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
Maybe I missed something reading through these 40 posts, but it seems as if people are saying that the 3 doesn't have good safety. With the ABS/SAB/SAC package, the 3 offers 8 total airbags (2 dash, 2 front seat, 2 A-Pillar, and 2 Rear pillar). I did see that the Civic was named a best pick by one of the agencies which is very commendable, but the 3 isn't a death trap  I own an 04 Mazda3 sedan, and it hasn't had any major issues in almost 26,000 miles. The ABS w/ EBD has saved me a least 4 times already. I do agree that Edmunds should have probably used either the I touring or S Touring model to compare to the Civic. The one thing all of us could probably agree on is that the 3 and Civic are the best economy/small cars out now. P.S. Hi Allfiredup! See you on the other Mazda3 Forum
|
|
|
Replying to: warner (Dec 28, 2005 5:37 am) However, I agree with all those above about the mileage issue. In mixed city/highway (with a lot of the highway in rush hour) the my Mazda only gets 23-24 mpg with the 2.0 engine. I'm sure the new Honda would do a lot better. So you can say that Honda is a better "economy" car.
|
|
My work commute is 20 miles each way, travelling at 25-55 mph on country/one-lane roads. I have a few stop lights, but not 'rush-hour' traffic. From spring to fall I average about 30 mpg (2.3 engine). With the winter (and different formula of gas, I have been averaging around 28 mpg. I am very happy with my mileage. When I did live in an apt. with a 4 mile stop and go commute, I averaged 23 mpg.
|
|
|
Replying to: robl1 (Dec 28, 2005 6:50 am) However, I agree with all those above about the mileage issue. In mixed city/highway (with a lot of the highway in rush hour) the my Mazda only gets 23-24 mpg with the 2.0 engine. I'm sure the new Honda would do a lot better. So you can say that Honda is a better "economy" car. I can live with that statement. It's obvious that the 3 is more sport oriented. If I were in that market I would have to consider the Civic Si, though too. On my brand new Civic, during the coldest Chicago December in recent history, my last tank got me 33mpg. I expect that to improve as the car breaks in and the weather warms up, which could be June with the weather we get here in Chicago! Haha. Warner
|
|
|
Replying to: lmp180psu (Dec 28, 2005 7:29 am) Perhaps you should look at the crash test results....... Frontal offset crash rating Mazda - Good Civic - Good Rear crash rating Mazda - Marginal Civic - Good Side impact Civic - Good Mazda - Poor (yes...no SAB) 1. How would an additional SAB change your rear crash test rating? 2. There are a number of cars with SABs that still did not fare well. What makes you think Mazda is automatically "good" with them.
|
|
|
Replying to: spinzero (Dec 27, 2005 8:59 pm) But I don't think that car magazines need to abandon the perspective of car enthusiasts and cater to the taste of general public. If you want to know what "everyone" thinks is good, you don't have to read a car mag or log onto a car website. Just ask your friends and neighbors. Or better yet, read CR. Well, here's the problem with that logic....when you are reviewing an economy car, there are certain characteristics that an economy car is designed to excel at, the first of which would be....anyone? Yes, ECONOMY. Like I said in another post, what they did is akin to testing two high performance sports cars and then announcing that they chose the one that got the best fuel economy as the winner. That's NOT what high performance cars are designed to do, and nobody CARES how efficient they are. So as reviewers of automobiles, they DO have certain journalistic responsibilities to the readers...they can't just define what they like in a car when they are comparing cars that are designed for a particular purpose. Do you not agree? What if they did an off-road truck test and picked the truck that went through the slalom fastest or got the best skidpad performance, while ignoring the off-road ability or towing capacity? Who cares? It's not what those particular vehicles were designed to do well. That's the point. Warner |
|
|
|
|
Here's the short story, Once Again. 1) the of the line Mazda3 sedan( on Sept , 11th, 2005, saturday , to be precise) was around 180 dollars under 20K, MSRP. 2) Scion tC was 17,199, on same date. 3)Difference on this part alone, MSRP versus MSRP = 2,700 dollars. With me so far ? Now, for the "hard to understand(?)" part..... ADD TAXES to this extra 2,700(difference on MSRP between the top of the line Mazda3 sedan and tC)... 7 cents on the dollar=approx 189 Extra dollars IN TAXES, ON TOP OF the 2,700 dollars difference between MSRP's; so far = 2,889 difference. ADD to this 2,889 difference(no down payment, so we had to finance EVERY PENNY DIFFERENCE HERE) nearly 800 more dollars for financing over 5 years: Over 3,500 dollars difference, TOTAL: ADD IN THE FOLLOWING: Difference between the MSRP's on saturday, sept 11,2005. Add the 189 dollars We would have paid on TAXES on that extra 2,700 difference in pricing. Add finance charges. Hope this helps. I also bought because Mazda 3 felt subpar to us. Sorry... I did read the upped the HP on the base to 150? may be a good thing. Might attract more buyers this way, versus the modle from 05. Combine paying 3,500 more , and the car felt no better than an Elantra GT(15K car), No Way! The Mazda3 is louder, more NVH, than my mother in laws' 97 Protege DX, which is actually a fairly quiet 4(90 hp?). I'd rather have a Tiburon GT V6 for 18K loaded. No as sharp looking(?), but ya get a V6, and not as loud when ya tromp the gas. Honda: Nothing against them except the dealership network here is horrible: Pay MSRP is their only mantra, it appears, thsu not only did they lose 2 customers in my family, they lost 4 more on the inlaws side when they pulled the same trash last Sept, when they wanted an Element, and another wanted a Civic. If Honda would knock off 1,000 off of that 1,500 mark up over dealer's invoice, that would be cool. No such thing as a perfect car or car company. If you think there is, I had a lake I can sell you, it's called Michigan, only 10,000 dollars Take Care/Not Offense. Happy New Year's.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: warner (Dec 27, 2005 8:08 pm) 1 - If you found yourself in a situation where you HAD to be in one of the cars while an Escalade hit you at 55mph, which one would you pick? 2 - Which one would you want your kids or your wife to be driving? "" Maybe I'm missing something, but why are some people here under the assumption that the 3 doesn't have side airbags? They are standard on 3s Touring and Grand touring, and available on ANY model 3. Civic has them standard, and that's good, but anyone who wants side/head curtain airbags can get them on any model 3. So in that case, to answer your question, with the airbags being EQUAL, give me the one with much better brakes and handling thrown in too |
|
|
Replying to: mrblonde49 (Dec 28, 2005 9:34 am) Handling/breaking is not going to stop you from getting rear ended while at a stop light or prevent someone from running a stop sign and slamming into the side of your car in an intersection. With drivers driving trucks to the corner store, talking on cell phones, reading, eating, and rearranging their financial portfolios while driving these days, passive safety measures well above and beyond handling are critical.
|
|
|
Replying to: mrblonde49 (Dec 28, 2005 9:34 am) 1 - If you found yourself in a situation where you HAD to be in one of the cars while an Escalade hit you at 55mph, which one would you pick? 2 - Which one would you want your kids or your wife to be driving? Maybe I'm missing something, but why are some people here under the assumption that the 3 doesn't have side airbags? They are standard on 3s Touring and Grand touring, and available on ANY model 3. Civic has them standard, and that's good, but anyone who wants side/head curtain airbags can get them on any model 3. So in that case, to answer your question, with the airbags being EQUAL, give me the one with much better brakes and handling thrown in too In the scenario in which the question was asked (a stationary vehicle about to be hit on the side from a speeding Escalade), the brakes and handling would be a non-issue. And to quote an excellent post by mcap: "Wait a minute!!!!!! Where are all you Mazda owners getting safety equivalence. Crash ratings are not simply the result of side airbags. Adding them to the Mazda does NOT make it as safe as the civic. There are a lot of other design elements involved. The Civic doors have a new construction designed to take an impact from a much larger vehicle. Perhaps you should look at the crash test results....... Frontal offset crash rating Mazda - Good Civic - Good Rear crash rating Mazda - Marginal Civic - Good Side impact Civic - Good Mazda - Poor (yes...no SAB) 1. How would an additional SAB change your rear crash test rating? 2. There are a number of cars with SABs that still did not fare well. What makes you think Mazda is automatically "good" with them." |
|
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
