protege 5 vs new mazda 3

accuser

Member
:
Mazda, Protege 5 - turbo
hey guys how do you think a mazda protege 5 /w muffler and intake will do against a mazda 3 wagon?

my boy just bought one and we were on some side street he started gunnin it.. and i gunned it... i was right on him the whole time... just not enough space to pass him... i think i can take him... i thought those cars were supposed to be faster... gonna race him on the highway sometime this week/weekend (unless he chickens out)

what do you guys think?
 
i don't know man but all i can say is that if my p5 beats this mazda 3 ... that's pretty gay for the mazda 3

it's got a bigger block... and more hp...
 
accuser said:
i don't know man but all i can say is that if my p5 beats this mazda 3 ... that's pretty gay for the mazda 3

it's got a bigger block... and more hp...
It's a heavier car. Just because it's newer (and uglier) doesn't mean it's faster.
 
the 2.3 is an option. maybe one not worth having.

id put my money on the 5 off the line butit just might get past before the end, good question my friend.

should make for good arguments in the flamewars section.
 
I can't find the power to weight ratio yet but I found this on Edmunds.com. Also I am almost certain that the 2.3L is standard on the hatch.

Mazda3
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=2 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=stripe-three colSpan=2>Exterior </TD></TR><TR class=table-sub><TD width="50%">Length: 176.6 in. </TD><TD width="50%">Width: 69.1 in. </TD></TR><TR><TD class=stripe-five width="50%">Height: 57.7 in. </TD><TD class=stripe-five width="50%">Wheel Base: 103.9 in. </TD></TR><TR class=table-sub><TD width="50%">Ground Clearance: 5.7 in. </TD><TD width="50%">Curb Weight: 2826 lbs. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=2 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=stripe-three colSpan=2>Performance </TD></TR><TR class=table-sub><TD width="50%">Base Number of Cylinders: 4 </TD><TD width="50%">Base Engine Size: 2.3 liters </TD></TR><TR><TD class=stripe-five width="50%">Base Engine Type: Inline 4 </TD><TD class=stripe-five width="50%">Horsepower: 160 hp </TD></TR><TR class=table-sub><TD width="50%">Max Horsepower: 6500 rpm </TD><TD width="50%">Torque: 150 ft-lbs. </TD></TR><TR><TD class=stripe-five width="50%">Max Torque: 4500 rpm </TD><TD class=stripe-five width="50%">Drive Type: FWD </TD></TR><TR class=table-sub><TD width="50%">Turning Circle: 34.1 ft. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Protege5
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=2 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=stripe-three colSpan=2>Exterior </TD></TR><TR class=table-sub><TD width="50%">Length: 170.5 in. </TD><TD width="50%">Width: 67.1 in. </TD></TR><TR><TD class=stripe-five width="50%">Height: 57.8 in. </TD><TD class=stripe-five width="50%">Wheel Base: 102.8 in. </TD></TR><TR class=table-sub><TD width="50%">Ground Clearance: 5.5 in. </TD><TD width="50%">Curb Weight: 2716 lbs. </TD></TR><TR><TD class=stripe-five width="50%">Gross Weight: 3611 lbs.</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=2 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=stripe-three colSpan=2>Performance </TD></TR><TR class=table-sub><TD width="50%">Base Number of Cylinders: 4 </TD><TD width="50%">Base Engine Size: 2 liters </TD></TR><TR><TD class=stripe-five width="50%">Base Engine Type: Inline 4 </TD><TD class=stripe-five width="50%">Horsepower: 130 hp </TD></TR><TR class=table-sub><TD width="50%">Max Horsepower: 6000 rpm </TD><TD width="50%">Torque: 135 ft-lbs. </TD></TR><TR><TD class=stripe-five width="50%">Max Torque: 4000 rpm </TD><TD class=stripe-five width="50%">Drive Type: FWD </TD></TR><TR class=table-sub><TD width="50%">Turning Circle: 34.1 ft. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
 
Last edited:
Looks like the 3 would be faster on paper, gearing might be different. Time to go race one. :)
 
<TABLE class=tblueborder style="WIDTH: 482px" cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR class=twhite><TD class=ttext vAlign=top>Mazda3 sedan - I4 2.0L (148 hp) 5M + ABS</TD><TD class=ttext vAlign=top>8.50</TD><TD class=ttext vAlign=top>16.71</TD><TD class=ttext vAlign=top>86.20</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

With a 16.7 @ 86mph in the base motor, the 2.3 should bend a P5 over nicely.
 
2002 Protege5 2.0 130hp, 135 lb/ft torque 0-60 9.5 sec 1/4 mile 17.0 sec @ 80mph
2004 Mazda3s 2.3 160hp, 150 lb/ft torque 0-60 7.9 sec 1/4 mile 15.9 sec @ 86 mph
2004 Mazda3i 2.0 148hp 135lb/ft torque 0-60 8.3 sec 1/4 mile 16.4 sec @ 83mph

In paper our Protege5 will lose. Sorry man!!
 
A few things to note.
1. Did it have the 2.3 badging?
2. Is the 3 an auto? (is yours an auto?)
3. The engine isn't broken in yet, so the driver probably won't push it, and the pistons haven't seated yet, so hp is down for the first few thousand miles
4. An intake and muffler (muffler or cat back exhaust?) won't really add any whp, sorry.
 
The proper number for the P5 are:

8.8sec to 0-60mph (motor trend)
9.2sec to 0-60mph (car & driver)
9.4sec to 100km/h (world of wheels)

mazda3:

8.9sec to 100km/h (world of wheels)
 
I took on a 3 sedan, had the 2.3l in it, we kept up with each other..

Could be the other person doesn't know how to drive too..

P5 should be quicker off the line, and better response, no drive by wire, unless the person knows what they are doing..
 
i owned one last week. they are slow compared to my car. i'm not sure what would happen if you did the same mods to one as I did to my car. then i would most likly be the slow one. but unless that happens. i vote slow.
 
I'm putting my money on the 3. It's heavier, but not that heavier. The extra power should overcome weight gain.

The gearboxes are the same too.

And the muffler and intake will gain you about 8hp if you're lucky.
 
End all the controversy. The Mazda3 with EITHER motor is faster than the P5. We took an auto Mazda3 hatch from work, and my wifes P5 with a stick and the 3 spanks it everytime.

You should really drive one, the 3 sedan with the 2.3 and a stick isnt much slower than a Speed.
 
Do you have any stickers on your car ? They would make almost as much HP as the muffler and Intake. :rolleyes:

The P5 should/would lose every time, all things being equal.
 
Back