Mazda3 Forums banner

1 - 20 of 87 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,505 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Just checking out reviews on the two engines... contemplating on which one to get...
Yeah, I know it's a tad early (okay, so it IS very early to tell). And we obviously want the faster engine...

BUT... I'm wondering if the performance gains of 10 hp and about 14 lbs/ft will make that huge a difference.
Was thinking 150hp would be enough... power to weight ratios of the cars seem very similar.

Planning on autoXing now and then, some SAFE spirited driving, and daily driving :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
I think Mazda's just trying to keep up with the Sentra 2.5's and Lancer Ralliarts of the world - two cars I think are butt-ugly next to the 3.

The preview on Edmunds.com basically said the 2.3 is a bit "punchier" than the 2.0, but not enough that you need it. I figure a 0-60 difference of like 0.5 sec. They said both engines were plenty powerful, quiet and smooth, fixing the one major flaw of the Protege. I wonder what the gas mileage difference will be... anyway, 148 hp trounces the output of the Civic, Carolla and Elantra. The only base model car that will match it is the '05 Jetta 2.0 direct-injection, which we know will cost thousands more.

It's nice to see Mazda ahead in the horsepower race for once.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,201 Posts
I think the 2.0l will be a very competent engine. I think at that point you have to consider whether or not the extra horse power is worth the extra couple of thousand for the S model. Of course, if you get the HB this is a non issue since the HB comes in the 2.3l only.

Hey, just remember that after a couple months we'll be seeing mods produceced for the 3 which will boost HP anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
172 Posts
I believe you'd be able to get much higher HP from 2.3L than 2.0L. Imagine putting that turbo as in Mazda6 MPS but in Mazda3 2.3L! That little car with 280 HP would fly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Yeah, I agree. The 2.3 is the only way to go, IMO.

This car is affordable to begin with, topping out with all the goodies where the 6 basically starts at. The only thing you give up is a little room, but that's made up for by the better power-to-weight ratio.

It's win-win, isn't it? Go all the way with the 2.3! =)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Yeah, I agree. The 2.3 is the only way to go, IMO.

This car is affordable to begin with, topping out with all the goodies where the 6 basically starts at. The only thing you give up is a little room, but that's made up for by the better power-to-weight ratio.

It's win-win, isn't it? Go all the way with the 2.3! =)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
172 Posts
jamester said:
Yeah, I agree. The 2.3 is the only way to go, IMO.

This car is affordable to begin with, topping out with all the goodies where the 6 basically starts at. The only thing you give up is a little room, but that's made up for by the better power-to-weight ratio.

It's win-win, isn't it? Go all the way with the 2.3! =)
I agree. You can get Mazda3 basically 2.3L engine, with every option including xenons, navi, leather (if available), sunroof, etc. and it'll still be around $18-19K USD. That's where Mazda6i starts off at.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,505 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
From what I read, the 2.0L has already been used in Europe for a year... oh, but the 2.3L was from the Mazda 6, right?

Hmm... so both engines are pretty reliable...I'd be interesting to see the statistics of each engine.

I'm sure the 2.3L engine with it's VVT will be better... but in what respect? better high end?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
172 Posts
Kazbaeden said:
What exactly is VVT (I'm assuming that means variable valve transmission)?
No variable valve timing. It's basically like honda's Vtec, but now most car manufacturer's are putting it in their cars. Of course its not same as honda's vtec, but it does similar thing.

www.howstuffworks.com
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,686 Posts
Yeah you were. Yep honda has a good head start on the other econo car companys that are playing with VVT.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,505 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
oops... wrong post.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,505 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
How strange that other countries are getting the 2.0L engine while we North Americans get the 2.3L engine. Will the 2.0L engines in Europe and elsewhere get VVT? Or is it just 2.3L?

Hmm... guess there'll be a ton of international tuning for the 2.0L :) [Turbo...*cough cough*]
Gas mileage should be better on the 2.0L, eh?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
172 Posts
I'm surprised they wont get 2.3L engine because their atenza's all only have 2.3L. But then again, I guess it would suck if Mazda Atenza got beat by Mazda3, so that's probably why they only gave them 2.0L.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
86 Posts
dugrant153 said:
How strange that other countries are getting the 2.0L engine while we North Americans get the 2.3L engine. Will the 2.0L engines in Europe and elsewhere get VVT? Or is it just 2.3L?

Hmm... guess there'll be a ton of international tuning for the 2.0L :) [Turbo...*cough cough*]
Gas mileage should be better on the 2.0L, eh?
Australia will also only be getting the 2.0L & 2.3 L engines only....

2.0 Litre output is 104 KW & 191 NM torque (on regular unleaded Fuel)
2.3 litre output is 115KW & 203 NM torque (on regular unleaded Fuel)

by comparison the Mazda6 2.3 litre Output is 122KW & 207Nm torque using premium Fuel ... and a dual Exhaust system....Where the 3 will only use a single exhaust system..

Although I bet there wil be heaps of Mods for the 3 engines in the future.. !!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,337 Posts
The dual exhaust has absolutely nothing to do with that kw/nm figure.

The difference is the fuel - in the american 6, output is exactly what the 3's is (160 HP), because it also uses regular fuel.
 
1 - 20 of 87 Posts
Top