Mazda 3 or Lancer EX?
-
2.0 is not that underpowered at all
-
Originally posted by ceecookie:
2.0 is not that underpowered at all
the only 2.0 that offer rear drum brake
-
Originally posted by mh2:
the only 2.0 that offer rear drum brake
they have it in all disc too...the only 2.0 tt offers drum brakes is nissan sylphy....
-
Originally posted by mh2:
the only 2.0 that offer rear drum brake
For the non-GT variants that is.Personally, it's up to owners if they wanna fork out more money for a better sound system, GT spoiler and a rear 16" disc brakes.
PS: it dont end there, the owners can fork out 1-2k for aftermarket drums-to-disc brake conversion.
And please,dont take the Selphy.Who on earth wanna have a miserable 135 horsepower for a 2.0 engine?That range is reserved for 1.6-1.8 engines -
Originally posted by ceecookie:
For the non-GT variants that is.Personally, it's up to owners if they wanna fork out more money for a better sound system, GT spoiler and a rear 16" disc brakes.
PS: it dont end there, the owners can fork out 1-2k for aftermarket drums-to-disc brake conversion.
And please,dont take the Selphy.Who on earth wanna have a miserable 135 horsepower for a 2.0 engine?That range is reserved for 1.6-1.8 enginesSo what's wrong with 135hp for a 2.0? Seriously there are a few 2.0 engines that are around that range what. For example the chery A5 2.0 has an output of 130hp. Ok granted you can say it's a china car, let me find another example.. say the Renault Grand Scenic, according to sgcarmart, the scenic 2.0 has 136hp. So "no one on earth wanna have a miserable 136hp for a scenic"? You sure?
-
For a 2 litre engine,the norm for the current generation is 140-160hp.So 130+hp should be for 1.8 typical engines and strong 1.6's.
Very few people were,unless of course they get inflatuated with the model and buy it for it's look.
Typical everyday buyers look at the comfort,power,handling,crusing capabilities(road noise,cruise control etc),and whatelse.So if im one of them,i would be hesitant to pick the renault because compared to other 2 litre cars it has the least power(for example).Power is important and even more in MPV because of the heavy weight and in case the driver want to sprint faster for some reasons.
And in money term, what you can get in a 1.6-1.8 is in a 2.0 capacity engine so you're paying more road taxes.
-
Originally posted by ceecookie:
Typical everyday buyers look at the comfort,power,handling,crusing capabilities(road noise,cruise control etc),and whatelse.So if im one of them,i would be hesitant to pick the renault because compared to other 2 litre cars it has the least power(for example).Power is important and even more in MPV because of the heavy weight and in case the driver want to sprint faster for some reasons.
I can't help but notice that in this statement that you made, you have effectively related comfort, power, handling, cruising and NVH with power. So by your line of reasoning, because the Renault has less power, it is therefore inferior to say, offers less comfort, handling, NVH than a similarly more powerful MPV?
Are you sure? Have you ever drove a Grand Scenic? Or for that matter, have you ever sat in one?
Going by your reasoning again, let us bring up another example, say of 1.8 MPVs. So the Wish has 132bhp, while the Stream has 140bhp. So going by your line of reasoning that for the same capacity buyers will buy the one with the higher output, tell me, do you see more Wish-es or Stream-s on the road?
-
Ok,lets not get this escalate to an argument.
It's difficult to get a universal rule here,because the phrase goes "to each his own" so anybody has the right to get whichever car they want.
What i mean in the previous post is that potential buyers(assuming neutral) would look at the list(which i had compiled above)
Power
NVH
Comfort
Looks
Engine Capacity
ETC
To each his own again, lower powered cars does not means inferiority but then again,assuming the said car is priced more than the more powerful counterpart,are you sure you want to fork out more money which for less you can get another car with more power?
I wont be biased against the Grand Scenic, but with the respective power and the engine capacity,i recommend looking at other similar cars unless this one has the best factor which the buyer is looking for.
In the case of the 1.8 MPV,again its up to the buyer but at least now the horsepower count is competitive for the engine capacity.130-140hp is the norm for the 1.8l field so now its up to preference again.In the previous post i was comparing engine capacity to engine power,not the same capacity.
So if i like the Wish alot,i wont mind the small difference,because at least it's not an alarming difference like having only 110hp for the engine for example.
-
thk u everyone for the invaluable advices.
i tink i will get the lancer ex.
will go n test drive the car.
cheers!
-
Originally posted by *prodigy*:
hi everyone,
need some help here.
planning to buy a 1.6cc or below sedan.
budget <S$70k.
tinking of mazda 3 or lancer ex... any guys here driving the above car or driven both?
pls give some reviews n opinion.
thks!
My 2 cents to you, get Lancer EX for low FC and more comfortable drive.
For Mazda3, I felt low down and cramped when sitting in it. The rear seat is not that comfy also when compare to Lancer EX. The FC can be around 8~10km/L according to source.
Even Mazda3 share the platform (bottom of the car only) with Ford Focus and Volvo S40, but they are totally different car built and quality on top of the platform.
Power spec : Lancer EX 1.5A
Max Power 109 Bhp / 6000 rpm Max Torque 143 Nm / 4000 rpm Mazda3 1.6A
Max Power 107 Bhp / 6000 rpm Max Torque 146 Nm / 4000 rpm Can you tell which one has less power or under power as some claimed?
Basically we just don't ask too much for a 1.5/1.6A engine. And that's including new Honda Civic 1.6A, some say they test drove it and felt was less power and speed when compare to a Hyundai Avante 1.6A.
-
Originally posted by NewForce:
My 2 cents to you, get Lancer EX for low FC and more comfortable drive.
For Mazda3, I felt low down and cramped when sitting in it. The rear seat is not that comfy also when compare to Lancer EX. The FC can be around 8~10km/L according to source.
Even Mazda3 share the platform (bottom of the car only) with Ford Focus and Volvo S40, but they are totally different car built and quality on top of the platform.
Power spec : Lancer EX 1.5A
Max Power 109 Bhp / 6000 rpm Max Torque 143 Nm / 4000 rpm
Mazda3 1.6A
Max Power 107 Bhp / 6000 rpm Max Torque 146 Nm / 4000 rpm
Can you tell which one has less power or under power as some claimed?
Basically we just don't ask too much for a 1.5/1.6A engine. And that's including new Honda Civic 1.6A, some say they test drove it and felt was less power and speed when compare to a Hyundai Avante 1.6A.
Civic 1.6 is SOHC while Avante is DOHC leh, pls compare apples with apples. For that matter, the civic 1.6 has better FC as compared to the hyundai.
Oh and the underpower engine one, no need to claim, I have hard facts to prove it
Lancer EX 1.5A Kerb Weight 1,260kg
Mazda 3 1.6A Kerb Weight 1,183kg
So according to physics, if both cars have just about the same power, but with about 80KG OF WEIGHT DIFFERENCE, so CAN YOU TELL WHICH ONE HAS LESS POWER OR UNDER POWER AS SOME CLAIMED?
And no need to claim here claim there. On MCF, there was a thread about the EX started by the SE who feedbacked the EX 1.5 FC was about 11+, while over here, sinicker has also kindly provided his FC readings of about 12+ km/l. All this based on hard facts and proof, instead of my dubious many friends who make many many claims.
-
BTW, sinicker is driving a Mazda 3.
Not that I have anything against the EX, I quite love the design and the high tech interior and beautiful instrumental dash, but want to compare have to compare honestly and fairly and not just anyhow whack without making sure of your facts correct in the first place. Mazda 3 how old liao?? EX how new? If the fact that the 3, which is an old car, can be compared to the EX, it just shows how forward thinking the 3's engineering was at the point of time of release.
-
like which wan jus buy lar. still need to ask meh? next time get married must post online and ask anot?
-
Originally posted by hondapons:
like which wan jus buy lar. still need to ask meh? next time get married must post online and ask anot?
Very true. then again, got people who getting married also got post on AA ask for advice mah, lol.
-
Originally posted by nightsky87:
BTW, sinicker is driving a Mazda 3
please indicate that i am driving my father's car. later some people not happy. i just want to avoid conflict, you see. thanks! -
Originally posted by sinicker:
please indicate that i am driving my father's car. later some people not happy. i just want to avoid conflict, you see. thanks!Do you find that the Mazda 3 generates too much tyre noise? At least this is what I felt after hitching a ride in it.
-
Originally posted by alleggerita:
Do you find that the Mazda 3 generates too much tyre noise? At least this is what I felt after hitching a ride in it.
not that i observe it or it irritates me! but yes. definitely much more tyre noise than in an estima(i dont take a lot of different cars leh how to judge. buses more!).
eh nightsky87, ko zaw drive estima leh. -
to add on, it's only human nature to feel proud of the car a person has booked for.
so let's allow NewForce to enjoy his new buy.. as we all just listen, smile & feel happy for him okay?
-
Originally posted by nightsky87:
Civic 1.6 is SOHC while Avante is DOHC leh, pls compare apples with apples. For that matter, the civic 1.6 has better FC as compared to the hyundai.
So according to physics, if both cars have just about the same power, but with about 80KG OF WEIGHT DIFFERENCE, so CAN YOU TELL WHICH ONE HAS LESS POWER OR UNDER POWER AS SOME CLAIMED?
So you want me to compare Avante with Civic Type-R, which DOHC to do your so-called apples with apples?
C'mon man, just be realistic. SOHC or DOHC is not that important anymore when compare Honda super i-VTEC SOHC engine to other make DOHC engine. It is just a simple comparison, don't make it so difficult to understand.
Some more I haven't compare their price yet leh, otherwise all will say Civic 1.6A not value for our hard earned money.
Frankly speaking I love Honda Civic too and it was my initial target for my new car. But with price tag at $73K, I had to say sorry and bye-bye as it is not that value for my money anymore.
Btw about the weight, you think 80kg is a lot different? If so, then why Mazda3 having such a bad FC when compare to other Jap make cars? It FC can't even compare to Lancer EX. Man, there's more factors that play a part to the car power, not just weight. You got my points?
-
Originally posted by NewForce:
So you want me to compare Avante with Civic Type-R, which DOHC to do your so-called apples with apples?
C'mon man, just be realistic. SOHC or DOHC is not that important anymore when compare Honda super i-VTEC SOHC engine to other make DOHC engine. It is just a simple comparison, don't make it so difficult to understand.
Some more I haven't compare their price yet leh, otherwise all will say Civic 1.6A not value for our hard earned money.
Frankly speaking I love Honda Civic too and it was my initial target for my new car. But with price tag at $73K, I had to say sorry and bye-bye as it is not that value for my money anymore.
Btw about the weight, you think 80kg is a lot different? If so, then why Mazda3 having such a bad FC when compare to other Jap make cars? It FC can't even compare to Lancer EX. Man, there's more factors that play a part to the car power, not just weight. You got my points?
Yes, the point about the price i totally and wholeheartedly agree with you. The civic pricing is just.. outrageous, absolutely and blatantly overpriced out of all the 1.6s. But even then you still see a lot of civics on the road.
As for the FC, I guess the fact that the 3 is a 4AT while the EX is a 5AT does play a part in it, as with other factors. The weight was just a comparison, the mazda 3 may not be the best fuel saving car around, yes, but it is still a very nice car to have and drive, considering that apart from sinicker, there is at least 1 more forumner who drives the mazda 3 as well. *ahem*
-
Originally posted by sinicker:
not that i observe it or it irritates me! but yes. definitely much more tyre noise than in an estima(i dont take a lot of different cars leh how to judge. buses more!).
eh nightsky87, ko zaw drive estima leh.Wah, estima is a very big upgrade from his previous ride!!
-
Originally posted by nightsky87:
As for the FC, I guess the fact that the 3 is a 4AT while the EX is a 5AT does play a part in it
Lancer EX 1.5A is same like Mazda3 1.6A, both 4AT.
Lots of Civic on the road? That mean we have more loaded people here. Good sign for our economy here. :)
-
Only the 2 litre and GT variants of the Lancer EX is 6AT and 5MT
-
Originally posted by ceecookie:
Only the 2 litre and GT variants of the Lancer EX is 6AT and 5MT
not 6AT.. is CVT... -
Originally posted by NewForce:
Lancer EX 1.5A is same like Mazda3 1.6A, both 4AT.
Lots of Civic on the road? That mean we have more loaded people here. Good sign for our economy here. :)
i have been observing your replies...congrats on ur new ride..
i can understand where u are coming from with ur new ride and all..
juz tt ur replies are somewhat biased which may irk some of the people here...