Combine this with a more generous use of leather upholstering than is normal for cars at this price point, as well as a selection of tastefully-styled moulded plastics, and the 3’s cabin is one that aesthetically makes a bit of a mockery of the Ford’s, and should give Volkswagen some serious pause for thought. Room in the back is a little tight, mind.
Anyway, the good news is the 3 remains one of the sweeter-driving hatches out there. Not perfect, admittedly, but there’s still plenty of evidence here that driver pleasure has been placed at the forefront of its development.
Control weights are all spot on; the slick six-speed manual 'box is a particularly pleasing point of interaction. It turns in with an energetic sense of eagerness, too, gripping with gusto and deftly containing longitudinal roll as you guide it through faster bends. A lift of the throttle mid-corner will cause it to rotate, but its inherent balance quickly sees it right itself. The steering rack isn’t quite as sweetly calibrated as that of the Focus in terms of feedback or weight, but it’s a far more engaging helm than that of the Golf’s. Nice one, Mazda.
But the ride quality is a bit of a sticking point. There’s an air of firmness about the way in which it goes down the road that you never quite experience in the other two hatches. It’s far from uncomfortable, but its secondary ride does seem to lack a degree of finesse and polish present in its chief rivals. I’d guess Mazda’s decision to opt for a torsion beam rear suspension set-up, as opposed to the multi-link arrangements of the Golf and Focus, is the culprit.
The 1.8-litre diesel powerplant sticks out as the least sporting aspect of the Mazda’s character. There’s a noticeable amount of initial lag on full throttle, but once everything has woken up it pulls well enough. It’s quiet, too, so long as you don’t insist on revving it out, and the test economy figure of 47.9mpg we saw on fast country back roads means it should make for a frugal motorway companion.
Join the debate
xxxx
Travel sick kids
Can't get over that C pillar and the restricted view it gives. Don't believe me look at the rear passenger picture (nr11 I think) then look at the same picture in Autocar's Golf mk7 review, the driver would have to give a constant running commentary of what the rear passengers are missing.
jason_recliner
Pure Class
And then...
A 1.8 diesel with 80-something kW! WTF Mazda! Nothing whispers "sophisticated refinement and style" like the knocking chunter of a diesel. And you'll have many, many hours to dwell on the miserable clatter due to your glacial rate of progress.
So close, yet so far.
john-ish
yeah
abkq
The profile of this car, with
The profile of this car, with that tiny rear window, upswept window sill, sloping and thickening roofline, superthick B- & C- pillars, just doesn't work for me.
xxxx
Opinions
Be careful Cenujlfmiu doesn't like comments on that restrictive C pillar
abkq
xxxx wrote:
At least you don't have FMS breathing down your neck.
xxxx
Secure
He can’t get me here, I’m sitting on my decrepit sofa whilst admiring my 'pavement' parked Mk2 Corsa
Takeitslowly
xxxx wrote:
Well, do you feel yourself as some here obviously do, by using these particular words, that FMS may have been right to be breathing down your neck?.
Cenuijmu
Can't get over that C pillar says xxxxx
Says xxxx.
Travel sick kids as a result.... lolz. This has to be the weakest reason ever not to buy a car. That c pillar makes your kids sick....
Such a pathetic response.
You can add me to typos1 not respecting your opinion. Your opinion is pants.
xxxx
Cenuljfso[gjero or whatever
Not sure what it's got to do with you the reasons I don't like the look of car. There's plenty of other reasons too but then you'd probably throw a tis over them.
Looking forward to your posts over other people's opinions on why they don't buy a particular car. Especially regarding looks and practicality
Pages
Add your comment