Having driven the Mazda 3 in all body styles and numerous Civics (but no '06 models) I really enjoy the driving dynamics of Mazda over the Honda. And as others have noted you can equip the Mazda with leather and other options. I do believe the 2.3 and gearing used to produce good response results in lower mileage for most uses but worth it to me.

 

Wow, the 3 pounded the new Civic in the above Edmunds test.

 

I really like both the Civic and the 3. If I want grocery getter duties and better milage, I would take the civic. For sportier looks and more fun driving I would take the 3. You could also look at a Civic SI but that is coupe only.

My fiance is interested in both and I would think either is a great purchase. Since she will only drive an automatic, I would think that perhaps the Civic is better for the milage and features. If the car were for me it would be the three with a stick. (Si excluded)

 

The Mazda3 also comes with a 150 hp engine that still has more power than the Civic. Consumer Reports averaged 30 mpg and an 8.6 sec 0-60 with the stick shift. The '06 should be a bit quicker with the addition of variable valve timing.

 

mazda 3 is a pretty sweet ride for an economy car with sporting traits....but if you can i'd pop for the civic si.

 

I use to own a Protege 5 Great car for the money

 

Hah! A funny comparison. A sporty mazda sedan vs a more eco friendly honda. I think this edmunds comparison was pretty unfair. The Mazda 3 is meant to be sporty. Choosing the 4 door civic was a bad selection. I find it funny because the 4 door civic held up decently against the sporty mazda 3. That's why Honda has the SI. Because it's meant to be SPORTY unlike the 4 door civic.

 

The comparison was between 4 door sedans, that's why the Si was not compared.
The way I read it, it wasn't close, except for the stereo being better and better cupholders, the Civic was outclassed.

Actually if you check out Edmunds test of the 2006 Civic Si, the only thing it did better than the Mazda 3 was accelerate faster, as it should because it has a superior engine. Even though the Si IS the performance model, the '3' posted better slalom and braking specs even though the Si tested had the optional 'performance' tires

Mazda clearly knows how to make a car handle, now if they can just get the HP...

Put the Civic Si engine in the Mazda 3 and you would have one fantastic car.

 

We bought a Mazda 3 this summer for my wife. She was ready to be done with minivans and wanted something fun to drive and with styling that she liked. We ended up with the 5-door, which still has some of the utility of the minivan.

Mazda seems to be the only auto company that has all the options available in this class of car - moon roof, leather, nav system. For the price, I don't think there's any competition. I had a 92 Civic which was a great econo-car, and drove great. But they couldn't even put a switch for the electric door locks on the passenger side until you got into an Accord. Last time I looked (2005), the Civic *still* didn't have this switch. Mazda seems to understand that not all buyers for their small car are looking to cut corners.

My wife really doesn't like Honda's recent styling trend, at least with the Accord (this was before the new Civic). The Accord is bland - not ugly, but no character. Too bad.

Tony

 

I went to look at the Mazda 3 today after reading the various comments on the post, and discovered a wonderful car. The particular model they had on the show room floor was a "Grand Touring" S model painted in pearl white with black leather. Options abounded this car for a sticker price of 22,240. Xenon headlights, heated seats, Bose soundsystem, automatic climate control, power sunroof, rain-sensing wipers...the list goes on. Previously thinking this car was just another econobox - I was more than pleasantly surprised to feel how solid, fast, and sporty this car was on the road. With a BtoB warranty till 50,000 miles, i'm sold on this car vs. the Civic.