I get exactly what you mean.... A WRX has the strength to WORK through a corner... hustle it, then leave it... while the RX-7 will almost seamlessly just glide along with it... while the WRX will fight it... haha its hard to reiterate, but i think were on the same page!

About the caliber srt-4... ehhh, no offense but were talking same bull**** quality for anything other than the drivetrain...

Straight line performance the caliber may outrun the speed3, but the better interior, driving dynamics, overall feel/performance, value, looks, etc all will go in favor of the mazda... Im pretty confident in that...

my dealer is due to invite me in in a week or so to test drive and have lunch with him... very chill guy... ill definitely post up my driving impressions once I get the chance..

 

I hate hype!! I also am very interested to see if the Mazda delivers on what "everyone" is saying. the Mazda 3 is a well built car and that motor is strong in the speed6 but I don’t think the cars are in the same class yes they are in the same price range but that is where the similarities end. well price and the whole wagon thing.
As for Sportcompact car they think every new car with a turbo is going to be the next WRX killer... whiney bunch of WRX haters.

 

i checked the specs for the car..

it has 263hp @5500 rpm 280lb-ft at 3000 rpm and a whole other stuff i'm lazy to write. I don't know about front-wheel drive cars w/ turbo becuase of the torque steer but the site said there's all kinds of stuff that helps the handling.


Who cares, I got 173hp and 166 lb-ft 2.5i..... :I

 

I don't know if there's already been a link posted but there are scanned pages from Motor Trend Magazine's November 2006 story on the 2006 WRX TR vs the 2007 Mazdaspeed3 (the WRX is a sedan, not a wagon, sorry).

--
0==WW==0
"…axles of evil…" - george w. bush

 

Wingless, I have that article. Its rather interesting how from 0-60 its a bit of a chump, falling behind the WRX about half a second.. but by 100 mph, its a half second AHEAD of a wrx, then continues to open the gap... The fact that cobb is working on this car makes it VERY promising!!! Also to explain its "slower" 0-60 times... the engine calibration limits power in first and second gears to make the car "driveable"... but apparently its in 3rd gear where this car plays the reeling in game with a full dose of power... yummy

Now check this out... http://www.automobilemag.com/feature...daspeed3_dyno/

A dyno has been done between the mazdaspeed3, the civic SI, and the VW GTI... The numbers are kind of shocking.... The civic si, and gti represent about 90% of their claim, meaning only about 10% drivetrain loss... thats not normal is it? My guess is those two MAY be underrated a tad.... The speed3 however, only managed about 218 whp... thats about 18% drivetrain loss... IS THAT NOT TOO MUCH??? Either mazda overrated the hp of this engine, or the dyno was improperly done. (Theres a video, the hood is open with a fan blowing to the front of the car... This is bad, since the speed3 has ducting UNDER the hood that pulls air from the upper grill and routes it DIRECTLY to the intercooler... During this dyno, they didnt close the hood, hence the intercooler isnt properly cooling...) However, I must note that the torque numbers were something like 245... which sounds logical given mazdas 280 claim... representing only a 13% drivetrain loss (if it is in fact 280 tq at the crank...)...Given that 13% drivetrain loss, the TRUE hp numbers of the car should be near 243... That number rings a bell.... It was the numbers magazines were publishing as the estimated numbers from mazda before the car came out... Sounds like the 263 is bull****... hmm...


Anyway... It just doesnt make sense to me that a car as heavy as about 3200 pounds is capable of reaching 100 in 14.2 seconds (Edmunds)... How does this car accelerate past a WRX over 60 mph if its only making 216 whp???


Thoughts anyone?

 

I drove a Mazda 3 a while back and thought it was a very nice car, aside from the center dashboard where the "waterfall" was a bit too wide. It handled well, and it accelerated alright.

As for the MazdaSpeed 3, it's an awesome car, but I deem it laughable at best that this car will out-accelerate or out-slalom an STI in stock trim.

What stumps me is that both, Dodge (SRT-4) and Mazda (Speed 3) have had chances to make excellent cars at very attractive prices, only to drop the ball at the 1 yard line by "forgetting" the AWD. It can be argued that the MS3 would be "stepping on the MS6's toes," but the MS6 is a larger car, while the MS3 is compact. It would be no different than the Impreza and the Legacy. While the Legacy GT (Spec B) is larger and more expensive than the Impreza (STI), the STI still out-performs it. It's not a conflict of interest, but rather a case of one being a "tourer" and the other being a "sports sedan."

 

I agree, it sounds underrated in terms of crank and wheel HP. Still, 14.2 seconds is not a blistering run, and I'm certain a TR could match that in the hands of a good driver.

Even though Cobb is looking into tuning these Mazdas, I am not excited about the prospect. I've worked with friends on several Mazda project cars (2 Miyatas and a Protoge) and they come from the factory very close to tolerances and don't have much tuning headroom. It took about five times the effort and triple the money to add 20hp to the Miyatas as it would take with a WRX, and at that point the Miyata feels ragged-out and near its peak while we all know the WRX has 150 or more HP of headroom with supporting mods, perhaps even 200 with careful tuning. If you plan to keep the car 100% stock, the Mazda does seem like a nifty little car and definitely has looks and interior to boot.

The driveline loss issue is interesting. I've never heard of or seen driveline loss as little as 10%, even on FWD cars. 18% sounds right and the other readings sound wrong.

 

For starters, they have the same curb weight. Secondly, the numbers look like they launched the WRX like my grandma. A 0-60mph of 5.6sec and a 14.2sec 1/4 mile time.... weak.

And 8.0g of lateral acceleration is super pathetic. Subaru needs to find a new tire to use

 

I think with 280 ft/lbs of torque on tap, then cornering is going to be tricky. can anyone say torque steer? I tested a 2005 VW GTI VR6 for a week and while it ws a great car nd very torquey, the torque steer issue was a huge disappointment. i have FWD cars all of my life and moving to the wrx was an eye opening experience. Don't think I could ever go back to a FWd car again, well except maybe a '65 through '68 Cooper S. God I miss that car.

 

+1 on that. I had a 2002 GTI 1.8T and while it was fun (in a straight line) once underway, the torquesteer was pretty horrible. As for handling, from what I understand, the 5th generation is much improved. But, I agree, I don't think I could ever own another FWD car.....

 

I would never own a FWD, but the review mentioned the MS3 showed very little torque steer. But given any more power, and there's pretty much no way to avoid having torque steer.