Two teams. Attractive females only. Knee and elbow pad are permitted. Strap ons are worn. PENETRATE THY OPPOSITION!
TEST DRIVES!
2008 2.3L Mazda 6 leather.
1) The seat bothered me. I flattened the lumbar, and I could still feel both the lumbar and the divider between the lumbar section and upper back section. This will not work.
2) The motor is SO lacking. I floored it on the highway, and watched the Acura TL ahead walk away from me, while the tach screamed to the red zone border (6.5k) before shifting. I got it up to 80, but it just feels wrung out, and it's loud to do it. In town accelerate is pretty weak too.
3) Handling is crisp and sharp, I still enjoyed that. It didn't seem quite as nimble as my previous impression, but still good.
4) The visibility was an unexpected perk. Despite having a paper on the left rear window, I could check my blind spot by turning my head a third left, and that let me see through the rear glass. It was quite excellent.
2008 2.3L Mazda 6 leather.
1) The seat bothered me. I flattened the lumbar, and I could still feel both the lumbar and the divider between the lumbar section and upper back section. This will not work.
2) The motor is SO lacking. I floored it on the highway, and watched the Acura TL ahead walk away from me, while the tach screamed to the red zone border (6.5k) before shifting. I got it up to 80, but it just feels wrung out, and it's loud to do it. In town accelerate is pretty weak too.
3) Handling is crisp and sharp, I still enjoyed that. It didn't seem quite as nimble as my previous impression, but still good.
4) The visibility was an unexpected perk. Despite having a paper on the left rear window, I could check my blind spot by turning my head a third left, and that let me see through the rear glass. It was quite excellent.
2009 2.3L Mazda 3 hatchback.
1) The seat was much more comfortable. Manual versus power, interesting, but so much better.
2) Visibility was lesser. I felt more cocooned inside the car, lower down, further back, restricted. It was very noticeable off the right front corner, and to a lesser extent, left front corner. Afterwards, I concluded the area right under the wing mirrors is 2" higher off the ground for the 3, and forwards of that, the 6's nose drops off quickly, the 3's nose stays taller. It creates a big tall blind area, and it bothered me. Checking view behind was a little more challenging, the interior mirror was more obstructed, and I didn't go on highway to confirm lanes.
3) The handling was fucking excellent. It started up, threw it in D, and whipped out of the lot. The 6's handling and my sense of its location surprised me when I first drove one, but this was on a whole other level. The 3 had a poorer sense of its location, but such tight handling.
4) The motor was the same as the 6, and so, extremely disappointing. Torque steer was found under hard acceleration on a right hand turn, either that, or I just overturned, either is possible.
1) The seat was much more comfortable. Manual versus power, interesting, but so much better.
2) Visibility was lesser. I felt more cocooned inside the car, lower down, further back, restricted. It was very noticeable off the right front corner, and to a lesser extent, left front corner. Afterwards, I concluded the area right under the wing mirrors is 2" higher off the ground for the 3, and forwards of that, the 6's nose drops off quickly, the 3's nose stays taller. It creates a big tall blind area, and it bothered me. Checking view behind was a little more challenging, the interior mirror was more obstructed, and I didn't go on highway to confirm lanes.
3) The handling was fucking excellent. It started up, threw it in D, and whipped out of the lot. The 6's handling and my sense of its location surprised me when I first drove one, but this was on a whole other level. The 3 had a poorer sense of its location, but such tight handling.
4) The motor was the same as the 6, and so, extremely disappointing. Torque steer was found under hard acceleration on a right hand turn, either that, or I just overturned, either is possible.
So.... the handling and visibility are nearly a wash, I'd lean a little more towards the handling of the 3 over the visibility of the 6.
In terms of comfort, the 3 was more comfortable for obvious reasons, in terms of appearance, the 3 hatch didn't look bad per se, the 6 just looks more normal. A wash?
But the motor is the killer. Only the 6 is available with a V6, a small and weak V6, but still a V6, and still dominant to the 2.3L I4.
If the 3 had that same V6, I think this would be done.
But it doesn't.
In terms of comfort, the 3 was more comfortable for obvious reasons, in terms of appearance, the 3 hatch didn't look bad per se, the 6 just looks more normal. A wash?
But the motor is the killer. Only the 6 is available with a V6, a small and weak V6, but still a V6, and still dominant to the 2.3L I4.
If the 3 had that same V6, I think this would be done.
But it doesn't.
If I could afford an MS3, again, this would be probably be done. Handling would surpass even the base 3, visibility would be just as mediocre, power would surpass the V6, comfortable, hatchback.
But I can't.
But I can't.
IndyColtsFan
Lifer
- Sep 22, 2007
- 33,655
- 688
- 126
Good news for today: I snagged a 32 GB Touchpad and our hot tub has arrived.
Bad news for today: Landscape company told us they won't start until 8/31 rather than the promised 8/24. Grrrrr.
Bad news for today: Landscape company told us they won't start until 8/31 rather than the promised 8/24. Grrrrr.
MS3 at 90 miles away, $16300, 2008, 67k miles, black, Bose.
It's still too expensive, and that's a LONG ride for a car that I can't really afford and can't really drive.
It's still too expensive, and that's a LONG ride for a car that I can't really afford and can't really drive.
The nearby MS3 has no Bose, is silver, has 49k miles, $18000, 2008, about 15 miles away.
Even more unaffordable though.
Even more unaffordable though.
The far away one would be about $3300 over the price of the Mazda 6 under consideration, which becomes $3500 over after tax.
Using the differences in loan rates, they do intersect. Unfortunately, that intersection takes place with a 14247 loan on an 08 or newer, with the payment then being 318/month.
That's... not helpful.
That's... not helpful.
Oh, below...
Wait.
Below...
Given the loan amount being less than 14247 on a 2008, or less than 10747 on a 2006, the monthly payments of the NEWER vehicle are lower, because the monthly payments will continue for an extra year.
Wait.
Below...
Given the loan amount being less than 14247 on a 2008, or less than 10747 on a 2006, the monthly payments of the NEWER vehicle are lower, because the monthly payments will continue for an extra year.
sdifox
No Lifer
- Sep 30, 2005
- 100,490
- 17,955
- 126
The payments hit my soft cap of $180 at 9500 for the '08, hard cap of $200 at 10250.
The payments hit the soft cap of $180 at 4600, hard 5500.
The payments hit the soft cap of $180 at 4600, hard 5500.
I was using X as a variable for the loan amount, then X+3500 for the for the newer car loan settings.
My intersection point was correct, the online calculator confirms it.
My intersection point was correct, the online calculator confirms it.
So it's not below, it's above, to make a short answer.
Until I reach 14247 for the newer car, or 10747 for the older car, the payments for the older car are LOWER, and the terms also end that loan a year sooner.
Until I reach 14247 for the newer car, or 10747 for the older car, the payments for the older car are LOWER, and the terms also end that loan a year sooner.
And if I use the online calculator for sample values, 5000 is a reasonable loan for the older and lower-priced vehicle, showing $148 for the three years. 8500 is the corresponding value for the newer car, and results in $190 for the four years.
The only way to knock the payments back down is to throw another $3500 down on the newer car, which will reduce the payments to $111 over four years, or even $146 for three years.
That $3500 is a few hundred more than my reduced stocks. And if I'm willing to liquidate those, I could just take care of the older car almost outright.
That $3500 is a few hundred more than my reduced stocks. And if I'm willing to liquidate those, I could just take care of the older car almost outright.
For that, the newer car would actually have more miles, some 26k more miles, two years newer, similar options loadout, but be the MS3 with the turbo 2.3L, meaning also higher insurance costs, more things to break, and being FWD, suffer from torque steer. And it's not subtle hatchback.
:/
:/
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter