Pic of my weapons

[jeebusm3]

Picked it up last night. The Mazda5 in the driveway is the wifes/family hauler.

 

[DailyDriver]

.

 

[jeebusm3]

I'll get more pics and a review soon. So far I am loving it though...granted, I only put 50 miles on it so far. I am pretty impressed with the bluetooth, even the a2dp stereo bluetooth for music from my iphone. I'm glad I skipped the tech package because I have good enough nav from my phone, don't mind the stock stereo, and don't give a crap about push-button start.

I absolutely love how this thing pulls though. So smooth and effortless. Torque, torque, and more torque. And it sticks pretty well for a stock car. Understeer is minimal (if driven like a front-heavy FWD car). My miata has wider wheels, better tires, and FM stage2 suspension so the fact that I can compliment the Mazdaspeed suspension is saying something by itself.

It feels pretty refined inside. Quieter than the Mazda5 (considerably). Certainly doesn't feel like a $22k car. I love the seats so far...wish my miata had seats this grippy. Shifter is decent, not honda awesome, but not bad. Clutch is a little vague, but I'm used to that with the Mazda5 already anyway.

 

[Reyan]

3 Mazdas, I hate you. lol goodluck with you new weapon.

 

[DailyDriver]

.

 

[jeebusm3]

jeebusm3, not to get too off topic, but, how do you like the Mazda 5 in general? I think you're a good guy to ask because you have two other Mazdas to compare to, and your Mazda 5 is a stick (which I'm more interested in), most of `em out there are auto.

In general, how about an "el-quicko" review of the Mazda 5 you have there. How would you rate power and handling overall? (Of course I do not expect it to compete with any type of "performance car", but just curious) Is your manual Mazda 5 "fun" to drive in your opinion? Or is it more of a "slow, boring, econo-box" as it would otherwise seem to be from the specs?

I'm still most interested in the MazdaSpeed3, I know its silly to compare the Speed3 to a 5 (in terms of fun and performance), but if I finally determine that the Speed3 is "too small" for my needs, I will need to start looking at larger vehicles.

The CX-7 has been recommended for more cargo capacity, seems to be a very cool vehicle, but sadly no manual tranny... and I really NEED a manual tranny this time around.

I did not even realize that the Mazda 5 came with a manual tranny option until you mentioned it above. This certainly interests me, every time I've ever seen a 5 on the street, I've always been impressed... it's a really good size and lay-out.

So the next question might be, how do we drop the turbo 2.3 engine from the Speed3 into a 5? (naughty)

-

We absolutely LOVE the Mazda5. It has been a fantastic vehicle in every way. We have two small kids (aged 1 and 3) and the sliding doors make it so easy to get them in an out. It doesn't have the room of a typical minivan, but that's ok for us. We still take the kids and the dog on trips without any drama. But if you have to flip up the rear seats, seating 5 or 6 people....then you really have no room for luggage. So it's definitely not a great car for people with large families, but having those 2 extra seats is nice ever so often.

I have owned lots of fun cars. 3 BMWs, 2 turbo subarus, and more...but I can honestly say the Mazda5 is still "fun" to drive. The specs make it sound like a dog, but in the real world it moves around just fine. It won't win any stoplight races, but I have no problems zipping around cars in town, and carrying 80+ MPH on the freeway. It handles like a Mazda3 with a little bit of weight above the center of gravity. Definitely not race-car precise, but no slouch. It has some body roll (which could easily be reduced with bigger sways or lowering springs) but it's not anything annoying. I wouldn't autoX the car, but I do have fun carving through tight canyons with it.

I never drove the automatic, so I can't compare it to that...we like manual cars in our family, which is one reason we even starting looking at the 5. We are REALLY glad we did, too. My wife averages around 24MPG doing normal city commuting, running errands, etc. On trips we regularly get 28MPG, and have seen over 30MPG a few times. This absolutely blows away anything else "mini-van like". And it's priced really well too. We bought at a time when nobody really cared about the 5, apparently they are now a pretty hot commodity. Ours is a 2008 Touring Manual (which technically doesn't exist, supposedly only the sport got the manual but we found ONE haha), and I got it for $18,500 NEW in Feb 2008.

Oh and about that Mazdaspeed5...Car and Driver recently took this project on. They had a hard time with it but I don't think they had the greatest experts to help them. It would be neat if they ever made such a car from Mazda but I doubt it would ever happen. If you are interested in a car like that, buy a 2004-2008 Subaru Forester XT with the manual trans....

 

[DailyDriver]

.

 

[jeebusm3]

Thanks! Very interesting!

And yes, I do remember the Forester XT... too bad no more manual... and I remember the Outback XT manual too... not sure why they killed those cars, it would seem to be the ultimate configuration.

And Mazda COULD offer the CX-7 with a manual, that would be cool.

I guess there's not enough "car guys" buying wagons / SUVs... but such cars are just so practical... everybody finally realizes this eventually.

But even say the new Cadillac CTS sports wagon... no manual...????? What's up? Are manual trannies really so unpopular these days? There are a lot of cool cars out there that I might be interested in IF they came with manual trannies.

I realize that the modern "high-performance" paddle-shift automatics are much cooler than autos of the past, but still... there's no replacement for a manual. And CVT...???? I drove one once and hated it.

Well, at least there's a MazdaSpeed3 anyway, a bit small but at least it's a hatch / wagon type configuration... with some power and a manual tranny. Cool.

(rockon)

traditional manual transmissions will likely eventually disappear. I've driven all the variants that will fill the void and none of them are as rewarding. Paddle-shifted automatics have gotten better, but they are still automatics, with torque converters. They still add more weight than a manual, and contribute to more drivetrain power losses. SMG and SMG2 is ok at speed, but in low-speed parking and traffic, far from perfect. DCT and DSG are much smoother, but you still lose the ability to do what YOU want with the clutch and as if one clutch wasn't bad enough, now you have two clutches to replace? And all the electronics to make it all work? No thanks.

Even traditional automatics are starting to fade away. CVT has really picked up speed and whether you hate it or not, there's no denying the obvious benefits of being able to be in the ideal portion of your powerband for extended periods.

 

[DailyDriver]

.

 

[jeebusm3]

Well, of course, it's all about driver control... and the way the car feels to the driver... and ultimately the driving experience. I don't see how you can ever really appreciate a car unless you are able to put the power to the wheels directly, and have full control over that. There is surely something to be said for having the engine DIRECTLY coupled to the drive wheels.

A CVT... certainly a great thing in THEORY... but how is the resulting driving experience it yields?

Note: I only test drove one Murano CVT and didn't even get a chance to beat on it, but my initial impression wasn't that great... like with just about any other auto, the engine felt very "disconnected" to the drive wheels, very dull and unexciting feel. But, in theory, if a CVT was tuned really well, maybe had a lock-up converter (?), I suppose it could provide a pretty good experience... though there would be essentially zero driver involvement, for better or for worse. A traditional manual tranny is such a basic and primitive thing... and a hundred years later or whatever it's still the best thing in my opinion.

I drove the 2010 Legacy CVT recently and I was quite impressed. It was really smooth. Buttery smooth. And when I put down the pedal it kept me in the meat of the powerband as long as possible. Was it as fun as a manual? No. Probably faster though, and definitely more efficient. The Legacy is rated at 19/29 manual but 23/31 CVT.

 

[Dubcnea]

i am sad to think and agree that the manual is dying off. i was lucky enough to get a manual in my '10, but it was the ONLY 2.5 manual they had on the lot. they have the manuals a plenty in the lower engine (cuz apparently only people that can't afford the higher models want to manually shift) but had just this one in the 2.5. there is only one mazda dealer close so that made it a no brainer. i didn't get everything i wanted, but it's loaded (sans tech package) just not the interior color i initially wanted.

in the midwest, in the snow, if you don't have some type of 4 wheel drive vehicle to plow around in (ice not included), then having a manual is the next best thing. having control over the amount of torque you put down is hands down amazing in snow. i see the 'sporttronic' tranny making it's way into most vehicles. not the same. you control nothing...even downshifting is handled for you. plus people nowadays are just plain lazy. and with more drivers, heavier traffic...peeps don't want a bulky left ankle from sitting in traffic. it sucks....and they can keep the flappy paddle gearbox BS.

 

[jeebusm3]

i am sad to think and agree that the manual is dying off. i was lucky enough to get a manual in my '10, but it was the ONLY 2.5 manual they had on the lot. they have the manuals a plenty in the lower engine (cuz apparently only people that can't afford the higher models want to manually shift) but had just this one in the 2.5. there is only one mazda dealer close so that made it a no brainer. i didn't get everything i wanted, but it's loaded (sans tech package) just not the interior color i initially wanted.

in the midwest, in the snow, if you don't have some type of 4 wheel drive vehicle to plow around in (ice not included), then having a manual is the next best thing. having control over the amount of torque you put down is hands down amazing in snow. i see the 'sporttronic' tranny making it's way into most vehicles. not the same. you control nothing...even downshifting is handled for you. plus people nowadays are just plain lazy. and with more drivers, heavier traffic...peeps don't want a bulky left ankle from sitting in traffic. it sucks....and they can keep the flappy paddle gearbox BS.

I'm totally with you. I've had 13 clutches, with a combined 67 manually shifted gears in my cars over the years. (yupnope) Only two torque converters...one was a gift, another I bought and sold for profit.

 

[Dubcnea]

i had a 1983 s-10 back in the day that was a stick. then autos from 97 until this year (and one was a 3 speed auto! omg). god i missed the manual tranny.

 

[Vater]

I've only owned one automatic (except for the vehicles my wife and I have owned together--she doesn't drive manual): my first car, a 1987 Chevy Nova. Since then I've had a '95 Jeep Wrangler, '99 Ford Explorer Sport, '91 Mazda MX-5, and the '10 MS3, all manuals. I've loathed driving automatics for years. I know it's in the realm of possibility that true manual transmissions may disappear for good, but I kind of doubt it.

 

[DailyDriver]

.

 

[jeebusm3]

Well, for serious road racing, will they ever use anything other than a manual tranny? I just don't see it. And as long as they're racing them, there will be some demand for it in street cars. The availability will get less I suppose, but I just can't imagine that one day you will NOT be able to get a manual tranny in say a Corvette or other legendary sports car / musclecar. If that day does come, wow... then the world has truly ended. And what about bikes? I know there are some auto bikes, but, bikes will likely always have manuals... and just that fact alone will help remind the motoring masses of the future that a manual is a great thing. Or yet another view on all this, hopefully, by the time manual trannies are eliminated forever, I'll be too old to drive one anyway.

8 out of 10 corvettes are auto

 

[DailyDriver]

.

 

[jeebusm3]

Yes, I know... was very surprised when I had first heard this (uhm)... there are apparently a lot of wimps driving Corvettes out there now (spin)

But at least the Z06 Vette... and MazdaSpeed3... and a lot of other "hardcore" type cars are manual-only... I'm sure mainly for mechanical reasons, but it's still a good thing... it sort of defines that "real cars" use manuals only. Hopefully this trend carries on for a while. And if so, there will still be manuals in other cars too.

I wonder why the auto industry would ever want to phase out manual trannies anyway. I guess it would just be a lack of demand issue. But, gee, I hope there are always enough serious new car buying driving enthusiasts out there to keep the manual transmission alive.

I always feel special owning cars that are built "manual-only". Because I know that every single person that also owns one, and every single person that wants to buy one...they also drive manual. You automatically get to weed out all the n00bs.

I've only owned 3 cars that were manual only (Acura Integra GSR, Subaru WRX STi, and now the Mazdaspeed3) and each one holds a special place in my heart just for that reason.

Oh and speaking of the Z06...one of these days I'd really like to pick a C6 variant one up. Problem is, then I'd have to get rid of the miata....cuz the wife would never let me have more than one 2 seater. And as crazy as this sounds....I don't want to get rid of the miata for a corvette. flame away!


This thread has gotten very very off topic. Hope nobody cares. For what it's worth, this is exactly how non-technical threads should go... (thumb)

 

[DailyDriver]

.

 

[jeebusm3]

^^ that's one reason the miata is so much fun. I can drive the piss out of it on a curvy, low-speed road and it's thrilling. I might not ever even go faster than 65mph but because of the feel of it all, you have this huge smile.

on that same road in the mazdaspeed I've hit 80+ without even noticing it hardly.