- Status
M
my3needsaname
Yea pretty much. It does around 12 city only and gets around 16 city/highway. But if you hit it only highway then you can hit the spot at around 20.
It sucks but it's not bad for 7100lbs and 8 cylinders.
Amazingly that's about half as good as the 3. 12 from 20 is like 40% worse. So it does a bit better than half as much city.
Last edited:
M
my3needsaname
Yea I hear ya but Ford did pretty good with balancing power and economy on it.
M
my3needsaname
which year tahoe?
M
my3needsaname
Eh, I'd rather have an Expedition over a Tahoe...likewise an 09 F-150 over a Silverado.
- :
- 2002 BJFW, 2007 BK3P, 1979 SA22C, 2005 BK3P
this will solve your problems
M
my3needsaname
Probably not....it's a VWthis will solve your problems
But that is classic.
happy and angry
Member
Vehicle Research Fail
How can you say that you researched the cars for 9 months and then say that:
- you failed to realize that magazines only compare cars to other cars in their own class
- that you were rushed to purchase between three cars
- that you didn't know what you were getting
I'm sort of confused on these points. Buying a car like the Mazda3 and then complaining about it being exactly what it is, and presumably exactly what you knew it to be after 9 months of research, is sort of... uh...
But I digress. Why 4 cylinders, you ask? Because in a compact front wheel drive car it fits horizontally in your engine compartment (which works conveniently well for the front drive shafts) with room for things like alternators and batteries and radiators and fluid resevoirs, while still allowing enough room around the front end for mechanics to (relatively) easily work on things that need fixing which is sort of important for a mass-produced vehicle designed to have broad market appeal. Because it makes enough power to get you to 60 mph in about 7.5 - 8.5 seconds which is all anyone needs, and still gets you over 30 mph highway. Because it's the evolution of an already well established and reliable technology that Mazda/Ford had developed for various uses so they save time and money by, you know, using it. There are lots of reasons why they used a 4 cylinder motor, and very few of them have to do with satisfying your unrealistic expectations about what a car should apparently be able to do IE: V8 power with I4 fuel economy, crammed into a subcompact vehicle without so heavily overloading the front end that vehicle balance is completely compromised.
Nowhere else in the world but North America could someone b**** about not having the same engine output as an SUV in a compact car. My lord are we an entitled bunch.
How can you say that you researched the cars for 9 months and then say that:
- you failed to realize that magazines only compare cars to other cars in their own class
- that you were rushed to purchase between three cars
- that you didn't know what you were getting
I'm sort of confused on these points. Buying a car like the Mazda3 and then complaining about it being exactly what it is, and presumably exactly what you knew it to be after 9 months of research, is sort of... uh...
But I digress. Why 4 cylinders, you ask? Because in a compact front wheel drive car it fits horizontally in your engine compartment (which works conveniently well for the front drive shafts) with room for things like alternators and batteries and radiators and fluid resevoirs, while still allowing enough room around the front end for mechanics to (relatively) easily work on things that need fixing which is sort of important for a mass-produced vehicle designed to have broad market appeal. Because it makes enough power to get you to 60 mph in about 7.5 - 8.5 seconds which is all anyone needs, and still gets you over 30 mph highway. Because it's the evolution of an already well established and reliable technology that Mazda/Ford had developed for various uses so they save time and money by, you know, using it. There are lots of reasons why they used a 4 cylinder motor, and very few of them have to do with satisfying your unrealistic expectations about what a car should apparently be able to do IE: V8 power with I4 fuel economy, crammed into a subcompact vehicle without so heavily overloading the front end that vehicle balance is completely compromised.
Nowhere else in the world but North America could someone b**** about not having the same engine output as an SUV in a compact car. My lord are we an entitled bunch.
wolverine_man
Member
- :
- 2008 Mazda3 S GT Sedan
(mswerd)
This automatic begs to differ with you.
That has a v12, and a seven speed trans. A far cry from a 4 cylinder mazda and a the way the trans is setup is closer to a manual trans. Now if it had a 4cyl it might apply to what I said, but it doesn't so your post is fail.
- :
- 92 & 16 Meyatas
(glare)
and your understanding of a post that was clearly meant to be silly failed and you use the word fail to much. Lighten up man. Good grief.
By the way. The SLR is an auto trans. Plain and simple. And advanced auto trans to be sure but an auto none the less.
Yes I was totally comparing a Mazda 3 to a Mercedes SLR. Heck. They are like totally close to the same. Geez.
Last edited:
skylar2ups
Member
- :
- 2011 Mazda3 iSport
Way to push people's buttons Jeff. Good gosh.
viagra is cheating
- Status
