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
Hatchbacks Mazda3 Article Comments: 2006 Sport Compact Comparison Test 
274 messages, Last post on Aug 20, 2007 at 9:50 AM
You are in the Mazda3 Forum. Your Host is pf_flyer
Article comments for 2006 Sport Compact Comparison Test - Here's the three-word definition we like: small, sporting, inexpensive. And because these cars are frequently the only transportation their owners have, reality says we should add a fourth: practical. (more)
|
Check out our comparison including these vehicles: 2006 Chevrolet Cobalt SS Supercharged, 2006 Honda Civic Si, 2007 Mazda Mazdaspeed 3, 2006 Mini Cooper S, 2006 Subaru WRX and 2006 Volkswagen GTI. Post your comments here! 2006 Sport Compact Comparison Test
|
|
|
|
| An all wheel drive WRX wagon, rather than a sedan, might have added enough weight to the practical considerations to tip the scales in favor of the Subaru over the Mazda. | |
|
Replying to: KarenS (Dec 04, 2006 2:11 pm) EDIT: A mazda dealer I know stated that mazda chose to not have full power and awd for two reasons, 1. It would devalue the mazdaspeed 6, and 2. The AWD would make it cost more... |
|
|
I have an 06 Civic Si. It is a highly entertaining car to drive. Loud/jumpy/jiggly until you start to explore the upper reaches of the tach when the sound changes to something I've never heard in a production car in this price range. The kind of sound that prompts me to turn off the stero so I can listen to the entertainment center! The jiggly jumpy ride changes into a hunkered down athletic sensation as the speed climbs. All of this just calls you to drive it hard. Now it will get it's doors blown off by several of the cars in this comparison but that doesn't mean it isn't still a ton of fun to drive. In fact I've posted this before..one way to look at it is that the "fun" of the Si lasts a couple seconds longer than it will in the other cars. Toss in the Honda reliability and typical resale value retention and there are still a number of reasons to purchase the Si. I've noticed that the mileage under very agreesive driving is around 23 mpg and under restrained agression is 26 mpg. My guess (based only on shopping the Subie Legacy GT for about a year) is that the mileage of the Turbo cars won't approach that when they are pushed hard. Now I know you don't buy a car like this for gas mileage but given gas prices it has an impact on the overall experience. BTW - At the MS3's price point the Legacy GT limited with the rebate can be obtained from some high volume dealers with active internet sales functions. |
|
|
out and drove a WRX wagon today after reading that article. It got me thinking sense the GTI, and Speed 3 are on the short list for my next car. It's not all that great IMO. The clutch, and gearbox are about 90% less that fun to use. It's like they are going through a divorce, and your caught in the middle of the asset fight. The interior is low rent, but the seats are comfortable. Lot's of turbo lag, and then it runs out of steam quick. It seemed to me to have a very small powerband. Just my 2 cents. |
|
| In the 2006 Sport Compact Comparison Test, The Civic Si posted a 0-60 time of 7.5 seconds. In the Civic Si vs. the VW GTI, the Civic posted a 0-60 time of 6.8 seconds. Now that's quite a difference. Regardless of any of these comparison tests, I'm planning to buy a 2007 Honda Civic Si 4-door with Navigation. Although it may not be the fastest or quickest, speed isn't everything. The Civic Si is fast enough for me. It also handles great and has a good ride (firm but never harsh). Also the 4-door is far more roomier than the Coupe. I also love the "Star Trek" interior and that amazing stereo & Navigation system. Factor in stellar crash test ratings, good fuel economy and Honda's superb reliability and resale value, and the Civic Si gets my money! Mind you, I think the Mazdaspeed 3 , Subaru WRX and the VW GTI are great cars, and I would be more than happy to own any of them, but the Civic Si gets my nod here. You can't go wrong with any of these cars, but I happen to prefer the Civic Si. | |
|
|
|
I’m going to say upfront that I own a ’06 VW GTI and I’m a bit puzzled by a number of things in this review. Since I know my car pretty well I’ll focus on the GTI rather then saying stuff that may be inaccurate about the other cars tested… First off the performance numbers cited in this article were quite a bit different then what was reported in the ’06 Civic SI – GTI head to head comparison (Inside Line April ‘06). What’s up with that? The previous article listed the GTI as having a 0-60 of 6.7 - which compares to what stock owners are reporting on VWVORTEX. The post by johnzocco points out a similar disparity regarding the Civic’s numbers. The other thing that bothered me when comparing articles is that the GTI was noted as “a better ‘everyday’ car” in the April article. However in this new article it’s a different tune – which is surprising because every day driving conditions were supposed to make up a larger part of testing. The Mini beat out the GTI because it’s ‘fun’ yet it is noted as being the most cramped and slowest. The GTI leads in every interior dimension except legroom – but I can’t tell where this fits into scoring. Since one of the 4 things this article is comparing is PRACTICALITY you think inside line would mention how that actually factors into scoring. My road bike (I’m 6’2”) can fit in the back of the GTI w/ the seats down as can two full hockey bags. Can the other cars do this? Other parts of the article seemed arbitrary as well. The Civic Si was noted as having the summer tires. Did the GTI have summer tires? You have the option of choosing summer tires or all seasons w/ the GTI (no change in cost). Can you get summer tires on the other cars? The article mentions that you can get a Civic Si sedan, but fails to mention you can get a 4 door GTI. Also a decent percentage of the score was based on “a 23 point evaluation” and “feature content”. So? What is the rubric for these categories. The description given for each scoring section is pretty pathetic. These numbers don’t mean anything unless you describe how you found them. At best displaying data like this is useless, at worst it’s misrepresentative. Personally I think the GTI comes with a awful lot of features standard – from HID headlights to a in dash 6 cd/mp3 player (plus a lot more – post in the GTI forum and I can go more in depth). Do the other cars have this equipment? Do the other cars tested have better amenities? Who knows! It’s clear there are better performers in this group than the GTI – I’m not contesting that. However I think the rest of the comparison is so muddled it’s meaningless. For a day to day car the GTI is ace. If you own any of these cars tested I encourage you to post about them! This article glossed over so many points … step up and fill the void.
|
|
|
Replying to: jitteryjoe_246 (Dec 05, 2006 7:29 am) I also agree that practicality was only mentioned for the sake of awarding extra points to the mazda for having four doors and a hatch. Why didn't they test the gti 4 door? its already out! Why didn't they include the si 4 door, it too is available. It would have made the competition closer and shown that the large gap that the mazda had the advantage in (performance) would have decreased. The civic still would have been behind as far as utility even in the 4 door, but the gti would have been on par with the mazda. Make the subie a wagon and it would have been closer still. These little quirks were what really got to me...all done in favor of making the mazda the winner. But then again, its not the first time. Remember the civic vs. mazda 3 ECONOMY comparison? There was no economy about it. The mazda won for all its sportiness and the civics high resale value, great balance of handling and comfort, and much better mileage were all mentioned as an afterthought. I should have realized that this same trend would continue with this comparison as well; practicality was mentioned for the sake of mentioning it; if they wanted us to take it seriously, they should have included the more practical' versions of all of these vehicles, instead of their 2 door counterparts. Had they done so, even though i accept that the mazda would still have won anyway, it would have been much more evident that although the other cars (i.e. gti or si etc) may not have been the ultra performers of the group, they offer real world practicality, a low price tag, and as opposed to the ultra stiff suspension of the mazda, a very important everyday driver factor that means a lot to a lot of people. Very disappointed with this comparison.
|
|
|
Replying to: eldaino (Dec 05, 2006 8:14 am) Why? The test was of sub-$25k sports compacts. There's NO WAY to get a new R32 for under $25k. And I'm unaware of a Type-R Civic currently offered in the U.S. Yes, the GTI and Si are available for sale as 4-door models (which would have helped the 'practicality' part of the comparison). The flip side (which you conveniently ignore) is that the Speed3 is available for sale in SUBSTANTIALLY cheaper versions than the one tested (which would have helped the Speed3 in the 'value' part of the comparison). It's a wash. Edmunds tested what they could get their hands on. If they had collected 4-dr versions of the GTI and Si, would it have helped their 'practicality' score? Yep. Are these versions HEAVIER than their 2-dr breathren and so perhaps might have HURT their 'performance' score? I dunno. Are the 4-dr versions more EXPENSIVE than the 2-dr versions and thus hurt their 'value' score? Quite possibly. The bottom line is Edmunds tested THESE cars. And based on a fairly comprehensive round of track use, highway use, and extended daily use, they placed THESE cars in this order. BTW - why do you continually refer to the Speed3's "ultra stiff suspension of the mazda, a very important everyday driver factor that means a lot to a lot of people."? In the discussion regarding the Speed3 and rough roads, the editors noted that "only the WRX was better over a less-than-perfect surface." If the Speed3 beats up the passengers as bad as you insinuate with it's 'ultra stiff suspension', why would they make the statement that the only the WRX was better over rough roads? "...they mentioned that the 2 german cars in the comparison, while not the best performers, both offered a unique driving experience that none of the other cars had." Unique is not always good. While they generally PRAISED the Mini (feeling only that it was down on power compared to the other competitors), they had this to say about the GTI: "...it's the least involving car to drive as a result." "...the VW's soft, long-travel suspension slows down its steering response, so it's not as much fun to drive." You know, I think you have a point. Compared to others in this group, little driver involvement and lowest fun to drive ARE unique driving experiences.....
|
|
|
Replying to: rorr (Dec 05, 2006 10:13 am) Perhaps because it was still capable of handling well over rough roads? This doesn't neccesarily refer to the cars ability to remain comfy over these roads, but that they are refferring to its abiltiy to retain handling prowress on rough pavement. Its common sense: stiffer suspension, better handling. If the gti has a softer suspension, that probably means its easier on your butt when the road gets bumpy;HENCE why them saying what you posted above refers to the ability to still handle well in that environment and not comfort. It's a wash. Edmunds tested what they could get their hands on. If they had collected 4-dr versions of the GTI and Si, would it have helped their 'practicality' score? Yep. Are these versions HEAVIER than their 2-dr breathren and so perhaps might have HURT their 'performance' score? I dunno. Are the 4-dr versions more EXPENSIVE than the 2-dr versions and thus hurt their 'value' score? Quite possibly. Heavier yes but by a very small margin. I think the gti 4 door is like 40lbs heavier and the civic si is 30. Not to big of a deal. And they are a bit more expensive, but still under that ms3's price. If a car that expensive cuts it, well then why not these? Even without the nav system they are still comparably priced. Why? The test was of sub-$25k sports compacts. There's NO WAY to get a new R32 for under $25k. And I'm unaware of a Type-R Civic currently offered in the U.S. Yes, the GTI and Si are available for sale as 4-door models (which would have helped the 'practicality' part of the comparison). The flip side (which you conveniently ignore) is that the Speed3 is available for sale in SUBSTANTIALLY cheaper versions than the one tested (which would have helped the Speed3 in the 'value' part of the comparison). A lot of people disagree with me on this, and then there are many who don't. I realize this is a comparison for the american market, but that still doesn't mean that a type r doesn't exist. I've seen r32's for less than 25. Not new but have seen them. I didn't choose to ingnore the fact that you can get the speed 3 cheaper. But then again the bottom line is that edmunds tested THESE cars, which includes an over 25k mazdaspeed 3 right?  Unique is not always good. unique is always good. The bottom line is Edmunds tested THESE cars. And based on a fairly comprehensive round of track use, highway use, and extended daily use, they placed THESE cars in this order I would still take the gti. What their idea of fun to drive is different from mine. I like a stiff chassis but i would still take vw 'long travel' suspesion over the mazdas. Its nice to not feel like you have to gun it everywhere you go because of the nature of the car you are driving. No one is saying the mazda being the winnner is ridiculous, i think if the test was done more fairly, it still would have come out on top. But that doesn't mean its the best car for everyone. I don't think its a bad car at all, it just honestly isn't as practical as some of the competition ACTUALLY is and i feel that this comparo failed to show that. Simple as that.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Hatchbacks Mazda3 Article Comments: 2006 Sport Compact Comparison Test
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Chevrolet Cobalt
2011 Honda Civic
2009 Mazda MAZDASPEED MAZDA3
2010 MINI Cooper
2010 Volkswagen GTI
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
