2o6 Mini Review - Mazda CX-3

[2o6]

I was bored on a Sunday, and I'm kinda hinting for my roommate to replace her Chrysler PT Cruiser and Smart fortwo with something else









Positives

- 2.0L is peppy and the right amount of HP/Torque without any lagginess that comes with the smaller downsized turbo units in other cars of this style

- Amazing interior that is very easy to use, and feels more expensive than it really is

- Excellent ride and handling

- Feels like a small car that really loves the curves, it really is a pleasure to drive


Negatives

- 6AT is a bit indecisive

- Kinda loud on acceleration

- Holy shit, this thing can get to $30K very quickly

- Automatic only.

- Rear space isn't good; it was OK for my body, but i'm not very tall. If I were taller, that rear bench would be nearly unusable.

- This is an SUV? Why is it so low to the ground? It's marginally taller than a Mazda 3, and i reckon it has maybe 1.5" more ground clearance



-----------


It's a wonderful car, but the fairly midlevel Touring model I drove stickered at $26K. Basically, you're paying more money for less car; the Mazda 3 is basically identical in every way, but cheaper and more room, and slightly better fuel economy. I think if this car were more SUV like; (i'd say the HR-V is wayy more SUV like compared to the Fit), I would like this car's concept more. The Juke feels more SUV like, and the Renegade feels very much so like a SUV, but then again I guess not driving like an SUV, that is this appeal of this car. But why get an SUV that's not an SUV? I think a lot of this could be solved by jacking it up further in the air, but that would likely compromise ride and handling.


I'd take this car if it were a Mazda 2; but then again I was kinda cold on the Scion iA I drove a few weeks ago.

[Eye of the Tiger]

I can't imagine what kind of person would own both a PT Loser and a DumbForTwo.

[giant_mtb]

I can't imagine what kind of person would own both a PT Loser and a DumbForTwo.

Certainly a strange combo.

[2o6]

Certainly a strange combo.

Inherited from her parents.


The PT somehow still runs well despite 217k

[ifcar]

I'm in a CX-3 test car right now and I share most of your impressions, including the car's existential pointlessness. It's well-executed in ways that are quite appealing from the driver's seat, but not in the ways that give you much of a reason to buy it. You'd have to *really* want the closest alternative to an all-wheel-drive Mazda3, despite less space, less power, and a higher price.

What would have been great would be if they made this thing a little bit lower and a lot less expensive, gave it a manual transmission, and called it a Mazda2. And, alternatively, I'd agree that it would need to be taller and roomier to be a crossover alternative.

[CALL_911]

At least up here, there's a market for this sort of thing. I see it as the successor to the Suzuki SX4.

[Madman]

- Holy shit, this thing can get to $30K very quickly


-----------


It's a wonderful car, but the fairly midlevel Touring model I drove stickered at $26K. Basically, you're paying more money for less car;

I'd take this car if it were a Mazda 2; but then again I was kinda cold on the Scion iA I drove a few weeks ago.

In a nutshell, the price differential between the Mazda 2 and the CX-3 is why we're only getting the later and not the former.  Considering the CX-3 is really little more than a taller 2 riding on jacked-up suspension, the profit margins must be enormous!  Why would Mazda want to sell anyone a Mazda 2 for $16K when they can sell every CX-3 they can make for ten grand more?  It sucks for those of us who'd like a nice small car without all of the bogus SUV-esque pretensions, but the market has spoken and voted with their wallets.

That said, if you're going to insist upon buying a CUV and you don't need U-Haul-sized carrying ability, these mini-CUVs make a lot more sense than a small sedan with a nearly useless lunchbox-sized trunk.  They're essentially B-Segment hatchbacks with a higher hip-point.  I can see myself in one of these, at least after my youngest leaves the nest and I no longer need my bigger and more family-friendly Mazda 5.

Mazda has done a good job with the styling and the reviews I've seen so far have been pretty positive.  Auto-only is disappointing but that's par for the course these days.  Market forces, etc.  I'm sure we'll be seeing quite a few of these on the roads very soon.

[Payman]

I recommended this vehicle to my 74 yr old mother. Efficient, good in winter, and easy for her to get in/out of.

Kevin/Brady, how's the seat height/ingress-egress/visibility?

[ifcar]

In a nutshell, the price differential between the Mazda 2 and the CX-3 is why we're only getting the later and not the former.  Considering the CX-3 is really little more than a taller 2 riding on jacked-up suspension, the profit margins must be enormous!  Why would Mazda want to sell anyone a Mazda 2 for $16K when they can sell every CX-3 they can make for ten grand more?  It sucks for those of us who'd like a nice small car without all of the bogus SUV-esque pretensions, but the market has spoken and voted with their wallets.

That said, if you're going to insist upon buying a CUV and you don't need U-Haul-sized carrying ability, these mini-CUVs make a lot more sense than a small sedan with a nearly useless lunchbox-sized trunk.  They're essentially B-Segment hatchbacks with a higher hip-point.  I can see myself in one of these, at least after my youngest leaves the nest and I no longer need my bigger and more family-friendly Mazda 5.

Mazda has done a good job with the styling and the reviews I've seen so far have been pretty positive.  Auto-only is disappointing but that's par for the course these days.  Market forces, etc.  I'm sure we'll be seeing quite a few of these on the roads very soon.

But this one is a B-segment hatchback with pretty much the same hip point as a Honda Fit or Versa Note. It doesn't feel crossover-y. And cargo space is poor behind the rear seat -- talk about lunchbox. About half the Fit/Versa volume behind the rear seat and a much smaller rear seat. Rear visibility is also much worse. Front-seat entry exit is pretty easy, but again, I don't feel like the seat is noticeably higher than in those other two. The CX-3 is less than an inch taller than them.

It's basically a CUV minus the utility and minus the crossover aspect. It's just an expensive tiny hatchback.

That said, it does have all-wheel-drive available, so it does cover the winter criterion. But I think you'd have to love the premium feel and/or the handling to put up with all the things it doesn't do so well, while also demanding all-wheel-drive rather than a cheaper, lighter, and potentially even more fun car. In the same class, the Subaru Crosstrek and Honda HR-V are much more useful vehicles and a better buy.

[2o6]

But this one is a B-segment hatchback with pretty much the same hip point as a Honda Fit or Versa Note. It doesn't feel crossover-y. And cargo space is poor behind the rear seat -- talk about lunchbox. About half the Fit/Versa volume behind the rear seat and a much smaller rear seat. Rear visibility is also much worse. Front-seat entry exit is pretty easy, but again, I don't feel like the seat is noticeably higher than in those other two. The CX-3 is less than an inch taller than them.

It's basically a CUV minus the utility and minus the crossover aspect. It's just an expensive tiny hatchback.

That said, it does have all-wheel-drive available, so it does cover the winter criterion. But I think you'd have to love the premium feel and/or the handling to put up with all the things it doesn't do so well, while also demanding all-wheel-drive rather than a cheaper, lighter, and potentially even more fun car. In the same class, the Subaru Crosstrek and Honda HR-V are much more useful vehicles and a better buy.

Yep, I agree. It's not as high of a hip point as the Renegade and Juke, and feels more similar to a Yaris or Fit. And it's low to the ground, and doesn't have much room, and it's kind of expensive.

Save for AWD - it feels really ergonomically similar to a Mazda 3.

[Laconian]

I'm renting a CX5 now. Visibility is very good and ingress/egress wasn't a problem for my 93 year old grandmother.

[2o6]

I'm renting a CX5 now. Visibility is very good and ingress/egress wasn't a problem for my 93 year old grandmother.

This is a CX3. This car probably is worse since the rear seat is so tiny.

[MrH]

Yeah I was shocked by how small the cx3 is. Looks good but pretty worthless from a utility standpoint.

[2o6]

Yeah I was shocked by how small the cx3 is. Looks good but pretty worthless from a utility standpoint.

It's size isn't the issue, it's packaging is. The HRV and Juke are better SUV type vehicles. This car is basically a hatchback.

[ifcar]

For perspective on CX-3 size and shape, here's a picture of my test car today:

[2o6]

It's got a lot of inches on the i3. And the i3 isn't that small, really.

[Payman]

It's size isn't the issue, it's packaging is. The HRV and Juke are better SUV type vehicles. This car is basically a hatchback.

Yeah well, the Outback is basically a station wagon. Like the Outback, it's a stylish lifestyle option.

[2o6]

Yeah well, the Outback is basically a station wagon. Like the Outback, it's a stylish lifestyle option.

Not true, though. The Outback doesn't have a Legacy Wagon. And even still, the Outback had more ride height over the Legacy Wagon. This is basically a smaller Mazda 3 with AWD.


It drives well, I mean, it won me over on dynamics alone. But I also realize the Mazda 3 is just as well, and does everything better.

[Payman]

Not true, though. The Outback doesn't have a Legacy Wagon. And even still, the Outback had more ride height over the Legacy Wagon. This is basically a smaller Mazda 3 with AWD.


It drives well, I mean, it won me over on dynamics alone. But I also realize the Mazda 3 is just as well, and does everything better.

Yeah, C&D basically said the same. AWD in a small efficient car is a big draw up here though, and I get the appeal of the CX-3.

[AutobahnSHO]

Kinda like the Crosstrek?   

(As far as I can tell, it's just as small as an Imprezza)

[MX793]

Kinda like the Crosstrek?   

(As far as I can tell, it's just as small as an Imprezza)

The Crosstrek is an Impreza with a higher ride height and body cladding (same as the old Outback Sport).  CX-3 doesn't appear to have much added ride height versus a Mazda2.

[ifcar]

The other difference is that the Mazda2 is one size smaller than the Impreza. The CX-3 is longer than a Mazda2 but not much taller, while the Crosstrek is the same size as a car that was larger to begin with, just higher off the ground.

[MX793]

I see the CX-5 as more a Crosstrek competitor.  The CX-3 is more like that Buick mini crossover.

[2o6]

I see the CX-5 as more a Crosstrek competitor.  The CX-3 is more like that Buick mini crossover.

But less SUV like than that as well

[ifcar]

I see the CX-5 as more a Crosstrek competitor.  The CX-3 is more like that Buick mini crossover.

Where would that leave the Forester to you?


Today's comparison photo, by the way:

[Payman]

Where would that leave the Forester to you?


Today's comparison photo, by the way:

What a looker though. It needs the Mazdaspeed treatment.

[MX793]

Where would that leave the Forester to you?


Today's comparison photo, by the way:

The Forester is dead to me.

I kind of put that in the same segment, but on the larger/pricier end.

[ifcar]

But the Forester is neither larger nor pricier than the CX-5...

Had I known this would be the conversation, I'd have taken the picture to capture the Forester that was parked right in front of that CX-5. 

[Madman]

Off the top of my head (and I'm sure I've missed a few).........

B-Segment crossover:  Buick Encore (AKA Opel/Vauxhall Mokka), Chevrolet Trax, Fiat 500X Ford EcoSport, Honda HR-V, Hyundai Santa Cruz, Jeep Renegade, Mazda CX-3, MINI Countryman, Nissan Juke, Renault Kadjar, Skoda Yeti, SsangYong Tivoli, Subaru XV Crosstrek.


C-Segment crossover:  Audi Q3, BMW X1, Buick Envision, Chevrolet Equinox, Ford Escape (AKA Kuga), GMC Terrain, Honda CR-V, Hyundai Tucson, Jeep Compass/Patriot, Kia Sportage, Mazda CX-5, Mercedes Benz GLA Class, Nissan Qashqai, Nissan Rogue (AKA X-Trail), Opel/Vauxhall Captiva (AKA Saturn Vue & Chevrolet Captiva Sport), Renault Captur, Subaru Forester, Toyota RAV4, Volkswagen Tiguan.

[12,000 RPM]

Turbo and coilovers will solve all problems

As is though seems pretty pointless. I guess this is what happens when you give a small car big wheel wells.