Audi A3 and Mazdaspeed 3 dilemma

[MS3077]

Now... on with as an objective post I can give on this topic.

Your buddy never said it was the 3.2 AWD version, so I will assume it is the 2.0T version. Like others have said, it is basically the GTI engine (200HP /207 tq) in a car a little heavier than the MS3.

Pros: Nicer quality. More distinguised label. Used cost cheaper than MS3
Cons: Used. Slower than a MS3. (If you care.) Higher upkeep costs. (Audi)

And before anyone starts pointing out chipping, stage 1 / stage 2, modding bulls*** --- let's just compare stock versus stock. I am so tired of hearing, "Yeah, but if mod the Audi/Mazda/etc. it will cure cancer, AIDS, and win the olympics!"

I agree with you but to some people it's important to note how the aftermarket supports said cars. Most people don't leave these kinds of cars stock anyway do they? I certainly don't. It's kind of like the New Cobalt SS when compared to the MS3. A few simple inexpensive mods can make all the difference making stock performance almost a mute point. Just my .02

 

[Nismothecat]

I agree with you but to some people it's important to note how the aftermarket supports said cars. Most people don't leave these kinds of cars stock anyway do they? I certainly don't. It's kind of like the New Cobalt SS when compared to the MS3. A few simple inexpensive mods can make all the difference making stock performance almost a mute point. Just my .02

im willing to bet that most A3's are not modified. hell i barely ever see them, and if i do most are entirely stock.

 

[MS3077]

im willing to bet that most A3's are not modified. hell i barely ever see them, and if i do most are entirely stock.

Good point. I think the A3 targets a different crowd as someone already mentioned. My statement was just in general as far as sport compacts. The audi A3 is more of a luxury car to some degree at least.

 

[Vord]

I brought it up because you said, and I quote:No. They don't. That is the only point of my comparison - that your assertion was incorrect.

No, my statement did not specify: pick a bad faultering car company that many people are steering away from and compare it to one that is much more popular. For example, lets compare lexus' on its cars with those of the camry and the such and THEN you can decide.


Car depreciation also depends on the market, supply vs. demand. If their is no demand, price goes down no matter what.

Don't compare an expensive pos to a cheap wonder.

 

[MS3077]

Vord makes a good point

 

[Vord]

I didnt agree with anyone if you read my post correctly. It is a proven fact that certain european cars command a high dollar value and also retain their value just as well if not better than some of the top japanese names such as Honda and Toyota. Is my statement incorrect? Care for me to continue?

Continue as you like, but Japanese companies are holding their value much better than the euros. Specifically it goes like this you got the Japs, then the euros, then the american companies, then suzuki (just a joke, i dont know were suzuki is at).

Did you read the article I quoted you? It lists the major European brands (VW, BMW, Mercedes) as being middle or upper-middle of the pack in terms of average yearly rate of depreciation.

You're right that Honda and Toyota hold their value better, but saying that average to above-average depreciation rates represents "[not] holding value anymore" is sort of... out there.

I apologize, I didnt mean that, I was just pissed at him.

personally, as a member of a family who just laid out 65grand on a ****** benz, I realize the cars are still nice and stuff. Mom bought her car simply because it was a benz and she feels like they are still reliable and all that. I provided her with extensive research on the Japanese cars (specifically on Toyota, Honda, and the Cx-9).

You are right none the less, they aren't pieces of s***. I was pissed, I apologize.

 

[happy and angry]

No, my statement did not specify: pick a bad faultering car company that many people are steering away from and compare it to one that is much more popular. For example, lets compare lexus' on its cars with those of the camry and the such and THEN you can decide.

Your statement was "more expensive cars depreciate less, percentage wise. It was very specific, very exact. It was wrong.

Car depreciation also depends on the market, supply vs. demand. If their is no demand, price goes down no matter what.

You. Didn't. Say. That. That's why I made the point I made.

Don't compare an expensive pos to a cheap wonder.

The S-class is an expensive POS? ... huh. I wonder why Mercedes tests well in initial quality and slightly above average in re-sale value?

 

[happy and angry]

Continue as you like, but Japanese companies are holding their value much better than the euros. Specifically it goes like this you got the Japs, then the euros, then the american companies, then suzuki (just a joke, i dont know were suzuki is at).




I apologize, I didnt mean that, I was just pissed at him.

personally, as a member of a family who just laid out 65grand on a ****** benz, I realize the cars are still nice and stuff. Mom bought her car simply because it was a benz and she feels like they are still reliable and all that. I provided her with extensive research on the Japanese cars (specifically on Toyota, Honda, and the Cx-9).

You are right none the less, they aren't pieces of s***. I was pissed, I apologize.

No worries. Just words, just the internet, no sense getting upset about it.

Mercedes reliability is average or maybe a bit better, and considering what you pay you'd think it would be better. In terms of reliability, the brand can't hold a candle to Toyota or Honda, but it still walks all over domestics.

You make an interesting point though: you know your mothers reaction to the Benz? That's part of what drives up resale value. BMW's, Audis, Mercedes... they all hold value because of the perception that they hold value. A lot of people have the same "WOW!" reaction to the brand your mom does, and that's a big reason why depreciation is pretty good for those brands. It's effective marketing, branding, history, pedigree...

 

[Super Unique]

The cheap shot against suzuki is kind of funny, but certainly not true. Suzuki has been making vehicles with gm under partnership in north america for many years now, and doing quite well at it. Their small SUV products are very, very reliable and extremely rugged for their class. Their cars for various reasons have never been a serious effort, but recently improved dramatically. They just aren't perceived well since they haven't produced a lot of cars, and those they did in the past are strictly low budget economy compacts that are smaller than most are willing to live with.

Let's also not forget the complete bashing they got from consumer reports for the unstable samurai (test was completely rigged) which nearly put them out of business over here. This was a shame as the suzuki samurai was an exceptionally rugged and good performing offroader.

Here is a 10 yr old example of a suzuki small suv with well over 100k miles on it. Ohio car that I got very broken in

 

[Vord]

Your statement was "more expensive cars depreciate less, percentage wise. It was very specific, very exact. It was wrong.You. Didn't. Say. That. That's why I made the point I made.The S-class is an expensive POS? ... huh. I wonder why Mercedes tests well in initial quality and slightly above average in re-sale value?

Although, I do agree with you in general, we seem to be nitpicking at each statement.

all I am saying is that comparisons should be very well picked that is all. I can't really compare an charger SRT-8 with the MS3 jsut because it ran a lower time at the VIR test (Car and driver test, it was a little rigged. Unfotunately, the rigging was done by chrysler as they sent the car as an automatic with all-seasons).

We really need to compare the cars based on specifics, otherwise we will have alot of things. As for the Mazda 3/A3 comparison, I think that is fine, overall, but the whole reliability of euros and japs. its not even a match, and don't let me forget to tell you guys, mazda actually beat honda & toyota in a recent reliability test. Its actually one of the largest done. I won't be no reliability fanboy for mazda as I think the testing may have been slightly rigged, but it matches up relatively well for previous ones. Here is the link.

If You look at my messages and ignore the one i fliped at jay about, you will see that I am not saying the A3 is depreciating worse than the MS3. I simply think its too early to tell how "bad" the depreciation will be for the MS3. Everything else, is really off topic and meant to prove a point.

http://www.caradvice.com.au/1436/top-10-reliable-brands/

Overall, the A3 will "probably" cost more in the end. At 17.5k it will leave you space to upgrade, so you are probably going to spend a few grand. the car may or may not break, so we will see. And if the market continues, it doesnt look good for the euro cars. Look to the past for signs of the future, ever since 2001 the euros have had a slow decline and now things are becoming even worse.

I like the A3 overall and if you can do it, then do it. but if you had a choice the MS3 is my pick!! but i am sure you know my opinion overall!

 

[Vord]

The cheap shot against suzuki is kind of funny, but certainly not true. Suzuki has been making vehicles with gm under partnership in north america for many years now, and doing quite well at it. Their small SUV products are very, very reliable and extremely rugged for their class. Their cars for various reasons have never been a serious effort, but recently improved dramatically. They just aren't perceived well since they haven't produced a lot of cars, and those they did in the past are strictly low budget economy compacts that are smaller than most are willing to live with.

Let's also not forget the complete bashing they got from consumer reports for the unstable samurai (test was completely rigged) which nearly put them out of business over here. This was a shame as the suzuki samurai was an exceptionally rugged and good performing offroader.

Here is a 10 yr old example of a suzuki small suv with well over 100k miles on it. Ohio car that I got very broken in

I like suzuki overall, the thing that is killing them really is a lack of funding i think.

They make these cars and then advertise them, but then like 2 weeks later the car gets on top 10 LEAST safe cars. Its like s***, I don't wanna die homie!!

I love their bikes and I actually like the Ninja. I just had to crack a joke because I dont want this to get into a flame war lol

 

[Super Unique]

I like suzuki overall, the thing that is killing them really is a lack of funding i think.

They make these cars and then advertise them, but then like 2 weeks later the car gets on top 10 LEAST safe cars. Its like s***, I don't wanna die homie!!

I love their bikes and I actually like the Ninja. I just had to crack a joke because I dont want this to get into a flame war lol

Understandable. I am not sure how suzuki consistantly manages to be on the auto press most hated list. Over the years their funding has been extremely limited. There have been a few absolutely killer roadster concepts floated at auto shows, then abandoned due to lack of funding.

 

[djthom]

Understandable. I am not sure how suzuki consistantly manages to be on the auto press most hated list. Over the years their funding has been extremely limited. There have been a few absolutely killer roadster concepts floated at auto shows, then abandoned due to lack of funding.

I think that car was abandoned because it was so ugly!(rofl)


Good debate folks...lots of good info shared and this has really helped me with my decision! Thank you all!

Here is the game plan...

I will be getting the A3 in about 2 weeks time and I will be going to the Mazda dealer next tuesday to discuss buying the MS3. I will trade in the slow mazda3 that i have now for the speed3. I figure me and wifey will both commute in the A3 (we work at the same place and the A3 gets much better MPG) and the MS3 will be the weekend warrior (manual transmission, fast, fun car)!

Of course if I was a smarter man I wouldn't get both I would keep my current ride and invest the extra cash i would be saving...let the record show I am not a smarter man!!

 

[djthom]

Pulled the trigger

I picked up the A3 today! I love it! Very nice car and wifey loves it too!

I know this is a mazda forum but i will post pics of my new whip anyways!

looks like I am now 3 months out from my Mazdaspeed 3 purchase...hope there are still some around...

 

[FrequentFlyer]

Is Suzuki now being funded by LEGO?

 

[happy and angry]

That would be awesome. Vehicle repairs would be easy and fun, come with colourful and wordless instruction booklets, and we could build our own mods from spare blocks.

 

[Rotus]

I love their bikes and I actually like the Ninja. I just had to crack a joke because I dont want this to get into a flame war lol

The Ninja name refers to Kawasaki sportbikes only. Suzuki sportbikes are all referred to by their letter/number designation GSX-R 600/750/1000. Using 'Ninja' to refer to a sportbike is a great insult to anyone not riding an actual Ninja and to some that do.

It's like asking if the MS3 had mad VTEC, yo!

 

[Vord]

The Ninja name refers to Kawasaki sportbikes only. Suzuki sportbikes are all referred to by their letter/number designation GSX-R 600/750/1000. Using 'Ninja' to refer to a sportbike is a great insult to anyone not riding an actual Ninja and to some that do.

It's like asking if the MS3 had mad VTEC, yo!

haha sorry I was refering to the suzuki Samurai. I guess thinking about bikes and all that got me a bit confused. sorry for any "insult"

 

[Rotus]

haha sorry I was refering to the suzuki Samurai. I guess thinking about bikes and all that got me a bit confused. sorry for any "insult"

lol, I don't know why, but the name Samurai has never really bothered me. i bet it bothers Jeep ppl, when you call a Samurai a Jeep.

 

[Vord]

why would Samurai Bother you?