Mazda 3 sedan "s" v. TSX
 

What do you guys think of the Mazda 3 sedan "s"? How would you compare it to a non-navi TSX?

I think it's a good looking car (I think better than the Mazda 6)that offers much of what the TSX offers for a fraction of the price. What do you think?

If you want a smaller car with less features, power, and luxo-items for less....

Mazda 3 is not competition for the TSX, its competition for the Civic.

Too bad the Mazda 3 is more than competition for the Civic. As an all-around car, it blows the Civic away. Honda needs to get their act together and bring the "fun" back to their econobox Civics. By taking away the tried and true double-wishbone suspension fore and aft, the Civic is as boring as econoboxes can get. Mazda did an awesome job with the Mazda 3 but aside from comparing fun-factor (which is very similar), you can't really compare it to a TSX because the Acura is on another level of comfort and luxury.... but still, it looks like Honda has a lot of catching up to do with its Civic.

Mazda3 is good competition for the RSX, maybe?

If the criteria is driving dynamics. Many shoppers in this segment are looking for an appliance-mobile and would still choose a Civic or Corolla based on track-record reliablity, fuel economy and proven resale value. The Civic is a boring, but safe bet. That doesn't appeal to the core demographic of this forum. I would be very surprised if the MZ3 outsold either Civic or Corolla in MY2004.

I never said that the Civic was better. In fact I'd take a Mazda 3 over a civic in a heart beat.

Have a look at this thread .. it wasnt even close.

http://www.acura-tsx.com/forums/show...&threadid=6007

But the point is, the Mazda 3 is not even in the same league as the TSX. If anything the Mazda 6 might be comparible, although not completely.

so what do you guys think of an acura TSX vs. an Aston Martin DB9, or Hummer H2, or what about a mini cooper, or what about a semi or how about a.....

No contest, if he wins the toss, it's Ditka all the way. 37-0.

I wouldn't discredit the 3 so easily.

Have each of you who have chosen to make comments actually been in a 3? Have you guys ever driven a 3?

I would say that they are very, very similar but for price and "image", whatever that is.

IMO, yes, the 3 is a tad weaker and a tad slower and probably not as "luxurious", but it is still a fine car. I would have to say that the main thing going for the 3, besides the $6-7k price difference for a loaded, non-nav, is the size and weight of the 3. Whereas the TSX's advantage is the service, the 6-spd tranny, better interior (not by much tho), and more luxury (no power seats on the 3 :dunno: !)

Now I'm not trying to start a flame war or anything, just pointing out that some of you that are being condescending of the 3 are just like those Audi A4 guys or BMW 325 guys being condescending of the TSX: it's just stupid.

The numbers show that each car has it's strengths and weaknesses...I'll let you guys decide for yourselves. But one thing is clear to me: the Mazda 3 is in a class all by itself. Definitely better than a Civic or Sentra, but somehow not quite a 325, TSX, or A4 1.8T...

Mazda 3

ACCELERATION (Seconds)
Zero to 30 mph: 2.3
40 mph: 3.9
50 mph: 5.5
60 mph: 7.4
70 mph: 10.2
80 mph: 13.1
90 mph: 17.4
100 mph: 22.8
110 mph: 30.1
Street start, 5-60 mph: 8.6
Top-gear acceleration, 30-50 mph: 11.7
50-70 mph: 11.7
Standing 1/4-mile: 16.0 sec @ 87 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 118 mph

BRAKING
70-0 mph @ impending lockup: 169 ft

HANDLING
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.87 g
Understeer: minimal moderate excessive

FUEL ECONOMY
EPA city driving: 25 mpg
EPA highway driving: 32 mpg
C/D-observed: 21 mpg

INTERIOR SOUND LEVEL
Idle: 44 dBA
Full-throttle acceleration: 77 dBA
70-mph cruising: 72 dBA

Acura TSX

ACCELERATION (Seconds)
Zero to 30 mph: 2.5
40 mph: 3.9
50 mph: 5.5
60 mph: 7.2
70 mph: 9.5
80 mph: 11.8
90 mph: 15.3
100 mph: 19.0
110 mph: 24.4
120 mph: 34.0
Street start, 5–60 mph: 7.7
Top-gear acceleration, 30—50 mph: 10.2
50—70 mph: 9.7
Standing 1/4-mile: 15.6 sec @ 91 mph
Top speed (drag limited): 133 mph

BRAKING
70—0 mph @ impending lockup: 185 ft
Fade: none light moderate heavy

HANDLING
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.85 g
Understeer: minimal moderate excessive

FUEL ECONOMY
EPA city driving: 21 mpg
EPA highway driving: 29 mpg
C/D-observed: 24 mpg

INTERIOR SOUND LEVEL
Idle: 38 dBA
Full-throttle acceleration: 74 dBA
70-mph cruising: 67 Dba

----------------------------------------------

BTW, just consider that for < $6k in mods (4k turbo, exhaust, intake, etc.), the 3 would still cost less than a TSX, but could be pushing in excess of 240HP in a sub 3000 lb car :eek:

This kit supposedly bolts onto the 2.3 in the Mz3 as well.

The Maz3 is a nice car. The styling will look dated in a few years, but sure looks hot now. Mazda generally has terrible resale value, so the total cost of owning a loaded Maz3 versus a non-nav TSX over 4-5 years is probably closer than you would think (within $2K I bet).

Performance wise, you get about the same power/weight ratio as the TSX (for the S version of the Maz3), and better braking. I think that for most people though, Honda reliability and the great interior push the TSX above the Maz3.

Don’t laugh but these are the 2 cars I am comparing. I really want the TSX for its luxury quality and overall feel. But with a new addition to the family (9 month old daughter) and a new house the Mazda 3s $11,500 savings (In Canadian dollars including the tax) can’t be ignored. Truthfully I will probably pick up the TSX but if I had the money why not a TL? or an NSX? It is easy to say that you can’t compare the 2 cars but you could argue that I could buy a Mazda 3 and put the savings onto my mortgage or better yet toward my daughter’s future education. I say bravo to Mazda for raising the bar. Also the fact that someone has even thought about comparing it to an Acura is a testament to how right Mazda got the 3. Just my nub 2 cents.

I don't see many old Mazdas on the road except some rusty RX7s. Meanwhile, there are still MANY old Accords and Civics that still look and run great. If I had a kid on the way, I'd be looking at safety and reliability as #1 concerns. As a Canadian, do you think you would want AWD? Perhaps you should be looking at Subaru and Audi too.

I like the way the Mazda 3 looks....but its a Mazda. No where near the class, luxury, and resale of the Acuras. Then again, its a lot cheaper. If I wasn't single and had lots of bills, I would buy one to kick around for 2-4 years.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

lol!

I'm going to make a very-BMWish comment here. If you think they are comparable, get the Mazda3. That is a LOT of money to consider, and the rational choice is clear IMO.

I agree with the comment on looking at safety as a primary concern - too bad neither has been crash-tested (to my knowledge).

Well, Im feeling you on this one. I'm really not a huge supporter of Acura or Mazda(I frequent freshalloy.com) the predicament you are in happens way too often. Ever since the introduction of the Mazda3 it has blown so many cars out of the water with it's high quality, good looks and stunning value. I myself, am looking to get one in a couple months depending on my job situation. Overall, I think they are in two different categories - I myself would probably not be cross shopping the two. But you obviously feel very concerned based on your financial situation. To play all things safe - get the Mazda 3. If you're not that worried about money right now - get the Acura. Of course, just my opinion....

I test drove the Mazda3S Hatch a few weeks ago. Due to Mazda's track record with subcompacts my expectations were low. But once I got on the lot and viewed the mazda3s for the first time I was actually impressed. The styling is not unique but reminded me of the older gen civic hatches. There was a Mazda3S next to a Mazdaspeed Protege and IMO I thought the Mazda3S looked better. Things got better once I sat in the car and went on a test drive. The seats were supportive and the dash was contemporary, I liked how the orange light on the radio would move to the left/right when you changed the volume/station. On an empty stretch of road the salesguy told me I could gun it so I downshifted and the pull was respectable. Not quick but it was sufficient for me. IMO, this is a nice car and the reason it's being compared to the TSX is it's way ahead of the focus, civic si, and other subcompacts in terms of features and appeal. If I was in the market for a civic or subcompact the Mazda3 would def have my serious consideration if not first choice. Heres some marketing pix:

http://www.dabuda.net/gallery/albums.../mazda3_01.jpg
http://www.dabuda.net/gallery/albums.../mazda3_02.jpg
http://www.dabuda.net/gallery/albums.../mazda3_03.jpg
http://www.dabuda.net/gallery/albums.../mazda3_04.jpg
http://www.dabuda.net/gallery/albums.../mazda3_05.jpg
http://www.dabuda.net/gallery/albums.../mazda3_07.jpg

Just because the Mazda 3 is ahead of the civic and corolla (its targeted competition) doesnt mean its suddenly in BMW 325 territory as someone suggested. So I guess Mazda 6 owners will now want to "upgrade" to the mazda 3? Come on.

Agreed. Safety is a big concern for me but I am a stronger believer in a good set of winter tires over AWD. As far as reliability don't get me started I was a loyal Acura follower for years (my previous 2 cars were Integras) I also convinced my parents to purchase Acuras. But at the time of my last car purchase there was no where for me to go with Acura. EL was too small and underpowered and the TL was too big. But for sure I needed 4 doors and more room (pregnant wife) LOL. So I went to Nissan……….BIG freaking mistake! So I want out and with the TSX here it fits my lifestyle nicely. I like the Mazda but I am not sure about their track record and I don’t need another Nissan on my hands. So once I get my taxes finished at the end of this month I am off to negotiate on a new TSX. My sales guy was so happy to see me the other day. He kept shaking his head and saying I can’t believe you went over to the dark side.
Listing to all you guys makes me think I shall be pleased with a new TSX!

1) In all honestly, yes, my gf has the 6i and I have suggested that she "upgrade" to the 3s.

2) This is just as baseless as a BMW owner saying: "Just because the TSX is ahead of the Accord and Mazda 6 (its targeted competition**) doesn't mean it's suddenly in BMW 325 territory..."

Munch on that for a second.

**I wouldn't say that these two vehicles are the "target" competition of the TSX, but 1) they are certainly likely to be cross shopped with the TSX, 2) they are all similar in price, 3) they are somewhat similar in performance, and 4) I was using these two only in the context of the structure of the original statement.

Perhaps you are caught up in the whole "wow new car!" feeling. Because if most people feel as you do, Mazda has a problem on their hands.

Absolutely not, because the civc and 325 are "many classes" apart, where are the accord and 325 are closer.

"class" is purely perception. And if you want to play that game, then you're just like the BMW guys calling your Acura "nothing more than a gussied up Honda". Totally baseless.

The reason I wanted her to get the 3s is simple:

1) Lighter weight. The 6i is a nice car, fun to drive, but weighs almost 500 lbs more. Same engine + same suspension setup - 500 lbs = more fun.

2) Better options. With the exception of the power seat, she can get better options on a 3s for the same amount she's paying on the 6 (i.e. xenon, moonroof, leather)

These are clearly logical reasons why the 3s is a better deal than the 6i. Given the two, I would pick the 6i over the 3s only if:

1) I was infatuated with power seat

2) I needed a tad more space

I like the car. Although that interior leaves alot to be desired, I much prefer the hatch over the sedan. First time I saw the sedan I thought it looked like a Hyundai Accoent somehow, their general profiles are similar. And that thinking was reinforced when two other people I know who were seeing it for the first time and both know littlke about cars also said it looks like a Hyundai and they were'nt impressed. Having said all that, if I was in the market for a compact car and looking to spend 25K (which is what a 3 Hatch loaded with leather costs here in Canada) it would be at the top of my list. Until a 5 door Civic Hatch with a 2.0L motor arrives on these shores, which is looking like never.

Class is definately alot to do with perception and marketing. Which is why I said that if many people feel that the Mazda 3 is an upgrade to the Mazda 6, it is a marketing disaster on Mazdas part.

I guarentee you that there wil be virtually noone seriously cross shopping a Mazda 3 and a BMW.

And by the way, saying the Acura is "nothing more than a gussied up Honda" is not totally baseless.

interior leaves alot to be desired... are you crazy. And btw fdl, the Mazda3 has navi and the 6 doesn't. So there are some things you could "upgrade" to. But back to the point of this thread, make your decision based on money... both are extremely good cars and are at the head of their class.

Many don't want to admit it, but alot of that goes on here. I have even seen it between Acura owners and Honda owners. Not necessarily a bad thing. But I got criticized for "class" thing because I wanted a car that offered more than what the TSX offered - both features and driving experience.

But as for the topic at hand, if given a choice between the 3 and the TSX - a no brainer - TSX all the way. Like I mentioned in the past, it would have been nicer if the TSX had some more of the luxo features that I particularily wanted but when compared to the Mazda, the feature set and quality of the TSX more than compensates and justifies it over the Mazda 3.

Far from it. Looks are subjective and IMO the 3's interior looks like crap. Looking at that center console strains my eyes. 3 pod gauges, can't stand that either. But hey nothing wrong with thinking it looks good.

Might want to throw a "IMO" after that statement Kewl. Would'nt want to get flamed now would you :D

Good to see you back here BTW.

No need for an IMO, is just plain fact. Check out the "what's the TSX missing" thread, and many of what people would like on the TSX is/was offered on the 9-3 and not even a option on the TSX. As for driving experience, like we have said many a time it's basically how you like your engine to perform (low end torque/turbo boost vs high rev smooth power).

Sheesh! You would think giving the nod toward the TSX over "competition" would be enough flame retardant! ;)

Thanks domn! :)

tarted up econo box :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

While I think it's perfectly fine to compare any two vehicles you are thinking about purchasing they are definitely in different classes in terms of size, weight, features, and amount of refinement so said comparisons on paper aren't going ot mean a ton. It's all about driving the cars and seeing what you like.

I think anyone looking at the 3s I would suggest taking a look at an rsx-s or an srt4 or wrx.

We're not getting into this again, although another fresh TSX vs 9-3 thread would be fun. I'll just give you a :grinfawk:


:)

Well I think the rear of the "3" is kinda :ghey:

I am sure it's a good car, but the rear just turned me off...

...and whether you want your car to be a 'gussied-up' Chevy Malibu with a turbo or a euro Accord. A Saab 9-3 Arc with equivalent features to the TSX costs $35,575; a TSX is $27,000. And you still get a FWD pseudo-luxury car either way.

I did the comparison between the 9-3 and the TSX on Saab's website. I recommend it; gave me a few good laughs. For the features where the saab has an advantage, it puts a little Saab logo next to that feature. The funniest was:

Weight:

9-3 3240lbs
TSX 3230lbs

Advantage: Saab

Man, if only they put a little lead shot in the TSX chassis it could have pulled ahead.....

If Saab was more reasonable with their option packages, the 9-3 might be a better buy. But just to get a 6CD changer, heated seats, xenons, and a moonroof you have to buy like $5k in options. You could just buy a TSX and slap a turbo in it, you'd have 90% of the options of a fully loaded 9-3, similar or better performance, and for much less money.

Before anyone accuses me of Acura bias, I drove a 1986 Saab 900S for 7 years prior to owning the TSX; I understand the appeal of having people search for 10 minutes for your ignition when you let them drive your car. I was planning on staying loyal to the brand until those dolts at GM took the reigns.

Right, and you could slap a 400HP engine in it and get 60% of the options on an Enzo Ferrari! :rolleyes: Now that would be a car I would buy! :D

Why bother?

Hey, I don't hate GM nor do I think they are the greatest thing since sliced bread, but they did do something right given that Saab had it's best sales year ever, due mostly to the sales of the 9-3. Namely, offer a product that appeals to a wider community of buyers. As a consumer, more choices to choose from is always good!

Yeah the "i could save x amount of money and put it in mods and blow you away" arguement doesn't hold water with me...mazda3 vs tsx or tsx vs 9-3 or anthing else.

I'm not advocating that anyone actually consider a TSX with an aftermarket turbo as a viable alternative to the Saab 9-3 Arc or anything else; the point is that to get the same interior features the TSX has standard in the 9-3, you have to pony up for 5 grand of silly options packages. What do you get for the extra $8500 over the TSX price? A power passenger seat, heated mirrors, a cooled glove compartment, 5 more speakers, OnStar (if you consider this a good thing), and a turbocharger. Worth it to some, not worth it to others.

Value is a subjective thing too I guess. The TSX doesn't offer much more than the US Accord for the added price; but to me, the only thing that mattered was the 'not ugly' feature.

At least the 9-3 looks good. For a car like the IS300, you pay all that extra money and get a smaller, uglier (inside and out) car that performs about the same.

:werd:

I cant see how anyone would buy a IS300 right now. Unless they get a massive deal on it. There are just so many better choices out there.

i went to take a look at the mazda 3 at a car dealer, it has a great price, but the interior looks cheap, the rearend looks like a ford focus, cause the next focus will look like the 3 , and mazda has poor resale value. it is also smaller than the Tsx. yeah the 3 is better for the money to buy right now than the Civic, but the civic is still more popular, the civic has a good reliablility history, there are many aftermarket parts for it, and more people know the civic name than the mazda 3.

bottom line, you always get what you pay for, yeah the Tsx is an entry level luxury car, but the Tsx could never be a substitute for a mercedes E-class, bmw 330xi, or an Audi A4 3.0.

I have to disagree. Looks as we know are subjective. IMO the IS looks good, except for the rear taillights. Its RWD for those that want it, has decent power and is much less expensive than a 3 series. Plus its relaible. Its drawbacks, bad on gas, smallish and in its last model year. But 5 to 7k off is'nt unheard of on those cars right now. I'd say that's a great deal.