Ask the Car People.SM


2010 Mazda3 - READ ONLY

832 messages,  Last post on Mar 04, 2013 at 3:05 PM

You are in the Hatchbacks - Archived Discussions Forum.

This discussion is ARCHIVED. To reactivate the discussion, post a request in the Lost? Ask the Hatchbacks Host for directions! discussion.

What is this discussion about? Mazda MAZDA3, Future Vehicle

Messages Page 71 of 84

#692 of 832 Re: Disappointed in interior color, lack of [creakid1] by igozoomzoom

Dec 29, 2009 (3:54 am)

Replying to: creakid1 (Dec 18, 2009 11:47 pm)
I don't like black/charcoal or tan. No wonder I am still keeping my old Mazda 3-series -- '90 323 Protege twin cam w/ blue cloth interior.
  
I really like the green velour interior that came out before I could drive -- The '78 VW Dasher/Rabbit Champaign Edition, the '79 Audi 5000...& these were quite expensive cars most people couldn't afford.
  
In the mid '90's, Lexus also had green leather interior in some GS/LS sedans, & that was the last beautiful thing I saw.
 
Most new cars have just two interior color options! Inevitably, the hues are limited to some variation of beige and gray. They try to make them sound like something interesting with names like names like Bisque, Dune, Blonde, Taupe, Frost, Stone and Graphite...but they're still dull-as-dishwater beige and gray!
 
Thankfully, some do offer a black interior option for those who prefer a dark interior color. I've owned 11 cars in 21 years, all with dark interiors. When I was shopping for my car in late 2005, the black interior of the Mazda3 s was a selling point!
 
My two favorite interior colors were on my '89 and '92 Accords. The '89 was Polar White with "Brown-Red" interior which looked much better than the name implies. In my LXi model, the seats were just a rich brown and only the dash and door panels had any sort of reddish tint. My '92 was Frost White with Blue interior. It wasn't quite as dark as a navy blue, but not a tacky Smurfy blue either! Interestingly, the Civic Hybrid ('06-present) and the new Insight (Hybrid) are the only Hondas since '93 to offer Blue interior as an option. I'm not sure why they think that only hybrid owners would be interested in the blue interior? Blue is actually the most soothing and calming of all colors...maybe it's to help them keep their cool during the long wait from 0mph up to highway speed???
 
But I also cringe when I remember the interior of my mom's '86 Cutlass and my sister's '85 300ZX. The Olds was "maroon" velour: a double whammy of an awful color and dreadful fabric. But the 300ZX was even more horrific in "RED", as the window sticker referred to it. It's a color you would only see today in a slaughterhosue or perhaps a crime scene!? The "Mr Roboto" digital dash was far too busy-looking the ones with tan, blue, black or silver/gray interior. But surrounded by a vast expanse of blood-colored dashboard, the mostly green digital readouts and graphs were soothing! I discovered the secret to enjoying the Z was simple- I only borrowed it after DARK!

#693 of 832 Re: Bad tires [morin2] by igozoomzoom

Dec 29, 2009 (5:07 am)

Replying to: morin2 (Dec 28, 2009 4:31 pm)
"There's no excusing the poor OEM tires used on new cars. Factors other than performance, such as cost, must be more important to the vehicle manufacturers."
 
I'm surprised Subaru chose that tire for the Outback! I'm sure cost is the primary factor, but there are other tires in the same price range that perform better in the Winter/Snow ratings!?? Then again, I was comparing them based on retail pricing, which has no correlation to the price that Subaru negotiated with Bridgestone.
 
My '06 Mazda3 s 5-door came with Goodyear Eagle RS-A tires which were shot at 28k miles. I was STUNNED when I learned that it would cost $238 per tire (before any fees/taxes/road hazard added) to replace with the same ones!!! The car has never been driven in snow (I'm in Georgia, we rarely see snow and we're smart enough to stay home on the rare occasion that it does), but it has very low scores on TireRack's Winter/Snow ratings.
 
The problem I had with the RS-As was thier abysmal performance in the rain! That's something we do see a lot of in Georgia and I quickly learned to avoid driving in the rain if possible, thanks to those stupid tires! With those tires, the car would hydroplane worse than any car I've ever had (including my '85 CRX that weighed about half as much)! The other issue was how easily the front tires would spin when starting off on wet pavement. Twice I pulled out across traffic only to end up ACROSS lanes of oncoming traffic when I lost traction! After that, I decided to sacrifice some clutch life instead of my own life and started slipping it when taking off on wet roads.
 
But in dry weather, they lived up to the "Zoom Zoom" hype and then some! The car stayed glued to road and, in the curves, my courage ran out long before their grip! I think that Mazda made dry weather handling the highest priority to deliver on the 'Zoom Zoom' image....but at the expense of wet and winter traction AND longevity!
 
Needless to say, I didn't pay $238 each for those tires! I went with Dunlop SP Sport Signatures that were $114 each instead. They've lasted 44k miles so far and still have plenty of tread life. I've never hydroplaned or lost traction during start off on wet pavement with them. Ride quality improved noticeably in dry weather as did road noise (reduced)....and it still takes S-curves better than any Honda or Acura I've ever owned!

#694 of 832 Snow Tires vs AWD by aviboy97

Dec 29, 2009 (7:28 am)

Good Morning Everyone-
 
I found this article today on autoblog that talks about snow tires vs AWD. Very interesting.
 
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/12/29/proper-winter-tires-are-more-important-than-a- ll-wheel-drive/#continued

#695 of 832 Re: Snow Tires vs AWD [aviboy97] by jeffyscott

Dec 29, 2009 (9:51 am)

Replying to: aviboy97 (Dec 29, 2009 7:28 am)
It was not mentioned, but I suspect winter tires help with stopping too...something that AWD is no help with (though many drivers of these vehicles drive as if this were not so).
 
For the Georgian - many place have things like snow plows and salt. Thus most of the time the roads are just wet or, perhaps, slushy within hours after the snow stops.
 
Once drove through KY and TN 24 hours+ after snow had ended. Went from driving on 4 inches of ice to wet pavement to ice again to pavement again as we went from county to county. This seemed to be the result of some counties actually clearing the interstate highway with actual snow plows and salt, while others seemingly did absolutely nothing or maybe had a road grader that they pretended was a snow plow.

#696 of 832 Re: Snow Tires vs AWD [aviboy97] by creakid1

Dec 29, 2009 (5:06 pm)

Replying to: aviboy97 (Dec 29, 2009 7:28 am)
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/12/29/proper-winter-tires-are-more-important-than-a- - ll-wheel-drive/#continued
This example is really "Snow Tires vs AWD wearing the #1 disastrous-snow-performing all-season tires". LOL
 
Because the only OEM all-season tires on the new Subaru Legacy is the Bridgestone Turanza EL400-02:
http://www.tirerack.com/tires/surveyresults/surveydisplay.jsp?type=ST&width=215%- - - 2F&ratio=50&diameter=17&tireSearch=true&autoMake=Subaru&autoYear=2010&autoModel=- - - Legacy%20Sedan&autoModClar=2.5i%20Limited
  
How can anyone be talented enough to pick out the worst tires possible for the snow?
 
I'm beginning to suspect that Subaru wants to help tire sales...
 
Therefore, this article still doesn't convince me how mighty the snow tires are.
 
I really want to see if this Subaru is still handicapped on snow when wearing a different set of all-season tires, such as the Goodyear Assurance Triple Tred:
http://www.tirerack.com/tires/surveyresults/surveydisplay.jsp?type=AS&width=205%- - - 2F&ratio=60&diameter=16&tireSearch=true&autoMake=Subaru&autoYear=2010&autoModel=- - - Legacy%20Sedan&autoModClar=2.5i

#697 of 832 Re: Snow Tires vs AWD [creakid1] by mz6greyghost

Dec 30, 2009 (5:47 am)

Replying to: creakid1 (Dec 29, 2009 5:06 pm)
Therefore, this article still doesn't convince me how mighty the snow tires are.
 
Apparently, since they weren't reviewed in a bias-filled Tirerack survey, it's info isn't quite good enough?
 
Take it from a person that's driven within the snow belt for their entire life, winter tires are for real, and I'd take them on ANY vehicle over any AWD vehicle (Subaru or otherwise) with any all-season tires. The winter tire advantages are quite huge, such as:
1. Great traction in snow/slush, not only in aiding acceleration, but also in steering, stopping, and overall handling, something that AWD does not do.
2. Effectively doubles the life of your tires, since you're running two sets of tires per year.
3. No AWD penalty (added weight, lower gas mileage, increased chance for mechanical breakdown.
4. Less expensive. A good set of winter tires/wheels can run about $600 (even less for just winter tires), a huge price savings over a comparably-equipped AWD vehicle.
 
More proof? Check out this article done by another reputable source. Better yet, check out these links from actual Tirerack TESTS, here, here, and here. The last article shows a definitive difference between AWD vehicles using all-season versus winter tires.
 
It's been said before, and will continue to be said: It's not the car, it's the tires.

#698 of 832 Re: Snow Tires vs AWD [mz6greyghost] by jeffyscott

Dec 30, 2009 (9:08 am)

Replying to: mz6greyghost (Dec 30, 2009 5:47 am)
One of the snow tires tested by CR was rated as poor on snow and/or ice. So just being designated a "winter tire" or "snow tire" is not a guarantee of good snow/ice performance, apparently.
 
Switching tires does not double tire life. You buy two sets of tires and have them twice as long (maybe). If I bought two sets of all-seasons that does not double the tires life, it just means I have bought replacement tires in advance, buying snows is effectively the same thing. Also tires should be replaced after about 6 years anyway, for someone like me 6 years is maybe 50,000 miles so I'd be buying 8 tires every 50,000 miles and getting only 25,000 miles per set.
 
None of this is meant to disagree with your main points that if you want the best performance in winter, a good set of winter tires is likely to give you that and if you are choosing between AWD and winter tires to accomplish this goal, going for the tires is probably the better option.

#699 of 832 Re: Snow Tires vs AWD [jeffyscott] by mz6greyghost

Dec 30, 2009 (12:55 pm)

Replying to: jeffyscott (Dec 30, 2009 9:08 am)
One of the snow tires tested by CR was rated as poor on snow and/or ice. So just being designated a "winter tire" or "snow tire" is not a guarantee of good snow/ice performance, apparently.
 
Well, the only thing I trust CR for is appliances, since IMO they're not quite as car-savvy as other sources in terms of both cars and tires. Besides, whether or not it's rated "good" in snow/ice, chances are that winter tire will still do better than an all-season. Just proves that one should keep up on their research before making a purchase, right?
 
Switching tires does not double tire life...
 
Yeah, I guess I didn't phrase that part very well. If you do run with winter tires, It does increase the amount of time that one has between replacing a set of summer/all-season tires with another set of summer/all-season tires, without an increase in treadlife, obviously.
 
None of this is meant to disagree with your main points that if you want the best performance in winter, a good set of winter tires is likely to give you that and if you are choosing between AWD and winter tires to accomplish this goal, going for the tires is probably the better option.
 
It's too bad that most people in snowy climates doesn't seem to (or refuse to) understand that. You don't NEED a gas-guzzling SUV or AWD vehicle to get around in winter months.

#700 of 832 Re: Snow Tires vs AWD [mz6greyghost] by jeffyscott

Dec 30, 2009 (1:44 pm)

Replying to: mz6greyghost (Dec 30, 2009 12:55 pm)
Besides, whether or not it's rated "good" in snow/ice, chances are that winter tire will still do better than an all-season.
 
No, that's the point, that apparently there are at least some winter tires that perform worse than at least some A/S. Granted the winter tire that performed poorly in winter conditions was the exception. But they rated Hankook icebear W300 "poor" for "snow traction" and "good" for "ice braking". Meanwhile a number of A/S tires were rated "good" or better for snow traction and also "good" or better for ice braking.
 
The Michelin Primacy MXV4 was rated very good on ice braking and good for snow traction and Hankook Optimo H727 was very good on both of those winter tests.

#701 of 832 Re: Snow Tires vs AWD [mz6greyghost] by aviboy97

Dec 31, 2009 (8:58 am)

Replying to: mz6greyghost (Dec 30, 2009 12:55 pm)
It's too bad that most people in snowy climates doesn't seem to (or refuse to) understand that. You don't NEED a gas-guzzling SUV or AWD vehicle to get around in winter months.
 
You can put my wife in that category. She refuses to drive anything but a Subaru because of snow. Listen to this....she is a teacher...she does not go to work when it snows!!! She stays home!!! LOL!!!

Messages Page 71 of 84

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement