Article Comments: 2006 Sport Compact Comparison Test - READ ONLY

274 messages, Last post on Aug 20, 2007 at 9:50 AM

You are in the Mazda3 Forum. Your Host is pf_flyer

What is this discussion about? Chevrolet Cobalt, Honda Civic, Mazda MAZDASPEED MAZDA3, MINI Cooper, Subaru Impreza WRX STi, Volkswagen GTI, Car Comparisons, Hatchback, Sedan

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)

Outline

Messages Page 24 of 28: 1; ...; 21; 22; 23; 24; 25; 26; 27; 28; Prev; Next; Last

#225 of 274 Re: mazdaspeed engineering [eldaino] by bani Jul 26, 2007 (9:55 am)
Replying to: eldaino (Jul 26, 2007 8:54 am) so uh, how much do you think the mkv gti weighs exactly? exactly how much more does the mazdaspeed3 weigh than the mkv gti?
#226 of 274 Re: mazdaspeed engineering [eldaino] by roadburner Jul 26, 2007 (1:20 pm)
Replying to: eldaino (Jul 26, 2007 8:54 am) the mazdaspeed is considerably heavier than the mkV...and heavier than a lot of cars. Here are the curb and test weights published by Road & Track in their June 2007 five car comparison test "League of Extraordinary Pocket Rockets": 2007 GTI- Curb: 3255 Test: 3420 2007 Mazdaspeed3- Curb: 3135 Test: 3300 The relative lightweight of the bunch was the Mini Cooper S, with curb and test weights of 2535 and 2700 pounds, respectively. I considered both the GTI and MS3. Both are fine cars, if a bit portly. I went with the MS3 because I preferred the rowdier character of the car. And I already had one German hatch in the garage.
#227 of 274 Re: mazdaspeed engineering [eldaino] by aviboy97 Jul 26, 2007 (2:40 pm)
Replying to: eldaino (Jul 23, 2007 9:01 am) but look at the power delivery on the 3; gutless under 3k and breathless over 6. You are forgetting that it was TUNED that way. The psi in the turbo is limited until 3rd gear on purpose. In first it gets something like 5psi, 8-10 psi in second, and all 15.6 psi in 3rd-6th. That is to eliminate torque steer. Remember all the fuss about "how is Mazda going to ground 263 FWD power?" that was floating around the internet for MONTHS before we knew what the real deal was?? You cannot say Mazda did not "tune" their engine, because they most surely did. There is already a piggy back ecu that hacks into the stock ecu to eliminate that psi restriction. Then you will get all the power from around 2,500-redline. It really comes down to how you like your vehicle. Do you like a constant power band all the way to redline? Do you like sheer power? Is the MS3 the fastest? Yes. Is it tuned? Yes. The facts do not lie. Replies to this message: bani (Jul 26, 2007 6:06 pm) eldaino (Jul 27, 2007 6:55 am) bani (Jul 27, 2007 9:04 am) and 1 more... aviboy97 (Jul 28, 2007 1:53 pm) and 1 more... themistocles (Jul 27, 2007 7:02 am) eldaino (Jul 27, 2007 7:03 am) and 1 more... eldaino (Jul 27, 2007 7:02 am) aviboy97 (Jul 28, 2007 6:22 am)
#228 of 274 Re: mazdaspeed engineering [eldaino] by aviboy97 Jul 26, 2007 (3:07 pm)
Replying to: eldaino (Jul 24, 2007 5:30 am) the si may be torqueless to it rivals, but its acceleration numbers are pretty strong when you compare it to how much guts the mazda speed 3 has. How so? I have seen numerous reports of the Si doing the 0-60 in around 7 seconds and the 1/4 mile around 15 seconds. The Mazdaspeed3 5.5-5.8 0-60 and 13.7-14.2 1/4 mile. There is no comparison. Not to mention the numerous track tests that show the Mazdaspeed3 won going around a track.
#229 of 274 Re: mazdaspeed engineering [aviboy97] by bani Jul 26, 2007 (6:06 pm)
Replying to: aviboy97 (Jul 26, 2007 2:40 pm) Nah the 3 is making more tq/hp under 3k than the GTI is. If the 3 is 'gutless' at 3k then the GTI is utterly apalling by the same rules. Don't forget the 3 has equal length half-shafts and a limited slip diff. If you want a constant power band all the way to redline, buy an Si. Virtually flat powerband across the revs. Of course you'll have to live with no tq, no hp, and rev hangs... Replies to this message: eldaino (Jul 27, 2007 6:55 am) bani (Jul 27, 2007 9:04 am) eldaino (Jul 29, 2007 3:43 am) aviboy97 (Jul 28, 2007 1:53 pm) eldaino (Jul 29, 2007 3:37 am) themistocles (Jul 27, 2007 7:02 am) eldaino (Jul 27, 2007 7:03 am) themistocles (Jul 27, 2007 7:15 am)
#230 of 274 Re: mazdaspeed engineering [bani] by eldaino Jul 27, 2007 (6:55 am)
Replying to: bani (Jul 26, 2007 6:06 pm) If you want a constant power band all the way to redline, buy an Si. Virtually flat powerband across the revs. Of course you'll have to live with no tq, no hp, and rev hangs... this is why i now you know nothing of power delivery. The si makes its peak tq/hp a few hundered rpms before redline...harldy a 'flat' powerband. you gotta keep it over 6k to enjoy it to its full potential. Look at the si boards. Folks are getting killer mileage by keeping their shifts economical...this car has two personalites BECAUSE of the way it delivers power. Before 6k, its just a regular civic with a cooler interior and MUCH better handling. I would never buy an si for all out speed...because that is not honda's mission. Mazda obviously wanted to guarantee a 'best in category' with regards to the actual numbers. (hp/skidpad/tq etc) Why are there people also buying the si and gti instead? because both honda and vw fans realize that there is more to this segment than those things. most people who don't car of inherent characterstics of a particular car company appreciate what the si and gti have to offer...yet is the people who are looking for the most of everything that are going to be drawn to the ms3...i personally find no passion or loyalty in that, and i bet there will be more ms3 buyers who are new to the mazda brand than there will be new honda/vw buyers for the si and gti respecitvely. Rev hangs? ok i'll give you that. at least the shifter is not vauge and rubbery. you can argue it all you want, but the si's manual is the BEST manual this side of an s2k. its one of hondas calling cards. Nah the 3 is making more tq/hp under 3k than the GTI is. If the 3 is 'gutless' at 3k then the GTI is utterly apalling by the same rules. um...lets look at the numbers, granted i know we are now getting a bit technical. the speed 3 offers its PEAK torque at 3000 rpm; and its 280lbs worth. the gti on the other hand offers 200lbs of torque at a mere 1800rpms. So techically, NO, the 3 IS NOT making the same hp/torque under 3k that the gti is. and that 200lbs of torque...its availble from 1800-5000rpms. THAT is its entire peak. Thats why you can stab at the gti in any rpm range or gear and there is tons of thrust. no tq limiters or anything. Don't forget the 3 has equal length half-shafts and a limited slip diff. the si has a limited slip too, and the gti has an electronic version of it(but its not as effective) regardless, its not a new feature exclusvie to the ms3. no torque, no hp huh? i'll give you the tq comment (granted for an n/a 2.0 thats still a healthy amount) but no hp? the si is making 15hp less per litre than the ms3, WITHOUT being turbo charged AND with a smaller engine. That is very impressive. by comparsion, the un-turboed 2.3 in the 3 only makes 68.70 hp per litre, as opposed to the si's 98 hp per litre. Replies to this message: bani (Jul 27, 2007 9:04 am) eldaino (Jul 29, 2007 3:43 am) aviboy97 (Jul 28, 2007 1:53 pm) eldaino (Jul 29, 2007 3:37 am)
#231 of 274 Re: mazdaspeed engineering [bani] by themistocles Jul 27, 2007 (7:02 am)
Replying to: bani (Jul 26, 2007 6:06 pm) Id take an Si or the GTi over the speed 3 anyday. I woulda bought a Lancer evolution or STi if i wanted a really fast high hp car that hugs the road. Certainly wouldnt be the twinkie lookin FWD speed 3. Its just like the srt-4, all numbers in my moms suped up econo sedan. The Si and GTi have stuck with there quality traits theyve had for years. yea, some people dont like the high revving of the Si, and thats fine, people have different opinions. I drove the speed 3 before i drove the GTi and Si and drove it again after them. I still think the Si and Gti are more fun to drive even though there slower(not to mention how much better they look . Its not only about speed... Like i said before, if im buyin a mazda for performance, its a RX-7 Anyway, if the speed 3 is what floats your boat, Im not hatin, your opinion and your tastes. Replies to this message: eldaino (Jul 27, 2007 7:03 am) themistocles (Jul 27, 2007 7:15 am)
#232 of 274 Re: mazdaspeed engineering [aviboy97] by eldaino Jul 27, 2007 (7:02 am)
Replying to: aviboy97 (Jul 26, 2007 2:40 pm) actually avi i can say it. the limiting of tq in the gears isn't engineering, its a neccesity. its a compromise due to the fact that they decided that 'our engine is going to be this powerful no matter what' before they decided how the car was going to get the power to the ground. the srt-4 took the same route. stuff like that just doesn't float my boat. on the other hand, it does put down great numbers...even if it does so with a slight 'i want to be the best EVER' complex. for an n/a 2.0, reported 0-60 runs of high to mid 6's is pretty dang good for the si. seeing the specs on the 3 would insinuate that it SHOULD do better, but again, its another compromise of the torque limitations. At least you can say you have the most hp in the class. i've read c/d comparos that put the si's skid pad numbers higher than the ms3 as well. Replies to this message: aviboy97 (Jul 28, 2007 6:22 am)
#233 of 274 Re: mazdaspeed engineering [themistocles] by eldaino Jul 27, 2007 (7:03 am)
Replying to: themistocles (Jul 27, 2007 7:02 am) The Si and GTi have stuck with there quality traits theyve had for years exactly! good points man. bring on the rx7. Replies to this message: themistocles (Jul 27, 2007 7:15 am)
#234 of 274 Re: mazdaspeed engineering [eldaino] by themistocles Jul 27, 2007 (7:15 am)
Replying to: eldaino (Jul 27, 2007 7:03 am) Haha, thank sir. Very well said yourself! You really got at what i was trying to say. I didnt see your posts till after mine, was too busy with other crap and took me too long to type my short post. I definitely agree with you and praise you for bringing up the difference in HP per liter. 2.0 and pumping out 200 hp with no turbo or supercharger is quite impressive like you said.