Honda City 1.5 e vs Mazda 2

[fox rider]

Hi Folks,

I'm a newbie here. I'm about to buy a new car but until now I'm still torn between the City 1.5 and Mazda 2. Things that I prioritize:

1. Technology
2. Porma
3. Fuel comsumption
4. Value for money

I would appreciate your advice.

Thanks.

[kentgil]

Hi Folks,

I'm a newbie here. I'm about to buy a new car but until now I'm still torn between the City 1.5 and Mazda 2. Things that I prioritize:

1. Technology
2. Porma
3. Fuel comsumption
4. Value for money

I would appreciate your advice.

Thanks.

Technolohy: Honda City i-VTEC na 120hp vs the mazda 105hp lang yata
Porma: Honda city
Fuel consumption: Honda city DBW+5AT and its euro4 na
Value for money: mazda2 ang price nito at par lang sa city na 1.3

[renzo_d10]

I guess you're looking at the sedan versions of both.

The Mazda 2 is better.

It's really value for your money.

Cheaper in terms of it's unit price.

The 1.5E City reached the 800K mark already, which for me buying it seems to be too unpractical alreadt

Regarding the style, the Mazda 2 ... being new is still " in " for others, including me.

Fuel consumption, I really don't know the figures yet maybe scharnhorst can supply the numbers because he owns one too !

Parts price for each wont differ a lot. Both are average in terms of price. Not cheap, not that expensive.

Technology, I really don't know but a wild guess would be the Honda City.

My own verdict would be still the Mazda 2. Cheap yet it has a 1.5L engine. Pretty fast for a small vehicle.

[scharnhorst]

hehe. was in this dilemma too, several weeks go

1) Technology. In terms of raw engine output, the peak horsepower and peak torque of the 1.5E city are higher. for the 1.3 city, they're almost the same as with the mazda 2, but the mazda reaches its peak torque at a lower rpm (4,000 rpm vs. 4,800 rpm)

but then, how often are you going to redline the car?

Regarding the transmission... if you're just using the car in the city, you won't miss the extra fifth gear of the honda. But the city E does have paddle shifters, the mazda 2 doesn't have a semi-manual mode.

In the interior stuff, the mazda 2 doesn't have a USB port.

2)Porma


the front of the mazda 2 is... ridiculously cute. the honda city is more handsome in the traditional sense.

but as lamborghinione pointed out, the lines of the mazda 2 are sleeker everywhere else.

3)Fuel consumption
On a fresh engine:
I'm getting 8-10 km/liter in the city - depends on the driving style.
14 km/li in the highway
11-12 km/liter mixed.

I've recorded my worst FC at 7.5 km/liter : pure city traffic with a full (or over? haha) load of passengers

4)Value for money?
There are still no figures regarding the maintenance costs of the mazda 2, we'll find out yet in the next months or years.

but the manual version is really bang for buck at 725k

We're happy with our mz2. It's fast (I took ours to 160 kph once ), the steering is precise, easy to drive, it's reasonably fuel efficient, the boot is big, the rear seats are OK even for 3 adults.

hehe. but you could opt to wait for the ford fiesta.

[water]

Nguso pa lang panalo na city.

[suysuy]

hehehe dati talo ang city sa nguso pa lang. ngayon panalo na haha

[lamborghinione]

1. Technology : Engine -> City, Drive Handling -> Mazda 2
2. Porma : Front -> City, Rear -> Mazda 2, Side -> Mazda 2
3. Fuel comsumption: Lamang ng konti ang City sa Mazda 2
4. Value for money: Mazda 2 syempre

[vincem]

Hi Folks,

I'm a newbie here. I'm about to buy a new car but until now I'm still torn between the City 1.5 and Mazda 2. Things that I prioritize:

1. Technology
2. Porma
3. Fuel comsumption
4. Value for money

I would appreciate your advice.

Thanks.

1) technology: honda

2) porma: subjective, if you want "cute", go for mazda. if you prefer sharp looks, go for city. honestly, i think the m2 was made for young females, and young males for the city.

3) fuel consumption: honda. never owned a mazda but according to my friends who have mazda 3's, its got bad fuel economy. honda on the other hand is well know for great fuel economy.

4) value for money: the honda is about 30K more expensive. personally i'd pay the extra 30K for better technology, fuel economy, and brand reliability.

[scharnhorst]

1) technology: honda

2) porma: subjective, if you want "cute", go for mazda. if you prefer sharp looks, go for city. honestly, i think the m2 was made for young females, and young males for the city.

3) fuel consumption: honda. never owned a mazda but according to my friends who have mazda 3's, its got bad fuel economy. honda on the other hand is well know for great fuel economy.

4) value for money: the honda is about 30K more expensive. personally i'd pay the extra 30K for better technology, fuel economy, and brand reliability.

hmmm.

you have to elaborate on your points regarding 1,3, and 4.

honda has always have had VTEC, mazda has its S-VT.

the mazda 3 has a rather smallish engine mated to a heavy chassis, hence the poor fuel economy.

value for money - see above points.

[Type 100]

It's a dead heat for me really. I like 'em both.

The only deal-breaker is interior plastics. The DE5 Mazda2 has cheaper, flimsier plastics vs. the GM2 City.

In terms of styling, the City hides its platform-shared roots better. It looks bespoke, and you'd be hard-pressed to see any trace of the GE6/8 Jazz (its mechanical twin) from its exterior. Front end aside, the Mazda2 has this "heavy rear fender" look that gives away its roots as a converted hatchback fitted with a trunk - something the old GD6/8 City suffered from as well (although the 2 looks much better than the old City).

Whether or not the price difference is worth getting the Honda for is your call. You can't lose with either.