VW Vortex - Volkswagen Forum banner
  • Mwerks and Fourtitude have rejoined VWVortex. For more info, see this thread.

101 - 120 of 130 Posts

·
Registered
2017 Genesis G90 Ultimate, 2017 Miata RF GT
Joined
·
1,525 Posts
Skip the turbo and the fully spec’d Mazda 3 is cheaper than all of the Japanese competition except the Sentra.

Mazda 3 Premium FWD: $27,795
Honda Civic Touring: $29,295
Toyota Corolla XSE: $28.985

It also has the following features unavailable on the Civic and Corolla: Heads up display, memory seats and a 12 speaker stereo.

Option in AWD which is unavailable in the Civic and Corolla and the Mazda 3 is almost exactly the same price, slightly cheaper than the FWD Civic and slightly more than the FWD Corolla.

Base Mazda 3 Turbo Sedan MSRP is $30,845. It is not overpriced. For $1800 more than a Civic Touring you get almost 100 more hp, double the torque, AWD, a normal 6 speed automatic, better interior materials, more features, etc. This is before you even compare it to cars like the A3, A class, 228i which are FAR more expensive.
Thank you, that's a fantastic summary. As I said in an earlier post, the 3 Turbo is actually a great value, especially in Canada.
 

·
Registered
982, F22, E88, etc.
Joined
·
5,146 Posts
So assuming the cars are equally as quick, what does the extra $9,800 in the Audi A3 Technik 45 TFSI buy you over the Mazda 3 2.5 T Premium? It's not buying you any extra speed. It's not buying you extra amenities (the Mazda, in fact, has more). It's not buying you a better isolated cabin or nicer interior. It's not buying you better build quality (hahaha, VWAG reliability). What is it that makes this car, as Poor King asserted, over priced?
I love the Mazda 3, and for someone looking for value, IMHO it is a much better choice than the current A3. Even in the US where they're more closely priced. That said, it's not unilateral, the A3 does bring a few things to the table if you know where to look:

1. DSG vs. slushbox w/lockup
2. Multi-link rear suspension vs. torsion beam
3. 235 section tires vs. 215 section
4. 312/272mm rotors vs. ?279/264?mm
5. 10 paints/5 leathers vs. 4 paints/2 leathers
6. Dealerships that have Smooremin vs. dealerships that do not

And most importantly, we're comparing a recently released Mazda to a 7 year old end of production Audi. Comparing new model to new model I think the A3 justifies the price difference much better:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,573 Posts
Most sedans are priced
What are "premium proportions"?
Longer hood, shorter cabin (CX-5 vs CR-V).

To be clear, I'm not saying that makes the CX-5 premium, but that Mazda's design intent was to go that route, to have proportions that are tilt towards what a typical rwd-based premium crossover would have, at the expense of interior volume. They made a conscious decision to do so. Whether that's right or wrong, successful or not is up to you. But that was one of their design intentions, and I can tell you that with certainty. They did the same thing on the CX-9 as well.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,573 Posts
I love the Mazda 3, and for someone looking for value, IMHO it is a much better choice than the current A3. Even in the US where they're more closely priced. That said, it's not unilateral, the A3 does bring a few things to the table if you know where to look:

1. DSG vs. slushbox w/lockup
2. Multi-link rear suspension vs. torsion beam
3. 235 section tires vs. 215 section
4. 312/272mm rotors vs. ?279/264?mm
5. 10 paints/5 leathers vs. 4 paints/2 leathers
6. Dealerships that have Smooremin vs. dealerships that do not

And most importantly, we're comparing a recently released Mazda to a 7 year old end of production Audi. Comparing new model to new model I think the A3 justifies the price difference much better:
Which is why if you can swing the Audi, you most likely will. Whereas the Mazda at present, is going to mostly steal sales from the rank below the Audi, by mimicking some of the Audi features for $10K less. However, their goal is to eventually reach parity, over the next coupel of generations. I think they've accepted that a mfr their size cannot compete and survive at the lower end of the segment, at least not as an independent. But they can compete more effectively in a higher margin premium or near-premium segments.
 

·
Registered
982, F22, E88, etc.
Joined
·
5,146 Posts
I think they've accepted that a mfr their size cannot compete and survive at the lower end of the segment, at least not as an independent.
I think it's also just where they want to be. There's something about Japanese craftsmanship that's hard to put into words; best example for me is my Makita tools. They're not necessarily "fancy", but they're solid, everything on them fits exactly the way it ought to, and they do their job flawlessly in any condition I'd want to use them. From a different angle, most Nintendo stuff is the same way. The direction Mazda has been and is going reminds me of those companies.
 

·
Registered
2019 Mazda 3
Joined
·
3,766 Posts
I love the Mazda 3, and for someone looking for value, IMHO it is a much better choice than the current A3. Even in the US where they're more closely priced. That said, it's not unilateral, the A3 does bring a few things to the table if you know where to look:

1. DSG vs. slushbox w/lockup
2. Multi-link rear suspension vs. torsion beam
3. 235 section tires vs. 215 section
4. 312/272mm rotors vs. ?279/264?mm
5. 10 paints/5 leathers vs. 4 paints/2 leathers
6. Dealerships that have Smooremin vs. dealerships that do not

And most importantly, we're comparing a recently released Mazda to a 7 year old end of production Audi. Comparing new model to new model I think the A3 justifies the price difference much better:
It's more than 4 paint options when looking at lower trims but I agree with the rest, especially point 6.

Smaller Audi's benefit from the development costs of larger ones in terms of tech. You can get similar tech on an A3 and an A8 and that tech is subjectively much more advance than Mazda's tech.
 

·
Registered
2017 Genesis G90 Ultimate, 2017 Miata RF GT
Joined
·
1,525 Posts
I love the Mazda 3, and for someone looking for value, IMHO it is a much better choice than the current A3. Even in the US where they're more closely priced. That said, it's not unilateral, the A3 does bring a few things to the table if you know where to look:

1. DSG vs. slushbox w/lockup
2. Multi-link rear suspension vs. torsion beam
3. 235 section tires vs. 215 section
4. 312/272mm rotors vs. ?279/264?mm
5. 10 paints/5 leathers vs. 4 paints/2 leathers
6. Dealerships that have Smooremin vs. dealerships that do not

And most importantly, we're comparing a recently released Mazda to a 7 year old end of production Audi. Comparing new model to new model I think the A3 justifies the price difference much better:
I think that's the S3 interior. The regular A3 is going to have less Alcantara and bling. Also, the Mazda interior design looks better to my eyes. Those misshapen polygons do not line up, at all. The driver vents and infotainment screen are particularly bad offenders.
 

·
Registered
982, F22, E88, etc.
Joined
·
5,146 Posts
I think that's the S3 interior. The regular A3 is going to have less Alcantara and bling. Also, the Mazda interior design looks better to my eyes. Those misshapen polygons do not line up, at all. The driver vents and infotainment screen are particularly bad offenders.
Oh you're right about the S3, A3 below. I'm certainly not going to tell you which to like better. But to the median person debating the upcharge it seems pretty clearly more expensive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
350 Posts
Skip the turbo and the fully spec’d Mazda 3 is cheaper than all of the Japanese competition except the Sentra.

Mazda 3 Premium FWD: $27,795
Honda Civic Touring: $29,295
Toyota Corolla XSE: $28.985

It also has the following features unavailable on the Civic and Corolla: Heads up display, memory seats and a 12 speaker stereo.

Option in AWD which is unavailable in the Civic and Corolla and the Mazda 3 is almost exactly the same price, slightly cheaper than the FWD Civic and slightly more than the FWD Corolla.

Base Mazda 3 Turbo Sedan MSRP is $30,845. It is not overpriced. For $1800 more than a Civic Touring you get almost 100 more hp, double the torque, AWD, a normal 6 speed automatic, better interior materials, more features, etc. This is before you even compare it to cars like the A3, A class, 228i which are FAR more expensive.
The OP on this thread was "can you cross shop the Mazda3 with an Audi. In order to establish that discussion, we were comparing the decked-out Mazda3 at $33k.

I do not disagree that the lower optioned packages are a great bargain when compared to it's rivals. Though in actuality, looking at the history of the Mazda3, it was placed below it's current competitors along with Hyundai and Kia as an even lower budget option (before the refresh).

Just because you can top it out with $33k worth of goodies does not mean it can level up to an equally priced Audi. It is not compelling enough to go brand-for-brand. But leave it fully optioned at 30k flat and Mazda will have the sales they need. Honda and Toyota loyalists will switch over then and they may even steal some Audi/BMW customers.

It's kind of like what Chevy did with the Corvette- keep the price low enough to sell more, thus gaining profits in the long term. You have to get the customers feet in before you can sell. With that pricing, the lower optioned units are a great bargain to it's competitors, and at it's highest price point it will steal sales from Audi.

30k or else it is overpriced.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,573 Posts
Just because you can top it out with $33k worth of goodies does not mean it can level up to an equally priced Audi. It is not compelling enough to go brand-for-brand. But leave it fully optioned at 30k flat and Mazda will have the sales they need. Honda and Toyota loyalists will switch over then and they may even steal some Audi/BMW customers.
The argument in this thread hasn't been that it's equivalent, or as good as a higher priced Audi. It was that it's a good bargain and a cheaper alternative, getting you a good chunk of the way towards an A3 for $10K less. It's obviously not at the same level as an A3, certainly not in terms of powertrain and chassis, and most definitely not with the A4. But it does get you close, for $10K less, when compared apples to apples against a comparable equipped A3. That was the premise of the C&D article as well.
 

·
Registered
2018 Accord Sport 2.0T 6MT / 1994 Miata
Joined
·
1,787 Posts
The OP on this thread was "can you cross shop the Mazda3 with an Audi. In order to establish that discussion, we were comparing the decked-out Mazda3 at $33k.

I do not disagree that the lower optioned packages are a great bargain when compared to it's rivals. Though in actuality, looking at the history of the Mazda3, it was placed below it's current competitors along with Hyundai and Kia as an even lower budget option (before the refresh).
This is completely in your head and not at all true. I suppose you think the Golf is the higher budget option in the eyes of the public? It’s not.

Just because you can top it out with $33k worth of goodies does not mean it can level up to an equally priced Audi. It is not compelling enough to go brand-for-brand. But leave it fully optioned at 30k flat and Mazda will have the sales they need. Honda and Toyota loyalists will switch over then and they may even steal some Audi/BMW customers.

30k or else it is overpriced.
You’re being obtuse for no reason. There is no equally priced Audi at $33,000.
 

·
Registered
'12 Mustang GT | '86 RX-7 | '20 Ninja 400
Joined
·
9,621 Posts
Oh you're right about the S3, A3 below. I'm certainly not going to tell you which to like better. But to the median person debating the upcharge it seems pretty clearly more expensive.
I'm actually getting really tired of Audi's everything-angular design and it turns me off from otherwise one of my favourite brands. Mazda on the other hand has a way about looking super good in the present, even if it is dated after 10-15 years.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
350 Posts
The argument in this thread hasn't been that it's equivalent, or as good as a higher priced Audi. It was that it's a good bargain and a cheaper alternative, getting you a good chunk of the way towards an A3 for $10K less. It's obviously not at the same level as an A3, certainly not in terms of powertrain and chassis, and most definitely not with the A4. But it does get you close, for $10K less, when compared apples to apples against a comparable equipped A3. That was the premise of the C&D article as well.
I don't know where you are getting a 10k difference in price. The A3 45TFSI Quattro is 36K. Most shoppers would cough up the extra $3K over the article spec'd 33k Mazda3.

Mazda3 was already trending down in sales prior to the pandemic; even after the refresh. Remember there was already a $4,500 boost in price for that.

2014) 104,985
2015) 107,885
2016) 95,567
2017) 75,018
2018) 64,638
2019) 50,741
2020) 30,352

A smart shopper will instead buy the CX-30 because that is "more" car for the same price. It is quite ridiculous for Mazda to think they can sell a sedan for the same price in this market.

This is completely in your head and not at all true. I suppose you think the Golf is the higher budget option in the eyes of the public? It’s not.



You’re being obtuse for no reason. There is no equally priced Audi at $33,000.
Ok I take that back because for some reason I always thought of the Mazda3's at a lower price category and was comparable to the Honda Fit and not the Civic/Golf category.



Nonetheless, I just verified that the Mazda is a much lesser car at 33k when in fact a 36K Audi equivalent does exist lol. Well then I will tell you slowly...

O-v-e-r-p-r-i-c-e-d.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,573 Posts
I don't know where you are getting a 10k difference in price. The A3 45TFSI Quattro is 36K. Most shoppers would cough up the extra $3K over the article spec'd 33k Mazda3.

Mazda3 was already trending down in sales prior to the pandemic; even after the refresh. Remember there was already a $4,500 boost in price for that.

2014) 104,985
2015) 107,885
2016) 95,567
2017) 75,018
2018) 64,638
2019) 50,741
2020) 30,352

A smart shopper will instead buy the CX-30 because that is "more" car for the same price. It is quite ridiculous for Mazda to think they can sell a sedan for the same price in this market.



Ok I take that back because for some reason I always thought of the Mazda3's at a lower price category and was comparable to the Honda Fit and not the Civic/Golf category.



Nonetheless, I just verified that the Mazda is a much lesser car at 33k when in fact a 36K Audi equivalent does exist lol. Well then I will tell you slowly...

O-v-e-r-p-r-i-c-e-d.
Serious? Are you being purposely obtuse or purposely glancing over every comment where it's stated the comparison is "apples to apples" in terms of features. On paper, that would mean an A3 45 Premium Plus with the Driver assistance package and navi package. That's right around $44K. The comparable Mazda 3 is $34 K, hence the $10K difference.

So if you want to compare a bare bones A3 to a loaded Mazda 3, yes, you'll have a $3K or so price difference, but they are not comparable in terms of features, so it makes no sense to compare them that way.

Also, a comparable equipped CX-30 is the same price as the aforementioned 3, $34K. They are pretty comparable in size, with the CX-30 having a slightly smaller cargo hold, but higher ground clearance. But the same price nonetheless.

Perhaps go read all of the posts above "slowly" as you're the one who's either being purposely obtuse, or unwilling to even understand the discussion at hand. If you don't like the Mazda, that's great. No one is suggesting otherwise. Calling it over-priced however makes no sense when it's offering many of the same features of car that costs $10K more. It's not for everyone, but for someone looking to have those features at a lower price, it's suitable for them. It's not intended to be a volume seller. And by the way, it outsells the A3, so not sure what your logic there is. Does that then make the A3 a bad car?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
350 Posts
Serious? Are you being purposely obtuse or purposely glancing over every comment where it's stated the comparison is "apples to apples" in terms of features. On paper, that would mean an A3 45 Premium Plus with the Driver assistance package and navi package. That's right around $44K. The comparable Mazda 3 is $34 K, hence the $10K difference.

So if you want to compare a bare bones A3 to a loaded Mazda 3, yes, you'll have a $3K or so price difference, but they are not comparable in terms of features, so it makes no sense to compare them that way.

Also, a comparable equipped CX-30 is the same price as the aforementioned 3, $34K. They are pretty comparable in size, with the CX-30 having a slightly smaller cargo hold, but higher ground clearance. But the same price nonetheless.

Perhaps go read all of the posts above "slowly" as you're the one who's either being purposely obtuse, or unwilling to even understand the discussion at hand. If you don't like the Mazda, that's great. No one is suggesting otherwise. Calling it over-priced however makes no sense when it's offering many of the same features of car that costs $10K more. It's not for everyone, but for someone looking to have those features at a lower price, it's suitable for them. It's not intended to be a volume seller. And by the way, it outsells the A3, so not sure what your logic there is. Does that then make the A3 a bad car?
I never called the Mazda3 a bad car... omg 🙃

You simply cannot compare them apples-to-apples because Audi offers features that are a step ahead of the curve than any implementation from Mazda. Whether you compare the headlight technology or the suspension/chassis dynamics, if you are getting it at a lower price from Mazda it is because they are of inferior technology/quality (except maybe for the interior).

Yet somehow that is the smart way to compare value. To compare a car on paper without ever driving it is the sensible thing to do. Then there's the fact that the A3 is equipped with a DCT transmission standard at the base 36k price. The way you have it optioned at 44K, this is what the infotainment looks like..




Show me where Mazda offers that level of technology in a premium package because that is where my opinion forms--The premise of the article is of Mazda's intentions to sneak into the luxury segment by undercutting the competition without actually being a luxury car. Tacking on features on top does not make it a bargain if you have to pay for them. You have to undercut pretty significantly in dollar amounts to do that.

(If they are genuinely serious about entering the luxury market they should follow suit and offer a premium brand like Hyundai did with Genesis.)

Sooo...still can't substantiate why you think it's overpriced? Got it.
I want you to be honest: would you prefer to drive a fully spec'd Mazda3 or a base Audi A3. $3000 sets these two apart.



The Audi offsets it with many years of R&D and style of it's own. That is not offered in any premium package from Mazda.



Your answer will pretty much sum up why the Mazda is overpriced even with more features. Unless you lie to not look stupid. For myself, if the Mazda3 was fully equipped at 30K, then I can overlook the base A3 for a significant saving.

List of features

Base Audi A3:
  • 18" 5-double-spoke design bi-color finish wheels
  • Audi smartphone interface with Apple CarPlay® and Google™ Android Auto™ for compatible devices
  • Xenon plus headlights with LED daytime running lights
  • Sport line front/rear fasciae and side sills
  • High-gloss titanium black exterior trim
  • Leather seating surfaces
  • Heated front seats
  • Audi pre sense® front and Audi pre sense® basic
  • Audi advanced key—keyless start, stop and front door & trunk entry
  • Panoramic sunroof
Mazda3:

-Android Auto/CarPlay
-Blind Sport Monitoring and Rear Traffic Alert
-360 degree camera
-Adaptive Headlights
-Power folding side mirrors with reverse tilt and memory
-Power moonroof
-Power heated seats with memory
-Upgraded audio system
-An exterior design package (similar to Audi Black Optics)
-Heated Steering wheel
-Leather seating, trim and steering wheel
-Navigation
-HUD
-Traffic sign recognition in the navigation and HUD
-Different suspension and transmission tuning
-Reinforced transmission, suspension and rear differential
 

·
Registered
2018 Accord Sport 2.0T 6MT / 1994 Miata
Joined
·
1,787 Posts
I never called the Mazda3 a bad car... omg 🙃

You simply cannot compare them apples-to-apples because Audi offers features that are a step ahead of the curve than any implementation from Mazda. Whether you compare the headlight technology or the suspension/chassis dynamics, if you are getting it at a lower price from Mazda it is because they are of inferior technology/quality (except maybe for the interior).

Yet somehow that is the smart way to compare value. To compare a car on paper without ever driving it is the sensible thing to do. Then there's the fact that the A3 is equipped with a DCT transmission standard at the base 36k price. The way you have it optioned at 44K, this is what the infotainment looks like.
The point is, if your budget is $35,000 for a small premium car, the Mazda is a great value compared to not only cars like the Civic, Corolla, and Impreza, but also the A3, A class, and 2 series.


The Audi offsets it with many years of R&D and style of it's own. That is not offered in any premium package from Mazda.
There is also a $10,000+ difference between the price of them. Cost of ownership is also significantly higher.


Audi A3:
  • 18" 5-double-spoke design bi-color finish wheels
  • Audi smartphone interface with Apple CarPlay® and Google™ Android Auto™ for compatible devices
  • Xenon plus headlights with LED daytime running lights
  • Sport line front/rear fasciae and side sills
  • High-gloss titanium black exterior trim
  • Leather seating surfaces
  • Heated front seats
  • Audi pre sense® front and Audi pre sense® basic
  • Audi advanced key—keyless start, stop and front door & trunk entry
  • Panoramic sunroof
Mazda3:

-Android Auto/CarPlay
-Blind Sport Monitoring and Rear Traffic Alert
-360 degree camera
-Adaptive Headlights
-Power folding side mirrors with reverse tilt and memory
-Power moonroof
-Power heated seats with memory
-Upgraded audio system
-An exterior design package (similar to Audi Black Optics)
-Heated Steering wheel
-Leather seating, trim and steering wheel
-Navigation
-HUD
-Traffic sign recognition in the navigation and HUD
-Different suspension and transmission tuning
-Reinforced transmission, suspension and rear differential
You don't make any sense. The Base Mazda 3 Turbo is basically fully loaded and comes with far more features than the base A3. The price difference is $6,000, a significant amount. Most people on this board including myself would chose the fully loaded Mazda over the base Audi. I think the Mazda looks far better inside and out also.

This is a pointless discussion.
 

·
Registered
'12 Mustang GT | '86 RX-7 | '20 Ninja 400
Joined
·
9,621 Posts
I never called the Mazda3 a bad car... omg 🙃

You simply cannot compare them apples-to-apples because Audi offers features that are a step ahead of the curve than any implementation from Mazda. Whether you compare the headlight technology or the suspension/chassis dynamics, if you are getting it at a lower price from Mazda it is because they are of inferior technology/quality (except maybe for the interior).

Yet somehow that is the smart way to compare value. To compare a car on paper without ever driving it is the sensible thing to do. Then there's the fact that the A3 is equipped with a DCT transmission standard at the base 36k price. The way you have it optioned at 44K, this is what the infotainment looks like..




Show me where Mazda offers that level of technology in a premium package because that is where my opinion forms--The premise of the article is of Mazda's intentions to sneak into the luxury segment by undercutting the competition without actually being a luxury car. Tacking on features on top does not make it a bargain if you have to pay for them. You have to undercut pretty significantly in dollar amounts to do that.

(If they are genuinely serious about entering the luxury market they should follow suit and offer a premium brand like Hyundai did with Genesis.)



I want you to be honest: would you prefer to drive a fully spec'd Mazda3 or a base Audi A3. $3000 sets these two apart.



The Audi offsets it with many years of R&D and style of it's own. That is not offered in any premium package from Mazda.



Your answer will pretty much sum up why the Mazda is overpriced even with more features. Unless you lie to not look stupid. For myself, if the Mazda3 was fully equipped at 30K, then I can overlook the base A3 for a significant saving.

List of features

Base Audi A3:
  • 18" 5-double-spoke design bi-color finish wheels
  • Audi smartphone interface with Apple CarPlay® and Google™ Android Auto™ for compatible devices
  • Xenon plus headlights with LED daytime running lights
  • Sport line front/rear fasciae and side sills
  • High-gloss titanium black exterior trim
  • Leather seating surfaces
  • Heated front seats
  • Audi pre sense® front and Audi pre sense® basic
  • Audi advanced key—keyless start, stop and front door & trunk entry
  • Panoramic sunroof
Mazda3:

-Android Auto/CarPlay
-Blind Sport Monitoring and Rear Traffic Alert
-360 degree camera
-Adaptive Headlights
-Power folding side mirrors with reverse tilt and memory
-Power moonroof
-Power heated seats with memory
-Upgraded audio system
-An exterior design package (similar to Audi Black Optics)
-Heated Steering wheel
-Leather seating, trim and steering wheel
-Navigation
-HUD
-Traffic sign recognition in the navigation and HUD
-Different suspension and transmission tuning
-Reinforced transmission, suspension and rear differential
Your bias is showing.

Even if the Audi is the better car (I would disagree that it is), the Mazda will be the better car to own 9/10 times, and not only from a TCO perspective. All that fancy-pants technology you claim as a boon in favour of the Audi could also be a major flaw come 10-15 years down the line. Not to say the Mazda doesn't have comparable worries (you're suggesting its infotainment is in the stone age, where it's just fine for most customers), but let's compare Audi electronics track record with Mazda's shall we?

On the balance of probabilities, fully speced competitor is generally better than base competitor. And these cars do compete, just at a slightly shifted price bracket. Mazda3 has always been very nicely-equipped mid-range and up for the price, even during the Ford era. In fact, some features were not even made available on its competition at the time.
 

·
Registered
2017 Genesis G90 Ultimate, 2017 Miata RF GT
Joined
·
1,525 Posts
The point is, if your budget is $35,000 for a small premium car, the Mazda is a great value compared to not only cars like the Civic, Corolla, and Impreza, but also the A3, A class, and 2 series.




There is also a $10,000+ difference between the price of them. Cost of ownership is also significantly higher.




You don't make any sense. The Base Mazda 3 Turbo is basically fully loaded and comes with far more features than the base A3. The price difference is $6,000, a significant amount. Most people on this board including myself would chose the fully loaded Mazda over the base Audi. I think the Mazda looks far better inside and out also.

This is a pointless discussion.
There are some people who will stay entrenched in their beliefs no matter how many facts you put in front of them or how many holes you poke in their logic. It's best to just stop responding or ignore them and move on.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,671 Posts
I don't know where you are getting a 10k difference in price. The A3 45TFSI Quattro is 36K. Most shoppers would cough up the extra $3K over the article spec'd 33k Mazda3.

Nonetheless, I just verified that the Mazda is a much lesser car at 33k when in fact a 36K Audi equivalent does exist lol. Well then I will tell you slowly...
Let's be honest - nobody seriously looking at a $33k Mazda 3 is cross-shopping an utter poverty A3/A220/whatever. People shopping a $33k Mazda 3 are deliberately seeking it out for its feature content, and you'd need to pay $45k-$50k for an equivalent feature set from the lux brands.

Source: wife decided on a $50k A220 after cross-shopping a CX-5 Signature as well as flirting around enough to test drive a tarted up CX-30 while we were there. That said, there are a lot of intangibles separating a $33k 3 from a $50k A-class - much higher quality sheet metal stampings, much nicer paint, dealer service and experience (Mazda dealer felt scummy), and not just feature content, but quality of implementation (such as the safety stuff which works much more seamless and unobtrusively than on the Mazda, which in a vacuum seemed to work great). At the end of the day, yes there's a Lux tax, but you do indeed also get what you pay for in other ways that aren't immediately obvious on paper.
 
101 - 120 of 130 Posts
Top