Volkswagen Jetta 2.5 vs Mazda 3 GT hatchback

[raildogg]

I am seriously considering these two cars but I am confused as which one is better overall. In terms of comfort, the Jetta is better, but the Mazda probably has better handling. Power might be similar.

One thing that I do like about the Jetta is its great interior. Mazda interior has lots of plastic things but it is still decent for its class. I think for gas mileage both cars will be similar but surprisingly, bigger cars like Honda Accord and Nissan Altima get better gas mileage than both of these cars. The Accord and Altima are even faster and still get better mileage. Sometimes I wonder if I should consider the Accord or Altima as well. Not sure.

So which car would be better in the long run? Which would you buy now?

I am leaning towards the Jetta due to the better interior but that is about it.

BTW, I'm currently driving a 2001 Honda Accord V6 which got around 30 MPG when I filled up today. Getting something with less power, less room and less fuel economy doesn't really make sense to me, but I do not really want a Honda Civic or a Toyota Corolla either.

 

[theeedude]

I bought a Mazda3, and I like it. The driving dynamics and exterior design is spot on greatness. Interior design is nice and functional, but I wouldn't mind if they spent a little more to make it feel more premium. I like the Jetta too in terms of design, but I have concerns over maintainance costs of a European sedan when it comes to economy cars.
As far as your concerns for mileage, yes, Mazda3 could really use a 6th tall gear for cruising fuel economy, especially on highway. I get 30mpg both highway and city in mine with lightfooted driving. Normally you'd expect highway mileage to be better than city, but because of gearing, they are almost similar in Mazda3. But that is a problem for a lot of tweener cars, like Mazda3, Jetta, and Scion tC, which have midsize sedan engines with economy car gearing. They really could gear them taller with the extra torque. But anyways, Mazda3 feels like a much more premium car in the way it drives, so I think it's well worth it, and 30mpg is good enough for me. Of course with vigorous driving, it's more like 26mpg, but still OK for the amount of fun it is.

 

[randomlinh]

I'm going to obvious go w/ the mazda because I have one... but vs the accord and altima.. all depends on what you want. I suspect they wouldn't be nearly as fun to drive, but that is subjective. If you plan on carrying people quite often, I will say the rear of the mazda is a bit cramped IMO, especially if you have a tall driver.

As far as vs the jetta, well, I'm a little biased against VW, and it looks soo much like a corolla...

 

[Pliablemoose]

I would never buy another VW given the choice...

 

[Gibson486]

You want the jetta to get 30 MPG? The Rabbit can't even do that.

 

[shocksyde]

An Accord V6 gets 30mpg? Damn, I wish I knew that when I bought my car.

 

[Dman877]

My Dad averaged 31.5 in his 1999 BMW 323i. It didn't make tons of power but it had plenty of torque low in the band to scoot off the line.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: Dman877
My Dad averaged 31.5 in his 1999 BMW 323i. It didn't make tons of power but it had plenty of torque low in the band to scoot off the line.

Those cars are a steal used, despite the 23 in the name, it's actually the same 2.5 6 cylinder used in the 325i and 525i. Not exactly thrilling performance, but very nice cars.

Altima 6spd V6 Coupe > VW/Mazda

Oh yeah, the Altima V6 is $5k more, but 270hp, 27 highway mpg, it's a damn good deal. Gorgeous in and out.

http://www.edmunds.com/new/200.../100874941/photos.html

 

[Dman877]

Too bad most of the automotive press has panned the Altima's handling characteristics.

 

[mwmorph]

The 2.5L I5 in the VW is not a very good engine. It's low powered (2.5L/150hp is very, very low hp/l), not very smooth(I5s are inherently not smooth), and the Jetta with the I5 is just slow. 0-60 for the golf/rabbit was somewhere in the mid 8 to low 9 second range with the 150hp I5. In comparison, the 0-60 for the 3s is in the mid 7 range.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: Dman877
Too bad most of the automotive press has panned the Altima's handling characteristics.

What are you talking about? It's great in it's class (Midsize 6-cylinder coupe)

From Edmunds :

"Handling is another area in which the 2008 Nissan Altima 3.5 SE Coupe reaches out to its driver. Its 66.8-mph slalom performance and 0.81g grip on the skid pad are no better than the sedan's, but there's a psychological component to the coupe's compressed dimensions and slightly lower curb weight. Maybe it's just us, but the two-door feels hungrier on a curvy road.

And compared to the understeer-prone Eclipse and unresponsive G6, Nissan's new coupe borders on the ravenous when it comes to eating up the road. It's also much quicker through the cones on its skimpy 55-series 17-inch tires than either rival is on low-profile 18-inchers. The Altima has the edge in steering feel as well."

 

[Arkaign]

Mazda 3 road test, Car & Driver :

"Other formal test results are equally remarkable. For instance, the car pulled 0.87 g on the skidpad, a distinct improvement on the 0.79 g showing by the Protegé5 back in 2002 and more consistent with sports cars than econoboxes. A 70-to-0-mph braking distance of 169 feet is likewise exceptional."

So the handling is great, just as you'd hope a lightweight 4 cylinder car to be.

But :

"Let's talk about those getaways. Equipped with the five-speed manual and the 2.3-liter engine, our tester did the 0-to-60 dash in 7.4 seconds, covered the quarter-mile in 16 seconds flat at 87 mph, and attained 100 mph in 22.8 seconds. Those are remarkable numbers for a car in this class. The only comparable performance in the class was posted by a 180-hp Toyota Matrix in our June 2002 hatchback comparison, and that car scaled in 110 pounds lighter than our hefty 2957-pound five-door Mazda test car."

0-100 in 22.8 Seconds? 0-60 in 7.4?

BLEH. Even though it's good for a cheap car, if you can afford a 6Spd 270HP that handles nearly as well, with the same fuel economy, and much better looks, what's not to like?

 

[ognabor]

i'd say the 3, but that's obvious, because i own one.

the thing about the 3 is the driving experience. it *feels* fast. it feels sharp, quick, nimble, and balanced, and holds the road like a sonofabitch.

for a car that costs as little as the 3 does, its performance is superb. sure, if you can afford a more expensive ride, you will start to see it outpaced in some areas. that's why they're more expensive rides.

 

[mitaiwan82]

I would definitely pick the 3 over the Jetta...it would be more reliable and cheaper to keep up. I drove a 3 HB last weekend, and the 2.3L had plenty of pep (although I felt the flywheel could've been lighter). But I was actually only driving it because the dealer wasn't letting me drive a Mazdaspeed3.

 

[bigdog1218]

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: Dman877
My Dad averaged 31.5 in his 1999 BMW 323i. It didn't make tons of power but it had plenty of torque low in the band to scoot off the line.

Those cars are a steal used, despite the 23 in the name, it's actually the same 2.5 6 cylinder used in the 325i and 525i. Not exactly thrilling performance, but very nice cars.

Altima 6spd V6 Coupe > VW/Mazda

Oh yeah, the Altima V6 is $5k more, but 270hp, 27 highway mpg, it's a damn good deal. Gorgeous in and out.

http://www.edmunds.com/new/200.../100874941/photos.html

Gorgeous? You have to be kidding. What POS cars have you been driving that makes the Altima gorgeous. Nissans are engines with absolutly mediocre cars wrapped around them.

 

[Heinrich]

I had 2 VWs and I set out this time to not buy another one. I mean, life's kind of short in the grand scheme of things, why not try something else?

The problem is that nothing made me happy. Hondas and Toyotas <$30K felt like cheap Walmart product compared to the 2007 VW GTI that I drove. I wound up with a 2007 VW GTI.

I know that's not quite what the poster had posted, as the 2.5 has kind of a boring engine, but the handling, feel, and interior make a better package than what anything that anyone else offers.

BTW the GTI won car of the year in two different British magazines, car of the year in Automobile magazine and 10 Best in Car and Driver. The GLI is similar but with a trunk. There are probably some other extremely minor content differences as well, but, engine, seats, transmissions, chassis , 99% of interior, suspensions, etc are the same.

This particular video sent me back into the VW dealership

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zsYRdYHCXAE

also

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6VCeMZfyzQ


"DSG , best production transmission, including Ferrarri and Lamborghini"

see

http://www.caranddriver.com/be...07-volkswagen-gti.html

and

http://www.automobilemag.com/f...2_2007_volkswagen_gti/

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: bigdog1218

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: Dman877
My Dad averaged 31.5 in his 1999 BMW 323i. It didn't make tons of power but it had plenty of torque low in the band to scoot off the line.

Those cars are a steal used, despite the 23 in the name, it's actually the same 2.5 6 cylinder used in the 325i and 525i. Not exactly thrilling performance, but very nice cars.

Altima 6spd V6 Coupe > VW/Mazda

Oh yeah, the Altima V6 is $5k more, but 270hp, 27 highway mpg, it's a damn good deal. Gorgeous in and out.

http://www.edmunds.com/new/200.../100874941/photos.html

Gorgeous? You have to be kidding. What POS cars have you been driving that makes the Altima gorgeous. Nissans are engines with absolutly mediocre cars wrapped around them.

Well, I think the new coupe is very G35ish, have you even looked at the new coupe? Anyway, it's a matter of personal preference, I personally think it looks waaay better than the Mazdas (other than the cool looking RX-8).

 

[vi edit]

Originally posted by: Arkaign

BLEH. Even though it's good for a cheap car, if you can afford a 6Spd 270HP that handles nearly as well, with the same fuel economy, and much better looks, what's not to like?

Nearly the same economy?

Altima Coupe: City 26 mpg. 19 mpg. AND REQUIRES PREMIUM
Mazda 3s Hatch: Highway 33 mpg. 27 mpg. Plain old regular unleaded.

Plus it's $7,000 more. And has less doors.

GREAT comparison. :thumbsup:

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: vi_edit

Originally posted by: Arkaign

BLEH. Even though it's good for a cheap car, if you can afford a 6Spd 270HP that handles nearly as well, with the same fuel economy, and much better looks, what's not to like?

Nearly the same economy?

Altima Coupe: City 26 mpg. 19 mpg. AND REQUIRES PREMIUM
Mazda 3s Hatch: Highway 33 mpg. 27 mpg. Plain old regular unleaded.

Plus it's $7,000 more. And has less doors.

GREAT comparison. :thumbsup:

No, comparing the 2.0 super weak 3 is not cool. We're talking about the 2.3 that STILL only gets you a 7.4 0-60 time.

The 2.3 seems to get somewhat unpredictable fuel economy, but 25/31 is the official rating. Also the price difference between a 2.3 3 and the $24,800 Altima V6 6Spd Coupe isn't outrageous, considering it gets you a 100hp boost and a roomier vehicle. I'm 6'3", and the 3 just feels like an expensive Civic to me. The 200hp Civic Si is also compelling.

 

[vi edit]

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: vi_edit

Originally posted by: Arkaign

BLEH. Even though it's good for a cheap car, if you can afford a 6Spd 270HP that handles nearly as well, with the same fuel economy, and much better looks, what's not to like?

Nearly the same economy?

Altima Coupe: City 26 mpg. 19 mpg. AND REQUIRES PREMIUM
Mazda 3s Hatch: Highway 33 mpg. 27 mpg. Plain old regular unleaded.

Plus it's $7,000 more. And has less doors.

GREAT comparison. :thumbsup:

No, comparing the 2.0 super weak 3 is not cool. We're talking about the 2.3 that STILL only gets you a 7.4 0-60 time.

The 2.3 seems to get somewhat unpredictable fuel economy, but 25/31 is the official rating. Also the price difference between a 2.3 3 and the $24,800 Altima V6 6Spd Coupe isn't outrageous, considering it gets you a 100hp boost and a roomier vehicle. I'm 6'3", and the 3 just feels like an expensive Civic to me. The 200hp Civic Si is also compelling.

Edmunds....

They say 26/33...Having owned a 3s hatch that's pretty close.

If you want to talk about performance, he could get a 3SPEED for less than an Altima coupe and it would run circles around the Nissan. Plus it would get similar, if not better milage. And has 2x the luggage capacity. 7 cubic feet for the Altima coupe! That's horrible. You'd be lucky to cram a set of golf clubs in there.

Are you paid by Nissan to peddle your posts?

 

[Arkaign]

Also from Edmunds :

"Powertrains and Performance
All i sedans use a 2.0-liter, four-cylinder engine rated at 148 hp and 135 lb-ft of torque, while s models use a 2.3-liter four-cylinder rated at 156 hp and 150 lb-ft. Both engines come standard with a five-speed manual transmission. A four-speed automatic transmission with an automanual mode is optional on i models, while s models upgrade to a five-speed automatic. In our test of a 3 Grand Touring sedan with the 2.3-liter engine and automatic transmission, the Mazda did the 0-60-mph sprint in 8.6 seconds. EPA fuel mileage estimates for that model are 25 mpg city/31 mpg highway."

*puke*

 

[Arkaign]

Well the MazdaSpeed3 is still a goofy looking little car. Performance is MUCH MUCH MUCH better on the Mazdaspeed than on the anemic normal 2.0 and 2.3 motors. 7-8 second 0-60 is just atrocious. MazdaSpeed3 is in the 5.5-6.0 second 0-60 range, putting it on par with the 6spd Altima Coupe, which still looks much better, IMHO.

This is all my opinion btw, just because I'm not a fan of Mazda (had an RX-7), doesn't mean anyone else has to take it personally. I don't care if we don't agree, to each his own

 

[Arkaign]

Ah, one final note on Mazdaspeed3 vs Altima V6 :

All from Edmunds :

MazdaSpeed3 Turbo 6spd

20/28 MPG
263HP/280TQ
3790LBS
FWD
14.5 Gallon tank for 290/406 Miles

Altima 6Spd V6

19/27 MPG
270HP/258TQ
3205LBS
FWD
20 Gallon tank for 380/540

It's sort of apples to oranges in the end, they're for very different types of buyers. The only 3 I would consider would be the Mazdaspeed version, the others are just agonizingly underpowered. I can't believe how heavy the Speed3 is though, almost 600lbs heavier than the V6-equipped Altima. I also prefer a normally aspirated engine to a turbo if the power is basically equal. Less moving parts = lower maintenance.

 

[vi edit]

That's gross weight.
Curb weight on a 3Speed is under 3200 pounds. And a standard 3s is anything but "grossly underpowered". I did some mountain runs with a Mazda group in Arizona that left me grinning ear to ear. It's an incredibly dialed in little car that is both practical and fun to drive. A car is more than just raw numbers.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: vi_edit
That's gross weight.
Curb weight on a 3Speed is under 3200 pounds. And a standard 3s is anything but "grossly underpowered". I did some mountain runs with a Mazda group in Arizona that left me grinning ear to ear. It's an incredibly dialed in little car that is both practical and fun to drive. A car is more than just raw numbers.

Well, that's sort of the point. I'm happy that you're pleased with your 3. The great thing about the car market is there's pretty much something for everyone. Underpowered to me is anything that is say slower than 6 second 0-60. But that's just me. To others, anything over 5 is slow, etc. And still others don't care at all.