2021 Mazda3 Turbo

Isn't this just some parts bin "why not?" engineering?

The 2.5 turbo is a remarkably good engine in the CX-9, it'd be a hoot in the 3.

I'm glad it exists and the power levels are reasonable for the class (hopefully all that torque evens things out with the AWD, and I'll definitely be keeping an ear out for what Corksport and Racing Beat do with it) but given their existing price point it's almost certainly going to be pushing towards the Type-R range.  Maybe they figure the luxe features, AWD and lower price point can lure people who are turned off by the Type-R's looks.

Either way, this car doesn't make sense at all when the Veloster-N with PP exists and is several thousand dollars cheaper.  Plus, the Veloster-N just plain looks better than the 3.

jb229 said:

Plus, the Veloster-N just plain looks better than the 3.

jb229 said:

I'm glad it exists and the power levels are reasonable for the class (hopefully all that torque evens things out with the AWD, and I'll definitely be keeping an ear out for what Corksport and Racing Beat do with it) but given their existing price point it's almost certainly going to be pushing towards the Type-R range.  Maybe they figure the luxe features, AWD and lower price point can lure people who are turned off by the Type-R's looks.

Either way, this car doesn't make sense at all when the Veloster-N with PP exists and is several thousand dollars cheaper.  Plus, the Veloster-N just plain looks better than the 3.

It is looking to me like the second coming of the Mazdaspeed6.

Another car that people were put off by the high mandatory content, and poor performanmce relative to contemporary cars that were geared more to the "fast" spectrum than "adult".

Also, another car that sold poorly new, but was prized as a used car.

I'm too far removed from 14 years old to want to be seen in a Veloster N.  Or a Type R, for that matter.

Pete. (l33t FS) said

I'm too far removed from 14 years old to want to be seen in a Veloster N.  Or a Type R, for that matter.

So you'd completely understand why, since I'm still a ways from being a senior, I wouldn't want to be seen in a pedestrian 4 dr like that 3

As someone who bought the last of the old body style 3, a 2018, I'm glad I did.  The new hatch style completely turns me off.  The reason I bought a hatch 3 and not the sedan was for cargo.  The '18 model is cramped enough as it is- my understanding is the '19 has an even more compromised boot area.  Add to that the massive hulking blind spot in the back and I'm not going to be trading mine in on the new one, that's for sure.  I was out the door for under 18k on my car, too. 

The power would be nice...I bought a 2.0 Sport model with the 6 speed; If I could have had the 2.5 without all the Touring garbage I would have, but they didn't package them that way.  Frankly, though, the turbo cars I test drove (Cruze diesel, Civic) felt laggy and jerky with the manual.  So I can sort of see why this is A/T only. 

The Civic is too boy-racer.  I really appreciate the subdued aesthetics of the 3. 

My own 2 cents, they should've used the 2018 as a baseline, given it an extra 3" of length in the cargo area, same wheelbase, made the 2.5 naturally aspirated the base engine, kept the manual, and gone up against the VW sportwagen.  I guess that's what they're going for with the CX-30, but I don't want AWD, ground clearance, or plastic cladding.  And Mazda's gearbox is a thing of beauty.  I really enjoy rowing through it, even if it is at 5 mph on the beltway. 

I saw an early 3 hatch today on the way home from work, a rarity around here, and I was surprised how dated it looked.

Good luck getting a CTR For below 40k. Mark ups are insane from what I’m hearing.

CyberEric said:

Good luck getting a CTR For below 40k. Mark ups are insane from what I’m hearing.

Markups were insane. Plenty of dealers selling at MSRP. As I noted in another thread, my brother picked up his CTR from Spreen (So cal), MSRP, as have many others . Plenty of thread info, if you are actually interested in picking one up

https://www.civicx.com/forum/threads/ctr-at-or-below-sticker-nice-list.11640/page-255

In reply to mr2s2000elise :

Good to know. I’m not interested. Too expensive. Too ugly. I’m sure it drives amazing though. Everyone who drives it is gaga for it.

I don’t buy cars that cost this much money. Which is exactly why Mazda, and others, don’t give a damn about what I think.

My last auto purchase was a $1600 economy car from 1991. Car companies are right to pay me no mind.

z31maniac said:

DirtyBird222 said:

z31maniac said:

DirtyBird222 said:

IMHO pricing will kill this thing as it currently is now. I can grab a Civic Hatchback Sport with a 6-spd MT for less than $25k. The same spec Mazda3 hatch is $29k. A Hyundai Veloster-N with the PP is $30k and a GTI can be had for $30k. Then you have the Civic Si and WRX sedan options at sub $30k. There are much sportier options out there for less or equal pricing and I feel like Mazda is totally missing the mark with this car as a whole (not just the turbo). I get they are trying to be more of a boutique upmarket car maker; but, com'on...they are pricing themselves out of the game. 

I totally feel the turbo car will be in Civic Type R pricing...

Yeah, but Subaru's have such great interiors and build quality..............oh wait. 

Type R pricing? I don't think everyone in the decision making path at Mazda is high on cocaine and opium to think anyone would look at this car for $37k or more. 

It's going to be in the mid-30s, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to look at their current pricing and options to figure that one out. If I'm wrong I owe you a six pack of your choice of malt liquor.

I've owned many a Subaru and their current build quality and interior quality is light years better than what most people base their opinions on. 

Could be, I don't know. I'm saying the upper-management at Mazda must be seriously high on pyschotropic substances if they think anyone is going to buy that car with an MSRP approaching $37k. Maybe there are some economies of scale since the engine is already developed? Again, I don't know. 

I've owned a "modern Subaru," and while I loved my '15 BRZ (purchased new), build quality and interior quality are not anything to write home about. The '18 STi I test drove a few years ago felt like a late-2000s Hyundai on the inside. If you think it is something to write home about, maybe you should lay off the Malt Liquor.

Or at least move on to grown up booze. 

I don't drink malt liquor, that's just what I'm offering you. :) 

Peabody said:

Pete. (l33t FS) said

I'm too far removed from 14 years old to want to be seen in a Veloster N.  Or a Type R, for that matter.

So you'd completely understand why, since I'm still a ways from being a senior, I wouldn't want to be seen in a pedestrian 4 dr like that 3

The nice thing about a large market is that there can be vehicles for every taste.

i wouldn't mind the N if it wss monochrome, and had wheels that didn't look like they were torn from an issue of Super Street.

OTOH with one exception, every CTR I have seen was driven by someone who looked like they were in their 60s.

Pete. (l33t FS) said:

OTOH with one exception, every CTR I have seen was driven by someone who looked like they were in their 60s.

Maybe it's geography 

around here (saw two CTR today) every CTR Owner seems to be 25-40

I bet Mazda doesn’t want this to be compared to the GTI, but the Audi A3. They seem to want that buyer, not the GTI buyer. It may actually compare favorably with the A3.

I agree with this.  

It is looking to me like the second coming of the Mazdaspeed6.

Another car that people were put off by the high mandatory content, and poor performanmce relative to contemporary cars that were geared more to the "fast" spectrum than "adult".

Also with this. 

One way that it will be very reminiscent of the old Mazdaspeed 3/6's is that with a hp/tq spread like 250/310 (or whatever it is), you can be damn sure the party will end at 5500 rpm just like old times. 

My wife chooses not to drive a manual shift car (can't blame her, in traffic) and has a 2013 Mazda 3 Sport (hatch).  The tap shift mode isn't bad, if they retained that in this new generation. 

If the damned thing looked a bit better the new car  might be a contender for her next vehicle (not that one can be too particular - hers is the last year of the second generation, the one that looks like it is chewing on a chocolate bar, sideways) 

The comparison to the MS6 is an interesting one.

This new 3 won’t have the diff or manual trans the MS6 had, but maybe it won’t (hopefully) have the mechanical issues either. The issues people had with it at the time don’t really concern me. It’s not an Evo, and that’s fine. I would really want a MS6 now if it had a different reputation regarding maintenance.

The only reason I care about Mazda releasing cars is that I might buy them in 10-15 years. Maybe the shortcomings of this new car will be addressed by the aftermarket. The only problem is the auto will be hard to correct. The current Mazda auto is very good at least.

wsphon, have you seen one in person? Have you seen the sedan?

I think Mazda is trying to be too upmarket here. Get back to basics. Make me another base cx-5 6 speed manual please. They have them in other markets so that is no excuse. 

CyberEric said:

 

wsphon, have you seen one in person? Have you seen the sedan?

No local inventory yet . And I've heard that the Sport/hatchback model has some blind spots in the rear quarters that the earlier versions didn't have.

In reply to wspohn :

Gotcha. Check one out in person when you can. I’m of the opinion that the new 3 looks fantastic, inside and out, especially when viewed in person in a color that shows off the subtle lines.

And the sedan doesn’t have the blind spots associated with the huge c-pillar in the hatch.

If the AWD isn't completely ABS controlled with electronic nannies that can't be turned off it might be worth a look.

We want a LOT of these to sell. They'll be great engine donors down the road.

 

In reply to Brett_Murphy (Forum Patrón) :

Why should it be much different than all the 2.5 turbos in the SUVs?  There's a ton of them out there right now.

I'm not convinced that electronically controlled AWD is necessarily a bad thing.  My Volvo's Haldex feels like magic.

Just bringing this up.  I saw a '21 turbo AWD hatch listed at $33k and a sedan for $38k.

250hp, 320 ft-lb of torque.

I assume it has a twist beam rear suspension like the CX-3.

Pete. (l33t FS) said:

Just bringing this up.  I saw a '21 turbo AWD hatch listed at $33k and a sedan for $38k.

 

250hp, 320 ft-lb of torque.

 

I assume it has a twist beam rear suspension like the CX-3.

Before the massive spike in car prices a few months ago, I bought my 2021 Mazda 3 Turbo hatchback brand new for $28.9k. I essentially bought it for WRX money (both turbo 4's, AWD, etc), but it's a heck of a lot nicer and more comfortable than any Subaru I've ever driven. 
 

Yes, it has a twist beam rear suspension. 

Still automatic-only though.  Shame, but if its as good as most autos these days, it's probably not a big deal.

I've had 3 3's.  My son had a 3, GF had a 3, friend bought a manual 3 on my suggestion a couple of years back.  It would be my go-to compact but they changed the focus of the car to a more upscale and less sporty buyer.  I hope that works out for them, would hate to lose the Miata too.