Mazda 3 1.6 TS2

Is it me or is that car in the photos smiling?

I had / have a deep respect for the old model, but it falls short of desirability. I get the feeling reading this I will probably feel the same about the new car.

In some ways it epitomises the traditional Japanese car perfectly. Brilliantly competent and efficient at everything it does, just without any joi de vivre.

I'm not sure about the looks, you look at you think hmm looks alright but then since then I've changed to I don't think I like it I don't quite know what I think of it. But from reading Autocar's view on this drive this car is hard to put up with in some aspects.

The front end would probably have worked better if the rest of the car had received a radical makeover, the fact it has barely altered save the frontal collagen implants just makes it look daft.

......still a new 3 will be along in approx 4 years

Thing is - you buy this car in 7 years time with 80,000 on the clock and you know it'll be driving exactly (if not better) than new. My Civic went to 145,000 without missing a beat - an equivelent Focus is falling all over the road (steering loosens after about 120,000, petrol engines past their best at 100,000 in most cases). Suddenly a 4 star car without your "joi de vivre" becomes the best handling and driving car within your price range - and it's reliable too!

The way a car looks counts for so much more than all its other qualities or failings. A looker can overcome many other failings, but an ultra reliable motor can never make up for an ugly mug. Perhaps Mazda have tried too hard to differentiate it from the Focus which shares a lot of its DNA. I still pass every morning an N reg 323F, great condition.and still could get away with being a current production model with some delicate, simple and well proportioned lines. Mind you the 3 still looks better than the X1 - what were they thinking of.

In my part of the world (downunder), the Mazda 3 and 6 are top sellers in their class - especially popular with private buyers (bulk of Focus and Mondeo's are sold as rentals/business leases).

The new 3 has 99% of the dynamic capability of a Focus, plus a roomier interior, higher build quality, better reliability, and quicker (we dont get the 1.6 here - base model is 2L).

Yes the old 323 and 626's were dynamically limp, and well, just plain crap, but the 3 and 6 (the first gen and new one) are as good as anything in the class.

And as already stated, after 3 years when the Ford feels old and worn out, the Mazda's still feel as good as new.

Looks wise, not a fan of the "smiling front", but the SP25 model is not bad.

"revs too slow to drop when off throttle"

i find this with my dads focus and it really irritates, how does this reduce emissions though? now my civic is back on the road love the free revving engine up and down almost instantly.

I'd have one of these over a Focus anyday. It's just as capable and doesn't have the frumpy, utility look of the Focus. Or the price. I had a sit in one the other day and it's light years ahead of the Ford inside.

I have to disagree with Autocar's assertion that Mazda doesn't have the engineering depth or history that its Japanese rivals have. Yes, they've made some dull cars but there's the Le Mans win, it's commitment to the rotary engine and there's some great cars in it's history. MX-3, MX-5, MX-6, RX-7 and the 323F V6 mentioned above.

Talking of which - has anyone seen the photos of the new 2010 Focus?

"Frumpy" it certainly isn't! Ford have given it a complete new look (asradical as the new Fiesta is from the old one) and actually made it lookvery nice indeed. Google it - and you'll see what I mean...