Help - sporty auto daily driver 2009 Mazda3 SP25 or 2007 WRX S-GT?

[gemini]

2009 Mazda3 SP25 or 2007 WRX S-GT (about same price)

Daily driver, automatic

Off-turbo take off speed from lights important which encompasses engine, transmission, drivetrain and weight

Also interested in handling around corners

Hopefully someones driven both

[optmspotts]

MPS is gonna be cheaper on insurance and repairs.

MPS have great power in them, fun to drive, torque steer is something to get used to (where the WRX will come in handy with AWD). 2.3L MPS engine vs 2.0L WRX theoretically means more low-end for your take-off at the lights. I\'ve had no experience with automatic versions however...

PS. Even though it\'s FWD the MPS can still handle VERY well.

Best thing about the MPS is driving what looks like a mum\'s car and then pulling up next to some racey looking thing and showing them who is boss. The look on people\'s faces when they get stomped by an MPS is priceless!

[GorGasmSpecB]

SP25 isn\'t an MPS...

One is a newer econobox, the other is an older performance econo box.

[optmspotts]

 GorGasmSpecB said:

SP25 isn\'t an MPS...

One is a newer econobox, the other is an older performance econo box.

Oops - my bad lol. Oh well, if the thought of an MPS ever crosses your mind

[gemini]

and probably not a fair fight

07 WRX vs 350Z is probably a better comparison

[Pappu1]

the mazda will probably have a longer service life

but cant beat the wrx for all out fun factor!

[Ninja8)]

The mazdas r known for snapping timing chains from engine sludge affecting the tensioner if they are not well serviced. We had a turbo cx7 come into work exactly the same scenario as stated.

[gemini]

Thanks for the tips on insurance and repairs

Will get it serviced every 5000ks

MPS doesn\'t come in manual so not an option for daily driver unfortunately

Looking for effortless power and good handling

Does the 3rd gen import WRX (07 S-GT) have power down low? The 2nd gen was severely lacking there

[Marky]

Do you mean the MPS 2.3 turbo or the SP25 n/a

My wife has the previous shape (04ish) SP23 auto and it\'s mint around town, very torquey little motor but ultimately never a rocket, gets brilliant economy for a big (ish) motor. Handles compentently enough for what it is meant to be - I did taupo and back in it the other week and have 0 issues with overtaking or what have you.

My mum has an 09 SP23 manual (the n/a one) and again much the same story, feels like a larger car on the road but otherwise identical in how it "feels" to drive

The FWD turbo MPS (if that\'s what you did mean?) I\'ve never driven sorry - have driven the mazda6 4WD MPS and was a hell of a Q-car, to be honest is my ideal upgrade down the track

WRX well - I can\'t compare as I havent driven an unmodified one, and to be blunt its a chalk and cheese comparison, they aren\'t really competing cars as such. Maybe the ralliart lancer could be an equivalent to the S-GT but not the little n/a mazda in my eyes

[gemini]

Thanks Marky, sounds like you are saying Mazda SP23/5 is expensive for what it is compared to WRX S-GT?

What about torque, a turbo car that\'s gutless unless you drive it hard is tiresome around town?

[Marky]

I wouldn\'t go that far - I\'d just say they\'re aimed at different market segments - the mazda is meant to be more of a "sporty" but still economical hatch type thing, whereas the WRX is aimed more as competition for the likes of your turbo ford focus / lancer ralliart / mazda MPS etc end of things I guess? (Then you get up to STi vs EVO territory beyond that)

The mazda feels "stronger" round town than my GTB does purely cause of the auto box and instant pickup so in that regard it has a tick in the box - I had an airtrek turbo before that and that was a prime example of an auto/turbo combination working perfectly well, downside was horrific gas bills - even driven with a light foot it spent a lot of time on boost - the WRX may be the same? I have no idea

Sorry I\'m not much help with a comparison - honestly you need to drive both cars, its not like comparing commodore/falcon or wrx/evo, its very different sorts of cars

[newsuba]

Mazda ftw

WRX S-GT is a bag of pooz.

Soft and wallowy, laggy engine, laggier auto gearbox, feeble brakes.

An embarrassment to the badge.

[gemini]

 Marky said:

I wouldn\'t go that far - I\'d just say they\'re aimed at different market segments - the mazda is meant to be more of a "sporty" but still economical hatch type thing, whereas the WRX is aimed more as competition for the likes of your turbo ford focus / lancer ralliart / mazda MPS etc end of things I guess? (Then you get up to STi vs EVO territory beyond that)

The mazda feels "stronger" round town than my GTB does purely cause of the auto box and instant pickup so in that regard it has a tick in the box - I had an airtrek turbo before that and that was a prime example of an auto/turbo combination working perfectly well, downside was horrific gas bills - even driven with a light foot it spent a lot of time on boost - the WRX may be the same? I have no idea

Sorry I\'m not much help with a comparison - honestly you need to drive both cars, its not like comparing commodore/falcon or wrx/evo, its very different sorts of cars

Ok guess it\'s different types of cars like Legacy GT vs Legacy H6 3.0

Out of interest have you compared Mazda SP25 to Legacy H6 3.0?

[gemini]

 newsuba said:

Mazda ftw

WRX S-GT is a bag of pooz.

Soft and wallowy, laggy engine, laggier auto gearbox, feeble brakes.

An embarrassment to the badge.

Yeah had heard WRX S-GT suspension was more compliant. New better independent set up in the rear but softer springs

But isn\'t it lighter with the engine and gearbox same as previous WRX tho? Or did they cut costs/improve economy?

[Marky]

 gemini']

[quote name='Marky said:

I wouldn\'t go that far - I\'d just say they\'re aimed at different market segments - the mazda is meant to be more of a "sporty" but still economical hatch type thing, whereas the WRX is aimed more as competition for the likes of your turbo ford focus / lancer ralliart / mazda MPS etc end of things I guess? (Then you get up to STi vs EVO territory beyond that)

The mazda feels "stronger" round town than my GTB does purely cause of the auto box and instant pickup so in that regard it has a tick in the box - I had an airtrek turbo before that and that was a prime example of an auto/turbo combination working perfectly well, downside was horrific gas bills - even driven with a light foot it spent a lot of time on boost - the WRX may be the same? I have no idea

Sorry I\'m not much help with a comparison - honestly you need to drive both cars, its not like comparing commodore/falcon or wrx/evo, its very different sorts of cars

/quote]

Ok guess it\'s different types of cars like Legacy GT vs Legacy H6 3.0

Out of interest have you compared Mazda SP25 to Legacy H6 3.0?

Thats prob not accurate - comparing the turbo legacy and the H6 one is just engine types

Comparing the H6 with the SP23/5 is like comparing a corolla and a camry - just too much is different for it to be a real comparison. Mazda6 and Legacy is more relevant I guess? The guy I bought my mazda off had an H6 wagon for sale as well, test drove it briefly as an alternative but compared to the mazda it felt like a big falcodore

Seriously just go do some test drives, you can get your heart set on a model from reading about it then drive it and go "ew" or vice versa

[gotasuby]

I just don\'t like how the manual ones limit power in first and have real bad understand under power. But they would be cheaper over all I would think

[newsuba]

 gemini']

[quote name='newsuba said:

Mazda ftw

WRX S-GT is a bag of pooz.

Soft and wallowy, laggy engine, laggier auto gearbox, feeble brakes.

An embarrassment to the badge.

/quote]

Yeah had heard WRX S-GT was soft

But isn\'t it lighter with the engine and gearbox same as previous WRX tho? Or did they cut costs/improve economy?

Yes it is lighter, hard to look that one up as it wasn\'t committed to memory...

;D

From the NZ brochures...

MY06 (hawkweye) WRX wagon;

2.5L turbo

169kW@5600rpm

320Nm@3600rpm

1430kg unladen mass

F 4-pot/R 2-pot ventilated disc brakes

17" wheels with 215/45-17 tyres

MY08 (fugly) WRX hatch;

2.5L turbo with AVCS

169kW@5200rpm

320Nm@2800rpm

1395kg unladen mass

F vented/R solid sliding calliper/1-pot brakes all around

17" wheels with 205/50-17 tyres.

Both run the same (ratios, final gearing) manual gearbox.

[gemini]

 newsuba']

[quote name='newsuba said:

Mazda ftw

WRX S-GT is a bag of pooz.

Soft and wallowy, laggy engine, laggier auto gearbox, feeble brakes.

An embarrassment to the badge.

/quote]

Yeah had heard WRX S-GT was soft

But isn\'t it lighter with the engine and gearbox same as previous WRX tho? Or did they cut costs/improve economy?

Yes it is lighter, hard to look that one up as it wasn\'t committed to memory...

;D

From the NZ brochures...

MY06 (hawkweye) WRX wagon;

2.5L turbo

169kW@5600rpm

320Nm@3600rpm

1430kg unladen mass

F 4-pot/R 2-pot ventilated disc brakes

17" wheels with 215/45-17 tyres

MY08 (fugly) WRX hatch;

2.5L turbo with AVCS

169kW@5200rpm

320Nm@2800rpm

1395kg unladen mass

F vented/R solid sliding calliper/1-pot brakes all around

17" wheels with 205/50-17 tyres.

Both run the same (ratios, final gearing) manual gearbox.

Yeah hawkeye is nicer lookin

Any auto trans option?

[newsuba]

 gemini said:

Yeah hawkeye is nicer lookin

Any auto trans option?

Rare in NZ new, only ever seen one WRX auto sedan, no wagon.

Plenty of 2.0R auto wagons.

For a WRX you will have to look at JUC.

[Heylin]

Why not a 2005+ Legacy GT-B wagon or sedan with 5 speed tiptronic ?, reasonable economy (8-10L per 100kms) good power, good handling.

Simple ECU flash and subtech pipe for under $1500 and you get a fair increase in power and economy if you like.

[gemini]

 Heylin said:

Why not a 2005+ Legacy GT-B wagon or sedan with 5 speed tiptronic ?, reasonable economy (8-10L per 100kms) good power, good handling.

Simple ECU flash and subtech pipe for under $1500 and you get a fair increase in power and economy if you like.

Possibly but would also be another 100kgs+ over the WRX

[KiwiJoe]

True, but part of that extra 90kg is made up by a 5-speed auto, versus the four-cogger fossil in the S-GT.

[gemini]

Ok have since driven 2nd, 3rd and 4th Gen Impreza 2.0, 2nd Gen WRX, 4th Gen Legacy GT and 3.0R and Mazda 2.0

My picks were...

The 2nd Gen WRX cos it's the most fun and still looks cool

The 4th Gen Impreza 2.0 cos it's surprisingly fast around town with strong brakes and less wind and road roar

[Kiwi_Fozze]

The s-gt being the jap model of the wrx is a little bit better. Do remember that these have an electronic throttle with 3 points of adjust ment. I mode is boring as ****. Sports or sports sharp gives a lot better drive. Being a tiny td04 twinscroll turbo means theres f**k all lag, but it does run out of puff at the top end.

$1500 for a tune? Jesus, raijin does them starting at 450 iirc, there are some offshore etuners who do it for a bit less too. Massive gains to be had in a reflash

[Timmah]

I'm saving up for an S-GT at the moment. I quite like the look and the size is more suited for me.

If they're reflashable then I'm bound to be happy for a while.