Topic: The Head versus the Heart: 2014 Mazda3 Sport GS and 2014 MINI Cooper

[Autos_Editor]

A downtowner with a head for good value and a heart for fun explains why a 2014 MINI Cooper trumped an almost identically priced Mazda3.

Read More...

[toolatecrew]

Is ir really that hard to get a 6 speed manual Mazda 3 test car when doing this kind of comparison. I mean its not like there aren't 20 of them sitting on every Mazda lot in the city.

[jyarkony]

Is ir really that hard to get a 6 speed manual Mazda 3 test car when doing this kind of comparison. I mean its not like there aren't 20 of them sitting on every Mazda lot in the city.

We don't just walk into any dealer and ask for cars for a comparison... We receive cars from Mazda Canada's PR division, and as mentioned, the Mazda3 is the 'logical' head choice in this comparison, so it makes sense to have an automatic, which is what we requested.

[superukr]

kind of strange comparing 2 seater (rear ones are good only for hand bag)  coup to honest 4 door  4 seater hatch

[JacobBlack]

kind of strange comparing 2 seater (rear ones are good only for hand bag)  coup to honest 4 door  4 seater hatch

I know,  right? It's almost like one of these is sensible and logical, while the other is just emotional... 

[bridgecity]

kind of strange comparing 2 seater (rear ones are good only for hand bag)  coup to honest 4 door  4 seater hatch

I know,  right? It's almost like one of these is sensible and logical, while the other is just emotional...

 

[hemusbull]

How can be the fuel efficiency close when one of two uses premium gas. In cases like that better to use costs for gas per 100 kms instead liters per 100 kms. And something more - kudos to Mazda engineers to build this very high ratio engine still using regular!

[greengs]

The 2015 (new and realistic) Canadian fuel ratings for the Mazda3 are 8.0L/100km city and 5.9L/100kms highway.  Considering it got 7.0L/100kms in this test I think it's bang on for the new upcoming ratings.  No more 4.8L and 4.9L BS in commercials!

[OliverD]

kind of strange comparing 2 seater (rear ones are good only for hand bag)  coup to honest 4 door  4 seater hatch

The rear seats of the Mini are usable. A bit tough to get into and I wouldn't want to go on a road trip with four people in the car but for short stints they are adequate.

This is a timely comparison – we just bought an '07 MCS to replace our '07 Mazda 3 sedan. Of course, we also have the 6 wagon – no way could the Mini be our only car.

[pcsp]

How can be the fuel efficiency close when one of two uses premium gas. In cases like that better to use costs for gas per 100 kms instead liters per 100 kms. And something more - kudos to Mazda engineers to build this very high ratio engine still using regular!

It's close because the Mini beat the Mazda ever so slightly, even considering the extra cost of Premium. Remember, if this is important to you, Premium fuel usually has no ethanol in it; so there is some value to the extra few cents per litre. I'd also be surprised if, driven carefully, a 3 cylinder 1.5L turbo wouldn't surpass a 4 cylinder 2.0 L. Both, however, are exceptional.

The "head vs heart" is so appropriate in this comparison. For me - no contest - I want a Mini (must be the base and have that beautiful panoramic sunroof)! To compare cargo space, backseat room, etc. is a bit pointless, as the Mini is still mini. It now makes great use of it's dimensions and has, I believe, topped out in terms of size. That awful ride is also is thing of the past. BMW has performed genius for the current generation - all under $21,000 to start. I'm not on the fence on this one.

[jpd]

I did about 1500km so far with the Mazda 3 GS automatic and it is about 6.3l/100km city and around 5.5l/100km highways.  It never went under 5.0.

[OliverD]

And if you really need a bit more practicality...

[mixmanmash]

How can be the fuel efficiency close when one of two uses premium gas. In cases like that better to use costs for gas per 100 kms instead liters per 100 kms. And something more - kudos to Mazda engineers to build this very high ratio engine still using regular!

It's close because the Mini beat the Mazda ever so slightly, even considering the extra cost of Premium. Remember, if this is important to you, Premium fuel usually has no ethanol in it; so there is some value to the extra few cents per litre. I'd also be surprised if, driven carefully, a 3 cylinder 1.5L turbo wouldn't surpass a 4 cylinder 2.0 L. Both, however, are exceptional.

The "head vs heart" is so appropriate in this comparison. For me - no contest - I want a Mini (must be the base and have that beautiful panoramic sunroof)! To compare cargo space, backseat room, etc. is a bit pointless, as the Mini is still mini. It now makes great use of it's dimensions and has, I believe, topped out in terms of size. That awful ride is also is thing of the past. BMW has performed genius for the current generation - all under $21,000 to start. I'm not on the fence on this one.

While there is value to not having ethanol content depending on what you are trying to achieve, the cost is not a mere few cents.  Around here, you pay 17 cents / litre more for premium unleaded.  Overall in year, if both cars were say averaging 10L / 100km, and 20k kms/year are driven, the fuel cost of regular is $2500 whereas premium is $2840.  Not that much of difference IMO.

Personally, I run ethanol blended Husky/Mohawk/Petro Canada 94 in my 300ZX.  Why?  Because I have a fuel tune for that particular fuel and it nets me about 30-40 hp more than regular 91.  However, when I store the car for the winter, it gets filled with 91 because ethanol is hygroscopic in nature and it also tends to separate from gasoline after a while.  Of course, when I do fill with 91, I switch the fuel tune over to the 91 map.

[pcsp]

How can be the fuel efficiency close when one of two uses premium gas. In cases like that better to use costs for gas per 100 kms instead liters per 100 kms. And something more - kudos to Mazda engineers to build this very high ratio engine still using regular!

It's close because the Mini beat the Mazda ever so slightly, even considering the extra cost of Premium. Remember, if this is important to you, Premium fuel usually has no ethanol in it; so there is some value to the extra few cents per litre. I'd also be surprised if, driven carefully, a 3 cylinder 1.5L turbo wouldn't surpass a 4 cylinder 2.0 L. Both, however, are exceptional.

The "head vs heart" is so appropriate in this comparison. For me - no contest - I want a Mini (must be the base and have that beautiful panoramic sunroof)! To compare cargo space, backseat room, etc. is a bit pointless, as the Mini is still mini. It now makes great use of it's dimensions and has, I believe, topped out in terms of size. That awful ride is also is thing of the past. BMW has performed genius for the current generation - all under $21,000 to start. I'm not on the fence on this one.

While there is value to not having ethanol content depending on what you are trying to achieve, the cost is not a mere few cents.  Around here, you pay 17 cents / litre more for premium unleaded.  Overall in year, if both cars were say averaging 10L / 100km, and 20k kms/year are driven, the fuel cost of regular is $2500 whereas premium is $2840.  Not that much of difference IMO.

Personally, I run ethanol blended Husky/Mohawk/Petro Canada 94 in my 300ZX.  Why?  Because I have a fuel tune for that particular fuel and it nets me about 30-40 hp more than regular 91.  However, when I store the car for the winter, it gets filled with 91 because ethanol is hygroscopic in nature and it also tends to separate from gasoline after a while.  Of course, when I do fill with 91, I switch the fuel tune over to the 91 map.

Wow, quite a difference between 87 and 91! In Newfoundland, it's about 6 cents, and 3 on Thursdays at select stations. At 3 cents, the annual cost difference with your example would be $60. 300ZX - sweet car.

[EV-Light]

The only thing I can see in the Mazda's design is how the license plate messes up their design...makes the Mazda actually ugly to my eyes.
Did Mazda designers forget that most of us need a front license plate?

[Blueprint]

With the MINI 5-door around the corner (basically same car), it's a very valid comparo for a fun-minded commuter.

As for premium, I just filled the lowly Sentra this morning with 0% ethanol 91, for 10 cents more per litre than 10% ethanol 87 (Costco). I was curious to see how the no-ethanol vs price compares over a tank of regular commuting, as read by the trip computer (sitting at traffic-typical 8.3 l/100km prior to fill-up). Report in 2 weeks.

[pcsp]

With the MINI 5-door around the corner (basically same car), it's a very valid comparo for a fun-minded commuter.

As for premium, I just filled the lowly Sentra this morning with 0% ethanol 91, for 10 cents more per litre than 10% ethanol 87 (Costco). I was curious to see how the no-ethanol vs price compares over a tank of regular commuting, as read by the trip computer (sitting at traffic-typical 8.3 l/100km prior to fill-up). Report in 2 weeks.

Blueprint, doesn't the 2.0L call for regular vs Premium? No ethanol is good, but personally I would use the recommended fuel. I guess that's why I see a value added aspect to vehicles that call for Premium.

[Nuttygent]

  For a long time I haven driven Japanese(mostly Mazda) and would never have considered a Mini. That little engine combined with great handling had me thinking. Thanks to whoever mentioned the premium fuel requirement, that is a deal breaker as I commute and that 10-12 cent added cost would tally up in a hurry. Seems odd that Hyundai and Ford both offer turbo 1.6's that use regular fuel.

[Fobroader]

I don't get the whole kerfuffle over premium. Really, in the grand scheme of things unless your a cab driver or hot shot delivery, the annual cost isn't even worth mentioning. Premium fuel wouldn't even be on the list of cons for a vehicle. If you have a turbo, for the love of god, run premium.

[jamesautos]

I don't get the whole kerfuffle over premium. Really, in the grand scheme of things unless your a cab driver or hot shot delivery, the annual cost isn't even worth mentioning. Premium fuel wouldn't even be on the list of cons for a vehicle. If you have a turbo, for the love of god, run premium.

not everyone can afford it... some of us flip burgers for a living...

as of late the difference btw regular and premium is 20 cents per litre
assuming your gas milage is 10L/100km for easier math...so for every 100km its will cost 2 dollar extra

most lease allow 20,000km per year...and if you use it up, thats $400 extra per year if you use premium gas (it will likely cover a monthly payment of your lease) not exactly pocket change for many of us...