You might be a loser if you buy a CX-3 (by WaPo)

:
2014.5 2.5L Touring /w bose
Well, I don't agree with article. What a review! Doesn't inspire confidence.

(to read it, right click on "review" and open new "private" or "incognito" window)

It would seem to be a great city car. Nimble. Skyactiv gets its best mpg in long suburban driving. Its a viable alternative to the Mazda3 hatchback. If they offered it with 2.5L manual, it would get rave reviews.
 
Who care about his review, everyone have different styles and need for their car, so peace please.
 
That was hard to get through. I only got a couple lines in before I had to close it.

What?? "Most young people cannot afford, not without parental or other help, many of the vehicles on display." Of coarse they can't Nothing wrong with that. Buy a clunker, save some money and buy a good quality used car.

Four things that seem to go together
I don't read the WP
I bought my first new car in 2014 48 years after I bought my first car.
I have never had a car loan.
I have owned a lot of fun high quality cars.
 
Wow that was an odd way of reviewing a car. I means it's no Porsche, but what do you expect for a compact CUV priced in the low 20s. I think the article is more about students not getting the high paid jobs that their degree or prestigious college promised them or what they thought they could get after they graduated. He could have used any car for this. And there are worse cars out there! i think the cx3 was unfortunate in being selected.
 
That article was all over the place, from talking about how little graduates earn, to Bernie Sanders, to Porsche's and Land Rovers. Seemed a bit more like a rant about what's wrong with American politics, than what's right or wrong about a CX-3.
 
I didn't read much hate for the CX3. Even the OP used a bit of poetic license to help the article get more clicks on this forum.

As with any Mazda, it's bit rough over potholes. Some folks would also like a bit more power. Nothing new here.

Complaining about high winds at highway speeds just seems odd. What CUV/SUV doesn't get blown around a bit by high winds?

The rest was largely complimentary. But I would not say it's basically a 3 like he did since it's based on the Mazda 2 platform. My previous 3 HB also had more storage space than a CX3.

Aside from that it was just a political rant. I don't need to get my political news from car reviews, regardless of who he was supporting. Lame.
 
Last edited:
What?? "Most young people cannot afford, not without parental or other help, many of the vehicles on display." Of coarse they can't Nothing wrong with that. Buy a clunker, save some money and buy a good quality used car.

It was mostly for the miss placed use of politics in a car review. There is no need for it no matter who your canidate is.
 
The article had NOTHING to do with a car review of the CX3. It was a political rant and rave.

This thread shouldn't have even been posted. It has nothing to do with a legit car review
 
The article had NOTHING to do with a car review of the CX3. It was a political rant and rave.

This thread shouldn't have even been posted. It has nothing to do with a legit car review

He says plenty about his hands-on experience with the vehicle, but yeah, there is a lot of rant in there, too. But its pertinent, I think, because vehicles don't exist in a vacuum, or we would only be discussing Ferrari, Porsche, Land Rover, Benz AMG, etc.
 
Well, I don't agree with article. What a review! Doesn't inspire confidence.

(to read it, right click on "review" and open new "private" or "incognito" window)

It would seem to be a great city car. Nimble. Skyactiv gets its best mpg in long suburban driving. Its a viable alternative to the Mazda3 hatchback. If they offered it with 2.5L manual, it would get rave reviews.

I took it a bit differently. He basically said it's a decent new car for those on a tight budget. Which is just about every young person these days who doesn't get free money (or work for a progressive tech company). Personally, if that's all I could spend, I'd go even cheaper and look at well maintained/driven used cars). I'll agree, it's a very non-professional review if you actually wanted to know about the details of the car. The review sounds like it was written by an older, lazy man who doesn't like small, light cars that are mini-SUV's.

Can you blame him?
 
I took it a bit differently. He basically said it's a decent new car for those on a tight budget. Which is just about every young person these days who doesn't get free money (or work for a progressive tech company). Personally, if that's all I could spend, I'd go even cheaper and look at well maintained/driven used cars). I'll agree, it's a very non-professional review if you actually wanted to know about the details of the car. The review sounds like it was written by an older, lazy man who doesn't like small, light cars that are mini-SUV's.

Can you blame him?

I've honestly found "RegularCars" to be pretty damn accurate, speaking of "non-standard reviews".

Sample:
 
Well, I don't agree with article. What a review! Doesn't inspire confidence.

(to read it, right click on "review" and open new "private" or "incognito" window)

It would seem to be a great city car. Nimble. Skyactiv gets its best mpg in long suburban driving. Its a viable alternative to the Mazda3 hatchback. If they offered it with 2.5L manual, it would get rave reviews.

The reviewer should retire with to drive his big cushy Oldsmobile V8 into the old people's home. Should also keep it in the right lane so under-powered Prius owners don't have to slow down for him.
 
Back