New Mazda 3 AWD Available
 

Car looks fantastic, Mazda is the little car company that could!

https://www.autoblog.com/2018/11/27/...#slide-7474705

I have a 1st gen 2004 Mazda 3, still running strong with zero mechanical issues at 130k miles.

I also have a 1st gen 2009 Mazdaspeed 3 at 100k miles, again running strong with zero mechanical issues and they're great cars.

But this generation, I don't know, I'm not sure if I can be onboard with it.

The rear multi-link independent suspension has been replaced by a semi-independent torsion beam.

https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.s2k...9aa39b9f1e.png

Mazda claims to revert to an older torsion beam design because people were complaining about noise and lack of refinement from the rear. Then idiots, don't buy an economy car!

I love my Mazda 3's, but not if it's a bore to drive.

I love the new design, and available AWD - very exciting!

^valid criticism, and I agree. However, they can't use the torsion beam design on the AWD model. That'll have to remain multi-link.

Sadly I'm hearing rumors that the manual transmission will not be available with the AWD drivetrain...

Yeah will have to wait for the driver tests to come out :)

I also had a 2004 that I traded in on an 2008.5 Speed 3, I loved both cars. I'm on a Golf R now because I wanted AWD. I might have been happy spending 10-13K less for an AWD Mazda 3 w Sky-Active engine though.

Interior looks great! Exterior...well...I'm torn. The sedan looks great (way nicer than a Civic, for instance) but the back end of the hatch just looks chunky and too "heavy". I'll wait to see it in person to form a solid opinion but for once, I think I'd choose the sedan based on looks.

That said, switching to torsion beam is ridiculous. That's a cost-cutting measure, no doubt about it - noise issues are not driving that choice, by any stretch of the imagination. They can spin it any way they want but that's a cheap setup. They're trying to stay competitive in a vehicle that has much lower sales than the Civic and Corolla and this is one way to do it. Most people aren't THAT worried about handling in the first place, so they'll probably get away with it. The Civic has rear multi-link and I pretty much guarantee it will be the handling champ after this change...

AWD is a great addition - they'll sell a ton of them in Canada (where they already sell a ton of them, relatively speaking) - and having a multi-link rear will also be an improvement in that vehicle. Best handling and best in inclement weather, in this config, I would imagine. :thumbup:

I might consider one after the reviews are in, especially of the late arriving Skyactive X engine. My wife has a current gen and of all the things that I really like about Mazda cars is that the interiors are top notch in each segment.

My wife loves her Mazdas and they have all been trouble free but she drives them up to 100k and then trades for a new one. If she likes the new 3, I might snag the turbo CX5 in the signature trim. It will probably put up numbers in performance to the X1, X2, Q3 kind of cars, with equal to a better interior at about $5-10k less.

Still want to drive the 2019 Miata as well. I could see adding one of those at the right price on slightly used.

I don't see how those prices will go down anytime soon. Not especially after Mazda stiff-armed the ND version 1.

Probably not super fast but I could see a loaded stickered RF touring at $34k going for $28k after a year. That would be fine by me. The trick to holding all of the resale is that you can always negotiated a couple off the sticker to begine with, and Mazda always has some left over late in the year or into the next that they put decent incentives on. At least around here they do. So you can save $5-$6k by waiting a year and going used, and then depreciation slows drastically after that.

Those that have driven vehicles with the new Mazda turbo motor have been less-than-impressed (in the Mazda6, specifically). It supposedly doesn't feel like 250 hp at all, and it feels decidedly slower than the Accord 2.0T and Camry V6.

Jalopnik said:

In light of that, the BMW turbo-4 is going to murder a CX-5 (in terms of performance) as the BMW is underrated and has an 8-spd transmission. Q3 will probably be roughly as quick, give or take. The CX-5 looks better than both of them, in my opinion, and I agree that it is pretty much as nice (or nicer) as well, in top trims. Can't go wrong with it, since it also has a higher probability of being more reliable and cheaper to maintain, given Mazda's general engineering goodness.

And they complained that a Crosstour was hard to see out of the ass end. Sedan looks decent though. Mazdas and Nissans tend to rust early here in the great white north.