Rental review: 2014+ Mazda 3i

[12,000 RPM]

Should be getting the Civic back this week. Supposed to rain the next couple of days so the bike is out. Enterprise was closed so I wound up having to go to a regional airport and renting from Avis. When I saw this sitting in the lot with weird plates I was stoked. Initial impressions?

Pros:
- Spring/shock tuning is on point. Every impact is mitigated in one cycle and there is no wasted motion.
- Infotainment is excellent and intuitive.
- Sound quality from the stereo is EXCELLENT. Even through Bluetooth. Fears about having to upgrade are allayed.
- Safety features like blind spot monitoring etc work pretty well.
- Rain sensing wipers are nice.
- Gas mileage is really good. Mid 30s no problem vs high 20s in the Civic on the same route.
- Keyless start is well implemented.
- A/C blows nice n cold (colder than the Civic for sure).
- Road noise is well controlled.
- Driving position is nice- you sit low; lower than the Civic I think.

Cons:
- Magazines lied. Steering is less syrupy and non-communicative than the Soul, but still way off from my bone stock (suspension + wheels) Civic.
- Again the game of "steering weight to replace feel" has been played. Just saps confidence and makes mid corner and lane corrections that bit more of a chore.
- 2.0 Engine + transmission are not super responsive or peppy (I guess not really fair against a modded stickshift car). Manumatic is not quick (maybe versions with the paddles are better)
- Visibility out of the back sucks (though to be fair the rear view camera is pretty good)

I was hoping this would counter the Golf TSI's refinement with dynamic zeal but honestly I would rank them about even. They both feel a lot more nose heavy and heavier in general than the Civic, which is weird as they are only like 100-200lbs more. Maybe it would take more time but I don't feel anywhere near as confident or encouraged to push this to the ragged edge like the Civic. I'm not having the dynamic revelation I was promised. Maybe the stickshift version is better but I kind of doubt it. Really feels like the Golf without that addictive torque.

Fuck.... so the GTI is out and this is out.... 9th gen Civic Si is good but has weird gearing.... Focus has promise but I just don't trust Ford or like the looks of the interior.... oh well. Gonna double down on the Civic until I can afford & put my kids in the back of a used M235i. I'm not put off like with the Soul, but as crazy as this sounds this thing is nowhere near the Civic dynamically. I think the Civic has a better engine too (though again the ricer intake and stickshift might be coloring my view). I know I sound like a total Honda fanboi but I think I give credit where it's due. This def has some good points but if this is the dynamic king of the segment the segment is in trouble for enthusiasts. I guess I will see what's up with the 9th gen Si and hold my nose and try the stickshift 1.5T Civic next year. Get it in black to hide its exterior if need be.

[2o6]

I thought the new Civic 2.0L is dynamically superior to the Mazda 3.

[ifcar]

I wonder if you just have unrealistic expectations about steering? Or maybe there's something specific to how your Civic feels that you subconsciously expect every car to match? Or maybe just those two rental cars were on bad tires?

I'd agree that the Mazda3 isn't perfect, but from what I can recall of driving that generation of Civic (which would have been something like seven years ago), it certainly wasn't a brilliant standard-bearer.

[2o6]

Yeah, I've driven a few of those Civics, and I'm not sure what the hoopla is.

[MX793]

The SkyActive 2.0 is a bit down on low and midrange compared to its MZR predecessor, from what I hear.

[2o6]

The SkyActive 2.0 is a bit down on low and midrange compared to its MZR predecessor, from what I hear.

It is, and the transmission economy shifts.

[12,000 RPM]

Ha! Did some digging... apparently my car has hydraulic power steering! I was almost certain it had EPS. That would pretty much explain everything.

Even with that, there are variations within the trims that might explain some of the differences. For example the LX's don't have a rear sway bar, and have different part numbers for steering rack components. The LX I drove felt pretty soggy compared to my car.

In any case, that pretty much explains everything, which really sucks WRT finding a replacement and the state of the industry in general. Also partially explains the less than great gas mileage of my car.

The SkyActive 2.0 is a bit down on low and midrange compared to its MZR predecessor, from what I hear.

Really weird considering the significantly higher compression ratio

[MX793]

Really weird considering the significantly higher compression ratio

I thought it was strange too.  I have a coworker who had a 2.0L 1st gen car and now has a SkyActive 2nd gen.  He handed down his 1st gen to his son.  I bumped into the two of them at an autocross and he mentioned that his son's MZR car has a bit of an advantage over his car because it has more punch off the bottom.

[ifcar]

Ha! Did some digging... apparently my car has hydraulic power steering! I was almost certain it had EPS. That would pretty much explain everything.

Even with that, there are variations within the trims that might explain some of the differences. For example the LX's don't have a rear sway bar, and have different part numbers for steering rack components. The LX I drove felt pretty soggy compared to my car.

In any case, that pretty much explains everything, which really sucks WRT finding a replacement and the state of the industry in general. Also partially explains the less than great gas mileage of my car.

The one I drove was indeed an LX, but I'd still wonder about the fact that I can't think of any reviews that said that era of Civic was downright brilliant.

[12,000 RPM]

The one I drove was indeed an LX, but I'd still wonder about the fact that I can't think of any reviews that said that era of Civic was downright brilliant.

Sorry to go all fanboi but....

http://www.caranddriver.com/features/the-quickest-cars-of-2007-less-than-20000-eighth-place-2007-honda-civic-page-1

Otherwise, traditional Civic attributes abound: a light clutch and shifter. Supportive front seats. Crisp handling. Steering that involves you with road textures while isolating you from kickback. Fit and finish that no manufacturer can top at this price. And C/D-observed fuel economy of 33 mpg--amazing for an engine we were endlessly zinging to its 6800-rpm redline.

http://www.edmunds.com/mazda/3/2006/comparison-test.html

Handling manners
On the street the Civic is responsive and sublime. Honda fans will be familiar with the control feel and engine sound. Its suspension, steering and brakes all work together respectably and it's clear that Honda's design ethos has regard for some mild sporting character. It's also a mindlessly easy car to drive with intuitive response to inputs and controls falling readily at hand.

^^^Was let down by cheap tires

Civic has handling chops if you can deal with the lack of torque and 90s grade road noise

[ifcar]

The phrase "mild sporting character" is definitely in line with my recollection. But fair enough.

[93JC]

The SkyActive 2.0 is a bit down on low and midrange compared to its MZR predecessor, from what I hear.

It is...

BS, no it isn't. The SkyActiv 2.0 L has more torque throughout its entire rev range over the old MZR.


(This graph was from 2012, so "current" is the MZR engines.)

... and the transmission economy shifts.

This is the difference. The old one had shorter gears, which gave it more pep at the expense of empeegees.

[SVT666]

The 2.0L Skyactiv is a very coarse sounding engine.  I didn't like the engine NVH at all.  The GT with the 2.5L was much much better.

[12,000 RPM]

It does sound like it is filled with sand on startup I like it, that is pretty much the only time I hear the engine.

Gas mileage is way down. Like just under 30. Not much better than the Ceebec. Not enjoying the auto trans either. Can't get my car back soon enough