You are here: Forums Hatchbacks Mazda3 Mazda3 v. Honda Accord

Mazda3 v. Honda Accord

99 messages,  Last post on Jan 24, 2008 at 12:01 AM

You are in the Mazda3 Forum. Your Host is pf_flyer

What is this discussion about? Honda Accord, Mazda MAZDA3, Car Buying, Sedan

Messages Page 5 of 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 10 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

#40 of 99 Re: strange comparison [yankeesuc4] by autonomous Feb 19, 2007 (2:26 pm)
Replying to: yankeesuc4 (Feb 19, 2007 2:07 pm) used volvo or acura (2005 or 6) Which models?
#41 of 99 - by dudleyr Feb 19, 2007 (8:51 pm)
Go new. Then you have the warranty and not somebody else's problem.
#42 of 99 Re: strange comparison [yankeesuc4] by ichpokhudezh Feb 20, 2007 (9:06 am)
Replying to: yankeesuc4 (Feb 19, 2007 2:07 pm) Mazda 3 are very good vehicles if a little lacking in interior materials. GT&Mazdaspeed trims are ok for the price level, I think.   TSX is not worth it, IMO, and TL holds its value quite good so 2005-2006 are not exactly "deals" - again, IMO. Are you thinking about volvo s40/v50? I would wait until c30 gets here - I expect it to be between MZ3s and Mazdaspeed 3 performance-wise and much better appointed.
#43 of 99 - by dudleyr Feb 24, 2007 (8:45 pm)
Still comparing these two vehicles.   Tough choice between the better handling 3 and the larger more comfortable Accord.   If it were just me I would ge the 3, but need to haul the kids around too, and they fit better in the back of the Accord. Of course we will usually drive the minivan when we have the whole family in the car, so there will very rarely be three kids in the back.   I have noticed that even though the 3 does not have much knee room there is a fair amount of foot room, and the slightly higher seats make the most out of the space. I can actually comfortably sit behind myself. Of course in the Accord I can actually cross my legs sitting behind myself.   It keeps coming back to stability control though. The 3 has it standard on the Touring S and the Honda does not have it at all on the 4 cyl Accords. Replies to this message: starhusker (May 20, 2007 7:58 am)
#44 of 99 Re: - [dudleyr] by starhusker May 20, 2007 (7:58 am)
Replying to: dudleyr (Feb 24, 2007 8:45 pm) Hi dudleyr, I have the exact same problem you are describing here. What did you end up getting? or still looking? Thanks.
#45 of 99 - by dudleyr May 20, 2007 (10:56 am)
I bought the Accord. My wife did not think the back seat was large enough for the kids in the 3.   Happy so far. Gas mileage is quite good.   I would have liked a hatch, and the 3 had better seats, but I don't regret getting the Accord. We were able to take it on a 400 mile trip with the 3 kids and I don't think it would have worked as well with the 3.   If it was just me though, I would have the 3.
#46 of 99 Re: Mazda 3 v. Honda Accord [nifty56] by savvyboy May 21, 2007 (12:03 pm)
Replying to: nifty56 (May 26, 2006 7:27 pm) Let's take this item by item...   Weak A/C - BS Hesitation and Stalling - only if you don't know how to shift Auto tran harsh shift from 1 - 2 - BS Excessive rear brake dust - I've seen some, but I can't call it "excessive" Cheap Interior - Obviously this guy has never been in a Cobalt Bad stock tires - I'll go along with that, but how is Mazda to blame? They're GoodYear tires. Had my 17s for three years...no rust No chipped paint (sans the roof which had a sizable rock land on it at highway speed, and the chip is EXTREMELY small) MPG problem was improved with the introduction of the 5 speed auto. Don't misunderstand, the fuel efficiency could be better, but not much for the power the 2.3 wields. This engine is designed to compete with V6s, it's designed to perform.   I'm on a Mazda 3 Forum and these complaints are very few and from a very few...like the same amount of people that you would find abusing a car.   The Accord V6 is a sweet ride. The V6 provides a great balance between power and performance. It would cream a Mazda3S off the line, but doesn't handle quite as well. It obviously has more interior space and more peripheral "stuff". But the bottom line is that these are two different kinds of cars for two different purposes aimed at two different segments.   If you want performance, and still insist on being a Honda yes man by taking cheap, unfounded shots at other vehicles, then go with an Acura TL S-Type. It handles every bit as well as the 3 and has power to spare. Replies to this message: thegraduate (May 21, 2007 5:10 pm) 03accordman (May 22, 2007 11:27 am) eldaino (May 23, 2007 11:58 am)
#47 of 99 Re: Mazda 3 v. Honda Accord [savvyboy] by thegraduate May 21, 2007 (5:10 pm)
Replying to: savvyboy (May 21, 2007 12:03 pm) Don't misunderstand, the fuel efficiency could be better, but not much for the power the 2.3 wields. This engine is designed to compete with V6s, it's designed to perform.   Eh, I'm gonna raise a question (respectfully) here. How do you gather that the 2.3L 4-cyl is designed to compete with V6s?
#49 of 99 Re: Mazda 3 v. Honda Accord [savvyboy] by 03accordman May 22, 2007 (11:27 am)
Replying to: savvyboy (May 21, 2007 12:03 pm) So what V6 is the 2.3 competing with? The 3.0 vulcan from Ford? Apart from that, I really don't see it anywhere near today's V6s, most of which put our in the 225-300hp range.

Messages Page 5 of 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 10 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

You are here: Forums Hatchbacks Mazda3 Mazda3 v. Honda Accord