|
|
|
Comment |
Sorted by
Date Written |
Re: Why? (Reply to this comment)
by mkaresh,  in Cars & Motorsports
Very good question. Most likely because the Mazda3 was designed more recently and more for international markets.
|
Jun 02 '05
4:19 am PDT
|
|
Why? (Reply to this comment)
by joela714
I'm curious. Why is the option for a NAV system available for the Mazda3 instead of the 6?
|
Jun 01 '05
11:11 pm PDT
|
|
Re: Re: I think i know where the extra inches went! (Reply to this comment)
by MASTERNC
While looking for info on this car (I am pretty close to buying now--albeit unexpectedly, and the 3 is one of my top choices), I read Car & Driver's test of the 3. They said that a structural beam ate in to the rear leg room. Oh well.
|
Jun 27 '04
12:17 pm PDT
|
|
Re: Hmmm.... (Reply to this comment)
by mkaresh, in Cars & Motorsports
The P5 is also very noisy and doesn't ride very smoothly, so it seems I'm not so particular about those aspects of a car as well.
By the first statement I meant that there are few cars I'd be happy driving all the time. But, at the same time, a car doesn't have to be perfect in all areas to make me happy. Basically, it just has to handle very well.
|
May 04 '04
4:46 am PDT
|
|
Hmmm.... (Reply to this comment)
by asafono
The comments below refer to your P5, not the 3 you reviewed here:
I’m very particular about what I drive.
The P5’s 130-horsepower, 2.0-liter, four-cylinder engine is perhaps its weakest aspect, both literally and figuratively. It runs out of breath well before the redline and feels agricultural everywhere from idle on up.
Seems a bit contradictory...
|
May 03 '04
5:14 am PDT
|
|
Re: I think i know where the extra inches went! (Reply to this comment)
by mkaresh, in Cars & Motorsports
Interesting possibility. I'll have to check into that. Of course, that can't be where all six went, but a few could have.
|
Apr 09 '04
5:23 am PDT
|
|
I think i know where the extra inches went! (Reply to this comment)
by islanderon
I think the extra 6 inches went to the rear bumper, (which is mighty large) which is bad for giving the illusion the car is longer than it really is but good in the sense it offers a lot of rear protection.
|
Apr 08 '04
3:38 pm PDT
|
|
Re: Rear Seat Room (Reply to this comment)
by mkaresh, in Cars & Motorsports
Actually, I had not noticed how close the legroom stats were for the 3 and 6. (I compared the 3 and my P5 in the review.) But your comment led me to check, and the combined figure differs by only a half-inch. Amazing. The difference is far larger in reality.
|
Mar 16 '04
4:01 pm PST
|
|
Re: Good ol' Mazda 3 (Reply to this comment)
by mkaresh, in Cars & Motorsports
I put headings on the sections for a reason. If you don't care what I think about the styling, then skip that section. You'll also find that I cover topics in the same order in just about every one of my reviews, for the same reason.
As for the Jetta, it's plenty quick with the turbo four or, my favorite, the VR6. But it's terribly unreliable, about the worst car out there right now.
|
Mar 16 '04
3:55 pm PST
|
|
Rear Seat Room (Reply to this comment)
by MASTERNC
Although I won't be buying for a while, I had been looking at the Mazda 6 because of its sportiness. However, I didn't like the price to get what I needed (about $25K--mainly due to stuff needed to get side airbags). When I saw the 3, it seemed too good to be true. A sporty car that is reasonably priced (side airbags are much easier to get than in the 6). Also, the car seemed to be as big as the 6 on most counts (at least on paper). Well, when I sat in the back of a 3 at the Auto Show, I was disappointed to find out that the 3 was more cramped than the 6 despite the similar measurements. I'm as confused as you were. Otherwise, I like the car. But I think it will be the 6 over the 3.
|
Mar 10 '04
10:46 am PST
|
|
Good ol' Mazda 3 (Reply to this comment)
by mycouponz
I test drove this car today for the 2nd time,and I must say that I now know the true meaning of Mazda's ZOOM ZOOM slogan. I'm almost sold on this car. Granted,relative to some other cars the HP isn't huge,it is up there for the price. Right now I think I'll either be getting a Mazda 3,2002 Jetta or others. I love the Mazda for it's zoom and of course for the other features-the rain-sensing wipers,the huge glovebox(though I probably won't use it),the tiptronic(not sure if I'll use that much either...),etc. is all very nice.. The Jetta's zoom is the only thing I hate about it. Basically from my test drive of the Jetta,it had none. Even putting the pedal to the metal,I wasn't getting much performance out of it. But,it had cruise-control,AC,power windows,power locks,heated seats,heated mirrors...jeez...I can't even remember all the features. Both the Mazda & VW are similarly priced.
Anyways,re: your review,it was okay,but too long. I'm sure other people have expressed the same opinion. Being a student I couldn't read through all of it...it's just too long for me. Also I think you focussed on the looks a bit too much. Being a 20-something I noticed that the car is very...attractive...and then I went for a test-drive. It was as simple as that. I looked at the outside,got in,looked at the inside and decided to take it for a spin. I'm happy I did,and I can see myself driving this car. Zoom-zoom-zoom.
Cheers,
Cozmo.
|
Mar 05 '04
12:19 am PST
|
|
Instrument Cluster (Reply to this comment)
by augustz
Couldn't agree more on the cluster. The car is nice all around, but that cluster is just a cluttered mess that makes you go, wow, what is it doing in this car?
They had a very nice thing going, I think it'll be subtle but that cluster is going to knock down sales. Too stylized, a few folks may like it, but lots of folks will hate it, myself included.
|
Mar 02 '04
2:01 pm PST
|
|
Re: Advertisement (Reply to this comment)
by mkaresh, in Cars & Motorsports
If this is true, then they should not have put so much money into this car.
Also, if you want value you buy Korean. Mazda cannot compete with Hyundai for the value buyer.
Finally, all such cars do not handle well. The Hyundai, for example, is at best middling in this area.
|
Feb 24 '04
5:38 am PST
|
|
Advertisement (Reply to this comment)
by kenikov
In the case of the 3 the TV ad I keep seeing over and over and over has a twentysomething innocuous dude by the side of the road imagining himself simultaneously driving the sedan and hatch. His primary observation? Each car has “lots of stuff.”
This seems a very base way to promote a car with so much more going for it than lots of bells and whistles. Such an approach is usually used to cover for an inadequate basic car. Since even without the optional xenon lamps, navigation system, and so on the 3 is an excellent car, I cannot begin to imagine why Mazda took this approach. Maybe their market research found that the target market cared mostly about “stuff.” But then why spend the money to develop and build a car with excellent performance and a decidedly upscale interior?
_____
You miss the point of the ad.
The people in the market for a $15,000 car care about one thing, value.
For $15,000, they get a car with...lots of stuff in it.
Why bother to make an upscale interior? It adds more to the stuff in it. Mazda calls one of the models, "sport." It's a small, Japanese car, so the handling is expected to be good. Zoom zoom is a phrase they use to demonstrate the performance of their cars.
All this equals value.
What their consumers care most about.
|
Feb 22 '04
8:01 pm PST
|
|
Re: You know... (Reply to this comment)
by mkaresh, in Cars & Motorsports
Thanks for the tip.
I won't be trading my P5. I continue to prefer its styling, driving position, handling, and far lower monthly payments. Especially the first and last.
I have to admit that even though I thoroughly evaluate every aspect of a car, how it looks--a very subjective, superficial thing--matters a lot to me.
|
Feb 16 '04
4:24 am PST
|
|
You know... (Reply to this comment)
by hyundai_fan
If I were you, and if you like the 3 more, you could trade in your P5 while the (P5's) price is still high. That way monthly payments would be a lot lower and you'd have a better car (but only if you like the 3 better.) But you still have a good car, trading it in or not :)
~Scott
|
Feb 15 '04
6:41 pm PST
|
|
You know... (Reply to this comment)
by hyundai_fan
If I were you, and if you like the 3 more, you could trade in your P5 while the (P5's) price is still high. That way monthly payments would be a lot lower and you'd have a better car (but only if you like the 3 better.) But you still have a good car, trading it in or not :)
~Scott
|
Feb 15 '04
6:39 pm PST
|
|
Re: Re: Re: Great review mkaresh (Reply to this comment)
by mkaresh, in Cars & Motorsports
You sit very low in a Honda Civic, but the dash is even lower relative to other cars.
What I suspect you did not like is that the corners of the car are not very visible. Through the windshield you cannot see much of the hood because it drops off.
I'm going to further investigate the change from the P5 to the 3. Today I was parked next to a circa 1990 Accord and I noticed that my P5's cowl is actually MUCH higher than that of an old Accord. Thus my sense that the cowl is low in my car owes much to a higher than normal seating position. I knew that with the Focus and Corolla the seating position is a few inches higher than normal both to increase legroom and provide the visibility today's SUV-acclimated consumer wants. I wasn't aware that the same is true of my car.
It follows that with the 3 they've raised the instrument panel, lowered the seat, or both. I suspect a bit of both. In my car I actually wish the seat would go a little lower.
|
Feb 15 '04
1:17 pm PST
|
|
Re: Re: Great review mkaresh (Reply to this comment)
by tch7
It was a '99 Civic that I drove (or around that model year, I didn't pay much attention to it), and it was a while ago so I'm not too sure precisely what the problem was. I just recall feeling very low in the vehicle and therefore had trouble knowing where the car was. Perhaps it was just due to other aspects that made it seem like it had a high dash, or maybe my seat just wasn't adjusted very well...
|
Feb 15 '04
12:09 pm PST
|
|
Re: Great review mkaresh (Reply to this comment)
by mkaresh, in Cars & Motorsports
The instrument panel is not unusually high in the 3; it's just average now where it was much lower than average in the Protege5.
I'm confused about your comment with the Civic, as I recall it having a fairly low instrument panel.
|
Feb 15 '04
5:41 am PST
|
|
Great review mkaresh (Reply to this comment)
by tch7
I'm aiming to go to the Mazda dealer sometime soon to check out the Mazda3. I looked at the P5 a year and a half ago and was very impressed, but I wasn't really looking for a new car at the time, but doing so has attracted me to seriously take a look at the 3. Although I had been looking into the Lancer (ES), I have become increasingly detached from it with the more I learn about the Mazda3.
I'm weary though, as your description of the driving position has somewhat worried me. I like being low to the ground, but I don't like being low in a vehicle so that I'm forced to look at the dashboard. That was one of the big reasons I didn't like the Civic (although it's engine was a bigger reason). Like you, I enjoy the "go-kart" feel. Hopefully though, I won't mind it.
Anyways, thanks for the great review that'll give me a heads up on what to look for and expect. I'm still waiting for my Accord to completely die before I actually buy anything, so I may end up seeing the 2005...or maybe even the 2006...
|
Feb 14 '04
8:17 pm PST
|
|
|
|
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.