2009 Mazda 3

[detsilverms3]

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=122903

From Edmunds.

It doesnt look like they are changing much except engines.

[Mazdaspeed2oo35]

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=122903

From Edmunds.

It doesnt look like they are changing much except engines.

That Mazda 3 Looks Like an Ass.... Horrible !!!!!

[mountjonas]

i don't think you guys know what a test mule is.

[ZOOMit]

ehhh, regardless it looks nasssty. I don't like the look of the plain 3's anyways (blarf)

Mazdaspeed 3's look so much better (rockon)

[Falconx84]

lol.... all I saw was "The increased displacement should provide a 20-30-hp boost"

Hi, my name is dave, and I'm a boost-aholic... I've been boost-free for about a half-hour now. All thanks to the support I get from the guys on mazda forums. I couldn't do this without you all.....

[AtenzaNY62]

dont think they're getting a complete makeover until like 2012? i've heard that from somewhere but just forgot where... dual exhausts would look nice btw

[CitizenPro]

i don't think you guys know what a test mule is.

yup.

[Raymo853]

yup.

A mule is just the current car being tested with some major part of what is planned for the next car. In this case they have put the 2009 2.5L engine into probably a 2008 3 to test ou this new engine.

[redspeed]

That Mazda 3 Looks Like an Ass.... Horrible !!!!!

That is because is a sedan. (angel)

I'm with you man, I don't like the mz3 sedan either. (drunk)

[CitizenPro]

A mule is just the current car being tested with some major part of what is planned for the next car. In this case they have put the 2009 2.5L engine into probably a 2008 3 to test ou this new engine.

I know the purpose of that vehicle, i simply agreed with his comment.

[iBoost]

(boom01)

[Dream]

I dont understand why Mazda changes the engines so much, whats wrong with the 2.3?

[mountjonas]

because there's always room for improvement.

[flipstylex]

yup.

i agree, (bike) . not bad thouugh, better engine i guess

[boostdog]

is it just me or does the pic of the front look like a junior high kid from the 80's with head gear? I wonder if they will offer the sedan with the mazdaspeed option...anyone heard anything on that?

[2.0t03speed]

i wonder if the new 2.5 is going to be the next mazdaspeed engine.

[fourthmeal]

dont think they're getting a complete makeover until like 2012? i've heard that from somewhere but just forgot where... dual exhausts would look nice btw

If they are doing a makeover for 2012, I hope it comes with accessories bound to fit our needs at those times...like a machine gun...lol.

[aaronc7]

I like it, 170-180hp sounds pretty good too for a little Mazda3.

[Dream]

because there's always room for improvement.

Well thats the case for everything.

[Falconx84]

If they are doing a makeover for 2012, I hope it comes with accessories bound to fit our needs at those times...like a machine gun...lol.

they are, but only as a dealer-installed item for the post apocalyptic world. And it has a built in can-opener since morons with stashes of canned food don't remember can openers...

[SeminoleMan]

I like it, 170-180hp sounds pretty good too for a little Mazda3. That may not add up to more fun if they make the car bigger.

[fourthmeal]

they are, but only as a dealer-installed item for the post apocalyptic world. And it has a built in can-opener since morons with stashes of canned food don't remember can openers...

LMAO!

[Falconx84]

LMAO!

finally..... someone gets it ;) :D

[1Sleepy93]

They should have kept displacement the same and just stuck direct injection on it. They have it on the turbo version so why not on the NA motor?

[Olestra]

Because competitors are bumping up displacement.
Hopefully we'll see a 2.5L DISI-T and then we'll all be really glad to see that Mazda built a bigger engine.

[jp4130]

They should have kept displacement the same and just stuck direct injection on it. They have it on the turbo version so why not on the NA motor?
What do have againts displacement?

Why are companys putting dual exaust on 4 bangers; it just adds wieght and complexity. Function is really taking a back seat to form if they go with that idea.

[1Sleepy93]

I really don't have anything against larger displacement motors, I have a nice sized V8 in my 58 Ford, but I'd rather see more efficient motors of the same size or smaller. The larger the motor the more fuel it's going to eat even if you aren't in the throttle and with the technology today there really isn't a reason to just go big.

[M3 5MT]

That may not add up to more fun if they make the car bigger.

Your Sig!

T-Bone Steak, Cheese Eggs 'n Welches Grape.

Funniest sh*t I've seen in months.

[Powerslave]

its going to have the new 2.5MZR, ahhhh the next speed??

[SeminoleMan]

Your Sig!

T-Bone Steak, Cheese Eggs 'n Welches Grape.

Funniest sh*t I've seen in months.


HAHA...thanks man! Believe it or not, few people get the reference.

[naddie]

I am not a fan of large displacement on small cars because of fuel economy.

[Falconx84]

HAHA...thanks man! Believe it or not, few people get the reference.

ok, I'm one of those people.....care to enlighten me?

[Falconx84]

I am not a fan of large displacement on small cars because of fuel economy.

depends... if the motor doesn't have to work as hard to get the same job done, you actually save fuel

or you can go get a hybrid, hippy (hippy)

[SeminoleMan]

ok, I'm one of those people.....care to enlighten me? It's just a reference to the Notorious B.I.G. and the song Big Poppa . I just put his lyrics to pictures.

[Falconx84]

lol.... I got u.... been a minute since i heard the song

[omarspeed]

Hi ,people Thats is my MSP3 with somethings modifications.........
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdbEvtSvQbc

[omarspeed]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdbEvtSvQbc

First Im sorry for my English if you not understandme....
thats is my Link for My MSP3, what is the modifications
First Intake MSP,and Intercooler 18x3.5 doing for me And Direct Cut Boost in Dino before without thats parts 230Whp Stock 15 PSI and with thats parts a 17PSI 263 WHP; OK second try in Dino with Catch back 3" with resonator Silverline and Pipe megaracing 3" and Mass Clam Mopar a 21 PSI 283WHP of course I have many trucks what learn for my old SRT4 and not said because thats is my secret.
OK what happened now Iam waiting the Downpipe Turbo XS 3" and I can proube to 25PSI with other trucks I learn for my friens Railly,He have one
SRT4 what actually do 10.7 second in 1/4 miles and with coming the Downpipe Iam Secure or wait what my MSP3 is 330WHP with 352 Torq;see you later guys...........(nana)

[br289165]

http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj298/br289165/944P5001-3.jpg[/IMG]
I like that dog what's her name?
i agree, (bike) . not bad thouugh, better engine i guess

[Raymo853]

depends... if the motor doesn't have to work as hard to get the same job done, you actually save fuel

or you can go get a hybrid, hippy (hippy)

Falcon that is like sayiong if you drive faster you save gas because you cover more distance per engine running time.

It does look like the new Mazda has been pushed back to at least 2010.
http://www.mazdas247.com/forum/showthread.php?t=123700285

[Falconx84]

wow, I thought this thread was dead...

its all a matter of gearing and efficiency - here's one example off the top of my head

2007 Chevrolet Silverado 1500
LT2 4dr Crew Cab 5.8 ft. SB
Base Engine Size: 5.3 liters
http://www.edmunds.com/used/2007/chevrolet/silverado1500/100810025/specs.html
Fuel Tank Capacity: 26 gal.
EPA Mileage Estimates: (City/Highway)
Automatic: : 16 mpg / 22 mpg


2007 Chevrolet Silverado 1500
LT1 4dr Crew Cab 5.8 ft. SB
Base Engine Size: 4.8 liters
http://www.edmunds.com/used/2007/chevrolet/silverado1500/100810023/specs.html
Fuel Tank Capacity: 26 gal.
EPA Mileage Estimates: (City/Highway)
Automatic: : 16 mpg / 20 mpg

[Raymo853]

wow, I thought this thread was dead...

its all a matter of gearing and efficiency - here's one example off the top of my head

2007 Chevrolet Silverado 1500
LT2 4dr Crew Cab 5.8 ft. SB
Base Engine Size: 5.3 liters
http://www.edmunds.com/used/2007/chevrolet/silverado1500/100810025/specs.html
Fuel Tank Capacity: 26 gal.
EPA Mileage Estimates: (City/Highway)
Automatic: : 16 mpg / 22 mpg


2007 Chevrolet Silverado 1500
LT1 4dr Crew Cab 5.8 ft. SB
Base Engine Size: 4.8 liters
http://www.edmunds.com/used/2007/chevrolet/silverado1500/100810023/specs.html
Fuel Tank Capacity: 26 gal.
EPA Mileage Estimates: (City/Highway)
Automatic: : 16 mpg / 20 mpg

When you throw in the gearing variable of course things are going to change. I am assuming the 4.8L has either a tranny with one less gear, a different final drive ratio, different gear choices, etc... causing the lower EPA mileage results.

[tripledigits]

Bigger = heavier = not better.

I wish car companies would stop making all their new models bigger and heavier. The new 3 looks like the outgoing 6 now.

[projectss]

the front doesn't look any different except of those bars that make it look like a skull. And two mufflers killed it... more power though... but that's not enough of an excuse!