Old vs New: Mazda 626 vs Mazda3 (long and unscientific)

[orly_andico]

After having driven the Mazda3 for a bit, I think I can get the feel of it and how it compares to our old car, a Mazda 626.

What immediately leaps out about the Mazda3 is that the steering is sublime. I am no enthusiast driver, but it's a delight to see the nose leap left or right at a flick of the wheel. The steering is heavy and very precise, with no dead zone. It's heavier in fact than the steering of the 626 (and I thought the 626 had faulty power steering because of a fabricated power steering hose).

The Mazda3 interior is acceptable, but like the Civic FD and Toyota Vios, the roof liner is made of some paper-like substance, not cloth like the 626. The plastics on the 3 are harder. The dash looks better though, the 626 dash is so.. early '90s. Which is completely to be expected.

Both cars have very firm suspensions. Both produce lots of noise over rough pavement. The 3 is better-damped of course, it is fourteen years newer and has had the benefit of better noise suppression technology. But the comparative noise levels surprise. I would have expected a greater disparity. I always thought our 626 was noisy. Yes it is, but turns out that's normal.

Or, nothing short of a BMW or a Camry will satisfy my desire for silence.

The only areas where I think the 3 has better NVH is in engine noise suppression (the 626's firewall insulation is gone, and it has a too-small muffler meant for a 323) and damping over rough surfaces. The ball joints on the 626 are rattling loose. Same story for the bushings. The springs are weak, damping time is quite long.

The 3 has some pretty nifty little touches: the dome light comes on when you get in (even after you shut the doors). When you turn off the engine, the dome light comes on again so you can get out. But it doesn't have courtesy lamps or even map lights (the Civic FD does have map lights). The 626 has all of the above but no timer function on the dome light.

One area where the 626 completely kicks the crap out of the Mazda3 is in performance. The combination of the puny 105-horsepower dinosaur Z6 1.6L engine (from the 323) and the over-eager automatic transmission means lethargic performance. The gas pedal on the 3 feels like it's attached to the throttle plate by a rubber band; press on the gas and snooze for a few seconds while the engine (attempts) to catch up.

The automatic transmission is very eager to upshift, resulting in stupid combinations like 3rd gear while crawling along behind a tricycle at 1000 rpm. It also means that when you boot the gas to overtake that tricycle, there is a very noticeable lag before the transmission kicks down, and the "little engine that couldn't" squeals like a stuck piglet as it revs up and tries its best to propel the 3's sizable bulk forward (the 626 actually weighs less than the Mazda3).

Another funny thing happens when you floor the gas pedal. The revs climb to 3000+, and you actually feel this sort of shudder or vibration through the gas pedal, like the engine is really hating what it's doing and is letting you know.

I've found that keeping the automatic transmission in "manumatic" mode, and up-shifting at 3000 rpm plus, gives back (some) of the immediacy and performance of the manual transmission 626. But not all. And working the manumatic all the time to keep the engine boiling gets old really fast. Also, the Z6 is very undignified when flogged, much like a piglet getting his balls removed. The 626 is noisy too at 3000 rpm, but it's a different kind of noise, a confidence-inspiring sort of noise, like a large hog having his way with the mommy pigs.

The 1.6L engine is purely adequate for city driving, where the automatic transmission and low average speeds don't tax it beyond its rather modest limits. But I don't want to try overtaking a large bus on a provincial highway with the Mazda3. It has no authority.

The 626, meanwhile, in spite of having a sensor problem which effectively limits the engine's performance to 3000 rpm, has lots of authority. The engine is only 118-horsepower, another dinosaur of a Mazda engine, the FS-E. But what a difference that 13 horsepower and 40 N-m maximum torque make.

The engine is a long-stroke design, not square in profile like, say, the 4AGE. It has a lot of torque (compared to the Z6) down low, and can confidently propel the 626 forward even from 1000 rpm when you boot the gas. It's not such a chore to drive, even with the manual transmission, because of the torque.

I notice that my driving style of very gently stepping on the gas pedal, which works fine on the 626, results in a long line of irate drivers behind me when I'm driving the 3. The Mazda3 absolutely requires considerable depression of the throttle pedal (say, 1/3rd to 2/3rd of the way to the floor) to get any sort of scoot out of it.

Which is really funny, because the Mazda3 we got is a Limited Edition hatchback, with 16" rims, fog lights, and a full aero kit. It could actually pass for a Mazdaspeed 3 (which is what I thought it was when I saw it in the showroom). All show and no go.

Makes me wonder if we should've gotten a Hyundai Matrix with its tractor diesel engine. But, Lalai didn't like the Matrix. It's an old (circa-2000) design, and a Hyundai to boot.

The Mazda3 only has an edge over the 626 in stop and go traffic, which really taxes my clutch foot. But on a provincial highway, I would feel much more confident in the 626.

Which is why, wallet willing, I want to fix that sensor problem, replace both the springs and shocks with new ones, and fix the ball joints and whatever other rubber pieces underneath need fixing. Sure the 626's interior is slowly coming loose from age, but it's still comfortable, if somewhat dated.

The Mazda3 is really let down by the engine (which is OK, I knew coming in that the Z6 was a weakling, and Lalai doesn't mind the lethargic acceleration). For city driving to and from the office, the Mazda3 is just fine.

The idea of getting the Mazda3 2.0 R crossed our minds, but it was simply too expensive. The monthly payments on an "R" spec Mazda3 would have put us in compact SUV territory already. But if I had my way and had no regard for practicality, the Mazda6 would surely be a worthy successor to our 626. The 3 is just.. a stop along the way.

[niky]

Good luck getting that Mazda6... I wanted one, too...

The Mazda6 actually feels like it handles a bit better than the Mazda3 (need more seat time in the 6 to verify this), and it has the same space as the 626 (of course, it's nearly the same car).

Hey, when did you guys get a 3? Congrats!

[orly_andico]

.. and the Mazda6 has... drool, drool... leather.

low rent talaga masyado ang interior ng 1.6L to 1.8L cars compared to the mid-size cars of yesterday. but the 6 is really drool-worthy. I like that black leather so much more than its snoozeworthy competition.

All show and no go talaga Mazda locally. I mean the 6 looks mean and fast, and also happens to have the weakest engine of the mid-sized cars.

A 2.0L or 2.3L Mazda3 hatch would be a killer car.. and cost as much as a Mazda6 due to the expensive hatch body. So no luck of having such a combination..

regarding size: actually the Mazda 626 was the smallest mid-size of its generation. It has the same wheelbase as the 3, and weighs less. So strictly speaking, it's in the same size class as the 3.

[McQueen]

Yeah hindi nga masyado updated engines ng Mazda dito sa Phil.
Sa states kasi yung 2.0 nila 150hp and yung 2.3 liters naman 160hp.
Sana mag upgrade naman dito.

[niky]

That's bound to change. The Mazda3 is getting the 150hp version of the 2.0 for the 2007 facelift here.

[mazdamazda]

That is why I prefer the Focus over the Mazda3 since the latter has a very lazy transmission.

Though the new transmission in the Mazda6 is a big improvement over the old ones found in the Mazda3 & the prefacelift Mazda6. Zoom-zoom-zoom!

[orly_andico]

The ironic thing is (see my prior Ford Focus vs Mazda3 thread) was that Ford Global City was willing to give me the Focus 1.6L AT at a whopping 120K less than the Mazda3 "blinged" hatchback.

Considering that the SRP on the Ford is 849K and the Mazda3 is 899K, that was a considerable discount on Ford's part (the Mazda was discounted too). And, the Focus has ABS, which is a very big feature in my book.

But... the fuddy-duddy looks of the Focus didn't go well with my wife, so here we are with the ABS-less Mazda3 hatch. It also occurred to me that for a little more than the Mazda3 (probably in the end, even less monthly) we could've gotten the Focus 1.8. But that doesn't solve the grandpa looks..

[niky]

Or the fuel economy issue... although word from 1.8 owners is that now that they've gotten past the break in, fuel economy is actually reasonable (reasonable in the heavy car / bigger than 1.6 engine context, not in the small car context).

[orly_andico]

Crap. I ran my little spreadsheet. Given Ford's more aggressive pricing, we could've gotten the Focus 1.8 for marginally less monthly than the hatch. Two-zone climate control! map lights! front and rear theater lights! it's the 626 come back to life!!!

I never thought of considering the Focus 1.8 because I thought it was out of our price range (and, the kitted-out red hatch looked so desirable... I actually thought, if we got the Focus 1.6, I'd spend every moment driving it, hating it)

BTW first full tank on the 3, 8.34km/L, including 150km of highway running. I figure the city mileage is around 7km/L right now. The 626 is down to 5.8

[lm723]

Orly, congrats on your new 3. :D