All-New 2019 Mazda3 Looks Sleek Inside And Out In Best Photos Yet

[12,000 RPM]

Not match as in not fit the current transmission?  Yeah, I don't know.  They have it working in the CX-5 and CX-9.  Is the auto in the Mazda3 based off the autos in those two cars?

I mean not match the Accord's 10AT, which is possibly the best FWD auto in the business. The Mazda 6AT has brilliant programming but it can't match the Accord's gear ratio spread (5.9 vs 10.1  ). That even beats the ZF9 and it shifts way way better too. Just needs a Quaife...

[MrH]

Oh, yeah.  Honda's 10 speed is the truth.

[BimmerM3]

Oh, yeah.  Honda's 10 speed is the truth.

It doesn't hunt for gears too much? That's my concern with the newer transmissions, but admittedly, I don't think I've driven anything with more than 7 gears. Maybe 8.

[MrH]

It doesn't hunt for gears too much? That's my concern with the newer transmissions, but admittedly, I don't think I've driven anything with more than 7 gears. Maybe 8.

It's really solid overall.  Upshifts are really fast.  Casual cruising is pretty funny when you listen for it.  It upshifts every few hundred RPMs   But it's quiet enough you don't even notice.

1st gear is really short, and 10th gear can cruise at 80 mph around 2k RPM.

[BimmerM3]

It's really solid overall.  Upshifts are really fast.  Casual cruising is pretty funny when you listen for it.  It upshifts every few hundred RPMs   But it's quiet enough you don't even notice.

1st gear is really short, and 10th gear can cruise at 80 mph around 2k RPM.

Damn, that'd be nice. I wish 6th in the S2000 were longer. It's not like people use 6th for performance anyway, and 4k RPM @ 75mph (indicated, so probably really 71 or 72) is kinda ridiculous.

[MrH]

Damn, that'd be nice. I wish 6th in the S2000 were longer. It's not like people use 6th for performance anyway, and 4k RPM @ 75mph (indicated, so probably really 71 or 72) is kinda ridiculous.

80 mph in the Accord = 2,000 RPM
80 mph in the S2000 = 4,200 RPM

I got 36.5 mpg last weekend going to Cleveland and back averaging 77 mph .  Slight inclines will actually kick it down to 9th gear.  It's pretty amazing a giant sedan that can run low 14s in the 1/4 mile and get that kind of gas mileage.

[Xer0]

Meh, it doesn't rev much and you don't get a lot extra out of it by revving.  Horsepower is relatively flat from mid range to the top end.  It does a great job of giving you a punch from down low when you floor it and putting the power down.

In comparison to your average 2.0T in the class it def is noticeably more revy with more top end, and especially versus the Mazda engine.  In comparison to the 2.0 in the S2K, well....

Damn, that'd be nice. I wish 6th in the S2000 were longer. It's not like people use 6th for performance anyway, and 4k RPM @ 75mph (indicated, so probably really 71 or 72) is kinda ridiculous.

That's gotta be a Honda M/T thing.  My Si is turning something like 3600RPM at 75MPH too and its annoying.

[BimmerM3]

80 mph in the Accord = 2,000 RPM
80 mph in the S2000 = 4,200 RPM

I got 36.5 mpg last weekend going to Cleveland and back averaging 77 mph .  Slight inclines will actually kick it down to 9th gear.  It's pretty amazing a giant sedan that can run low 14s in the 1/4 mile and get that kind of gas mileage.

Yeah, that's pretty crazy. I think Honda was recently named the most fuel efficient manufacturer (though I suppose Tesla was not included). The Si's similarly good numbers is one of the reasons I've been kinda sorta looking at those.

[MrH]

In comparison to your average 2.0T in the class it def is noticeably more revy with more top end, and especially versus the Mazda engine.  In comparison to the 2.0 in the S2K, well....

That's gotta be a Honda M/T thing.  My Si is turning something like 3600RPM at 75MPH too and its annoying.

It's a high revving, low torque thing.  You couldn't gear an S2000 much longer.  It doesn't make enough power at low RPM to overcome the drag   You would never be able to pass anybody or accelerate in 6th.  It's also an efficiency thing.  If you geared an S2000 to run at 2,000 RPM at 80 mph, you'd probably have to be at full throttle the entire time just to maintain speed.  Not good from a durability or efficiency standpoint.

[Laconian]

Yeah, that's pretty crazy. I think Honda was recently named the most fuel efficient manufacturer (though I suppose Tesla was not included). The Si's similarly good numbers is one of the reasons I've been kinda sorta looking at those.

<debbie_downer>it's more eco-friendly to drive a less efficient car into the ground than it is to buy a new car</debbie_downer>

[BimmerM3]

<debbie_downer>it's more eco-friendly to drive a less efficient car into the ground than it is to buy a new car</debbie_downer>

That's definitely something to consider, but this particular hypothetical scenario is where I'm getting a new car either way for other reasons, and I'm deciding between an Si and a WRX. Besides, if I were to do that, the new car would replace the S2000, so it's not like that would go straight to the junk yard. Someone else would get life out of it. Of course, the chain reaction might result in some other vehicle hitting the junk yard sooner.

I'm also mostly just rambling here. I don't think I'm going to get rid of the S2000 so it's pretty moot. 

[12,000 RPM]

Old school Honda MT gearing drove me nuts. Kind of funny how they went from the manufacturer with the narrowest gearing to the widest

But honestly if I never have another manual daily I wouldn't be too bummed. Once you learn how to cajole an auto to do what you want it's good enough. And I feel like they learn what you want over time.

[Laconian]

Old school Honda MT gearing drove me nuts. Kind of funny how they went from the manufacturer with the narrowest gearing to the widest

They went from VTEC N/A to F/I blah.

[BimmerM3]

But honestly if I never have another manual daily I wouldn't be too bummed. Once you learn how to cajole an auto to do what you want it's good enough. And I feel like they learn what you want over time.

Well, autos have also gotten WAY better over the past 20 years. But yeah, a lot of it is just getting used to a particular car. I still get frustrated with the Explorer on mountain roads sometimes, but it's a 2006 and even it's a lot better than my anecdotal experience with cars just not too much older.

[Rich]

The NB would do 4500rpm at 80, the ND does about 3000. I'd be ok if it were geared to an even lower rpm. If I want to accelerate I'll pop a shift. I'd much rather have better mpg and enjoy the activity of driving more

[12,000 RPM]

They went from VTEC N/A to F/I blah.

Oil dilution issues aside, Honda has done F/I a lot better than most of its competitors.

And IMO there's no replacement for displacement (or weight reduction). Someone said VTEC is like a turbo with all the lag with none of the boost

[Laconian]

With all of the sound. The DOHC VTEC cam change is orgasmic.

[BimmerM3]

With all of the sound. The DOHC VTEC cam change is orgasmic.

It wasn't very noticeable in my old Accord, but I love the cam changeover in the S2000. It's been a long time since I've been in an AP1, but IIRC, it was even more aggressive in that version.

That said, the Explorer has taught me the value of low end torque.

[Laconian]

Accord uses a very different VTEC implementation that's optimized for fuel economy, not output.

[12,000 RPM]

Yea, real VTEC is very distinct. People actually shift the changeover point down to get more total power through the rev range.

Every engine that revs to and makes power at ~8K will have some aural rip though. My beloved G didn't have a distinct changeover... but it sounded great at redline (7500 RPM)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZDKnX7gWaY

[2o6]

I was picking up parts for my Mazda at the dealer, and I got some seat time with the new 3.

1. The interior is very impressive, everything feels good quality and looks great

2. The sight lines on the hatchback are bad

3. I can see why someone would pass on this car; it feels well made but claustrophobic. It's definitely much more snug than it's competitors. This was a Mazda/Nissan dealer, and although the Sentra isn't a very nice vehicle to drive, the Sentra has commodious interior room and is viable for the sole car of a smaller family. It legitimately felt like it had less room inside than my Chevrolet Sonic.

[MrH]

It wasn't very noticeable in my old Accord, but I love the cam changeover in the S2000. It's been a long time since I've been in an AP1, but IIRC, it was even more aggressive in that version.

That said, the Explorer has taught me the value of low end torque.

It's like a different engine when you get on the hot cam.  If you rev everything out to redline, you stay in the money rpm range the whole time.  If you short shift at all, you fall below into slow range.

[93JC]

I was picking up parts for my Mazda at the dealer, and I got some seat time with the new 3.

1. The interior is very impressive, everything feels good quality and looks great

2. The sight lines on the hatchback are bad

3. I can see why someone would pass on this car; it feels well made but claustrophobic. It's definitely much more snug than it's competitors. This was a Mazda/Nissan dealer, and although the Sentra isn't a very nice vehicle to drive, the Sentra has commodious interior room and is viable for the sole car of a smaller family. It legitimately felt like it had less room inside than my Chevrolet Sonic.

Did you sample just the hatchback, or also the sedan? To me the sedan is noticeably larger on the inside than the hatch, which really is far too small.

[r0tor]

The 3 got slammed in C&D for its driving dynamics in this months issue... Still finished 2nd though because ause of its sophistication despite nobody picking it as their favorite car to drive

Mazda has sadly gone all BMW

[FoMoJo]

The 3 got slammed in C&D for its driving dynamics in this months issue... Still finished 2nd though because ause of its sophistication despite nobody picking it as their favorite car to drive

Mazda has sadly gone all BMW

Twist beam suspension?

[HurricaneSteve]

Who won? Civic? And who were the other competitors?

The 3 got slammed in C&D for its driving dynamics in this months issue... Still finished 2nd though because ause of its sophistication despite nobody picking it as their favorite car to drive

Mazda has sadly gone all BMW

[r0tor]

Civic won... I'm sure it will be on the web in a few days

[Laconian]

Slammed for its driving dynamics?

Well, I'm looking forward to this review.

[2o6]

I read it online.


It wasn't "slammed". It just wasn't as sharp as they wanted.

[12,000 RPM]

Driving dynamics are no longer a feather in the 3's cap

Frankly, as I've said ad nauseum, the last gen didn't thrill me either. The current Civic was better than that too, but hardly a hair raising thriller.

I can't knock Mazda for focusing on what matters to customers. 3 just needs more power to be truly "premium"