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

What is this discussion about? Mazda MAZDA3, Mazda, Sedan

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)

Outline

Messages Page 2 of 4: 1; 2; 3; 4; Prev; Next; Last

#6 of 31 Not sure I like the style... by dlam Dec 01, 2008 (5:31 pm)
The 3 has sold plenty of units... I've always thought change is most welcome, but not always... Style-wise, the car looks like a cross between a Peugeot and the Joker... Too much grin... Replies to this message: mpg60 (Jan 05, 2009 1:35 pm) ahightower (Jan 06, 2009 8:41 am)
#7 of 31 Full Test available! by KarenS HOST Jan 05, 2009 (10:45 am)
2010 Mazda 3 s Grand Touring Full Test and Video
#8 of 31 Re: Not sure I like the style... [dlam] by mpg60 Jan 05, 2009 (1:35 pm)
Replying to: dlam (Dec 01, 2008 5:31 pm) i think if they would color code the front the same as the rest of the car color the smile would diminish. the black grille just makes it stand out so much. Replies to this message: ahightower (Jan 06, 2009 8:41 am)
#9 of 31 Re: Not sure I like the style... [mpg60] by ahightower Jan 06, 2009 (8:41 am)
Replying to: mpg60 (Jan 05, 2009 1:35 pm) Yeah, I'm trying to get used to it, but the 2009/earlier model appearing in the sidebar advertisement still looks much better to me. Maybe it will grow on me when I start to see them in person. Also I think the wagon will look better than the sedan. In its current form, the sedan has a totally different front clip than the hatch, more conservative. Apparently that differentiation is over, and the new over-the-top styling probably works better on the hatch. All that talk about functional aerodynamics is nice, but it still isn't the very best mpg in the class. For now, I'm still very happy with my 2008. If anything, I will probably trade up for a new 6 eventually. If I'm going to move up to a larger engine and lower gas mileage, I might as well get more leg room to go with it.
#10 of 31 Re: Article Comments - 2010 Mazda 3 First Drive [KarenS] by dc_dave Jan 07, 2009 (7:06 am)
Replying to: KarenS (Nov 25, 2008 12:00 pm) I'm looking forward to test driving the new Mazda 3 this Spring (as a 5-door); however, I am a bit disappointed with the EPA numbers and performance numbers. I mean come on Mazda, Acura, since 2006, has produced 200+ HP with their NA 2.4 liter motor and by the way, its rated 21/30 by the EPA. Even Honda's 'detuned' 2.4 liter puts out 190 HP in the Accord. Shouldn't a new DI 2.5 liter engine produce more that 167 ponies? Maybe this is were the Mazdaspeed comes in but I think Mazda could have pushed the new DI 2.5 a little more. Dave in VA Replies to this message: aviboy97 (Jan 07, 2009 10:23 am) dc_dave (Jan 07, 2009 12:08 pm) aviboy97 (Jan 07, 2009 7:25 pm) jeffyscott (Jan 07, 2009 12:47 pm) ahightower (Jan 07, 2009 2:22 pm) and 2 more...
#11 of 31 Re: Article Comments - 2010 Mazda 3 First Drive [dc_dave] by aviboy97 Jan 07, 2009 (10:23 am)
Replying to: dc_dave (Jan 07, 2009 7:06 am) Lets take a look at the K series engine by Honda you are talking about compared to Mazda's MZR. 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. Replies to this message: dc_dave (Jan 07, 2009 12:08 pm) aviboy97 (Jan 07, 2009 7:25 pm) jeffyscott (Jan 07, 2009 12:47 pm) ahightower (Jan 07, 2009 2:22 pm) jeffyscott (Jan 07, 2009 4:52 pm) and 1 more...
#12 of 31 Re: Article Comments - 2010 Mazda 3 First Drive [aviboy97] by dc_dave Jan 07, 2009 (12:08 pm)
Replying to: aviboy97 (Jan 07, 2009 10:23 am) Thank you for that reply, very insightful as I am new to Mazda but have owned several Hondas/Acuras. 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 Replies to this message: aviboy97 (Jan 07, 2009 7:25 pm)
#13 of 31 Re: Article Comments - 2010 Mazda 3 First Drive [aviboy97] by jeffyscott Jan 07, 2009 (12:47 pm)
Replying to: aviboy97 (Jan 07, 2009 10:23 am) Since HP is proportional to rpm, most of that peak HP difference is just the high rpms. Assuming the same torque at 6K and 7K, the Honda engine at 6000 rpm would be ~176 HP. 205 X 6000/7000 = 175.7 Replies to this message: ahightower (Jan 07, 2009 2:22 pm) jeffyscott (Jan 07, 2009 4:52 pm) aviboy97 (Jan 08, 2009 9:23 am)
#14 of 31 Re: Article Comments - 2010 Mazda 3 First Drive [jeffyscott] by ahightower Jan 07, 2009 (2:22 pm)
Replying to: jeffyscott (Jan 07, 2009 12:47 pm) "Since HP is proportional to rpm" I suspect that is not quite right. Power and torque curves are never a perfect 45 degree incline. Replies to this message: jeffyscott (Jan 07, 2009 4:52 pm) aviboy97 (Jan 08, 2009 9:23 am)
#15 of 31 Re: Article Comments - 2010 Mazda 3 First Drive [ahightower] by jeffyscott Jan 07, 2009 (4:52 pm)
Replying to: ahightower (Jan 07, 2009 2:22 pm) You did not understand my post, HP is proportional to rpm...the fomula is: 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). Replies to this message: aviboy97 (Jan 08, 2009 9:23 am)