all a taurus needs is some small things to be bad a$$.....
I would either get a Camry or a Fusion. Maybe even a Passat.
i dont see wtf ANYONE would buy a Ford car other than the Mustangif you want a 4 door, get an import.
they have that same 2.3 in ford focus, it's a shared motor... it's getting hard to tell the mazdas from fords
I used to HATE the MadzaFords like the probe/cougar but now that mazda is using Ford EEC it's much better.. Who ever at mazda invented the MECS setup needs to be stabbed in the eye with a rusty screwdriver and then have battery acid poured into the wound.
I would consider a fusion, or wait for the SVT fusion.. 400 HP AWD STI killer!!!!!!
they have that same 2.3 in ford focus, it's a shared motor... it's getting hard to tell the mazdas from fords.
Its actually not the same 2.3. Its basically the shortblock thats the same. The rest is different. The Mazda version also has variable valve timing and is rated at a higher hp.
That being said the Focus is a total turd compared to the Mazda3 as far as quality, chassis, looks, options, etc. The European Focus shares the same platform as the Mazda3 but the US Focus is an older chassis design.
Ill believe that when I see it, 400hp doubtful especially since it needs to be 28-30K price range. If there is an SVT version which I doubt, chances are it would get the same 2.3 turbo thats in the Mazdaspeed6.
Mazda 3 MazdaSpeed edition. it's the SRT-4 killer. http://www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/displayPage.action?pageParameter=modelsMain&vehicleCode=MS3
263hp and 280ft/lbs with a 6 speed.
SRT-4 killer? Not.
You do know that the "230hp" of the SRT-4 is rated AT the wheels, right? Most I've seen dyno at 230 or a bit higher. Couple of hundred pounds lighter than the Mazda and 14.4 -14.5 seem about right for the stock Mazda - doesn't seem to own the SRT-4, IMO, at all.
The only thing the SRT-4 has on the Mazdaspeed 3 is maybe straight line speed. The SRT-4 is still based on the ****ty Neon platform with Neon build quality and **** interior. The Mazda3 is light years ahead of any domestic compact car as far as being an overall great car. The 3 has a high quality interior, great handling, plenty of power stock, great looks, comfortable, and most of all its resale value is awesome.
Btw I used to drive a neon as a commuter and it was awful, the SRT-4 is still an awful car with a fantastic powertrain.
When the word "killer" was used, was it used to compare "straight line speed"?
And please don't be one of the people that uses the SRT-4 is a "Neon with a turbo" excuse - like saying a Cobra is a GT with a supercharger, or saying a GT is just a base model V6 Mustang with a bigger engine dropped in. I work on Neons and I own a SRT-4 and I see really nothing in common between the 2. And if the "Neon build quality and **** interior" are such disasters...why does my SRT-4 interior look like a total upscale winner when compared to the interior of my '02 Mustang GT. Except for Leatherastic seats in my "premium" Mustang, almost every piece of SRT-4 interior looks and feels better, especially the Viper-ish seats. And at 10,000 miles my SRT-4 has Zero squeaks, rattles, plastic interior buzzes and body groans...like my Mustang did. Mazda 3 = "great looks" ? WTF?
Don't know what the SRT resale market is like in your area, but I see stock low mileage used 2005 SRT-4's going for 18-19k...that's what I paid for mine when it was new last year.
When the word "killer" was used, was it used to compare "straight line speed"?
And please don't be one of the people that uses the SRT-4 is a "Neon with a turbo" excuse - like saying a Cobra is a GT with a supercharger, or saying a GT is just a base model V6 Mustang with a bigger engine dropped in. I work on Neons and I own a SRT-4 and I see really nothing in common between the 2. And if the "Neon build quality and **** interior" are such disasters...why does my SRT-4 interior look like a total upscale winner when compared to the interior of my '02 Mustang GT. Except for Leatherastic seats in my "premium" Mustang, almost every piece of SRT-4 interior looks and feels better, especially the Viper-ish seats. And at 10,000 miles my SRT-4 has Zero squeaks, rattles, plastic interior buzzes and body groans...like my Mustang did. Mazda 3 = "great looks" ? WTF?
Don't know what the SRT resale market is like in your area, but I see stock low mileage used 2005 SRT-4's going for 18-19k...that's what I paid for mine when it was new last year.
You wont hear me complimenting any mustang interiors either, they are pretty crappy as well imo. The ergonomics, shifter placement, materials, and especially leather seats on the mustangs are awful. But people buy mustangs for some of the same reasons as an SRT-4. Cheap speed with a huge aftermarket to make the car whatever you want it to be.
But I was comparing the Mazda 3 interior to a Neon interior and there is no comparison.
Yeah I understand the SRT-4 is more than just an engine dropped in the car, but the majority of components are the same. The suspension, brakes, and drivetrain are different.
The seat obviously are different but its still a neon
and I am not trying to bash the SRT-4
as I owned a neon, but its not even close to as nice a car as a Mazda 3.
If you dont think a Mazda 3 looks better than a neon, you definatly need your eyes checked.
But looks are subjective. Yeah the SRT looks more aggressive than the base neon but its still not a real looker imo.
When I was commenting on resale value I was talking in general vs the domestic compacts, so I guess ya got me there. The SRT-4 does hold its value better than a base neon.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?