www.mpt.org/motorweek/reviews/rt2947a.shtml . Will post video when available . That's if I remember .
MOTORWEEK : Test drive of 2011 MAZDA 2
- Thread starter odie
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: daves87rs
Interesting.
For sure
Interesting.
For sure
100 HP and it still gets such poor mileage for the class. Why do Mazdas always get such poor mileage compared to other cars in the same size? This car is lighter than the Fiesta and has a smaller engine yet returns 6 mpg less....whats up with that? The six speed in the Fiesta must have one heckuva tall OD 6th gear....seems to be the only real difference that would explain such a huge difference in mileage.
Mazda's priority isn't mileage. Its zoom zoom, which means more torque and throttle response, and less mileage. They want their cars to be (relatively) fun to drive.
If I'm careful, I can get 30 mpg on the highway in my Mazda 3. My mom, with her new Honda Civic, consistently gets 35+ mpg on the highway and doesn't even try or care.
If I'm careful, I can get 30 mpg on the highway in my Mazda 3. My mom, with her new Honda Civic, consistently gets 35+ mpg on the highway and doesn't even try or care.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: stranger706
Mazda's priority isn't mileage. Its zoom zoom, which means more torque and throttle response, and less mileage. They want their cars to be (relatively) fun to drive.
+1
And that approach has its consequences. It is likely to be one contributing factor as to why Mazda has never been and likely never will be a mainstream car.
Mazda's priority isn't mileage. Its zoom zoom, which means more torque and throttle response, and less mileage. They want their cars to be (relatively) fun to drive.
+1
And that approach has its consequences. It is likely to be one contributing factor as to why Mazda has never been and likely never will be a mainstream car.
Originally Posted By: The Critic
Originally Posted By: stranger706
Mazda's priority isn't mileage. Its zoom zoom, which means more torque and throttle response, and less mileage. They want their cars to be (relatively) fun to drive.
+1
And that approach has its consequences. It is likely to be one contributing factor as to why Mazda has never been and likely never will be a mainstream car.
Let them stay this way, we've all seen what mainstream doeas to cars, there is already too much bloat, bland styling and poor driving dynamics on the market as is.
Originally Posted By: stranger706
Mazda's priority isn't mileage. Its zoom zoom, which means more torque and throttle response, and less mileage. They want their cars to be (relatively) fun to drive.
+1
And that approach has its consequences. It is likely to be one contributing factor as to why Mazda has never been and likely never will be a mainstream car.
Let them stay this way, we've all seen what mainstream doeas to cars, there is already too much bloat, bland styling and poor driving dynamics on the market as is.
I suspect this car will be very popular in Canada.
Mazda 3's are already almost the No.1 selling car here, and with gas prices moving up, folks are going to want this car.
Although nearly the same car, I like the look of this car better than the Fiesta.
Mazda 3's are already almost the No.1 selling car here, and with gas prices moving up, folks are going to want this car.
Although nearly the same car, I like the look of this car better than the Fiesta.
here's the MOTORWEEK video for the MAZDA 2 test drive , http://video.pbs.org/video/1562386903/ . Here's a quick reference operating manual for the 2 , www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/pdf/smartguides/2011_MAZDA2_QT.pdf .
Originally Posted By: odie
here's the MOTORWEEK video for the MAZDA 2 test drive , http://video.pbs.org/video/1562386903/ . Here's a quick reference operating manual for the 2 , www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/pdf/smartguides/2011_MAZDA2_QT.pdf .
I'm just curious. Why do you have such a fascination with low quality, entry level, poor value econoboxes?
These cars are entry level cars that are not built with quality and comfort in mind. They are a very poor value as by the time you add an automatic transmission and a few other common features, the price rises to $15k or more. At that price, you can purchase a base model Camry, Altima or Fusion and will have a much more comfortable car.
here's the MOTORWEEK video for the MAZDA 2 test drive , http://video.pbs.org/video/1562386903/ . Here's a quick reference operating manual for the 2 , www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/pdf/smartguides/2011_MAZDA2_QT.pdf .
I'm just curious. Why do you have such a fascination with low quality, entry level, poor value econoboxes?
These cars are entry level cars that are not built with quality and comfort in mind. They are a very poor value as by the time you add an automatic transmission and a few other common features, the price rises to $15k or more. At that price, you can purchase a base model Camry, Altima or Fusion and will have a much more comfortable car.
Epidode 19 here
http://www.motoringtv.com/watch-motoringtv-p127719&epId=138228&yr=2010
has a video review of the Mazda 2. Apparently, Mazda is hugely popular in Quebec.
http://www.motoringtv.com/watch-motoringtv-p127719&epId=138228&yr=2010
has a video review of the Mazda 2. Apparently, Mazda is hugely popular in Quebec.
Originally Posted By: The Critic
I'm just curious. Why do you have such a fascination with low quality, entry level, poor value econoboxes?
Where do you get this 'low quality' and 'poor value' nonsense from? We're not talking about a chincy Yaris here. I don't think any of cars you own utilize high tensile steel frames which may cost more, but are lighter and offer better rigidity than your standard stamped steel rails. The 2 has been very well engineered and cleverly dieted. It's won many international awards including "International Car of the Year" since it went on sale in 2007. I really doubt that was because of it's alleged low quality or poor value.
Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
100 HP and it still gets such poor mileage for the class. Why do Mazdas always get such poor mileage compared to other cars in the same size? This car is lighter than the Fiesta and has a smaller engine yet returns 6 mpg less....whats up with that? The six speed in the Fiesta must have one heckuva tall OD 6th gear....seems to be the only real difference that would explain such a huge difference in mileage.
Actually, Mazda's in general are now consistently exceeding EPA ratings. When the Mazda3 came out, some people complained about poor mileage within the first 20K on 06 models. Sites like fuelly and clean MPG are full of people exceeding EPA ratings, mostly on the 2.0L which are seeing up to mid-40s!.
Also, FWIW I took the time to find out the differences in the Fiesta and Mazda2 engines. While both use the same chassis' and drivetrains, Ford opted to use the Mazda Z6 1.6L engine. The Z6 is identical to the ZY 1.5L used in the Mazda2, except with a longer stroke (78x78.4 bore stroke VS 78x83.6), bumping up the displacement. Ford also chose the exact same pistons as the ZY, which combined with the longer stroke, brings the compression ratio up to 11:1 vs 10:1 on the ZY. Mazda used an economy aimed version of the ZY 1.5L, for obvious reasons, because they could have easily used the ZL 1.5L with S-VT that makes 130hp. The 130hp ZL has been around for over 6 years or so. I suspect the 2 will exceed EPA estimates considerably, and be happier with regular fuel.
I'm just curious. Why do you have such a fascination with low quality, entry level, poor value econoboxes?
Where do you get this 'low quality' and 'poor value' nonsense from? We're not talking about a chincy Yaris here. I don't think any of cars you own utilize high tensile steel frames which may cost more, but are lighter and offer better rigidity than your standard stamped steel rails. The 2 has been very well engineered and cleverly dieted. It's won many international awards including "International Car of the Year" since it went on sale in 2007. I really doubt that was because of it's alleged low quality or poor value.
Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
100 HP and it still gets such poor mileage for the class. Why do Mazdas always get such poor mileage compared to other cars in the same size? This car is lighter than the Fiesta and has a smaller engine yet returns 6 mpg less....whats up with that? The six speed in the Fiesta must have one heckuva tall OD 6th gear....seems to be the only real difference that would explain such a huge difference in mileage.
Actually, Mazda's in general are now consistently exceeding EPA ratings. When the Mazda3 came out, some people complained about poor mileage within the first 20K on 06 models. Sites like fuelly and clean MPG are full of people exceeding EPA ratings, mostly on the 2.0L which are seeing up to mid-40s!.
Also, FWIW I took the time to find out the differences in the Fiesta and Mazda2 engines. While both use the same chassis' and drivetrains, Ford opted to use the Mazda Z6 1.6L engine. The Z6 is identical to the ZY 1.5L used in the Mazda2, except with a longer stroke (78x78.4 bore stroke VS 78x83.6), bumping up the displacement. Ford also chose the exact same pistons as the ZY, which combined with the longer stroke, brings the compression ratio up to 11:1 vs 10:1 on the ZY. Mazda used an economy aimed version of the ZY 1.5L, for obvious reasons, because they could have easily used the ZL 1.5L with S-VT that makes 130hp. The 130hp ZL has been around for over 6 years or so. I suspect the 2 will exceed EPA estimates considerably, and be happier with regular fuel.
Originally Posted By: ItsuMitsubishi
Where do you get this 'low quality' and 'poor value' nonsense from? We're not talking about a chincy Yaris here. I don't think any of cars you own utilize high tensile steel frames which may cost more, but are lighter and offer better rigidity than your standard stamped steel rails. The 2 has been very well engineered and cleverly dieted. It's won many international awards including "International Car of the Year" since it went on sale in 2007. I really doubt that was because of it's alleged low quality or poor value.
The Mazda 2 was designed to compete in the class of the Yaris, Accent and other entry-level cars. In fact, I personally think that the people who buy these cars really cannot a new car anyway and should either consider an used car or wait until they have more money.
High tensile steel frames are not something that most buyers care about. Most buyers look for features such as automatic transmissions, cruise control, bluetooth, iPod adapters, etc. When you price a Mazda 2 with these features, the MSRP is over $17k. Since entry-level cars are low margin cars to begin with, they are not discounted heavily. For the $15k you may pay for one, you can purchase a stripper mid-size sedan that will already have all of the features desired and deliver nearly the same fuel economy.
Where do you get this 'low quality' and 'poor value' nonsense from? We're not talking about a chincy Yaris here. I don't think any of cars you own utilize high tensile steel frames which may cost more, but are lighter and offer better rigidity than your standard stamped steel rails. The 2 has been very well engineered and cleverly dieted. It's won many international awards including "International Car of the Year" since it went on sale in 2007. I really doubt that was because of it's alleged low quality or poor value.
The Mazda 2 was designed to compete in the class of the Yaris, Accent and other entry-level cars. In fact, I personally think that the people who buy these cars really cannot a new car anyway and should either consider an used car or wait until they have more money.
High tensile steel frames are not something that most buyers care about. Most buyers look for features such as automatic transmissions, cruise control, bluetooth, iPod adapters, etc. When you price a Mazda 2 with these features, the MSRP is over $17k. Since entry-level cars are low margin cars to begin with, they are not discounted heavily. For the $15k you may pay for one, you can purchase a stripper mid-size sedan that will already have all of the features desired and deliver nearly the same fuel economy.
[/quote]
The Mazda 2 was designed to compete in the class of the Yaris, Accent and other entry-level cars. In fact, I personally think that the people who buy these cars really cannot a new car anyway and should either consider an used car or wait until they have more money. [/quote]
Was looking at one of these, so I thank you for your personal opinion regarding my inability to afford one of these, and to just save my money till I acquire more funds. I'll now continue to drive my 2001 escort which is paid for and runs fine, thank you.
BTW My last car payment was in 1972 when I made my 2nd payment on my 1972 Corvette, yup I paid cash, and have for every auto, P/U, Van since.
The Mazda 2 was designed to compete in the class of the Yaris, Accent and other entry-level cars. In fact, I personally think that the people who buy these cars really cannot a new car anyway and should either consider an used car or wait until they have more money. [/quote]
Was looking at one of these, so I thank you for your personal opinion regarding my inability to afford one of these, and to just save my money till I acquire more funds. I'll now continue to drive my 2001 escort which is paid for and runs fine, thank you.
BTW My last car payment was in 1972 when I made my 2nd payment on my 1972 Corvette, yup I paid cash, and have for every auto, P/U, Van since.
here's a CONSUMER REPORTS video for the MAZDA 2 , www.youtube.com/watch?v=iD_J1fKWMvE . You shouldn't be paying window sticker price for a 2 .
- Status
