Interesting that you speak condescnedingly about your own car, but different strokes for different folks.

Never said the MP3 was a great car, I said it was a great handling, quick, economy car, which it undeniably is.

Not knowing why its a bad thing to come off as arrogant? There's no helping you I suppose, go ahead and apply for your membership to AMOC (the fact that people are PROUD of being called arrogant still amazes me though, I sincerely hope it was just all a setup for the guy to make his "run AMOC" joke)

And if that is genuinely how you felt, maybe you should learn how to phrase yourself more clearly, cuz its impossible for any logical reader to see your initial post and not see it as condescending to mazda.

I mean:

"Its still a Mazda...built in some farmhouse in a rural area in Japan. Who cares? Who the hell drives Mazdas anyway?"

and not a single mention of Car and Driver in your post. Maybe I'm just too stupid cuz I'm a mazda driver, but I fail to see how this is condescending to C&D and not to mazda. . .

 

and, while mazda is no MINI, it is a hell of a car. As you may see from my post in the thread about what other cars MINI owners have driven, I have has some pretty decent rides. It was amazing to me that, switching off from a Benz, that the Mazda - an $11000 car -- would be not merely tollerable, but fun. Plus my daughter, famed for her Mr. McGoo driving habits, totaled 2 Mazda Proteges, one in an offset frontal collision (the most deadly) with a Jeep and another in a high speed spin-out on the NJ Turnpike. While the cars were write offs, neither she nor her passengers suffered anything other than a bruise from the shoulder harness. So, anyone who would make that characterization of a Mazda, let alone a Mazdaspeed3, is simply too purile to tangle with.

 

Well, me for one. Besides my MCS, I also have a Mazdaspeed Miata. I like it. My appologies if you disaprove but, since Mazda has, as of January 30 of this year, sold 800,000 Miatas, I guess I'm in good company.

Anyway. The C&D article is a bit odd in that it's the first one I've read that's so critical of the R56's handling. "The brakes are abrupt, the steering is darty, the ride nasty." At least they like the "EZ-to-grab door pulls"! I haven't driven a Mazdaspeed 3 but I imagine it's a very good car and some people, Patrick Bedard included, might prefer it to the MINI but, obviously, I'm inclined to disagree with the tone of the comparison. I've noticed that, as the C&D staff's average age increases, they seem to have become more biased towards softer vehicles. They printed a letter this month saying "someone stole my car magazine and replaced it with Candy *** Monthly". Oddly though, given Bedard's comments about the handling, the MINI was tied for first place in the "Chassis" category with the Mazdaspeed.

Anyone else notice that the MINI was over 400 lbs lighter than the next lightest car?

 

Dude ... lighten up. How can you be "arrogant" towards a journalist you dont even know

If you want to bash another carmaker other than the almighty MINI, try taking it here https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...ad.php?t=75340

 

I was just ranting because the article was a little biased

Come on guys.. there always has to be ONE guy that exaggerates

I'm actually quite fond of Mazdas, especially the RX-7, incredible car.

And as for the comment about the farmhouse, not totally untrue.. Mitsubishi builds their cars in a farmhouse :P Although Mazda does have a state-of-the-art facility.

 

Got my copy of C&D today. Read the article at lunch. Just one testers opinion. He just doesn't get what a MINI is.

As was stated before, throw out the rear seat & trunk scores along with low scores for its quirky ergonomics & you have a winner with the R56. I didn't buy my R53 for its rear seat or trunk room. I did buy it to put a smile on my face whenever I motor. That it does in spades. My MINI's a winner. Hope I didn't come off as a whiner or a weiner for that matter. Wait, my supercharger is a whiner.

 

The very same reason I bought my R53 and R56

 

I think this is the fun of Car & Driver - it is extreme in many ways and exagerates - makes it a much more interesting magazine to read that your typical car magazine. I especially enjoy the bashing of the reader letters.

Having said this, they all should be shot for saying anything negative about a MINI !!!!

 

It's a fun magazine. John Phillips editorial about the press days at the North American International Auto Show, with "journalists" knocking each other down to get pictures with their Nokias, is hilarious. And, unfortunately, accurate.

 

As for me, I didn't buy my MC for its track performance. What sold me was its high level of stylishness. Now that I own the car I appreciate its exceptional level of maneuverability and I love the way the car drives in speed mode.

I'm sure the Mazdaspeed3 is one hell of a performer but in terms of style the Mini has it beat.

 

C/D writers are frequenty smart-*** - for me that's one of the reasons to read the mag. Minis are different, maybe even "iconic," but they ain't mainstream (thank god) and not everyone appreciates their peculiarities. I really like cars - I've had a Mazda RX-7 convertible (very nice car), currently am interested in the retractable-hardtop MX5 roadster, and currently have the '06 Cooper, an a4 1.8 T and a TT 225 Coupe. The TT would "spank" the Mini in most measurable performance terms - it should - it has over 100 more hp and cost roughy twice as much. Day in, day out I prefer driving the Cooper - it makes me smile and its fun to drive in a way that has very little to do with speed, except on a curvy road, and unfortunately 95 % of my driving is in a straight line on the 405 commute. We like what we like and if we get to wound up about what any writer says about our cars, we need some perspective. Motor on.

 

Maybe Patrck Bedard, who wrote the article, still has lingering head injuries from one of his Indycar crashes.

 

It doesn't matter whether the magazine people thrash the cars or not if they thrashed them equally to the max. potential. That means if any given person drove all those cars in the same manner the top performer in the magazine will still be the top performer. (If you thrashed a kia and drove a M3 like a grandma, the kia would beat the M3. But that's not what the comparison is about. Being fair is what counts.)

If we all bought what magazine says #1 is, then the car manufacturers won't have to do any R and D's. They will just have to bribe the writers. (They might be already doing that.) Even though I would be very pleased to see my car win every comparison tests, I really don't care what the articles say. The writers criticise Ferrari, Porsche, and everything else. I would be happy to just have any one of the F or P cars in my garage.

It is a lot like stock picks in the business paper. They are not always right. In fact, they are wrong half the time.

 

The Mazdaspeed3...moves like a rocketship but looks like a brick!

I stopped by my local Mazda dealer yesterday to have a look at the Speed3. It has one hell of an engine but lets face it folks, its a sooped up SUV! The average person that sees this thing parked in front of a shopping center will have no idea that it moves as fast as it does because its not very stylish. This mean street machine doesn't even come with racing stripes! I would rather have a sports car that has moderate road performance but LOOKS like its the fastest thing on the road since the average person who encounters it will have no idea what its true performance stats are about.

I must admit the speed3's performance is entcing but I hate SUVs. The Speed3 gains many points for its impressive performance but for me it loses the race due to a lack of style.

 

Personal preference about appearance aside, the MS3 has nothing in common with an SUV, be it size or platform. It's a very competent car that's quite quick and surprisingly agile. I was pleasantly surprised by its interior and the value is hard to deny. However, I didn't have any "zoom zoom" moments of zen when driving it. For a lot of people, its size and quickness will make it a better bet than a Mini; for me, I ordered my R56 MCS yesterday and won't look back. I drove all of the cars in that test and strongly considered the GTI and MS3. Perhaps other cars represented more value, but to me the fun quotient was solidly in Mini's corner and I'm willing to put up with what some others might consider flaws.
A review such as this is entirely subjective and everyone has different needs, so I think some people might need to back off the ledge and get out and motor...especially since I can't for 8 weeks and need to live vicariously through the rest of you.

 

Uhmm, isnt that being a poser?

Maybe you can stick a JCW badge on the back

 

You must really like the Whalen shift *****.. Are they just shorter than stock? Do they really enhance the shifting experience?

 

Since most sports cars (which the MINI is NOT) take their styling from the track, but have nowhere near the performance of the race cars they try to emmulate, one could argue all sports car drivers are posers. So???? They didn't spend your money did they??? More often than not it's posers who worry about others being posers.

 

I guess if a person buys a car to impress other people, then yes the Mazdaspeed 3 is a wagon. I kind of like cars that don't shout HEY LOOK AT ME. The Mazdaspeed is what's called a Q ship. Plain vanilla with a big punch. I sort of like that aspect of the MCS too. Well yes it's looks get noticed, but most people have no clue they pack such a big punch.

 

Another take on the Mazdaspeed 3. I'm and R53 S owner so I will not comment on comparisons to the R56, or to street performance in general since I have not driven the MS3 on the highway. I did autocross a new MS3 (just purchased by my brother) last month at a San Francisco Region SCCA Solo event. I finished first in a field of 13 in stock street-tire class. The MS3 is classed in DS compared to GS for the MCS.

My general impressions: rather like driving a larger version of the MCS with good performance 18" non-runflats. Mild understeer, decent rotation, good exit traction (LSD equipped), and relatively flat cornering with good steering feel. The MS3 has much better stock tires for autocross compared to the MCS runflats. I can see why C&D might think the MCS is twichy in comparison; of course changing to non-runflat high performance tires changes that.

The MS3 did not feel a whole lot quicker around this rather tight course compared to my past experiences with the R53 MCS. I think this is due to a torque-limiting function in the MS3 which is designed to reduce torque-steer and low speed understeer in 1-2 gear. I think this car will do well in its class in SCCA competition.

The MS3 is a nice sized 4-door hatch with better rear-seat passenger and luggage room, but higher fuel consumption compared to the MCS. If you need that kind of space it is a nice car and good for the money. I don't need the space, and I love my Mini for its small size, low weight, styling, and reasonable fuel economy.

 

NM

 

Car and Driver is a bunch of idiots.

 

Ummm, have you ever seen the Speed3 in person? Slap some plywood on the sides and you have my old man's station wagon for Christ sake. Of course its an SUV A streamlined one, but an SUV none the less.

 

Seeing the car was a fairly integral part of the test driving process wherein I obtained the driving impressions outlined in the post you quoted above.

I guess I'll leave you to your unique definition of SUV...I was hoping you were joking but apparently not.

 

The C&D review is full of a lot of cheap shot, trash talk about the MCS. It is very unprofessional and disappointing. Many of its comments are just wrong.