Discussion in 'Mazda' started by xcel, Jul 1, 2013.
In other words, ruining it for families just like Hyundai did to the Elantra Touring/GT.
Wri, I'm convinced it's a feature, not a bug. For those applications, they're happy to sell you a CX-5, or a Santa Fe, or a CR-V, or...
Yup, the same "feature" they've been pushing on me for 20 years ("the CR-V is just like your old Civic Wagon!"), since they phased out most wagons in favor of SUVs. Almost all Americans have bought into it too.
It's sad but true. Not too many true station wagons left. Your Hyundai is one of the last.
Lots of hatchbacks but most of them don't have true station-wagon capacity or utility.
My first new car was a 1973 Ford Pinto wagon. Not exactly a Hall of Fame great car , but it sold me on the value of a wagon.
There is no reason in the world that we should not have a small wagon out there. One with big mpg and big cargo space. There is a huge niche between the hatchback and the CUV that is not being taken care of by manufacturers. Who needs ground clearance and ridiculous amounts of torque? I knew that the Elantra GT was about ready to come out when I purchased my Elantra Touring in March of 2012. The GT is a beautiful car and 40 mpg would be nice. The cargo area would not have worked for me and my job requirements as a delivery driver subcontractor. I can state this very specifically and without reservation. I went for something tried and true and also avoided the gasoline direct injection engine. The only other possibility of all the vehicles on the road was the VW Jetta Sportwagen. In 1995, it was the final year of the Toyota Corolla Station Wagen with 30 mpg. Where are we now, 20 years later?
Did anyone notice that FE numbers are up on fueleconomy.gov already?
Is this the "EPA estimate"? We cant even look at the FE numbers here in Canada as they are so unrealistic to compare. Does the manufacturer simply provide an EPA estimate to the Gvt and then let them post it? Seems like a flawed system. Although, Hyundai at least has come clean with over-stating their numbers a little bit.
The new 3 looks awesome and if its City FE number is real its quite good with the Automatic too.
My list still includes the CX-5 with the 2.0L. Great FE numbers for such a useful vehicle. Ground clearance and storage are a + here for families and winter driving.
Ok, so it's +2 mpg from the current model. I'll wait to see the cargo space numbers, but I'm not holding my breath for anything great. For 2 mpg I'd stick with the old one.
2012 manual hatchback: 27/38
2014 manual hatchback: 29/40
Great find! I incorporated the 5-door hatches certified EPA results into the preview.
And yes, the manufacturers provide the EPA with the numbers and the EPA tests maybe 15% of the total population to make sure everyone is above board.
I loved the CX-5 with the 2.0L SKYACTIV-G too! More so then the 2.5L Mazda is incorporating in the 2014 CX-5 and 6 in fact.
It was kind of a fluke. I was just doing a comparison with my old '03 Protege5 to the 2013 Mazda3 Skyactiv for fun and clicked 2014 by mistake. funny that.
Mazda Canada already has pictures of the new Mazda3 on their site as well which is a surprise. I guess they will be clearing out the 2013's soon! Maybe I can get a deal.
My wife found the Mazda3 less appealing than the simplicity of the Protege5. Amazing what 10 years can do though.
Edmunds reports cargo space at 20.2 cu ft. That's not bad. It's up from the 2013's rating of 17 cu ft, and matches my Fit. I'm surprised, based on the outward appearance.
Mazda has finally posted the full US specs but Edmunds is right on.
There are 2 body styles (4-door and 5-door hatch) along with 6 trims, an i SV, i Sport, i Touring i Grand Touring, s Touring and s Grand Touring. The s denotes the 2.5L SKYACTIV-G whereas the i denotes the 2.0L SKYACTIV-G.
The Grand Touring trims can be ordered with the Technology Package (2TE) on up whereas the Touring trims can be ordered with Technology Package (1TE) on up. Sport and SV do not receive any of the packages listed below.
Moonroof (1MR): Moonroof, power sliding-glass ("one-touch" open feature) with interior sunshade, overhead console w/ sunglasses holder, illuminated vanity mirrors (driver & passenger)
Moonroof (2MR) [w/ 1TE]: Moonroof, power sliding-glass ("one-touch" open feature) with interior sunshade
Technology Package (1TE): 7" full-color touchscreen display, navigation, Commander switch, rearview camera, Bose 9-speaker surround sound audio system with Centerpoint 2, HD radio, SiriusXM satellite radio w/ 4 month subscription, dual zone (driver & front passenger) automatic climate control system, overhead console w/ sunglasses holder, illuminated vanity mirrors (driver & passenger), shark fin antenna
Technology Package (2TE): i-ELOOP regenerative engine braking system, active grille shutters, Forward Obstruction Warning System (FOWS), High Beam Control (HBC), Lane Departure Warning System (LDWS), Mazda Radar Cruise Control (MRCC), Smart City Brake Support (SCBS)
On the FE front, the i sedan with the 2.0L and 6-speed stick is rated at 29/41 mpgUS city/highway. The i 5-door hatch with the 2.0L and 6-speed stick is rated at 29/40 mpgUS city/highway.
The i sedan with the 2.0L and 6-speed AT is rated at 30/41 mpgUS city/highway. The i 5-door hatch with the 2.0L and 6-AT is rated at 30/40 mpgUS city/highway.
The s sedan and 5-door hatch with the 6-speed AT (only) are rated at 28/39 mpgUS and 28/37 mpgUS city/highway respectively.
The s sedan and 5-door hatch with the 6-speed AT (only) and i-ELOOP are rated at 29/40 mpgUS and 29/39 mpgUS city/highway respectively.
Passenger and Cargo volume
The sedan is rated at 96.3 and 12.4 cu.ft. passenger and cargo volume respectively. The hatch is rated at 96.4 and 20.2 cu. ft. passenger and cargo volume respectively.
The Cd of the i-ELOOP equipped sedan and 5-door hatch are 0.255 and 0.275 respectively. The non i-ELOOP sedan and 5-dpoor hatch are 0.26 and 0.28 respectively.
Top speed and RPM@60 mph calculations
Top speed is rev limited to 130 mph for all models.
The RPM@60 mph calculations show the 2.0L with the 6-speed stick achieving 2,054 RPM@60 mph. The 2.0L with the 6-speed AT achieves 1,688 RPM@60 mph. The s models with the 2.5L and 6-speed AT achieve 1,593 RPM@60 mph.
Ok, just give us the Mazda5 with SkyActivD and 6MT, as previously mentioned in threads, and I will stop snivelling. Ground clearance. I won't be driving through 8 feet of snow or in the mud off-road.
That is good news about the cargo space. I'm less concerned with the height of the cargo hold than I am with the amount of floor space in there, so I'll anxious to see the cargo floor dimensions to see how it will serve a (i.e., my) family.
Also Wayne, am I correct in understanding that the i SV and i Sport variants will now include the Skyactiv engine? Yay! Good news for us cheapskates. Those are the cars that go on ad in the paper all the time.
Wri, considering how sloped that rear window is, I think it must be a wide/long load space to achieve that cargo space.
Yup, all variants are SKYACTIV-G equipped! Still wish we had the diesel coming but until then...
Andrew, I think you are right. It does not look like it holds much with that rake but the cargo volume is pretty impressive regardless.
The rear cargo area really does look a lot larger than a std. hatch we are being sold nowadays!
2014 Mazda3 Preview
Rear hatch with seats up and down. It appears to provide 30 to 36 inches of floor space with the seats up!
C-Segment Hatch Competitive Comparison
Column1Column2Column3Column4Column5Column6Column7Column8Column9Column10Column11YearMakeModelEnginehpTorque (lb-ft.)Fuel Economy (mpgUS city/highway)Passenger Vol. (cu. ft.)Cargo Vol. (cu. ft.)Max Cargo Cap w/ Rear Seats down (cu. ft.)Total Interior Vol. (cu. ft.) 2014Mazda32.0L15515029/40 (6-speed MT) – 30/40 (6-speed AT)96.420.247.1116.62013HyundaiElantra GT1.8L14813126/37 (6-speed MT) – 27/37 (6-speed AT)9623511192013ToyotaMatrix1.8L13212826/32 (6-speed MT) – 25/32 (4-speed AT)9420491142013FordFocus 5-door2.0L16014626/36 (5-speed MT) – 28/38 (6-speed AT)9124451102013VWGolf2.5L17017723/33 (6-speed MT) – 24/31 (6-speed AT)9315NA108
Wow. That 29/40 EPA means the rest of the C-class hatches can kiss Mazda's rear bumper.
And it very nicely beats my Civic's 25/36.
I have never owned a Mazda , inspite of the fact that an acquaintance is a long time owner of a local Mazda dealership and now owns several dealerships in my area. I am now completely convinced of Mazda having highest quality and innovation. I really want to do business with Mazda now. This is all very exciting. Please give us many SkyActivG and SkyActivD variants with lots of drive train and vehicle choices.
Hmm ... This is starting to look like a plausible contender to replace my aged GLC (= 323). The current Mazda3 and Mazda2 aren't.
O M G this car is looking great. 36" of floor length would be awesome (i.e., same as my ET), and a bit longer than the current model. 30" would be not so impressive.
But that looks pretty much like 36" to me. I'm excited. Not that I plan to replace the ET anytime soon, but I always keep an eye on the market in case it gets wrecked or stolen.
Separate names with a comma.