1. Guest, see the CivicX Forum Rules and User Agreement before posting.  After reading click here to dismiss this notice →
    Dismiss Notice

2019 Civic vs. 2019 Mazda 3

Discussion in 'Civic versus...' started by jred721, Jul 28, 2018.




  1. jred721

    jred721 Senior Member

    Rank:
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2018
    Posts:
    667
    Thanked:
    305
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    First Name:
    James
    Car(s):
    '18 Honda Civic EX, '15 BMW 550i, '13 Mercedes ML350
    According to this article: https://autowise.com/2019-mazda/ it says that the all new "Skyactiv-X" engine should provide 190 HP, 170 TQ (thats IF it passes testing) along with a generally more efficient architecture and quick throttle response. This seems reallly intriguing and it definitely would beat out the 1.5T engine if this comes to fruution. It is also supoosed to me more efficient, and have the torque curve of a diesel engine.

    The Mazda 3 is already highly regarded aa a sporty car and its consistently compared to cars like the BMW 3-series in driving dynamics. If you were shopping for lets say a 1.5T civic or sport hatch, would you also look into the Mazda if it had those specs? Or is it going to be an unreliable flop? Seems like it would be a pretty competitive vehicle in the segment.

    620C4BA7-03F2-4173-952B-D3E164233FFE.jpeg
     
  2. Civics4Ever

    Civics4Ever Ralley Red EXT

    Rank:
    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2016
    Posts:
    952
    Thanked:
    666
    Occupation:
    Swimming pool tech
    Location:
    Chicago
    Car(s):
    97 civic, 99 civic, 16 civic
    Please explain how this will beat out the 1.5T?
     
  3. OP
    jred721

    jred721 Senior Member

    Rank:
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2018
    Posts:
    667
    Thanked:
    305
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    First Name:
    James
    Car(s):
    '18 Honda Civic EX, '15 BMW 550i, '13 Mercedes ML350
    Well the numbers are right in front of you...how would it not? If your comparing stock for stock to a NON si 1.5 it has 16 more horsepower around 8 more torques out of an N/A 2.0 engine and because of the claimed tuning of the engine (diesel torque curve means torque will come really early on) and quick throttle response, all of that would most likely beat the the 1.5. I also suspect fuel economy would be extremely compareable if not better because Mazda has been developing this engine for some time now with the goal of insanely good fuel economy, so wouldn't be surprised if it did. Plus, I've driven a Mazda 3 before buying my civic, and it IS a sportier/sharper car for sure no doubt. Only area the 1.5T wins is tuneability because you can just crank up the boost and it'll walk the Mazda.
     
  4. charleswrivers

    charleswrivers Senior Member

    Rank:
    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2017
    Posts:
    1,569
    Thanked:
    1,352
    Occupation:
    EMNC(SS)
    Location:
    Kingsland
    First Name:
    Charles
    Car(s):
    '14 Odyssey EX-L '18 Civic SI Sedan '94 300zx twin turbo 2001 Ford F-150 Sport
    Garage Profiles:
    1
    It will be stiff competition. Those numbers are from a supercharger and not a turbo, so the power delivery will be very different and more linear like an enhanced NA as the SC will feed the engine proportional engine RPM.

    As most diesels are turbocharged, though that have longer rods, providing more leverage... plus *very* high compression, I'd argue the Civic might be a bit more diesel-like, at least post-reflash. You can make stupid amounts of torque at 2000-3000 RPM.

    I tried a '15 with a 2.0 and the 2.5 and took a '15 SI over it. Engines influenced but wasn't the deciding factor in picking a Honda over a Mazda. I went into the that drives knowing the 9th gen Si was a middling to bottom pick, and the Mazda 3 was at the top of the critical heap.

    I didn't like it. It didn't like much if *anything* about it, truth be told. I didn't like it's power, I didn't like how the seats felt, though they were seemingly high quality, I didn't like the cheap HUD compared to the two-tiers of gen 9, I didn't like the way the steering wheel felt in hand, I didn't like it's ride, I though the glued on infomat screen looked very tacky.... I could go on and on. It just didn't hook me at all. Nothing about it.

    Mazda claims for improved efficiency sounds great, but I actually think they're going to to just meet Honda, not greatly exceed them. The power numbers will make it competitive... but it won't be a blowout. SC cars tend to have lower limits for modding, but it's all based on what it gets to start with. If the SC has some capacity left and the aftermarket releases more belts (and they will) that allow tue car to make more boost w/o detonation... and assuming the car has an equivalent to K.control that is as forgiving as what Honda has... we shall see.

    Time is unkind to car reviews. The Mazda, if it just meets the Honda, may get a buy, based on it being the new kid on the block and Honda being old news. Still, the 2.5 in the '15 Mazda3 was a little down on power but still competitive to the K24Z7 in the '15 Si, and more economical as I recall. Engines played little part in my decision. We've got to see the total package.
     
    Last edited: Jul 29, 2018
    grumpyguy6 thanked this.
  5. Civics4Ever

    Civics4Ever Ralley Red EXT

    Rank:
    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2016
    Posts:
    952
    Thanked:
    666
    Occupation:
    Swimming pool tech
    Location:
    Chicago
    Car(s):
    97 civic, 99 civic, 16 civic
    I believe the 1.5T has around 190hp also, even though Honda says 174. A MT was dyno'd at 192hp? It was in a thread a long while back. I guess we'll see when C&D do the road test. I'm still not convinced of the engines technology. And they are still using a spark plug.
     
    charleswrivers thanked this.
  6. charleswrivers

    charleswrivers Senior Member

    Rank:
    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2017
    Posts:
    1,569
    Thanked:
    1,352
    Occupation:
    EMNC(SS)
    Location:
    Kingsland
    First Name:
    Charles
    Car(s):
    '14 Odyssey EX-L '18 Civic SI Sedan '94 300zx twin turbo 2001 Ford F-150 Sport
    Garage Profiles:
    1
    This along with Nissan's variable compression 2.5 are pretty cool technologies. I think they all have merit... though I don't know if they in some way compromise longevity. We'll have to see. Honda took existing relatively mature tech (DI, CVTs, turbos) mated it to a *very* small displacement on a engine block design that was already as mature as the K series and put it altogether well. Other than the fuel dilution and fouled valves doom and gloom that is a DI specific issue and has been, I've not heard anything really bad. This stuff as actually pretty cutting edge for being in a mainstream car... and may get widespread adoption next decade.

    We'll have to see what the total package is though. Nissan hasn't managed to entice me to look at a car at their dealership for a number of years. The last time I looked seriously would have been when I was van shopping late '13 and their Quest was comparatively awful compared to, well, everything else. I'd put it under Honda, Toyota and Dodge/Chrysler. Nissan brand language doesn't engage me like it did through the 80s-mid-00s. The did a return to form in the early 00s and have just made incremental changes when large ones were needed/justified. Just look at the Z. They've been riding on momentum made in the early 00s when their whole lineup got major redesigns or re-releases... after Renault bailed them out. IMO, their momentum has really been lost and they need a major push again. It's a change/evolve or die business. The variable compression engine is a right step, but they've got to make the car surrounding the engine enticing.

    Mazda really underwhelmed me with their 3, and made me wonder what all the fuss was about when I looked. I always thought Mazdas had one of the most attractive cabins when viewed from the outside, in. I still think the RX8 has the best looking 2+2 cabin ever made. Still, once you get behind the wheel, they just don't do it for me... despite apparently being great for others.

    My opinion sure isn't a make or break it for either one... but I've heard a lot of folks at least share my sentiments on Nissan. If nothing else, they'll give stiff competition and keep Honda from resting on their laurels for gen 11. The mild L15B7, at least for the Si, was kind of a playing it safe choice and certainly won't compare favorably if it is not more powerful/economical (or both) when compared to these offerings and the known 250 hp GTI and the offerings Hyundai has (though I sort of despise Hyundai).

    I wish I was a fly on the wall and could see what Honda is working on to release in the next ~3 years regarding gen 11. They took a big misstep from gen 8 to 9 by their own admission. I don't think they want a repeat.
     
  7. OP
    jred721

    jred721 Senior Member

    Rank:
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2018
    Posts:
    667
    Thanked:
    305
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    First Name:
    James
    Car(s):
    '18 Honda Civic EX, '15 BMW 550i, '13 Mercedes ML350
    Personally, don't really think you can compare the Mazda to the SI because the SI is a manual only, purpose built, sport trim of the civic x versus a sport-y normal Mazda which is much more comparable to a regular 1.5T civic. As far as interiors go, they would have to update it in 2019 to stay competitive but I found the interior to be pretty nice actually, and much better than the two tiered look of the 9th which imo sucks. But what swayed me to the civic x is the fully digital cockpit, the apple carplay, remote start and overall looks/value for money and the proven reliability you are getting on a more base trim Honda versus a base trim Mazda.

    You have to remember, Mazda is a much smaller company than Honda (their dealer network is nowhere near Honda's) so I don't think their sales will go past the Honda overall, but it could sway people in a certain segment looking for a sporty compact car that isn't manual. Also, I personally love the feel of a good N/A engine of a turbo car any day, and I know a lot of people who feel the same way. This might make people go towards the S/C setup of the Mazda. If you gave me a turbo and a naturally aspirated car that made the same power, I would pick the n/a car anytime because of that linear powerband. Not advocating for Mazda whatsoever, but just saying that there are a lot of reasons why someone would pick this over a CVT sport hatch. A lot of factors will determine how it compares such as final fuel economy numbers, interior look/features, and value for money overall. We would have to see the final product to accurately judge which is better.
     
    charleswrivers thanked this.
  8. OP
    jred721

    jred721 Senior Member

    Rank:
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2018
    Posts:
    667
    Thanked:
    305
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    First Name:
    James
    Car(s):
    '18 Honda Civic EX, '15 BMW 550i, '13 Mercedes ML350
    I seriously doubt that a bone stock 1.5 civic is making that much. You have to remember when you dyno a car, the numbers you get are in WHP and not the manufacturer standard of Crank HP numbers. You're saying that it made 192 WHP on a dyno which with a standard 15% drivetrain loss means it is making 220.8 Horsepower to the crank which is WAY over the quoted 174 to the crank. I seriously doubt Honda is underrating their engines that much. If that dyno result is actually true there is absolutely no way that car was stock.
     
    xbbnx, Civics4Ever and hobby-man thanked this.
  9. charleswrivers

    charleswrivers Senior Member

    Rank:
    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2017
    Posts:
    1,569
    Thanked:
    1,352
    Occupation:
    EMNC(SS)
    Location:
    Kingsland
    First Name:
    Charles
    Car(s):
    '14 Odyssey EX-L '18 Civic SI Sedan '94 300zx twin turbo 2001 Ford F-150 Sport
    Garage Profiles:
    1
    At the time, I was comparing a 2.5 (though I did try a 2.0 for kicks) 6 speed vs a Si. They were put against each other in a lot of car comparisons, with the 3 winning handily at times. Given the choice between the R18 in a non-Si and the Sis K24Z7, the Si was the only one for me. Despite lower horsepower... the 3 was still within around 20 or so of the Si, had greater torque and got upper 30s highway compared to the Sis 30. I don't recall but I think the 3 never had a LSD.

    This was also a newly designed 3 vs a last year of a generally unliked 4 year run 9th gen... so there's that to consider as well.

    I did find, after you opted for the 2.5, it seemingly *had* to come with some option packages that put it towards $30k at the low-volume dealer I did my test drives as... well over the ~22k or so OTD I paid for the Si at the time. I never got to haggling on the 3, and there may have been room to work, bit I doubt I could have gotten it down towards Si money. Sticker alone was over a 5k difference once it had the 2.5. there was a $1600 ground effects package on any one I saw. Even if I ordered one w/o it... it was still several thousand more.
     
    jred721 thanked this.
  10. Zooropa82

    Zooropa82 Senior Member

    Rank:
    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2016
    Posts:
    4,478
    Featured Threads:
    5
    Thanked:
    3,161
    Location:
    PA
    Car(s):
    2016 Civic EX-T(Sold) 2017 CRV EX - 2018 Impreza Sport w/Eyesight
    They have the 1.5T rated at 174 for insurance reasons. Anything over 175 presents a spike in Insurance because of the HP rating.

    The Hatch and Si, CTR are therefore more $ to insure.

    The 1.5T makes more than the rated 174, but Honda lists it there for this reason.
     
    RobbJK88 thanked this.
  11. IDriveACivic

    IDriveACivic Senior Member

    Rank:
    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2017
    Posts:
    260
    Thanked:
    137
    Location:
    Canada
    First Name:
    J
    Car(s):
    2017 Civic Touring Sedan
    Mazda 3 is always going to be competitive because no matter the test results, auto-journalists will pick the 3 over regular, non-SI, non-Type R Civic because of better "handling feel". The 3's styling is also less polarizing than CivicX. Now you throw a more powerful, and more efficient engine to the mix? On top of improved NVH, and (finally) AA/AC support? Yes, the new 3 will be a contender for sure.

    Some possible negatives:

    - Torsion beam rear suspension?
    - Unknown reliability of SkyActivX?
     
    jred721 thanked this.
  12. charleswrivers

    charleswrivers Senior Member

    Rank:
    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2017
    Posts:
    1,569
    Thanked:
    1,352
    Occupation:
    EMNC(SS)
    Location:
    Kingsland
    First Name:
    Charles
    Car(s):
    '14 Odyssey EX-L '18 Civic SI Sedan '94 300zx twin turbo 2001 Ford F-150 Sport
    Garage Profiles:
    1
    I was looking and was curious if anyone knows of an actual released MPG estimate of the new HCCI engine in a 3? I've heard things of "2.5 power with 2.0 economy" and the like...

    37-43 combined MPG.

    We're, what 32 combined on an Si and a little better on a base? That would represent a substantial improvement, assuming it *is* a combined number we're talking about, and not a highway figure. Otherwise, it's about the equal to what we have now.

    https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2...i-engines-asterisk-fine-print-subject-change/

    The best I found is this (and it's old)... but it looks like Mazda will reach or exceed Honda's figures.

    Given how long I've heard HCCI was coming out and how long the test mules were running around, I figured we'd of heard some harder estimates by now... but anything I've found is still pretty old news.
     
    Last edited: Jul 30, 2018
    jred721 and grumpyguy6 thanked this.
  13. OP
    jred721

    jred721 Senior Member

    Rank:
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2018
    Posts:
    667
    Thanked:
    305
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    First Name:
    James
    Car(s):
    '18 Honda Civic EX, '15 BMW 550i, '13 Mercedes ML350
    Maybe it is making over 174 HP but is it really to the point where it is making almost 47 HP more than what was stated by Honda? 220 is a LOT in the car the size of a civic, and I feel like if it was making that it would feel much quicker (not that it isn't already).
     
  14. LegendaryElite

    LegendaryElite Senior Member

    Rank:
    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2018
    Posts:
    121
    Thanked:
    76
    Location:
    Tallahassee, FL
    Car(s):
    2017 Civic EX w/ Sensing
    This might be irrelevant since both cars are going to get their refresh next year, but since this is the only ongoing thread about Mazda 3, I'll post some thought here.
    I originally posted this in another thread, but figured that this can be useful for those cross-shopping hence the repost.

    Since my fellow Asians universally love the Kodo design language, I've gotten a lot of opportunities to drive in the Mazdas.
    All in all, both Civic X and Mazda 3 (I'm talking about 2017 sedan models here, specifically) are great cars, and I'd argue that they are two of the best in the class.
    I personally love the Civic X more, but each to their own.

    What I like about Mazda 3 -
    + Bottom-mounted gas pedal.
    + Available manual mode due to the 6-speed automatic transmission.
    + Active safety features that are not available on the Civic X (e.g. blind-spot monitoring and cross-traffic alert).
    + Better climate control. The touch-screen-integrated one on the Civic X is just bad.

    What Civic X does better -
    + Driving dynamics. No matter what the critics say, I love the handling of my Civic more. But both are top-notch in the compact class.
    + More space everywhere (comparing sedan models) - cabin storage, trunk, front and back seats, Civic X wins in every categories. (may not be obvious in numbers, but it feels that way.)
    + ACC is available on every trim. Extremely useful for long road trips.
    + Android auto / Apple Carplay, or overall infotainment. The Mazda 3's system is functional, but I don't like the rotary button. And you can only use the touchscreen while parking.
    + Resale value. Needless to say, Hondas are the absolute best in this category.

    What are comparable -
    = Seat comfort. I've only driven in cloth seats, and both are way better than Corolla's or Elantra's seats.
    = Warranty. Almost the same except some specific ones like corrosion. Both are bad comparing to VW's 6 year bumper-to-bumper or Korean's 10 yr/100000 miles powertrain.
    = Value. Both are fine. I'd say Corolla and Jetta have more value for your money in terms of technology and features. Still better than American and Korean brands (low resale value, less standard equipment nowaday) though.
    = Design. Look is subjective, but I haven't heard anyone criticizes the design of either of these two.

    Verdict -
    I love my Civic X, and I'm sure you won't regret getting one. However Mazda 3 is a respectable competitor, and you will likely love it too.
     
    xbbnx thanked this.
  15. hunter44102 Senior Member

    Rank:
    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2015
    Posts:
    507
    Thanked:
    233
    Location:
    Cleveland
    Car(s):
    2006 Civic Hybrid, 2016 Civic Touring
    What about mileage? The 2019 Mazda 3 is supposed to have some new Compression engine that gets an extra 6-8 mpg's.
     
Loading...

Share This Page