MX-3.com

Yes! I was right about something!! Pretty sure .32 CD is great for a car of this era, isn't it? Considering the ~'07 MazdaSpeed 3 & current M3 Coupe get an identical .32 cd, I think this is pretty good!
I totally agree on road noise - a major omission from the negative list... One day I plan on taking everything out of the interior & adding some sound deadening - On Australian country roads, the noise is deafening... just as well I usually only do such trips with music cranking, then
More positives:
- amazingly good a/c! The other day was 37 degrees (Celcius), and I actually got cold in the car with the a/c on only the middle fan setting The heater's pretty good, too, from what I can tell, though I very rarely need it in Australia!! (lowest ever minimum temp I can remember in my city was 0 Celcius, but that was like at 4am haha)
- neat little 'touch' button to stop the car from zapping you on egress from the vehicle
- great visibility (has been mentioned, I know, but it's extra worth mentioning!!)
- combinations of 'looks' one can achieve using OEM parts from different parts of the world
- rarity/people always asking what it is
- modern, elegant looks - I often get asked how I can afford such a flash, new car as a student. People seem to think its about $40k's worth of car (which it was in Australia when new), and are amazed when I say it cost $4k!
- chuckability - if the mood takes you, it can handle pretty well, even running mostly stock gear.
- liveability - when the mood doesn't take you, it's fuel efficient & very easy to tootle about town in
- massive boot - again it's already been mentioned, but worth mentioning again - I fit a full road bike in the boot with seats folded, without having to remove the front tyre!! It often baffles people!

I totally agree that the car would have been better with the larger engine, but the bean counters see things differently.

1) price increase...more interest from tuners less interest from everyone else.
2) begins to compete with other "sporty" models and potentially affects their sales.

I also think that on some level they are giving some consideration to how the product will evolve with communities like ours as time goes on. By using common engine families like they did they have made it possible for us to experiment and have a lot of fun. Other car companies specifically stop this sort of thing by making cars as unique as possible.

wytbishop wrote:I totally agree that the car would have been better with the larger engine, but the bean counters see things differently.

1) price increase...more interest from tuners less interest from everyone else.
2) begins to compete with other "sporty" models and potentially affects their sales.

I also think that on some level they are giving some consideration to how the product will evolve with communities like ours as time goes on. By using common engine families like they did they have made it possible for us to experiment and have a lot of fun. Other car companies specifically stop this sort of thing by making cars as unique as possible.

Than you have the insurance increases too from the power. And look at how much of a theft target old Preludes and Civics used to be? I think even the old 2000 SIR is still in the top 10. Than you have some countries that were limited to 2.0L otherwise they'd be taxed extra.

Charlie, wouldn't putting a KL in the MX-3 have actually reduced costs? Being the only American car with a K8 in it, that's a chunk of money saved in designing the K8... I'm not as positive about other countries, but I believe the same holds true. No K8 = less money into R&D, and they already produced more of the KLs, which in and of itself should reduce the manufacturing costs of the engine...

I'm in agreement on the competition between MX-3 and MX-6 though, I still can't wrap my head around it competing with the Miata or RX-7. It just doesn't make sense, when you look at the major selling points of both cars.

That's a good point about communities though, I don't doubt the thought crossed their minds at one point or another.

I would peg Honduhs for common targets of theft because of an abundance of parts... If you wreck your green Civic, and there are 10 more in the apartment complex 2 blocks away... you'll be wanting some parts come midnight. It's not about power, it's about lazy criminals who treat their cars like crap. There are mismatched Civics and Del Sols all over my town, more by far than anything else. Second to that would be older Toyota and Datsun pickups, I see a lot of those as well. It's easy to steal interior trim, fairly easy to steal a set of rims, it's not easy to steal an engine. The entire car, I could see; but the inherent risk makes it less likely than a few body panels.

MrMazda92 wrote:I'm in agreement on the competition between MX-3 and MX-6 though, I still can't wrap my head around it competing with the Miata or RX-7. It just doesn't make sense, when you look at the major selling points of both cars.

Miata not really, but for the Rx-7, if one wanted just pure speed, didn't care so much for corners, the Mx-3 would be right there. The FD3S Rx-7 was the fastest car in Mazda's line up at the time and had a 1/4mile time of 14.0 seconds, something a ZE Mx-3 can do, and has done better than, and for those who are affraid of the rotary and want to stick with a piston motor, with better mileage, cheaper (the Rx-7 ran for $70'000! new) storage room and seats 4, it can make the rx-7 less attractive, especially for half the price, depending on the person's wants/desires of course, cause the hardcore enthousiasts wouldn't of compromised and went with the Rx-7 regardless.

I'm 99.9% sure Mazda didn't have our little modding community in mind when they made it all interchangeable.

How many of us bought an MX new, and how does Mazda make money?

The reason its all so interchangeable is to reduce production costs.

Take our calipers for example. These are made from a cast/die process. The engineering that must go into a caliper is staggering. Straight up stress analysis, secondly heat analysis, thirdly vibs, fourthly fatique, and then heat dissipation in general (respect your brake fluid and wheel bearings, which will be destroyed by overheated brakes), plus maintenance and service life requires mes... plus the feeling Mazda required... its just a massive task.

So if you can cut the amount of times you need to re-design a part like that, you save five figures in engineering costs, not to mention the cost of making the dyes to form the parts... HUGE cost.

One way to avoid that cost is to make s--- interchangeable. Design it once and use it everywhere, we share calipers with 323's. Next option is to buy the parts from someone else. Most of our electronics are Mitsu. Mazda's economists determined this to be the most cost effective route.

It had nothing to do with us. There's no money in us, and its ALWAYS about money.

Nd4SpdSe wrote:

MrMazda92 wrote:I'm in agreement on the competition between MX-3 and MX-6 though, I still can't wrap my head around it competing with the Miata or RX-7. It just doesn't make sense, when you look at the major selling points of both cars.

Miata not really, but for the Rx-7, if one wanted just pure speed, didn't care so much for corners, the Mx-3 would be right there. The FD3S Rx-7 was the fastest car in Mazda's line up at the time and had a 1/4mile time of 14.0 seconds, something a ZE Mx-3 can do, and has done better than, and for those who are affraid of the rotary and want to stick with a piston motor, with better mileage, cheaper (the Rx-7 ran for $70'000! new) storage room and seats 4, it can make the rx-7 less attractive, especially for half the price, depending on the person's wants/desires of course, cause the hardcore enthousiasts wouldn't of compromised and went with the Rx-7 regardless.

The people who had the money for the RX-7 didn't need to stress the cost really. I don't hear anybody driving a $50,000+ car complaining about how much it cost. Now sub $25,000 cars? I hear those owners complaining about every penny...

I have always gathered that the novelty of the rotary engine meant more to most people than the drawbacks and fear of the unknown. Honestly, how many people drive RX series cars just to say they own a Rotary powered car? I know too many people with too much money and a fast car they can't change a tire on... Speed doesn't make a car a hot seller, not when the masses are looking for other things. That's why the RX7 was so popular, it gave them something new, fashionable, and desirable to seek out. It's an image thing, rather like the Roadster thing with the Miata.

That's obviously not an umbrella explanation for every RX7 owner, but I feel it's an adequate description... check Craigslist for any RX series car. You'll see "ROTARY", "THIS CAR HAULZ", and similar statements.

Also, again, both the Miata and RX-7 were RWD... That's a bigger selling point than the Rotary even, to some people.

Ryan wrote:I'm 99.9% sure Mazda didn't have our little modding community in mind when they made it all interchangeable.

How many of us bought an MX new, and how does Mazda make money?

The reason its all so interchangeable is to reduce production costs.

Take our calipers for example. These are made from a cast/die process. The engineering that must go into a caliper is staggering. Straight up stress analysis, secondly heat analysis, thirdly vibs, fourthly fatique, and then heat dissipation in general (respect your brake fluid and wheel bearings, which will be destroyed by overheated brakes), plus maintenance and service life requires mes... plus the feeling Mazda required... its just a massive task.

So if you can cut the amount of times you need to re-design a part like that, you save five figures in engineering costs, not to mention the cost of making the dyes to form the parts... HUGE cost.

One way to avoid that cost is to make s--- interchangeable. Design it once and use it everywhere, we share calipers with 323's. Next option is to buy the parts from someone else. Most of our electronics are Mitsu. Mazda's economists determined this to be the most cost effective route.

It had nothing to do with us. There's no money in us, and its ALWAYS about money.

Oh I understand the economics. I live the economics. I'm just saying that Mazda has a tuner friendly phylosophy where other manufacturers make our hobby much much more difficult.

Can't say I've ever thought about their philosophy including the modding community...

But probe guys couldn't find OE replacement parts in 2000.

There's still some body panels out there for us, and every engine/electrical part you could ever want.

I don't think the KL MX-3 would have taken sales from the Miata or the RX-7 those people want legitimate sports cars. There is a reason that the RX and the Miata are still in production compared to the MX-3 and MX-6. The sports cars have a luxury attached to them. The Mercury Grand Marquis, the Ford Crown Vic, and the Lincoln Town Car were almost the exact same, but the Lincoln sold because of its sticker.
If the MX-3 would have had the larger engine it would have taken away some of the MX-6 sales, but the MX-6 offers more interior room and a different body style. I know in the United States the bigger trend was still popular in the 90's. Also people on the MX-6 forums know about the MX-3 and still KLZE swap there cars instead of going out and buying an MX-3 to do it. If it was that superior no one would do it.
At the end of the day Mazda is still selling cars and making money, and would not have had to spend millions to redesign a smaller K series engine. Imagine what it cost to make nearly the same engine in 3 sizes with 1.8, 2.0, and 2.5. MSN has the original price for the 93 MX3 at about $13,000 and the MX-6 about about $16,000 (does not specify the trim). Even with the same engine the MX-3 was most likely cheaper to make. The smaller body requires less paint, less metal, ect. With the increased demand that everyone on this page agrees with if they could have bumped the price up a bit it still would have worked out for them. As a business student it just seems like a stupid mistake.

I think you will get further if you look at this from a design pov. They marketed the car to a specific target audience. It was made to fill a gap not to be part of an existing market. At the time mazda needed a low budget eco car to compete with the Toyota Paseo, Hydudai Scoupe and similiar models. Hence the mx-3, it filled a gap that they didnt have and helped expand their market and target audience. The 6cyl option was merely a way to outsell the competition, it didnt need to go 100mph, it justed needed to outperform the competion, which it did in BOTH mpg and performance without surpassing their target audiences income level.

I see this every day at honda, you sell the kid on the civic, and when he grows up he comes back to buy the 40-50K Pilot/Crosstour. It was meerly a way to sell the brand and try to secure more profit.

Makes total sense actually.

Though I think Mazda also sold me on Ford. Their desgins are so similar that I almost decided on buying a Focus Titanium.

Hey Ryan, why dont you mention anything about the handling?

93 MX3 GS handling > 95 Civic EX handling

like this post and agree . good info and agree with all ur facts . mooneggs very true what u say i feel ya