Mazda 3- Best bang for the buck

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mazda3 and Civics (and Yaris for that matter)
have a premium price for a few model years when they are released and deemed ( or are) the best in class.

In Northern Cal you can buy a new Corolla for the same price as a Yaris. Ford Focuses are heavyily discounted and have $1000 rebate since they're a generation behind the Mazda3 and end up $3000-4000 less. Best bang for the buck - no. Best bang for an extra $3000 - yes.
 
Goodyear at wal-mart is where i got my price along with Big-O-Tires, but i cant remember their brand. My mazda6 has the 215/50/17's which should be the same on the mazda3. Though, my mazda6 came with michelins and i think the 3 comes with goodyears, so they might be slightly different.


Also, just look at tires over the last few years. As these lower profile setups age, the cost will go down.

One last point, those kumhos are good tires. Check out the reviews of them.
 
I wouldn't buy a SAAB if I was worried about life cycle costs. High gas mileage good - high repair costs if you need any and low resale- GM has you coming and going.
 
The 17s on the 3 are 205/50R17. The Michelin Pilot Sport A/S ran me cdn$1100 total. Certainly more than I thought I wanted to spend, but I am quite impressed with them. Very quiet, 400 treadlife, they have deep, wide grooves so they would be usable all-season, and I didn't know a FWD could actually hook up and pull hard on a launch until I got them!

The problem with this tire size is that there currently aren't many cheaper tire models made for it. Almost all the tires available are V-rated or higher.
 
This whole point on 17" tires on the Mazda 3 is sort of overblown. They are only standard on the Hatchback version while the sedan comes originally with 15" with smaller more economical 2.0L motor and 16" with the 2.3L sedan.

I looked at Mazda3 hatchback too but something came over me and purchased a 2004 Subaru WRX Wagon($21k) which I wanted since WRX released in 2002. The pricing was within $4k of Mazda 3 hatchback. It suits my needs as a second car that is only driven 6k miles per year currently. (commute 0 miles)

I too liked the Saab esp economy/power compromise but was scared of reliability and resale is horrid.

As it stands a used minivan may nudge my WRX out of garage for a second child. Thankfully these cars hold their value well at least in New England. At least I will inherit my wife's 2005 Legacy GT Wagon (250HP) which is grown up and comfortable version of WRX.
 
Cars always seem to move up levels in price and appointments over time as they compete for market share. The current Civic is probably bigger than the original Accord. They just fill in underneath when a model gets too big.
 
I was on a market for a new cars. I did drive mazda 3, Toyota Matrix and suzuki Aerio.
At the end of the day I bought Suzuki Aerio SX. I got fully loaded with AWD for $$ less than Mazda 3 or Toyota. It also 100% made in JAPAN. The only thing is dissapointing is m/g I avarage about 26 m/g 50/50 driving. I know it is poor, but it is AWD.
 
It's supposed to be an improvment to the Protege5 that I own. My P5 is a great car, It handles and rides like a german car, not the typical stiff, bumpy, disconnected japanese car. it's a sports car in the tradition of the miata/austin/mg/morgan/2002 sports cars, not alot of power but will hang with anything on a twisty road. In 80,000 miles reliability has not been an issue.

from what I have seen the only people who think mazdas have reliabilty issues have never owned one. the people who have owned mazdas have often owned more then one.
 
quote:
Originally posted by tom slick:

from what I have seen the only people who think mazdas have reliabilty issues have never owned one. the people who have owned mazdas have often owned more then one.
Click to expand...
cheers.gif

My second car was a Mazda MX6 2.0L MTX with 81k miles. It now has 194k and runs great. I will definately look forward to another Mazda, but I think this one will get me 250k before I sell it.
 
That's what I have, the SP23. It's a special edition. Only 5000 total were produced for the US, and only 1500 of those were hatchbacks. The SP23 was only offered in 2005. The SP23 has a few options that couldn't be had on the other trim lines like: Carbon Mica Gray paint, clear LED tail lights (hatchback only), Bose sound system, painted wheels and some other things I can't think of right now.

We love our SP23 hatch. It's an awesome car for it's class and for the money.
 
What do you guys think the reliability of the mazdaspeed 6 will be like? The one thats out now, with the 290hp and ft/lbs of tq, plus AWD. NICE! but I am always leary of putting a turbo onto an NA car, even from the factory (or semi sort of factory)
 
quote:
Originally posted by 2003TRD:
What do you guys think the reliability of the mazdaspeed 6 will be like? The one thats out now, with the 290hp and ft/lbs of tq, plus AWD. NICE! but I am always leary of putting a turbo onto an NA car, even from the factory (or semi sort of factory)
Click to expand...
I honestly don't see reliability being a problem for the MS6 or the upcoming MS3. That 2.3L I4 is a great engine. On top of adding a turbo, they have also added direct fuel injection. I love the 2.3L in our Mazda3.
 
quote:
Originally posted by 2003TRD:
What do you guys think the reliability of the mazdaspeed 6 will be like? The one thats out now, with the 290hp and ft/lbs of tq, plus AWD. NICE! but I am always leary of putting a turbo onto an NA car, even from the factory (or semi sort of factory)
Click to expand...
I believe the motor was modified and fortified to handle the turbo. This is not a frankenstein job done by a hot rodder.

However I am a bit leary on the engine as I am done with high pressure turbo peaky motors like the one in my current WRX and in the Mazda. My wife's Legacy GT is so much more pleasant with lower pressure turbo and larger engine with variable valve timing and less HP/torque. I believe our wagon is actually quicker 0-60 than a MazdaSpeed however handling is not at the same level.
 
I drove both the 06 Civic EX 1.8 and 06 Mazda 3 2.0 (not the 2.3) side-by-side. Both cars were comfortable with good view in all directions(maybe except the rear pillers in both cars) and nice interior layouts. I would take the Civic over the Mazda for the fuel economy alone. BUT! The Mazda 3 was FUN! FUN! FUN!(Zoom Zoom), even with the 2.0 engine. I would buy the Mazda 3 with the 2.0 or the 2.3 enging just for the thrill ride alone. The Mazda 3 has a more controlled ride with a tighter body structure, better ride and handling and more direct(tight on center) steering feel and quieter on the highway. Engine sounds great at WOT. Kind of the way Hondas use to sound. Kind of the way Hondas use to feel. The Mazda 3 was one of the nicest small cars that I have ever driven for that kind of money. I was acutally kind of disapointed in the Civic since it's a brand new redesign. Not a bad car, just not what I expected.
dunno.gif
 
I considered buying a Mazda 3 but I'm addicted to the handling and 45+ mpg fuel economy of my Jetta TDI. Its not the fastest thing but it'll smoke almost any vehicle going up a mountain pass...and yes, that's in 5th gear...no downshifts required.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

W
20,000 miles in a CX-5 GT-R
3 4 5
Replies
92
Views
22K
Tshane3000
wwillson
  • Locked
Gumout Q&A - Best bang for your buck with Multi-System Tune-Up
Replies
18
Views
29K
wwillson
C
  • Locked
Mazda CX-3 first view
2
Replies
20
Views
4K
Bladecutter
D
  • Locked
2011 Mazda RX-8 R3: 2 months after purchase
2
Replies
35
Views
19K
SteveSRT8
S
  • Locked
List of Best Used Cars under $5,000?
2 3
Replies
50
Views
62K
CROWNVIC4LIFE
Back
Top Bottom