Which 2-liter Car to Buy?

[GTi]

I have read that the 7th gen K24 Accord was more fuel efficient than the older 6th gen F23. It is the 7th gen K20 which has higher FC. My neighbor who has a stock 8th gen K24 Accord said he can do 7 km/L on the usual Sucat-Makati route, and the 8th gen is way bigger than the 6th gen.

It would be great if you can get 7-8 km/L on the 2.3L Mazda6 but it's possible that you will be doing only around 6-7 km/L.

It probably is, if it's matic to matic, courtesy of the newer engine design and extra gear. But ours isn't known for it's fuel efficiency. Around 7km/L on a South Triangle, QC to Valenzuela route (via Mindanao Ave). Light footed driving. With "normal" driving habits, it'll dip to the vicinity of 6km/L more or less. It's a real solid car though. Cabin materials are very durable. Leather seats still look very new despite lack of conditioning (and at 91tkms mileage). Electronic seat adjustment works like a charm with no weird noises whatsoever (unlike some same-era Camry's I've ridden).

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

[jut703]

While waiting for a Mazda 6 seller to come along, I started thinking about whether it's really worth it to get a 6 over a 3.

Assuming their purchase price would be the same (~350k), the Mz6 is still thirstier at the pump. This will be my daily drive so I'll be racking up about 15,000 km a year. If the 6 does 6 km/L and the 3 does 7 km/L, that's a difference of P1,500 per month. Other maintenance costs will most likely be more expensive with the 6 as well. I can afford the cost, but of course I can also invest the 1.5k elsewhere.

On the flipside, the added fuel cost comes in exchange for much better performance. The 6 is faster both in terms of acceleration and top speed than the 3. However, the 3's performance is already good enough for me. I appreciate the extra grunt of the 6, but I can live with what the 3 offers. If I begin to want more, I can always chip the 3, but then the cost of the chip would offset a year's worth of fuel savings.

In terms of features, the only things that the 6 has that the 3 doesn't are the side/curtain airbags, traction control, and power driver's seat adjustment. These are stuff I can live without. The 3 even has aux-in which the 6 doesn't, and that's more useful on a daily basis.

However, the 6 still has more presence than a 3, being 1 class higher and thus bigger in every dimension. While both designs are timeless, I think the 6 still looks more expensive, but maybe that's just me.

Previously, I thought the 6 was the better bargain. I mean, if both cars were sold at the 3's brand new price of 1.1M, wouldn't you have gone for the 6? Now though that I begin to consider cost of ownership, I wonder if it's still the runaway winner...



Posted via Tsikot Mobile App

[EQAddict]

id save the money (350K) wait a bit and save more and get a brand new car in a few months time. Those cars are way too old.

[jut703]

id save the money (350K) wait a bit and save more and get a brand new car in a few months time. Those cars are way too old.

I don't mind an old car. They're 1/3 the price of equivalent brand new cars. I don't need the new car smell or happiness of buying something new. I prefer getting the most value and it's with depreciated stuff that I often find it.

These Mazdas have no known issues and most Mazda 3 owners that I know can attest that their ownership has been worry-free.

I don't mind tinkering my car for minor niggles and for major replacements I don't mind scouring Banawe or Evangelista for parts.

The idea of going brand new begs me to ask - why spend triple when a much cheaper option can do all the things I need it to do?


Posted via Tsikot Mobile App

[EQAddict]

i don't mind buying 2nd hand cars myself Though I must admit my preference is brand new.

Since you are a value minded shopper I guess this works. Good luck with your car hunting.

[leodawesome]

While waiting for a Mazda 6 seller to come along, I started thinking about whether it's really worth it to get a 6 over a 3.

Assuming their purchase price would be the same (~350k), the Mz6 is still thirstier at the pump. This will be my daily drive so I'll be racking up about 15,000 km a year. If the 6 does 6 km/L and the 3 does 7 km/L, that's a difference of P1,500 per month. Other maintenance costs will most likely be more expensive with the 6 as well. I can afford the cost, but of course I can also invest the 1.5k elsewhere.

On the flipside, the added fuel cost comes in exchange for much better performance. The 6 is faster both in terms of acceleration and top speed than the 3. However, the 3's performance is already good enough for me. I appreciate the extra grunt of the 6, but I can live with what the 3 offers. If I begin to want more, I can always chip the 3, but then the cost of the chip would offset a year's worth of fuel savings.

In terms of features, the only things that the 6 has that the 3 doesn't are the side/curtain airbags, traction control, and power driver's seat adjustment. These are stuff I can live without. The 3 even has aux-in which the 6 doesn't, and that's more useful on a daily basis.

However, the 6 still has more presence than a 3, being 1 class higher and thus bigger in every dimension. While both designs are timeless, I think the 6 still looks more expensive, but maybe that's just me.

Previously, I thought the 6 was the better bargain. I mean, if both cars were sold at the 3's brand new price of 1.1M, wouldn't you have gone for the 6? Now though that I begin to consider cost of ownership, I wonder if it's still the runaway winner...



Posted via Tsikot Mobile App

18k more per year on gas alone vs. 1 tier higher + overall safety and performance package.

Maintenance, I bet they wouldn't be that far between the two. Since 2nd hand naman sya di mo na need ipasok sa casa palagi. Masmahirap nga lang maghanap ng parts ni 6.

[jut703]

What about the '06-'08 Ford Focus TDCi MT?
Napunta na rin naman sa practicality yung usapan, it seems that this car best balances practicality with performance.

Previously, I crossed it out because Focus TDCi units were still around 450k. However, there are 2008 units now only at 390k, which is quite close to the price of a Mz3/Mz6.

Pros:
- FAST (0-100 in 9.5s, no sweat reaching 200, making it as fast as the Mz6 and faster than the Mz3)
- VERY FRUGAL (10 km/L in city driving, and it's a diesel)
- Manual transmission (more engaging and enjoyable for me, no Powershift issues)
- Good handling (more nose-heavy than the Mz3, but otherwise similar since they share the same platform)

Cons:
- Ugly rims (needs to be upgraded to 18" with 1.5" lowering springs)
- Ugly interior (no choice but to live with it)
- Not as prestigious as a Mazda 6

Assuming I can haggle to 380k, I still have to change my wheels which will cost more or less 40k, and then lowering springs, which will cost 15k, and possibly projector headlamps (25k). That brings the total to 460k, all in.

It seems that it's much more expensive than a Mz6 now, but once you factor fuel costs, winner pa rin. Assuming I travel 1,250 km a month, with the Mz6 doing 6 km/L, the Mz3 doing 7 km/L, and the Focus doing 9 km/L; gas at 52 and diesel at 45, my monthly fuel costs will be:

Mazda 6: P10,833/mo
Mazda 3: P9,285/mo
Focus TDCi: P5,625/mo

That's savings of over 5k/month compared to the Mz6, and 3.6k/month compared to the Mz3. If the Mz6 is 330k, I can recoup the extra cost of the Focus in a little over 2 years. If the Mz3 is at 320k, it only takes 3.5 years to recover the cost.

[[archie]]

Practicality on FC yes... Parts no.

Walang dulo yung focus but I guess that don't matter since hindi naman Kailangan to go beyond 140km/h.

[GTi]

The 3 2.0L isn't really that much more fuel efficient compared to the 6 2.3L. I doubt it can get 7km/L in rush hour city driving. It's like comparing the FC of the FD 2.0 with the Accord 2.4. Very minimal difference, if any at all. Want something upscale, fast and fuel efficient? I'd suggest you save a bit more and get a Santa Fe. Older units go for 500+k with some negotiation. Sonata-based platform ensures midsize sedan-like ride and handling. Powerful diesel engine is a match for typical 2.4L midsize sedan engines in terms of performance.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

[jut703]

The 3 2.0L isn't really that much more fuel efficient compared to the 6 2.3L. I doubt it can get 7km/L in rush hour city driving. It's like comparing the FC of the FD 2.0 with the Accord 2.4. Very minimal difference, if any at all. Want something upscale, fast and fuel efficient? I'd suggest you save a bit more and get a Santa Fe. Older units go for 500+k with some negotiation. Sonata-based platform ensures midsize sedan-like ride and handling. Powerful diesel engine is a match for typical 2.4L midsize sedan engines in terms of performance.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

I'm sure that the 3 2.0 will get 7 km/L because it's even more efficient than our old Altis 2.0 4AT which I could squeeze out 7 km/L in my usual city driving (not always rush hour since I also have weekend runs and I sometimes don't go along with the rush hour on weekdays).

I'm also fairly certain that the 6 is about 1 km/L more thirsty. And 1 km/L from 6 to 7 km/L is already 17% more. Unless you're saying that if the 3 gets 7 km/L, the 6 can get 6.5 km/L.

The Santa Fe looks cheap and old to me, and again, expensive. It was nice during its time because of the 200hp but it was never pretty. The Sorento looks good to me but still way too expensive since earliest you could get is a 2010 model. Also, I look at expenses on a 5-year horizon and 500+k for a Santa Fe is just not recoverable vs. a 3/6/Focus.



Posted via Tsikot Mobile App