Mazda3 Forums banner

1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
345 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I noticed in the curb weight specifications on the 2007 cars increased dramatically compared to the 2006 models.

For example, the 3s sedan 5spd manual for 2006 is listed as 2758lbs. For 2007, I found the spec increased to 2905lbs. This is a pretty substantial increase in weight between model years. I can't imagine that the car has that much more mass in it than the previous year. I did read where there were some floor pan reinforcement added, but I can't imagine that alone accounting for the weight gain in just one model year.

Heres my theory and lets see how many think I'm stinking up the wrong rope on this one. I think the new weight spec is more a matter of a fully optioned car, where the previous spec was for a car /w no options other than what comes standard. By that I mean the new weight spec might now include: sun roof (which can add a substantial amount of weight to any car) and all the spoilers, wings, gfx, etc. for which the 2006 spec did not. All that stuff does add weight.

Am I on the right path or is there some other reason(s) of which I'm not aware of?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
439 Posts
my guess would be that the structural reinforcements introduced on the 07's may add 20-25 lbs at most, then the sunroof may add another 25-35 lbs. the new wheels may or may not be heavier... also they've supposedly added more sound deadening. that can get heavy fast. 25 lbs of deadener is not a lot. so yeah, after you add all these things up, it can hit 100-150 lbs. body FX do not add more than a few pounds however. also, do the balance shafts added to the 07 motor add a lot of weight? sounds reasonable...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
345 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
I understand the 2.3 engine has balance shafts. The 2.0, if memory serves me correctly, does not.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
345 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Sorry, I meant that statement to go on another thread....I must've screwed up somehow...

Anyway, the reason I'm inquiring is because I'm presently choosing between 2 cars. The tC and Mz3s sedan. The tC is a very quick car. And they've booted up the power on it this year. The 2.3 Mazda engine lost power on the new ratings. And now the sedan weighs the same (as shown in the specs) as the tC.

I originally drove a 3iT and was pleasantly surprised how quick that car was. I've not driven the 2.3, however. I plan to do so this spring as I'm nursing my rusted out se-r through it's last winter.

I was pretty surprised at the weight spec changes from '06 to '07 and was wondering if, perhaps, the cars still weigh the same, but now the specs are for 'fully loaded' cars? Like /w the Grand Touring option plus motorized glass roof?

My goal is to keep the car as light as possible. I just want to order the car with no other options. Compared to what I'm driving now, it'll still seem like I'm stepping into a BMW by comparison.

The tC is less expensive, has more power and drives very similarly to the Mazda3. It's ride quality is similar. It's 'feel' is similar. It weighs 2905 /w manual trans. Mazda now rates the 3s sedan manual within a pound of the tC. The tCs biggest problem is it's tighter in back seat and entry/exit can be a chore. And I can't delete the glass roof. So it's weight is 'as is.'

So, I'm wondering if I order the Mx3s 2.3L /w 5pd manual /w nothing on else on it, if it'll still be meeting the previous years (less new reinforcements) weight spec.?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
Questions for you... Given that you are already pleased with the performance of the 2.0 Mazda 3, why are you so concerned about weight? The 2.3 will only improve the performance, and while it won't out power the Scion, it won't embarrass itself either.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
345 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Fair enough....I'm concerned about the weight because I'm hoping the Axela platform didn't suddenly become a porker between the 2 model years. That much more girth would definitely affect everything about performance. All the lines of the 3 increased weight in the '07 specs, so I'm not sure if what I drove for '06 still applies for '07.

However, I can't imagine the whole line increased that much weight in just 1 model year. That's why I'm suspecting the '06 weight spec was for a minimally optioned car where the '07 spec is for a car which is fully loaded up on all options.

I suppose I could email Mazda USA and ask them. I thought about doing that but just figured no one would bother to even get back to me. Then again, I could be wrong...Perhaps I'll give it a try...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
345 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Can you tell me which issue this was in? I tried looking up the test on their on line site but it wasn't shown. Was this test done in a very recent issue?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
345 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
I must've missed it. Thank you!...The acceleration times shown are very impressive. 0-60 in 7.3sec and the 1/4mi in 15.8/88mph. That's pretty good and a bit better than what I'm presently driving. I'll have to print out and fully read the article. Thanks again!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,263 Posts
[quote author=Stefano-M link=topic=65744.msg1134399#msg1134399 date=1168014139]
Questions for you... Given that you are already pleased with the performance of the 2.0 Mazda 3, why are you so concerned about weight? The 2.3 will only improve the performance, and while it won't out power the Scion, it won't embarrass itself either.
[/quote]

I don't know SM, but perhaps he is deciding on an SCCA Solo H stock car? Both the Scion and Mazda3 could be HS contenders.

PZ
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
345 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
They'd both do really well. Along with the Mini Cooper S...But...Naaahhhh...I just want the max bang for the buck.... :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
907 Posts
do the balance shafts added to the 07 motor add a lot of weight? sounds reasonable...
[/quote]

just a note: the 2.3 motor has always had balance shafts ...ever since it's inception w/ the MZ6
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
345 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
I did get a email back from Mazda. Unfortunately, it only explains the option diff between the 2 model years. Not why there is a difference between the 2 specs from one year to the next. I guess I'll just have to take a drive and see for myself. I guess my choice comes down to:

Scion tC: A affordable Lexus like coupe with less rear head/knee room than the Mz3 and 2 less doors.
Mazda3: A affordable BMW like sedan /w FWD thats maybe a bit slower than the tC but probably handles better.

I wouldn't think adding balance shafts to a engine increases weight but more than maybe 5-10lbs. Similar to a pair of camshafts but with weights on them...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,160 Posts
The TC is FWD too... Then I would say it handles like a bigger "lexus".

At least your comparison of the BMW and the Mazda3 works... lol :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
345 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
I forgot to mention the tC is FWD. Doh!!!

My se-r at the time was compared with a BMW 2002tii and 320i. It was like a simple FWD version of those cars. Thing is, the se-r was probably more reliable and could get through snow easily. The interior wasn't nearly as nice on the se-r but it seemed to me to be better than it's class. At least the plastic in the sentra was thick and didn't break easily or feel flimsy as in GM cars I've had.

To me, the 3i 2.0L seems like the car Nissan SHOULD have built to update the Sentra line. But they didn't. Mazda did. Too bad for Nissan. They could've owned the market....imho
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
345 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
It seems the only light weight cars available are cars like the 'B' class cars. The Honda Fit is one that comes to mind. But it doesn't have the torque or performance of a similarly equipt mazda3.

I did get a response from Mazda after I posed the question to them but I got a response from some marketing none technical wonk who just skirted around the issue and mentioned all the new 'great improvements' for the '07 car. So that turned out to be a dead end, information wise. Oh well. The only way to really tell is to get a hold of a typical build sheet where the usually put on the car's true weight.

At least in the lastest issue of car & driver comparo test, as was pointed out to me in a previous post, the M3s manual /w touring option was able to do 0-60 in 7.3s. The 1/4 was 15.8s ( a bit sluggish in my opinion but still acceptable). Also, I have to figure the engine was still pretty green in the test and might perform better as it loosens with mileage and use of synthetic oil after break-in.
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Top