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 - 2010 Mazda 3 First Drive, Full and Follow-Up Test
31 messages, Last post on Aug 15, 2009 at 7:25 PM
You are in the Mazda3 Forum. Your Host is pf_flyer
2010 Mazda 3 First Drive - First Impressions: A promising follow-up to a class-leading performance. (more)
2010 Mazda 3 s Grand Touring Full Test and Video - Bottom Line: Mazda introduces its new 3 without compromising the spirit of its outgoing model.(more)
2010 Mazda 3 s Five-Door Grand Touring Follow-Up Test and Video - Bottom Line: Quality meets fun-to-drive in a convenient hatchback package. (more)
|
Replying to: dc_dave (Jan 07, 2009 7:06 am) Honda: 2.4L 205 HP  7000 rpm 164 ft-lb 4500 rpm Fuel: Premium Mazda: 2.5L 167HP 6000 rpm 168 ft-lb 4000 rpm Fuel: Regular On paper, those figures show an advantage to the Acura / Honda. It is duely noted that when actually using that power at 7000 rpm's in the K series engine, you are most certainly not getting anywhere near the EPA estimates of 30 mpg. In fact, combined FE usually falls around 22mpg. Same can be said for the Accord as well. Let's not forget that power coming from the K series engine needs Premium fuel. The high EPA highway estimate is due to the top gear in the transmission. It's sole purpose is to have the engine turning at a low rpm, resulting in better FE, but, far from the power band. Mazda does not engineer cars that way. They have the car constantly running in or near the power band so there is less gear hunting, and more engine response in various driving conditions. That is part of the "zoom-zoom" philosophy. If you look at performance numbers of Honda's 2.4 in the Accord vs the 2.5 in the Mazda6, the Mazda is much faster while boasting less horsepower, and yet, have basically the same EPA estimates. Which is really better? Mazdas 2.5 in that case.
|
|
|
Replying to: aviboy97 (Jan 07, 2009 10:23 am) And I agree about the tall 5th gear on the TSX 5-spd auto. Although in general I do like the gear spacing on the Acura 5-spd (much, much better than on my 08 Volvo V70 with the 6-spd). I hope Mazda's spacing is also good so I can actually use the gears/engine to slow the car at highway speeds (to aviod riding the brakes). Overall Edmunds review looks positive with except for the brakes. Dave in VA
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: aviboy97 (Jan 07, 2009 10:23 am) 205 X 6000/7000 = 175.7
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: jeffyscott (Jan 07, 2009 12:47 pm) I suspect that is not quite right. Power and torque curves are never a perfect 45 degree incline.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: ahightower (Jan 07, 2009 2:22 pm) HP = (torque X RPM)/5252 As for the torqu being different at different rpm, that is why I said "assuming the same torque at 6K and 7K". A better way to show the same thing would be to calculate the torque at the HP peak for each engine. For the Mazda engine the torque at 6000 rpm is 146, for the Honda the torque at 7000 rpm is 154. This is only a 5% difference, while the difference in HP is 23%...thus most of the difference is due to the high rpm for honda. The mazda engine actually has higher peak torque and it occurs at 500 rpm less than Honda. So at lower rpm, where you are far more likely to spend more time, Mazda would appear to have higher HP. The mazda engine definitely has at least very slightly more HP at 4000 rpm (128) than the honda does (less than 125).
|
|
|
Replying to: dc_dave (Jan 07, 2009 12:08 pm) Mazda is a company that also builds good cars. They market and build their cars to perform. Hence the "zoom-zoom" philosophy. This translate into cars that excel in every driving dynamic. To get that little edge out of their engines, the gears in the transmissions are close together. As a result, you get a very responsive vehicle. The downside it fuel economy will suffer a bit. In Mazda's eyes, they offer a vehicle that has "competitive" fuel economy, but hands down a better performer. That is they way they build cars, and I do not see that changing anytime soon. If you are not too keen on the 2.5L, check out the 2.0L is has 148hp and gets 33mpg. Thats 1 mpg off of a Honda Civic and 8 more HP. |
|
|
Replying to: jeffyscott (Jan 07, 2009 4:52 pm) I suppose that analysis explains why the 200 hp K series engines feel slugging ( noted by several TSX owners) unless you are hovering around 7,000 rpm's. |
|
Can anyone comment about the ride/handling/road feel in comparison to the VW Jetta / Golf cousins or Honda Civic? Much has been written about the Jetta/Golf's Germanic feel; like it was formed out of a solid steel billet. How does the Mazda 3 feel? Memories of Mazda's past is that they handle good but feel a bit "cheap" overall on the road.
|
|
|
Replying to: hondanut (May 13, 2009 6:39 pm) Why did I choose the Mazda over the Honda? Several reasons actually, A) the Mazda had a much better steering feel, B) better brakes, C) better seats, D) better value for the dollar, and E) it looks better to my eyes. Let us know what you choose. Best regards, Shipo
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: shipo (May 14, 2009 2:14 am)
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Hatchbacks Mazda3 Article Comments - 2010 Mazda 3 First Drive, Full and Follow-Up Test
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Mazda MAZDA3
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
