Caliber vs. Mazda3 5-door
#21
04-08-2006, 10:55 PM
Professional
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location:
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Caliber vs. Mazda3 5-door
ORIGINAL: savvy
If you have to ask that, you didn't read my post completely.
If you have to ask that, you didn't read my post completely.
How can you comment and compare longevity to a vehicle that has only been out 3 months or less??
I could say the same thing, just in reverse if you would like, but would like to see some facts, which I have that make each of the cars better in some areas than the other, but saying that the 3 is superior acccording to your oninion (which I respect to an extent) to the Caliber doesn't justify it and shoudn't justify it for anyone.
#22
04-08-2006, 11:49 PM
RE: Caliber vs. Mazda3 5-door
Interior CHEAP!? I went today and took my wife this time to look at a Caliber and it was very well built...especially the interior. Although the roof line is a little low and I did have to bend over more to get in; that is my only complaint about this sweet car. At first my wife wasn't quite sure what she thought about it; until she saw it in person; now she wants one. She fell in love with it. I looked at a Mazda 3 and it looked like it was built cheap; with cheap interior. You are just pissed that you bought your Mazda 3 before the Caliber came out; now you trying to justify that your car is more awesome than it really is.
Hmmm, though the Mazda 3 is ok looking; the Caliber gets my vote!
[IMG]local://upfiles/26521/3E1466620A154B58ABA714FEED773BA3.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]local://upfiles/26521/3508227FC69F4AE59E3F3CF4AF71A574.jpg[/IMG]
Hmmm, though the Mazda 3 is ok looking; the Caliber gets my vote!
ORIGINAL: savvy
Syriel -
I'll preface in hopes that my opinion will carry some validity.
I was raised in a Chrysler family. My uncle works at the plant (I still do have faith in Dodge Trucks).
That uncle owned two Chargers,a Jeep, and a full size Dodge Van. My other Uncle owned a Dart, a Valiant, and restored an Aspen. His father (my Grandfather) owned a Newport and a Sundance. My father owned a Polara, Cordoba and LeBaron. My mother owned a Dart. So please understand that it pains me to say that a 3 vs. a Caliber is a no brainer. Go with the 3.
In terms of compact cars, the Neon is a joke. They are a joke off the line, and they are a joke in terms of longevity (which it seems to me is important to you). Why do I bring up Neon in a Caliber thread? Do you really think Mopar/Chrysler/Mercedes has really made a breakthrough in producing quality small cars in that short of a time? No. It's not reasonable to make such a leap. I test drove a Caliber with the CVT. While it was roomy, it wasn't responsive, the interior is cheap, there was just nothing impressive about it. I own a 3 hatch. I've driven the hell out of it. I've put a cord of firewood in it, hauled family around int and all it does is come back for more. Considering the 3 is essentially a Volvo S40 with a Mazda engine (that has proven itself in the low end 6) and Mazda badge; safety, longevity, and handling are all but assured. The interior of the 3 is superior. To coin a phrase I would label a 3 hatch as a "UUV - Ultimate Utility Vehicle". What do I mean by that? At 160 hp you can haul some small stuff, furniture, jet skis, etc. You can do this while its' look is at the VERY least contemporary, and "euro-sporty" without looking the least bit wimpy. It's been described too many times by too many sources (including myself) as "intimidating" for it to be seen any other way. You can show up at the club, a play, or at the baseball game and it still fits in all contexts. It kills plenty of V6s (not to mention pretty much any non-turbo 4cyl ) off the line. I destroyed an Avenger just a couple of weeks ago. And finally when driven right you can get 33 mpg.
The only way I would even lean toward Caliber is if AWD is a must. Even if AWD IS a must, why not consider a Matrix AWD?
It's very easy math dude. Until the Caliber proves itself somehow by demonstrating some miraculous upgrade in design and process by Chrysler, go with the 3.
Syriel -
I'll preface in hopes that my opinion will carry some validity.
I was raised in a Chrysler family. My uncle works at the plant (I still do have faith in Dodge Trucks).
That uncle owned two Chargers,a Jeep, and a full size Dodge Van. My other Uncle owned a Dart, a Valiant, and restored an Aspen. His father (my Grandfather) owned a Newport and a Sundance. My father owned a Polara, Cordoba and LeBaron. My mother owned a Dart. So please understand that it pains me to say that a 3 vs. a Caliber is a no brainer. Go with the 3.
In terms of compact cars, the Neon is a joke. They are a joke off the line, and they are a joke in terms of longevity (which it seems to me is important to you). Why do I bring up Neon in a Caliber thread? Do you really think Mopar/Chrysler/Mercedes has really made a breakthrough in producing quality small cars in that short of a time? No. It's not reasonable to make such a leap. I test drove a Caliber with the CVT. While it was roomy, it wasn't responsive, the interior is cheap, there was just nothing impressive about it. I own a 3 hatch. I've driven the hell out of it. I've put a cord of firewood in it, hauled family around int and all it does is come back for more. Considering the 3 is essentially a Volvo S40 with a Mazda engine (that has proven itself in the low end 6) and Mazda badge; safety, longevity, and handling are all but assured. The interior of the 3 is superior. To coin a phrase I would label a 3 hatch as a "UUV - Ultimate Utility Vehicle". What do I mean by that? At 160 hp you can haul some small stuff, furniture, jet skis, etc. You can do this while its' look is at the VERY least contemporary, and "euro-sporty" without looking the least bit wimpy. It's been described too many times by too many sources (including myself) as "intimidating" for it to be seen any other way. You can show up at the club, a play, or at the baseball game and it still fits in all contexts. It kills plenty of V6s (not to mention pretty much any non-turbo 4cyl ) off the line. I destroyed an Avenger just a couple of weeks ago. And finally when driven right you can get 33 mpg.
The only way I would even lean toward Caliber is if AWD is a must. Even if AWD IS a must, why not consider a Matrix AWD?
It's very easy math dude. Until the Caliber proves itself somehow by demonstrating some miraculous upgrade in design and process by Chrysler, go with the 3.
[IMG]local://upfiles/26521/3E1466620A154B58ABA714FEED773BA3.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]local://upfiles/26521/3508227FC69F4AE59E3F3CF4AF71A574.jpg[/IMG]
#23
04-09-2006, 12:14 AM
RE: Caliber vs. Mazda3 5-door
I have to say that if you get a Caliber with the Interior Sports Appearance Group, then its one of the best looking interiors for a car under $20,000 I've ever seen. Its by far, better than any Neon. I've haven't seen a Mazda 3, so I can't judge against that, but I strongly disagree with the interior of the Caliber being cheap. Its not a Cadillac for christ sakes, its a $15,000 automobile. So its not going to have the plush seats, wood grain dash, etc instead of the plastic molding.
Everyone who owns a Caliber seems to be saying the exact opposite of what Syriel is saying tho, so I can't disagree with what anyone else is saying. I have yet to test drive one, but I have seen one in person and it looks better than any Neon inside and out.
Everyone (including myself) also has to realize that this car isn't going to appeal to everyone. Some people are going to hate it and its were just going to have to live with it, but for those people who don't like it, they don't need to be posting in every thread saying how much it sucks either. You can get your point across with ONE post in ONE thread.
Everyone who owns a Caliber seems to be saying the exact opposite of what Syriel is saying tho, so I can't disagree with what anyone else is saying. I have yet to test drive one, but I have seen one in person and it looks better than any Neon inside and out.
Everyone (including myself) also has to realize that this car isn't going to appeal to everyone. Some people are going to hate it and its were just going to have to live with it, but for those people who don't like it, they don't need to be posting in every thread saying how much it sucks either. You can get your point across with ONE post in ONE thread.
#24
04-09-2006, 01:52 AM
RE: Caliber vs. Mazda3 5-door
umm...I'm not pissed about anything...and I don't "feel a need" to justify anything...
Don't take my word for it. Comparison after comparison, reputable publication after reputable publication, 3 wins out in nearly every comparison. The only time it loses out (yes the new Civic included) is when compared to the BMW backed Mini. And if Mini didn't have those three little letters in its' corner I doubt it would win anything this side of a Pinewood Derby.
If the FACT that the 3 is an S40 (which I did mention) somehow lost its' way from your eyeballs to your brain, then I deeply regret that. But if homework is really done on here, then that in itself should carry plenty of meaning. The 3 is a "better bang for you buck" car than anything else out there simply because Ford was smart enough to uses its' ownership of Volvo and control of Mazda to put a superior compact on the market. If you want to look up turning radius, handling, comfort, responsiveness, and ergonomics analysis, then please do. I already have. That's why I drive the car I drive, because I did the research. Edmonds, Consumer Reports, Car and Driver...etc.
Now you are correct about comparing it to a brand new car. Well if my original post was read completely you would see that's why I brought up the Neon. Please do not try to convince me that engineers that have produced a half-*** product in the Neon, have suddenly seen the light, and NOW know how to produce a quality compact car. Please... I just ate.
I also guess you all missed that Chrysler products carry sentimental value with me, and I always route for them. I was pleased when they came out with the Prowler and the Viper. Those are obviously quality vehicles. I also liked the innovative, "ahead of it's time retro" design of the PT Cruiser, and I get a laugh whenever I see an HHR cruising down the road, knowing that there are still free spirits at Chrysler that aren't afraid to try stuff that other makers can only react to by duplication.
But facts are facts. Civics, Corollas, and Sentras, have proven they can outlast and out perform a Neon, Sundance or Omni. Based on homework I can't imagine who would even consider a Caliber, or a Lancer over one of those vehicles much less a 3.
I am driving one of the single best compacts on the Market right now, and test after test, review after review has supported that. If the engineers of Chrysler have suddenly created a vehicle that can actually last well past 100,000 miles without falling apart, then great. I'll eat my words, sell my 3 (which is retaining very high value still) and buy American, but only time will tell, and Chrysler has burned the public too many times to be taken seriously in the compact market.
Don't take my word for it. Comparison after comparison, reputable publication after reputable publication, 3 wins out in nearly every comparison. The only time it loses out (yes the new Civic included) is when compared to the BMW backed Mini. And if Mini didn't have those three little letters in its' corner I doubt it would win anything this side of a Pinewood Derby.
If the FACT that the 3 is an S40 (which I did mention) somehow lost its' way from your eyeballs to your brain, then I deeply regret that. But if homework is really done on here, then that in itself should carry plenty of meaning. The 3 is a "better bang for you buck" car than anything else out there simply because Ford was smart enough to uses its' ownership of Volvo and control of Mazda to put a superior compact on the market. If you want to look up turning radius, handling, comfort, responsiveness, and ergonomics analysis, then please do. I already have. That's why I drive the car I drive, because I did the research. Edmonds, Consumer Reports, Car and Driver...etc.
Now you are correct about comparing it to a brand new car. Well if my original post was read completely you would see that's why I brought up the Neon. Please do not try to convince me that engineers that have produced a half-*** product in the Neon, have suddenly seen the light, and NOW know how to produce a quality compact car. Please... I just ate.
I also guess you all missed that Chrysler products carry sentimental value with me, and I always route for them. I was pleased when they came out with the Prowler and the Viper. Those are obviously quality vehicles. I also liked the innovative, "ahead of it's time retro" design of the PT Cruiser, and I get a laugh whenever I see an HHR cruising down the road, knowing that there are still free spirits at Chrysler that aren't afraid to try stuff that other makers can only react to by duplication.
But facts are facts. Civics, Corollas, and Sentras, have proven they can outlast and out perform a Neon, Sundance or Omni. Based on homework I can't imagine who would even consider a Caliber, or a Lancer over one of those vehicles much less a 3.
I am driving one of the single best compacts on the Market right now, and test after test, review after review has supported that. If the engineers of Chrysler have suddenly created a vehicle that can actually last well past 100,000 miles without falling apart, then great. I'll eat my words, sell my 3 (which is retaining very high value still) and buy American, but only time will tell, and Chrysler has burned the public too many times to be taken seriously in the compact market.
#25
04-09-2006, 02:03 AM
RE: Caliber vs. Mazda3 5-door
savvy is another example of someone who just hears the rumors... Another exmaple of someone who is taking the 1st gen Neons bad rap and sticking it on the 2nd gen Neon... My Neon is not a joke. It is an excellent car and has had zero problems... I have no complaints about my car... It has excellent space, decent speed and takes most other small 4 cylinders, gas milage is great, and reliability is awesome... Just because the first Neons had problems, doesn't mean they all do.
#27
04-09-2006, 02:53 AM
RE: Caliber vs. Mazda3 5-door
i went and looked a caliber a couple days ago. and i was no impressed AT ALL.
i found interior quality to be shotty. i found the storage under the e-brake to be unusable by any means. the hatch area was smaller than i expected and i believe most of the claimed large cargo area is space that is unusable. i'm looking at a mazda3 in a couple days...but i think i'm putting off buying a car right now...the dodge turned me off of purchasing a car right now because i can't afford what i need.
i found interior quality to be shotty. i found the storage under the e-brake to be unusable by any means. the hatch area was smaller than i expected and i believe most of the claimed large cargo area is space that is unusable. i'm looking at a mazda3 in a couple days...but i think i'm putting off buying a car right now...the dodge turned me off of purchasing a car right now because i can't afford what i need.
#28
04-09-2006, 02:57 AM
#29
04-09-2006, 03:07 AM
RE: Caliber vs. Mazda3 5-door
ORIGINAL: savvy
let me guess...that post from Syriel was another rumor...and was a decision based purely on conjecture and no first hand research...
let me guess...that post from Syriel was another rumor...and was a decision based purely on conjecture and no first hand research...
Car & Driver hates Dodge... and typically most American cars... (except GM) They have boners for Asian cars... Why make judgements on what mags say... I say make your own decisions, and it seems he has... so i guess it's end of discussion?
#30
04-09-2006, 03:16 AM