Mazda3 Forums banner

1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
20 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I live in Canada and I am currently looking into buying a car. I read a lot about the Mazda 3 but I am also interested in the Acura RSX and Mitsubishi Lancer. Can somebody show me the right direction as to which car is better..

Thanx a lot..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,849 Posts
Hey! And welcome!

1. Please add your city, province to your profile. This way we can give you more "personalized" info if you intend n buying the 3.

2. The RSX will cost an arm and a leg and still only give you steel wheels on the base trim. If you can afford the Type S RSX you better look at the Mazda6 I4 GT. Contrary to what most ppl think the 6 is a car that can run with cars that look sporty. It pulls nice Gs on a skidpad and has amazing brakes.

3. As for the Lancer, I don't know. I'm a VERY satisfied Protege driver - it beat the Civic, Sentra, Corolla and all domestics in FUN TO DRIVE, quality of the interior, features/$ and styling. I can say the same about the 3. Take a look at mazda.ca - the car is well-equipped and competitive and got good reviews in Europe (those guys are harsh on Japanese cars)

I'll continue later (I'm at work now).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
I seen the site, the car looks crazy, ima get the sedan......I hope it comes in the metalic blue though, and there was another question i had, does it come with navigation as an optiion? Thats the sh!t.......
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,337 Posts
Yeah Canada is getting screwed out of options - we have NAV and HID's and SAB/SAC in America, but not in Canada.

The MZ3 is a cheaper car than either the RSX or the Lancer (I think?), so it depends what your budget is. Also, I think the RSX borders on a girls car, but that's just my opinion (it looks too much like a Celica to me).

I really know nothing about the Lancer, other than I hate them because of those stupid commercials that used to be on all the time ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,849 Posts
I did mention it - you just quoted me on it. I don't care for NAV and HIDs one bit. SAB/SAC yes, but the other 2 are just useless gimmicks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,089 Posts
hahaa...ppl dont read now a days ;) haha...as for HID's dinu..iono..i think its the point htat i believe you get better visibility with those...AND..since theya re illegal to get aftermarket haha its nice to have them str8 from mazda...so u dont have to risk gettin a ticket if u want htem on...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,849 Posts
I just don't want HIDs and NAV - useless options IMO. HIDs are no better that well-designed halogens. CR tested many cars w/HIDs and halogens and the P5's halogens were #1 - better than HIDs.

And they cost a ton of $$$ too and blind other drivers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,337 Posts
Yeah, they do (cost tons and blind others). And before you HID lovers chime in - THEY DO. HID's unlike Halogens have a beam that ends suddenly, so if you're around the edge of the beam and it's bouncing in and out of your eyes, they BLIND.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,089 Posts
Kazbaeden said:
Sometimes I find myself flashing my lights at someone with HIDs, thinking their hi-beams are on.
hahaa ...we've gotten that in my dads benz hahaa...damn u flashing us! haha jk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
187 Posts
Hahaha, yeah well ... I don't know about Canada, but if it helps me to even the odds against all the X5's, RX330's, Toyota Land Barges, and other import luxury SUV's with HID's that aren't angled towards the ground properly, then I'll be happy. I have never had any visual impairment resulting from the HID lamps on BMW, Audi, Lexus, and Mercedes sedans, so I don't see how the 3 will be a nuisance. It's the angle at which HID lamps are shooting the beam that makes them blinding, and the SUV's with them piss me off because it shoots straight into your eyes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
984 Posts
I think SUV/Truck halogen lights are worse than HID's because they shine right in your eyes. I think HID's are less blinding than others.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
106 Posts
I'm looking for a new car as well so here's what I found during my test drives:

I currently drive a '93 Altima 2.4L 150HP. I love the car, it has adequate power, roomy up front (back kinda tight), and has a very smooth ride. But its getting old and starting to show its age.

RSX:
I never tried (car seems too small for my needs)

Matrix XR 1.8L 130HP:
pros: roomy, nice dash board
cons: suspension stiff - harsh ride (maybe preferable to some), engine loud, lacks power, ugly exterior

Corolla CE 1.8L 130HP:
pros: sits high - good view, nice exterior, fairly smooth ride
cons: acceleration and brake pedals touchy, lacks power but feels more powerful than the heavier Matrix.

Lancer OZ 2.0L 120HP:
pros: nice looks (except front grill), fairly smooth ride
cons: no power at all, abit small for me (test vehical with moonroof - lower clearance).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,849 Posts
eipromb said:
I'm looking for a new car as well so here's what I found during my test drives:
RSX:
I never tried (car seems too small for my needs)

-Too pricey!

Matrix XR 1.8L 130HP:
pros: roomy, nice dash board
cons: suspension stiff - harsh ride (maybe preferable to some), engine loud, lacks power, ugly exterior

-Inferior to the 3/Protege in terms of driving fun

Corolla CE 1.8L 130HP:
pros: sits high - good view, nice exterior, fairly smooth ride
cons: acceleration and brake pedals touchy, lacks power but feels more powerful than the heavier Matrix.

-I drove one many times. Hate it. Weird sitting position, tippy in corners, not something I could live with

Lancer OZ 2.0L 120HP:
pros: nice looks (except front grill), fairly smooth ride
cons: no power at all, abit small for me (test vehical with moonroof - lower clearance).

-Get a 2003 Protege over this one.

My bottom line: Drive a 3. You'll likely find out what smiles/miles means, like I did with my Protege
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top