jun 12, 2007 5:47 pm) No doubt that they are long lasting cars, but Corolla never had the design to handle the roads well. It doesn't hang curves well and it just looks really boring. If I consider a Honda, it has to be the Si Sedan with 2.0L and 197HP. But as for torque, Mazda has honda beat. Its even better if you move up to Mazdaspeed3, 1-60 in 5.8 sec. The problem with Mazdaspeed3 is that, the hatchback is just not my style....I am 6'1 and 210 (I am not fat, just a big guy physically fit) and I would look really funny in a wagon/hatchback...
|
|
|
Replying to: sonnyrocker (Jun 12, 2007 6:30 pm) Despite the torque advantage the mazda 3 has, the civic si IS faster still. and it handles better. (i'm not talking about the mazdaspeed though.) The si sedan sounds like your sporty ride; plus you still get to keep your honda loyalty going! |
|
You are here:
Forums
Sedans Honda Civic Honda Civic vs Mazda3
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2011 Honda Civic
2010 Mazda MAZDA3
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
