It’s amazing how promises we make to ourselves in our youth can be broken as we get older. In this particular COAL, I will break a huge one.
I learned to drive on a stick shift (a 1981 Plymouth Reliant, with four on the floor). For more than two decades, manual transmissions were pretty much all I knew. The clutch pedal was so wired into my muscle memory that on the few occasions I drove an automatic car, I would sometimes jam the brake pedal coming to a stop trying to engage a non-existent clutch pedal.
I love driving stick shifts. It is like a dancing with your car. You are literally in touch with your vehicle in a way that is impossible in an automatic. Plus in college I seldom had to lend my car out, as few people could drive a stick. I was a lifer, or so I thought. I swore to myself that I would never own a car with an automatic transmission for as long as I lived.
Then the bloom started coming off the shifter in the early 2000s, so to speak. Most of the problems I ran into I’ve already documented my 2002 VW Jetta COAL: longer commute, extra rowing required by 6-speed vs. 5-speed, and a spouse that doesn’t drive a stick shift.
So when it came time to turn in the Jetta, I thought long and hard about my automotive needs. Do the occasional moments of joy outweigh the hours of drudgery I have to endure with a stick shift? Earlier in my life, the answer was an enthusiastic yes, but now the answer was decidedly no, as evidenced by the use of words like “drudgery.” I had decided to get an automatic.
As usual, I was looking for maximum content for minimum cash outlay. I looked at various options for compact cars, and I quickly zeroed in on the Mazda 3. The Grand Sport trim, in particular, seemed to have a lot of stuff. Leather, Bose, automatic climate control, Xenon headlights, heated seats—pretty much all the goodies I had in my A4 a decade earlier. Heady stuff for a compact car at the time (and today, for that matter).
I’d always heard good things about Mazdas, but my experience with them was limited to an MX-3 that my brother owned back in the ’90s. Stylistically, the Mazda 3 was very attractive (especially in profile), and the automotive press simply adored it.
Despite having 17″ wheels and tires, it always looked under-tired to me.
If I had to pick a car to ween myself off of manual transmissions, the Mazda 3 was a good choice. For starters, it had a 5-speed automatic at a time when many compacts still had only four. It had a manual gate, which I used frequently during my detox period. And it had an LCD indicator on the dash that always showed what gear it was (both and automatic and manual mode), unlike most other cars that only show the gear number in manual mode. This allowed me to supervise the automatic transmission and make sure that it was doing its job correctly. Transparency is an important part of building trust.
After experiencing the HID headlights of my A4, the halogen bulbs of the Jetta seemed like two flashlights in comparison. By virtue of working for Stylin Concepts, an online auto parts seller, I had access to a large amount of aftermarket headlight bulbs (at cost, no less). I tried them all – blue bulbs, gold bulbs, silver bulbs. None were close to actual HIDs in brightness, and most in fact weren’t any brighter than the stock bulbs (just colored differently). Many were cheaply made Chinese junk that burned out after a month or two. I was glad to get back into genuine HID lights with the Mazda.
Note the engaged handbrake, an old manual transmission habit that took a long time to die.
The interior of the 3 could best be described as austere, especially after coming from a Jetta, which is pretty much at the opposite end of the spectrum of interior design. It was somber inside, with only a strip of obviously fake gray carbon fiber to break up the gloom. The rotary automatic climate controls were odd: obviously they needed to share the same bezel as the manual climate control system. Hard plastics were everywhere, and even though the seats, steering wheel, and shifter knob were all supposedly leather-covered, they all could have passed for vinyl. However, the orange instrument panel illumination was a welcome relief, after coming from the garish blue illumination of the Jetta.
Mazda 3, and youngest son Ryan. Chrysler Pacifica in background.
The 2.3L four-banger wasn’t a rocket, but it got great gas mileage (helpful at a time gas was over $3.00 per gallon). In any case, my stoplight drag strip days were way behind me, so the performance was more than adequate for me. During its time with me I averaged 28 miles per gallon, making it the most fuel-efficient vehicle I’ve ever owned.
On the negative side of the ledger, the 3 felt about as solid as a beer can. The door sounded tinny when I shut it (and yes, I know, this is a terrible way to judge the quality of a car). Otherwise, the panel fit was tight, and no major squeaks or rattles developed that I can recall. The rear spoiler interacted oddly with the auto-dimming rearview mirror. It seemed to be perfectly positioned to cast a shadow over the light sensor, causing it to un-dim just when some idiot pulls up behind me with their high beams on.
Lacking traction control and a clutch to feather, winter driving presented a challenge, so much so that this was the first car since my 94 Integra that I had to buy snow tires for.
Looking back, the Mazda 3 was a good car. Heck, it was a great car. It may have been the car that I needed, but it wasn’t really the car I wanted. In the pantheon of cars I’ve owned, it would be mid-pack at best, and definitely in the bottom half.
Luckily, interesting things were afoot at work, and I was about to undergo a dramatic change at work, and one that would greatly increase the quality (and eventually the quantity) of my motor pool. Stop back soon to find out what that shocking change is!
Tom,
Good choice here; I’ve always like the look of the Mazda 3. And the 6.
And you are not alone in feeling that manuals add a dimension of implementing competent complexity to the skills of driving as opposed to the simplistic on/off aspect of an automatic. But then the stop and go traffic on the long incline to the George Washington Bridge from the FDR Drive in Manhattan can make one look at things differently.
Regarding your photo caption: “Note the engaged handbrake, an old manual transmission habit that took a long time to die.”
Keep using the handbrake with an automatic. Trusting a small metal parking pawl to hold back a multi-thousand pound vehicle is not something to inspire confidence. Plus the fact that sometimes the pressure of a transmission parking pawl holding a car on a hill can make it [very] hard to get the vehicle out of Park. The solution to parking on a hill: Apply handbrake, let car roll back on it, put into Park (as backup).
And recent news about the danger of the new shifting devices, like the Jeep Monostable shifter (http://autoweek.com/article/recalls/nhtsa-upgrades-fca-gearshift-probe-amid-reports-crashes-and-injuries), make it even more important that drivers get into the habit of using the hand/foot operated parking brake. Just in case.
It took years to standardize PRNDL. Why is the auto industry messing with that now?
Looking forward to the next installment.
I was going to say something very similar myself! When you see the actual size of the parking pawl in an auto trans, you’d think twice about trusting it. I could never wrap my head around the habit of calling it an ’emergency brake’ in some countries. It’s not.
And I think you nailed the case for the manual transmission. It’s not about speed and ultimate efficiency, it’s about a connection to the car; being able to feel what it is doing. It’s about being active rather than reactivate (or worse, passive) when driving. That said, my daily driver is automatic. Sigh.
The parking pawl in many cars cannot be used as an emergency brake. If engaged in motion, it sort of ratchets, and doesn’t stop the car until almost at rest, when it suddenly CLUNKS in. At about one mph, which is hardly an “emergency.”
I’ve been a manual fan for ages, and always rely on the parking brake myself. Someone, however, said this to me way back when and it has always stuck. “What’s cheaper to replace? A broken transmission or a worn out emergency brake?”
You’re absolutely right of course… my message got a bit mixed there. I meant that people called the handbrake an emergency brake.
Agreed 100% on the parking brake. I also learned on stick shifts and grew up in hilly territory. You never trusted only the parking pawl to hold your car in place, at least if you liked your car.
And, like everyone else as they age, I switched to an autobox and haven’t looked back. My feet and ankles can’t take the repetitive motion. Worse, with arthritis in my right foot, I’m finding I have to resort to left foot braking…
Brother called me because he couldn’t find a NLA parking pawl rod that broke inside his ’91 Vanagon’s automatic transmission. After a little research, I realized any ’70’s to early ’90’s 3 speed (010) automatic Audi or VW, front or rear drive used the same part. At U pull, I dropped the valve body out of a MK2 Jetta 3 speed automatic and pulled the spring steel with a roller on the end pawl and shipped it to him in Florida.
I asked him how it broke, did he slam it into park while it was moving? No, he said he took his Vanagon in to have the leaking rear main seal replaced, and the shop told him it was broken. They also told him they really had to beat on the crank pulley bolt with an air gun to get the bolt off. They also said they couldn’t find a replacement
parking pawl anywhere in the country. Discontinued from VW years ago.
After a little thought, I realized they must have had the car in park instead of locking the engine with the trans in neutral, snapping the little pawl in two. Brother told them what I thought happened and they agreed and replaced the parking pawl part at no charge.
Definitely a solid choice for a COAL. It’s a shame it didn’t really speak to you, Tom. Although I haven’t owned one myself, I’ve driven a number of cars on this platform, both the 3 and 6 varieties. I’ve generally found them to be quite an engaging drive, especially the later versions. They absolutely seem a cut above most others in the class for handling, driver feedback, and, well… fun. I’d agree that the interiors are somewhat austere (really, they’re no worse than most Japanese rivals), but the functionality is there, so it gets a pass. I found the 2.3 and 2.5 to be highly competitive – easily more pleasant to stir along than the Honda, Toyota, Nissan or Subaru big fours. One thing that annoyed me with several of them was the programming of the drive-by-wire throttle – it is extremely touchy in the first few degrees of travel, which makes it feel responsive, but also making smooth progress more difficult than it should be. They said, it’s a million times better than the execrable attempt in the Peugeot 406 I drove (recreated in ghastly detail in a 407 I drove later).
Mazda 3s are very popular here in NZ, and as a result, they hold their value better than most on the second hand market. Which is one reason that they dropped off my short list last time I was car shopping.
The closest I’ve come to Mazda is owning a 1997 Ford Escort station wagon that Ford and Mazda codeveloped into the Escort and Protege of that generation.
Still the best handling car I’ve ever owned (in the “fun to drive a slow car fast” kinda way) and much more entertaining after the automatic transmission was rebuilt. The rebuilder (small independent guy) used the Mazda parts which really firmed things up and made the shifting more aggressive and a little slower to grab top gear and hold it.
Hmmm… I took exactly the opposite route on my 3 even though it does see some city duty. Each to his or her own of course – I hate auto boxes, plus one of the things one has to consider with modern auto boxes is the amount of electronic trickery which is simply not there on a manual box. Unfortunately manual boxes are a dying breed given emission regulations, so eventually on an everyday car I may have to accept one.
Unfortunately manual boxes are a dying breed given emission regulations,
Now that’s one I’ve never heard. And I can’t imagine where it comes from. There’s no basis for it.
Manuals are dying because of two reasons: as traffic gets worse, folks are tired of shifting. Young people often see it as a useless relic from another time. Why bother learning? And the distractions of in car entertainment, navigation, texting/phoning all conspire against manuals.
The other reason is because there’s also no fuel economy or performance advantage to manuals. Those reasons were once compelling.
The only reason now is to satisfy hard-core manual drivers, who are getting older and fewer. We manual driver are a dying breed and might as well accept it.
Turtle’s observation is accurate. Emission regulations are just one more nail the manual-shift coffin. Accurate and precise automatic-shift programming helps car designs meet regs, with thin margins for error. A manual transmission introduces a human element of uncertainty and imprecision which affects the approval process.
Auto manufacturers limit manual transmission choices accordingly, which is convenient, given the market for them has been in decline for decades.
Yes, manual shift cars need to be certified, which undoubtedly costs a bit of money. But I refuse to accept that all/most modern engines couldn’t be readily certified. (Traditional) emission regulations are not getting any tighter, and haven’t been for some years. Modern engines are remarkably clean.
There’s no doubt in my mind that if there was a demand for manuals, every car being sold on the market would/could readily offer it. It’s absolutely not a technical hurdle. You’d have to prove it to me otherwise.
In addition to the minor hurdle of the expense of certification, the biggest one by far is that manufacturers want to have as few variations, because of the expense of stocking them. As manual take-rate drops, the number of models available drops. And that is of course a death spiral. Who wants to offer a model with a 3-5% take rate? Nobody.
It isn’t a matter of if they could certify a manual transmission, they certainly could. However developing a calibration and certifying it is expensive and doing it with a manual trans is more difficult and time consuming than with an auto. So with the low take rate it makes it too expensive to certify a manual trans option.
Thank you for restating exactly what I said.
But if you were to take the emissions certification out of the equation it would be profitable to offer that manual transmission even with the low take rate. So yes emissions certification is a large part, but certainly not all of the reason, of why the MT is dying.
It is more time consuming and thus more expensive to develop a compliant MT calibration. The norm is to go into DFCO or as is becoming more common ADFCO mode as much as possible for both emissions and fuel economy purposes. That is easy to manage with an AT however throw in that clutch pedal that could be activated w/o notice or reason and you need a quick transition to stall prevention mode. That means a big puff of CO and HC and if you are already running on the ragged edge, as is the norm, that represents a big problem.
So it is both the low take rate and emissions/fuel economy regulations that are combining to kill the MT. Change either of those factors and the MT wouldn’t be dead or dying in many segments.
Paul,
At the risk of being reprimanded severely for not doing the research right now (I will later), I’m fairly certain Subaru Austria has no manual g/boxes offered anymore, and many other manufacturers seem to offer them only in the lower hp models here (and it’s not because they cannot build them). OntarioMike has explained why already.
T.Turtle: I very much doubt Subaru builds hardly any manual transmissions for any part of the world anymore. The US is its main market by far, and thus it has dropped manuals. The Japanese have long been big automatic drivers. Subaru’s sales in Europe are extremely small, and mostly only in the Alpine area. There’s no way Subaru is going tool up to build manual transmission cars for the few thousand they sell there annually.
of course manuals are only offered with the smaller engines; why would someone buying a more expensive/luxurious/nicer car want a manual, even in Europe? Other than maybe a handful of hardcore enthusiasts.
It all gets back to the whole brown, stick-shift, diesel station wagon thing: folks on the car blogs cry for them, but nobody really buys them.
OnatrioMike hasn’t proven anything, nor has Scoutdude. Yes, certifying a manual transmission car cost a bit more, but we don’t know how much exactly. Obviously not all that much. Scoutdude and OntarioMike are speculating that emission regulations are harder to meet; so hard that they don’t offer them. They need to prove it. Until they do, I won’t believe that it’s a material issue.
As I said before, the overwhelming reason is declining demand. The US system of production, distribution and retailing is very different than in Europe, where a very large percentage of cars are built to order, hence a wider number of engine/transmission combinations are available.
In the US, almost 100% of cars are bought from dealer stock, so the manufacturers want to build and stock as few variations as possible. That already explains why options are all lumped into a few packages.
There’s no doubt that the manufacturers/importers in the US are extremely motivated to see the manual totally go away, except for a very few cars like the Miata or so. Good luck trying to find a manual version that is technically offered here at a dealer. Manufacturers and dealers undoubtedly hate manuals for that reason, and will be thrilled to see them go away.
My point is this: if the demand for manuals were greater, they would all be offering it, because they certainly can/could. And they wouldn’t want to miss the sales of them, so for competitive reasons, they would have to. And easily could.
The market has spoken, and the manufacturers have responded. Manuals are an anachronism and one that will very soon be history, gone the way of manual crank windows, manual steering, manual brakes, no air conditioning, carburetors, starter crank handles, magnetos, acetylene headlights, manual chokes, manual ignition advance…
Get over it 🙂
“End of argument, because I’m already repeating myself.”
.
A. I didn’t see this as any argument, I thought it a lively discussion .
.
B. I too agree that manual trannies are dying primarily because no one buys them .
.
C. I trained to be a California SMOG Test Mechanic and even on fuel injected engines, trailing throttle in a manual tranny certainly emitted more pollutants, even if you cut the fuel flow 100 % .
.
I swore I’d never have a slushbox but I also wasn’t stuck with the traffic we now have much less was I crippled then =8-^ .
.
-Nate
Paul,
Just a couple of points:
– if your argument is made in the context of the US, Canada or Israel only, certainly. Auto box is king in all three and has been for ages. That, as you must know, was not the case until recently in the EU and the reason more people are buying cars with them is because they are gently nudged into this by manufacturers, not because they converted to the American way of drive.
– Re. certification costs, I think this is the lesser issue. The main point is that with modern auto boxes, controlled as they are by electronic gizmos (which “talk” to their engine management brethren) help to achieve better mileage and lower emissions when compared with a manual box driven by (and this is the important point) an _average_ driver. Bearing in mind ever stricter regulations and the risk of being seen to provide inaccurate figures (particularly after the VW scandal) manufacturers take the auto box option more and more, even if this does not conform with local driving preferences and habits. Purchasers – particularly uninformed ones – slowly start capitulating. I suspect we will eventually become sort of “Americanized” in this respect.
Not sure what you mean by “The US system of production, distribution and retailing is very different than in Europe, where a very large percentage of cars are built to order” – I always had the impression you had more choice in optioning a car than we do, but maybe things have changed. Here we have a few rigid spec options and it is almost impossible to mix & match anything (e.g.: you want an Opel Insignia with the seats that fit your body? Fine. There’s a model costing €40,000 just there. Otherwise, nothing (yes, I did ask, and would have pressed the button if it would have been possible to have the seats I wanted. But not if I had to add an extra €10;000)).
No, it won’t kill me but I hope that when no options remain auto boxes will have become as reliable as manual ones or the old, fully mechanical ones. I’ll always have a second fun car with a manual. The joke is that, as things stand, other car is more likely than not to be an… American-made one.
Re. Subaru Austria, I have checked and you _can_ get manual box in the XV and the WRX but not the Outback, Forester or Levorg (which would be the kind of car I’d be interested in. Not sure why not if they have one in the more powerful WRX). Auto boxes are also becoming more prominent on VWs and others.
I don’t know if it’s emissions regulations (both sides make reasonable arguments ?) but CAFE may have more impact … many auto transmission cars are now rated higher than their manual trans counterparts. We have one of each in our family; ironically the MT (car) gets used for urban and commute use, and the AT (truck) is the road trip vehicle. My Tacoma is still available with a 6 speed manual, and sometimes I wonder about trading mine for an identical 2017 manual trans truck before it gets discontinued. The Tacoma 6 speed AT shifts smoothly, but programming is definitely CAFE or emissions cycle oriented, even after at least one software update.
Last time I checked Subaru USA’s online configurator, they still offer MT’s (even with limited availability, and sometimes only on certain trims, such as with the Forester) on all but the Legacy and Outback. The WRX and BRZ still offer it across the board, and the Crosstrek and Impreza offer it in a similar fashion to the Forester. Granted, the take rate is likely quite, quite low, and it is likely nigh near impossible to find one on the lot, but Subaru still technically offers them nonetheless.
All we remaining stick shift fans can do is put our money where our left foot is every time we buy a new car, hopefully preserving a market niche. I have told my 14 year old that in two years he can have my 09 Chevy HHR SS if he learns to drive a stick – that will be my excuse to get a new car, looking at a Focus ST if they still have those in 2019 .
As the site’s longtime resident young’un, I will admit that these opinions are much more common than I would like to admit. Case in point, I recently taught my oldest sister how to drive stick (on my car, with it’s clunky 5MT). Even though she knows how to do it (and fairly well, mind you, for only having done about half an hour’s worth of drive-time on it), she thinks it is too much effort to try and learn more of it. My mother (who, after about 30 years of failed attempts, finally got it), has a similar opinion. These thoughts don’t just create themselves, with years of marketing pushes (look, it’s “convenient”) having probably helped to create it. I concur with Paul in the fact that manual drivers (like himself and myself) are a dying breed, using an “antiquated” technology. It still doesn’t mean that those of us who remain can’t have fun with what remains; I still manage to have plenty of fun with my 1941 Remington typewriter (another antiquated technology), and I continue to do so with Snowball, the Gutless Wonder (seen below).
Mazda is the #1 fully imported brand here in Australia. We are one of Mazda’s best markets and the Mazda3 has long between #2 behind the Corolla, occasionally besting it for overall small car sales. So, I see these Mazda3s everywhere. They’re excellent cars. But I can relate to your tale of not really clicking with it… It’s a similar story to my Subaru COAL from the other day.
A sad but true situation ~
.
I too remember those halcyon dayze of youth when I swore I’d _never_ own a slushbox equipped vehicle .
.
Then came the daily slog in rush hour traffic and the fatal Motocycle accident that severely limited my left leg’s working ability…
.
Good to hear the Mazda has kept the fun factor in the car’s design .
.
I’ve never driven a 5 speed slushbox and would like to try it ~ is it permissible to manually row the gears ? .
.
I do this constantly on my old Mercedes four speed slushbox and it doesn’t seem to mind one bit .
.
Adding hushmat or equal inside the doors helps get rid of the tinny feeling .
.
-Nate
Youth is wasted on the young.
I hope you meant “fateful” motorcycle accident, and that no one actually died!
No ;
.
I wrote what I meant ~ my Dr’s still don’t know how I’m still alive much less ambulatory .
.
That I still try to get out there and ride my Moto pisses them off to no end .
.
I hear you about Youth being wasted on the Young, or is it really ? .
.
Maybe it’s one more life test, if you pass, you’re allowed to keep on living….
.
I dunno, I’m old now and ruminate on all the opportunities I wasted and marvel how I survived the stupid shit I did as a young manchild .
.
I think I’d like to try one of these 5 speed slushboxes, I give my old Mercedes quite a workout on the road rallies ~ more gears allows greater flexibility in enthusiastic driving, non ? . =8-) .
.
-Nate
I had a Mazda 3 just like this but from 2005 thus I had the 4-speed auto instead of 5-speed. Since my better half can’t drive manual, I’m stuck with automatics. This autobox was great because of these things: 1. The response in manual mode is very fast (not DCT fast, but very good for a regular slushbox), 2. It holds gears to redline (most other manual modes just chicken out and upshift for you), 3. 2nd gear starts are allowed, and 4. Most importantly, the + and – detents are in the correct place – push forward for downshift and pull back for upshift.
Too bad the car succumbed to tinworm way too early in life… I’m glad I bought it used, otherwise it would be a world of hurt to just finish off your payments and have a rust bucket already. IMHO, Mazda still hasn’t got their corrosion resistance right, and as such, despite being such great fun to drive, I won’t be putting my money on one anymore. 🙁
Add me to the list of former “mANUal 4 lyfe” drivers. Screw up your legs or lower joints, or develop arthritis in them, your tune changes quickly. Or, live in a large city that has traffic that moves like molasses in January. In the arctic circle…
I had to laugh about the stomping on the brake pedal comment. My wife and I had two Mercury Capri 5.0L when we first got married. Her first new car, a 1985 with a manual and my first new car, a 1986 with the automatic. It’s way worse when you’re frequently in two cars that are identical with the exception of a couple of major controls. I also have slammed on the brakes while searching for the clutch pedal in the automatic car…
I’ve never been a big fan of the Mazda 3, like the OP they’ve always left me wanting. I know they have a rabid fan base, just try knocking them on TTAC, for example. There are several “usual suspects” who will come out of the woodwork with withering defenses of their favorite marque. I’m guilty of the same thing, at least when it comes to Pontiacs.
The driving dynamics are not quite right for me, the build quality and level of materials used are no better than a lot of others. Here in rust country, these things still do a good job of advertising their lack of resistance. Not my cup of tea, I guess.
This post makes me sad. I hope I never get to that. Manual only for life.
Hah! Funny how people’s experiences are so similar all over the world. I also swore, years ago, I would never own another automatic car. Now my DD is automatic, though not through necessity, or even preference. I simply grew tired of searching for that unicorn, the unmolested manual vehicle. I widened my search for the best example of the best automatic transmission I could afford, and I’m reasonably satisfied with the result so far. Don’t get me started on CVTs though…
Many years ago, I owned mostly 4-cylinder imports. Some of them were only availible with a manual-shift.. Most that I tested with an automatic were a big disappointment.
Eventually, I wound up with a couple ’72 Mercedes – a 220/8 and 250/8 with automatics, simply because those models were no longer sold in the US with a stick-shift. I grudgingly came to accept the benefits of the slushbox, though my other vehicles remained firmly clutch-operated.
Finally, in 2005, I replaced a beater 5-speed ’84 Accord. with a ’98 Nissan Altima. Though it had only a 4-speed automatic, the car was fairly responsive, with overdrive gearing that provided decent fuel economy. Same thing with the automatic ’96 Camry I got in 2011.
But two yeas ago I got a stripper ’96 Tacoma pickup, at a bargain price, with a 5-speed stick, so I’m back to rowing a shifter and pumping a clutch.
Though, while I no longer have to endure rush-hour, I have to admit the Altima and Camry are more pleasant rides, and remain my preferred vehicles when I’m not hauling something.
OTOH, the stick-shift Tacoma is certainly more fun to drive and quicker – plus, I recently installed AC in it – so we’ll see.
As for the parking brake, I still use it with my automatics if I’m parked on any significant slope.
Happy Motoring, Mark
I have owned about 25-30 cars and trucks so far, with a mix of automatic transmission and manual transmission along with a wide range of makes. The automatic transmission cars always leave me with the feeling that something is “holding the car back”, while a manual transmission leaves me feeling like the vehicle in question is eager to get under way.
Oddly, the best cars with automatic transmissions were those Chevys that had Powerglide. One of the worst was an Acura Integra. The best manuals? Acuras and Hondas, American manufacturers can’t seem to “do” a really good manual….or I haven’t driven one, yet.
The only Mazda I’ve ever driven was a 626 ES (V6 and automatic transmission), and I once drove a 1st generation Probe. Both good cars, but not great. The Probe was a Vulcan V6 with automatic transmission and was memorable for it’s “styling” with the inside being particularly …..interesting. (Red upholstery and a digital dash)
I’m almost old enough for Social Security, but as long as my feet continue to co-operate, my next car will have a manual transmission.
In 2006 I had a major crush on a Mazda 3 hatch. I loved the car’s aggressive shape. A local dealer had one in my favorite color (that rustish red) with a stick. The best part was the minor hail damage with the accompanying discount.
Alas, The timing was wrong. When I was ready to buy later in the year I was bummed to find that the 3’s rear headroom was not going to accommodate my very tall sons within another couple of years.
The good news has been that the 3s I have seen in recent years seem to be plagued by Mazda’s rusting tendencies. I have thus far avoided this problem with the Honda Fit I bought instead.
Me too, I spent more than a bit of time considering a 3 Hatch, and that coppery color was very distinctive. The rear headroom would not have bothered me, you know I would have rationalized it away at the time and then had a reason to replace the car a couple of years later. Kind of like now with three kids and a wife I somehow am wondering why we have two 3-row vehicles since we almost never go anywhere all together anyway and a 4-seater would surely work out just fine 🙂
I’m sure Daniel Stern will agree with your comment about the uselessness of the various “upgrade” halogen headlight bulbs…no brighter than standard ones though our eyes and brains might tell us they are. How a “blue” bulb that gets that way by filtering out part of the visible light spectrum can be “brighter,” is illogical. Moreover, many had the filaments positioned wrong so the beam got distorted. Misposition the low beam filament toward the high beam location and the resulting beam pattern might look “brighter”…like a high beam, when it is really a misaimed low beam (and given the wonderful quality “control,” the next one could be misaimed the other way).
LED retrofits I’ve seen have been useless. With a grouping of several LEDs making a more diffuse source than a hot filament, they produce a diffuse, poorly aimed light with no “hotspot” for intensity down the road, in the stock headlight reflectors. Maybe someday…but for now they seem to be a work in progress.
Your point about various upgrade bulbs is mostly true. Way back when, I experimented with several different bulbs in my 1995 Celica. Stock, the headlights were already exceptional, so it was mostly just aesthetics I ways toying with. Sylvania Silverstars were what I stuck with initially, but they would only last a year, at most. On a whim I decided to try Sylvania Hyper White as a replacement, and they were vastly superior. Silverstars had a blueish hue to them, while the hyper whites were just that; crisp pure white. I swear they improved the headlight performance, especially in regards to reflection (or lack thereof). I installed them into my following 1998 Accord, and enjoyed similar results.
Nope.
Sylvania does not make a “Hyper White” bulb, number one. Number two, any of the “extra white” bulbs is a nonstarter as far as seeing better is concerned. It doesn’t matter whose name is on the bulb. Sylvania SilverStar/Ultra, PIAA, Hoen, Phillips BlueVision and CrystalVision, Wagner TruView, Nokya, Polarg, etc—all the same scam. They have blue-tinted glass, which blocks some of the light that would reach the road if the glass weren’t tinted, so they produce less light than ordinary bulbs (not more), and in order to get legal-minimum levels of light through the blue glass the filament has to be driven very hard so these bulbs have a very short lifespan. And there’s nothing about the tinted light that improves your ability to see, either—the opposite is true, in fact. All it does is change the beam colour slightly, to zero real benefit.
Note Sylvania recently got spanked to the tune of thirty million dollars(!) for the false “upgrade” claims they make for their Silver Star bulbs.
Further: there is nothing such as “crisp” light. That, like the bogus “whiter” claim for light that is actually bluer, is a meaningless bit of marketeering babble. Light can’t be “crisp” (or “clean”, or “pure”, or “fresh”…) any more than it can be odiferous, oleogelatinous, or bitter.
Someone invoke me? 🙂
All the ones sold through toy stores like “Stylin’ Concepts”, yes. Most of the others, too. There are a few that give a genuine, objective improvement in headlamp performance: Philips Xtreme Power and Xtreme Vision and GE Night Hawk Platinum and Night Hawk Xenon. There are also certain strategic bulb swaps that work very well in certain headlamps, made possible by compatible filament geometry between different types of bulbs (HIR2 and 9006, HIR1 and 9005, H9 and H11) but you have to know what you’re doing because some headlamps are marginal in terms of glare control even with their relatively weak spec bulbs, and putting a higher-output bulb in will make hazardous levels of glare.
The best of those strategic bulb swaps give objective performance that gets within reasonable striking range of HID headlamps, but no, there’s no magic halogen bulb that eliminates the whole difference. And so-called “HID kits” in halogen-bulb headlamps or fog/auxiliary lamps (any kit, any lamp, any vehicle no matter whether it’s a car, truck, motorcycle, etc.) do not work safely or effectively, which is why they are illegal. Same goes for “LED conversion” bulb kits. They are not a legitimate, safe, effective, or legal product—no matter whose name is on them or what the vendor claims, these are a fraudulent scam. They are not capable of producing even a fraction of the amount of light produced by the filament bulb they supposedly replace, let alone producing it in the right pattern for the lamp’s optics to work. Halogen lamps need to use halogen bulbs or they don’t (can’t) work right.
Like many here I was a “manual transmission for life” guy; every car I owned from 1973 until late 1988 had a manual transmission. In addition there were a couple of other manuals in the mix in the 1990’s. What finally soured me on three pedal driving was the increased amount of in town, stop and go, daily driving I found myself having to deal with. Evansville, Indiana is hardly a large city but it is difficult to get anywhere here without having to put up with multiple stoplights/stop signs. Even the crosstown “expressway” has traffic lights, which amuses people from out of town no end.
Modern automatic transmissions are so much better than those of even 20 years ago that it is hard for me to imagine even wanting a manual as a daily driver. Sure, when I win the Powerball I will have at least one stick shift in my stable but it will be only for driving on the open road and not for in town use.
Ah, Evansville. Stoplight city, as the truck drivers called it on the CB radio back in the 70’s. My mother grew up in Evansville, and we made many trips there growing up to visit her relatives. I recall being amazed how an otherwise modern 4-lane highway like 41 literally had stop lights at every major cross street.
I haven’t been there for many, many years, so I don’t know if it is still like that or not, but judging by your comment it doesn’t sound like much has changed. Evansville is one of the largest cities in the US that doesn’t have an Interstate highway going through it, so the local expressways don’t have to be built to Interstate standards.
Pretty much the same as forty years ago, going through town on US 41 still requires you to stop for a traffic light every 4 or 5 blocks. There is now a bypass around town (it is part of I69) and it is heavily travelled but there are still lots of trucks using US41 through town. The regular surface streets are even worse, as far as I can tell the stoplights are not synchronized so you end up having to stop for 95% of them.
After my stint with a manual ’83 TBird Turbo Coupe in LA, I was quite happy to switch to an automatic in my ’86 MB 300E, although its 2nd gear starts were a bit annoying (I learned to start in 2, which engaged 1 for starts if I was in a hurry). Except for my truck, we were all-automatic for a long time until I bought my xB. Since I don’t drive to work, and the traffic here is still quite light, it’s great, especially on the back roads.
But the downside is that Stephanie can’t drive it, which means no opportunity to swap cars, which can on occasion be a bit of a limitation.
My next car, if there is one, will most likely be an automatic. I’ll still have my truck to shift.
I miss manuals, but the reality is for commuting it just sucks. I go the manual for the improved mpgs (no longer valid), less complexity (still valid) and driving engagement (ditto). My Trooper was the first automatic I had in 30 years…it made the daily grind considerably less toxic. I still have the Saab with the 6-speed for the weekends; it was even tolerable for a 3-week commute while the Outback was getting fixed.
If I lived out of the city then I’d have a manual daily. But the choices these days are far and few between, and I can’t blame the manufacturers for limiting selection with the low take rate. You’re right about a death spiral….
I’m firmly in the manual transmissions are fun to have, except as as daily driver. While we do not have the legendary CA traffic in eastern PA, we do have our share. I have borrowed my dad’s GMC Sonoma (4cyl, 5 speed) to haul various things, and since it’s so under powered, I’m constantly having to shift gears. And it’s not a light clutch, either.
I too have suffered the confusion of trying to work a clutch in an automatic. In the late 2000s, I had a manual shift Civic and an automatic Escort for a beater. Especially when I put the Civic away for the winter and drove the Escort’s slushbox for 4 months straight, “comedy would ensue” in the spring when the Civic awoke: stomping a non-existent clutch in the Escort vs forgetting to clutch when rowing the Civic.
For the past year, I have had both an automatic Jetta wagon and a manual shift Ford Focus beater. I am happy to report that, so far, I have been able to switch between the Jetta and Focus without forgetting which trans I was driving, even this spring when the Jetta was roused from it’s winter slumber.
I’ll echo the other comments about using the parking brake vs relying on the automatic’s parking pawl. Having started on automatics, I have been in a situation where, parked on a slight incline, I have had a very difficult time getting an automatic out of Park. Making a habit of using the e-brake also keeps it exercised as a preventative against the thing rusting in place and becoming useless. With the move to electronic gear selectors now I wonder if people are experiencing a return to the issue owners of 1956 Packards discovered: parking on an incline would put so much load on the parking pawl that the electric motor of the Packard would blow it’s fuse as it struggled against the friction, leaving the car unmovable.
The only Mazda I bought was an 85 GLC. Astoundingly bulletproof car, tho it did suffer inordinate amounts of chassis flex and the typical old school Japanese suspension ills of being oversprung and underdamped. Unlike newer Mazdas, that old GLC was, by 80s standards, particularly rust resistant, my 85 only getting really frayed after about 10 years of Michigan road salt and constant exposure to the elements as I did not have a garage.
When I was in the market for a new ride in 98, I would have bought a Mazda, without even looking at another make, so completely was I satisfied with it, but Mazda did not make a hatchback at that time. When Mazda introduced the Protege5 in 02, I considered making my 98 Civic my winter beater, so enthralled was I with the P5, but I never pulled the trigger. I didn’t feel so bad about that missed opportunity when I started seeing tinworm attacking P5s I saw in traffic.
My dear, departed Great Little Car, taken when it was about 10 years old.
That’s a great-looking GLC, by 1985 the design looked just right – and then they replaced it with the 323 which looked good as well.
I’ve never seen those particular steel wheels before on one, at first I thought it was the larger alloys with the little square holes at the perimeter which I found quite fetching and I think were for 1985 only in the top trim level. It looks good though!
Jim, those are stamped aluminum wheel covers. Mine was the top LX trim. The color is “tornado silver”, a dark metallic clear coat grey. I shot that set of pix at my aunt’s house, which was in an oak forest. Did not realize until I got the prints back that the light filtering through the forest canopy gave everything a green tint. Never got around to taking another set of pix of it.
I wore out the Midas muffler shop with that car. That was in the days before stainless steel exhaust pipes, and I was back to Midas for a free muffler and tailpipe about every three years.
Traded it in on the Civic in 98. According to Carfax, that car had an active registration until 2006.
Interesting, thanks! These are the wheels I was thinking of, maybe they were an option or something…Either way the picture makes your car look very nice, the green tint doesn’t hurt it.
These are the wheels I was thinking of,
Those aren’t alloys either. They are wheel covers. I dug out the 85 brochure. There is no mention anywhere of alloys being available, standard or optional. There is mention of “full wheel covers” on the LX trim, vs bare steelies painted silver on the lower trims. They must have made a running change of wheel cover style during the year as the style in the pic you posted is the style in the brochure. My car was a late 85, bought in October of 85.
Here is a pic from the options page of the brochure. The pic is showing the optional mud guard, but, from the angle you can see that it’s a flat wheel cover.
My parents owned the platform mate Ford Laser with those very wheels, and I can confirm that they were indeed alloys (at least in this part of the world). Of course, a similar style may also be available as a wheel cover.
And thanks for the compliments. I really liked that GLC.
You’re welcome, I always liked the look of the later model GLC. They are alloys though, but yes, there are some wheel covers that look similar. Here is a link to an alloy wheel reseller that gives the specs of the wheel with a pic…I think the giveaway is the little 2″ diameter hub-cover disc in the middle that is a somewhat.slightly different finish.
http://www.oemwheelsrims.com/products/oew064660?make=Mazda&model=GLC
That is weird though that the GLC brochure doesn’t specifically mention it.
That is weird though that the GLC brochure doesn’t specifically mention it.
*whew*! Mystery solved. We are all right. This scan is from the 82 brochure, announcing the *new* optional alloys available on the Sport trim. The Sport trim was gone by 85. So yes, Mazda offered an alloy that looked like that, but not in 85.
Well thank you for that bit of research! I never knew there was a Sport trim and it was that early in the run, good to know, thanks! 🙂
I never knew there was a Sport trim and it was that early in the run, good to know, thanks! ?
The Sport trim started in 81. Reading over the features the Sport included, it sounds like everything my LX had except the 4 spoke steering wheel. On the Sport, the window frames were blacked out. On my LX the window frames were body color. The LX also had a big orange stripe down the center of the seats, instead of the attractive grey tweed the Sport had.
This is from the 81 brochure.
These were nice cars. Five years ago I bought a 2002 Protege ES, and my god, that car was among the top 3 handling cars I’ve ever driven (the other two being a ’95 Impreza and ’94 G20t.) My brother liked the car so much he bought it from me and drove it for two years, and when he replaced it he bought an electric blue ’08 Mazda3i Sport sedan (a grade below the subject car IIRC) That car was well equipped but I distinctly remember the interior feeling slightly cheapened compared to the Protege (which I hold as the standard of the late 90’s compacts) and he had the transmission replaced under dealer warranty.
The 3 was lost through a repossession but the Protege is still in the family albeit worse for wear as my sister’s high mileage daily driver. My brother replaced it with a P71 Panther and is actually much happier with it despite his initial misgivings. A hatch version of this car would still be tempting as a cheap used buy.
I have limited experience with Mazda other than everyone who had one swore by them. Got my hands dirty with a valve stem seals on a smokey 323 once and woke up a lazy 626 by setting the valves and taking the slack out of the throttle cable. Seemed that Mazda was the last hold out for setting valve clearances.
I test drove a Protege while car shopping and came away unimpressed. That made me wonder why everyone raved about their Mazdas. Mazda was never on my radar until 2008 when Hertz put me in a Mazda 3 for a week in SanDiego. I thought the car was very well done and felt very capable and the “Zoom Zoom” marketing of the day was fairly accurate. It was a very nice car and a pleasure to drive except for the two main issues that I had with it. The trunk opening was rather aukward but a hatchback would solve that particular peeve. The shift lever on the other hand was a definite no for me. I literally fought with it the first few trips just going from where it parks to where it moves. I referred to it as a “monkey puzzle automatic”. I had to really pay attention and my excuse was that I didn’t know how to drive an automatic. I tried manually shifting it with the up down gate but touristy type driving in an unfamiliar city made it pointless. I’m sure that under different circumstances and more time to get to know the car things might have been different. On the other hand a manual transmission would take care of that also. If I ever do find myself in one of these it would be a manual and a hatchback.
I too am a lifetime manual transmission driver. No-one ever asks to borrow the car and will not even if offered. The last time I went car shopping the salesman slipped when he said “You don’t want that one. It’s got a stick.” and the hunted became the hunter.
Count me in the manual for life category. I’ve had my share of automatics but they were all bought due to financial necessity, you don’t often get the choice when paying $500 for a car. I live in a rural area and don’t often deal with traffic so rowing through the gears has never felt onerous. The only time it’s annoying is when towing a trailer up a steep incline from a dead stop. The clutch on my 4 banger Tacoma doesn’t like it so I often have to switch to 4wd low until the steepness is over. That’s what I get for pushing the trucks limitations.
I’ll echo the comments on pushing the phantom clutch pedal and hitting the brake on an automatic, I do that all the time on the wife’s Matrix. I think the fact that’s it’s also a Toyota fools me into thinking it’s my truck as I only do it on her car. Also, the fact that she refuses to learn stick on my truck is a limitation, the aforementioned steepness around here doesn’t help.
Automatics are boring, but I get why sticks are disappearing. I hope to be motorcycling for at least a few more decades so I should be self shifting for a long time to come.
I test drove an 06 hatch in the same colour when I was car shopping a few months back. It was a manual and kept stalling it due to how close the gears were and that I hadn’t driven stick in over a year. Funny enough I ended up getting a low mileage 02 VW Golf, I understand why that orange dash lighting must’ve been a welcomed change, VW’s blue lighting is too bright for nighttime driving. I first drove stick in my friends my-3 last year, personally I think it looks like the mutant offspring of a fish and a bar of soap.
When I saw my current truck come up for auction I knew I had to have it and was willing to even slightly over pay for it simply because it was a unicorn with the big “horn” sticking up from the transmission hump. I figured it was my last chance to have what I used to think was the greatest transmission combination possible for a truck, a close ratio 4sp with low and OD. Of course in practice there certainly are times when I wish I wouldn’t have had my rose colored glasses on and had waited for a truck with the AT, and a V10. But at least I’ll always be able to say I had the last of the breed.
I rather liked these cars when they debuted. I was two years into a nightmare experience with a Ford Focus at the time, and strongly considered dumping it for one of these (2.0 + manual). After driving one I reconsidered. Nothing was wrong dynamically speaking, but certain details were less than appealing. Tiny back seat. Loud. And a terrible sounding audio system. Today it’s easy to say small cars aren’t really compromises, but in 2003 if you weren’t careful you certainly could still end up with a penalty box (ask me about my Focus, lol). I couldn’t justify more new car payments for something that felt so similar to what I had, so I passed. As time would tell, that likely wasn’t a bad idea, as these Mazdas in Minnesota winters would have visible rust scars at the rear wheel wells after 5 seasons without batting an eye.
Oddly, the smaller Mazda2 five-door has a more habitable back seat than the 3. One particular advantage is that the 2’s rear doors aren’t as narrow at the bottom as the 3’s are, which makes step-in a lot less awkward.
Count me in the manual for life camp. However I had a tough time finding a standard transmission 4 door sedan on my last curbside classic hunt. I ended up finding a 98 Nissan Altima which so far has been a good car.
About a month ago I sprained my knee and was having second thoughts about my stance. Luckily my knee has healed up and I have the option of borrowing the wife’s auto Toyota previa if I need it.
I liked the styling of this gen of 3. The later ones appear overdone and in some ways cartoonish. Beautiful color as well.
Either or for transmission. The ONION is an automatic because I hated the way the manual version operated and in LA traffic I wasn’t going to put up with that. If the ION had shifted as well as the 95 SL1 manual I also owned, I would have gotten the 5 speed.
The auto was the right choice as I see traffic in Tucson almost as bad as in Hell-Ay.
For manual fun there is still the three on the tree 63 Valiant in the driveway. No power steering. Undivided driver participation mandatory.
Tom, I have to ask: do the snow tires on a FWD car go on the front ? All four wheels ?
Of course I assume “yes”, but when I left snow country, everything was rear wheel drive and it’s been decades. If yes, how does it affect the ride, steering, handling and noise level ?
Sorry for the dumb question, it’s something I have never had to deal with in Kali and AZ.
Ideally, snow tires should go on both ends. Snow tires are noisy, they make your steering feel wobbly, and they reduce your gas mileage by about 2 or 3 mpg. They are a hassle to swap out twice a year, and you have to have a place to store them off season.
But when the snow and ice start piling up, there is nothing better than a good set of snow tires.
I’ll respectfully disagree to the extent to which they affect the car, the last thing we need is people coming up with more excuses as to why they won’t use them… They are not necessarily noisier than many other tires (however YOUR particular snow tires may be noisier than YOUR particular non-snow tires but that can be said about any tire A vs any tire B but this is not an absolute). The Blizzak LM-60’s for my Porsche are much quieter than the Pirelli P-Zero’s I run over the summer on one set of my wheels and about the same as the Sumitomo HTR-ZIII’s on the other set. I can’t tell a difference on the Highlander (Blizzak DM-V2 vs Bridgestone Dueler same size and the Mercedes is more pleasant to drive on the smaller diameter snows than the stock larger tires. (18″ Blizzak DM-V1 vs 20″ Bridgestone Dueler)
The steering doesn’t get wobbly, it is merely less responsive due to the more flexible tread blocks in a snow/winter tire. If you mean wobbly as in the wheel shakes back and forth, then you may have a wheel balance issue. You get used to it after the first day and adjust your driving style, then forget about it until you swap back.
Generally though, the ride gets better, again due to the squishier tread blocks and possibly softer construction of the body of the tire even if the tire is nominally the same size.
I just swapped out the last set for the year on the third car today and it’s about 40 minutes start to finish, not quite as fast as the F1 Red Bull team but not bad for a 47yr old whose knee hurts (and they have more guys). The key is having a second set of wheels that the tires stay mounted on. Yes, we have a couple of stacks of wheels/tires in the garage but so be it. There is plenty of other junk I’d get rid of first if I needed the storage 🙂
Agreed. I put Blizzaks on my xB, and I was almost shocked at how much quieter they were than the Michelin all-season tires I use in the rest of the year. And the ride is better too. Handling is only very slightly “mushier”, but since the xB is has a firm and sports-tuned suspension, it’s not in the slightest objectionable. I just put my Michelins back on last weekend, and I almost regretted it. 🙂
Ditto on having an extra set of wheels. I change them in the driveway in 15 minutes.
How do you deal with the TPMS sensors? I had a second set of rims (with a second set of TPMS sensors) and I always had to go to the dealer to have them reprogrammed every time I switched.
Good question. My xB doesn’t have TPMS. Maybe Jim will have a better answer.
The Porsche doesn’t have them.
For the Mercedes I bought an extra set online from a third party vendor and the car automatically learns them which is very nice when switching over.
For the Toyota I bought an extra set as well and a tool from ATEQ that lets you program in the codes for both and then you plug it into the OBD port and select which set you have on. It was around $100 IIRC and took a couple of calls to tech support even though it seems pretty foolproof. I’m no IT guy, it’d probably go smoother for you…My main issue was that I bought it before the 2016 model was officially supported even though there isn’t a difference from 2015. It does work though, great tool.
Different manufacturers handle it differently. Often the car learns the sensors after driving for fifteen minutes or so. Right after switching them in the garage the car is still getting the signal from the wheels in the corner…the Asian makes seem to be the least user friendly in this regard overall.
Different manufacturers handle it differently. Often the car learns the sensors after driving for fifteen minutes or so.
My VW uses the rotational speed data from the ABS wheel sensors to infer inflation pressure, rather than sensors in the wheels. The idea being that a soft tire will compress some, reducing the effective radius of the tire thus increasing rotational speed relative to the other tires. In the case of replacing one tire, for instance, where the new tire with full tread will rotate slower than the other tires, which are half worn, there is a reset button in the glove box to prompt the system to relearn the relative speeds of the tires.
This video explains the system in my 2014
Newer VWs have the TMPS reset function built into the in-dash video game.
TPMS thing varries significantly from brand to brand. As mentioned some vehicles use indirect and use the ABS sensors, so no sensors and no need to do anything.
The direct systems range from an intelligent controller that automatically figures out that the compatible sensors that it keeps getting a good strong signal from must be installed on the car. On the other end of the spectrum you need to know the sensor’s ID and then use a scan tool type device to program the car to accept those particular sensors. In the middle you put the car in learning mode and then force the sensors to transmit on demand. That can range from as simple as dropping the pressure on a fully inflated tire, placing a magnet over the valve stem or using a hand held transmitter. When Ford’s needed a transmitter they included them with the vehicle on those trucks that had different front and rear pressures.
Thanks, Tom. I was embarrassed to ask.
The rear ones on the family cars I drove in the early 70s rode harder and were noisier as well. It was such a nice surprise when Dad would replace them in the spring, just for the extra quiet.
Snow tires, if you insist on only two for FWD (pointless) go on the rear. When front mounted the rear end will do everything but track appropriately. Scariest road trip of my whole life involved sitting in the back seat of a car the driver put snows on just the front. We hit freezing rain and then snow and the rear was constantly letting go and getting sideway at highway speeds. The car literally acted like a pendulum.
Given the inherent better traction of FWD, it makes no sense to just put two on. Four or nothing. With a RWD car, one could make an argument for two on the rear only, and it was common way back in the day, but I wouldn’t do it. The differences between front and rears can be too great. Either put winter tires on all four or don’t.
Don’t forget: these aren’t “snow tires”; they’re winter tires, designed to have better traction on cold surfaces, even when dry. It’s not just about the snow anymore.
I suspected there might be more to it than two on the drive wheels like on RWD cars. I don’t think anyone in our old neighborhood put 4 on when I lived in Iowa but it makes a lot of sense.
It never even charted back then.
Excellent information on winter rubber. Time to stop referring to them as “snow” tires.
I owned the platform-mate of the 3, an ’06 Mazda5 (it was my wife’s car). Great engine/drivetrain, manual mode on the A/T worked well, nice handler. It was also lightly built, especially the suspension. The front struts packed it in at 45,000 miles; the rears made it to 70K. I had to have it 4-wheel aligned a couple times due to our Wisconsin potholes moving things around. It also didn’t like our salty winter roads; both rear wheel arches were beginning to rust. All 3’s and 5’s around here are rusting in a similar pattern.
I, too, was a manual-only driver until a month ago. My new DD has a 6-speed autobox.
The last daily driver I had with an automatic was a ’69 Ambassador, in about 1974.
justplainjoe, I am also from Evansville, Indiana. Remember Division Street, and how it ran right down railroad tracks? You could look in your rear view mirror and see a train behind you! Plus how Dress Plaza used to slope right into the Ohio River? Lots of scary driving.(Tom’s Mom).
I guess I must be a dinosaur, I’m 53, still on my 2nd car, all manuals. I agonized about the trans choice before getting my current car. Sure, it’s a bear in traffic, and my knees aren’t getting any better, but a good shift is fun and fulfilling; and rolling into 2nd gear, or skipping gears just makes me smile. My current Honda is a stripper, no pw, pl or power seats, I just don’t like all the frills. My knees may not approve when I get a new car, but it may be manual or just fix the old one.
I’m looking for some cheap and cheerful transportation. The Mazda 3 is said to be fun to drive so it’s on my list. Went to look at a manual 2007 today but it was very rusty underneath. I’m thinking rustproofing wasn’t the best on these cars. I peeked under vehicles of a similar vintage and they didn’t look as bad.
Hey, you got a really nice one there, Tom!
I drove an ’05 3 for five years, a 2 litre manual Maxx Sport hatch. That translates to a more basic trim level than yours, but with the sports suspension, bodykit and 16s. It was the most luxurious car I’d ever had. I’d page through the handbook looking at all the features mine didn’t have….
Fun to drive, but it always felt heavy and cumbersome to me, probably because of the thick pillars and poor visibility after my previous cars. The clutch was heavy, but what killed it for me was the road noise. Didn’t seem to matter what tyres I threw at it.
We sold it after my wife won a MINI Cooper in a competition. The teenager whose dad bought it for him was ecstatic. To be honest, I was kind of glad to see the back of it. I so much wanted to like it, but…..
I have a 2005 3s (2.3-liter) sedan with five-speed manual. I’ve always though the interior was generally a fairly classy place for the price, the main debits being the cheesy silver plastic IP surround and maybe the faux carbon fiber dash strip. (I’m just glad it’s not wood.) The 2.3s manual has an aluminum trim plate, which is a nice-looking touch, albeit a little impractical in very hot or very cold weather. Compared to the contemporary Civic (the one that looks like a Cylon hadn’t come out yet when I bought my car) and Corolla, it was a LOT more luxurious and had significantly less equipment for the money.
I would agree with Old Pete about the road noise, which is pretty high. It’s unfortunate because the engine noise is reasonable (and generally pleasant) and wind noise isn’t bad. I’ve never considered it cumbersome, though. It’s not quite as agile as the Prelude I had before it, but that was a sporty coupe with 4WS. I’ve also never found the clutch at all heavy. I’ve driven a few cars with a lighter clutch, but the lightness often translated into a lack of feel, making the clutch harder to modulate smoothly.
I’ve never owned an automatic car. I don’t know how strongly I feel about that at this point. With the torquier modern fours, a decent five- or six-speed automatic with manual controls might not be so bad. I’m unlikely to consider buying a car with six or more cylinders (I just don’t need one and would resent the feeding costs), and until the past decade, automatics really sucked the life out of smaller fours.
I still have pretty dour feelings about CVTs except in hybrids — they make sense in some respects, but the lack of control and the odd relationship between engine and road speed is grating.
According to Wikipedia they belatedly added some extra sound deadening for the 2007 facelift.
So if comments about noisy snow tires may be erroneous generalizations, I think the comments about manual transmissions in traffic may be close. While I suppose having to do something other than look through the windshield is some effort, not all stick shift cars add much effort, unless one is truly injured/disabled. I commuted extensively in the Bay Area from 1976 to 2015. A bad traffic day in my Forester, especially on the long upgrades of Hwy 17 southbound to Santa Cruz, could indeed be painful to my left leg. Ditto the dry clutch on my Ducati, albeit it was my left hand that felt the pain, and lane splitting (legal now!) could relieve that. But my wife’s 16 year old VW has a butter-smooth, light clutch. And even approaching Social Security age, I have never found it limiting in traffic. Our old Corolla, and our Vanagon weren’t bad either. Other things about traffic bother me much more. Now a heavy duty clutch in a one ton truck, or old muscle car, or just a rusty old clutch cable, may not be much fun …
It depends what you mean by traffic. In moderate city or freeway traffic, where you’re still consistently moving even if it’s not that fast, manual shifting isn’t that big a deal, although it doesn’t allow you to tune out the way an automatic would. (Which is both good and bad, for obvious reasons.) In really ugly traffic of the “stop for a while, inch forward, stop some more” variety, it gets nasty.
At one point, I was in Santa Monica for some reason and made the mistake of trying to head east to go home during rush hour. The straight-line distance was a little less than 5 miles, but it took 50 minutes, very little of that at speeds above 10 mph or in gears higher than second. When I finally got home, my left leg was spasming badly enough to make walking very awkward.
That kind of traffic isn’t atypical in urban areas, depending on which way you’re going at what time. If I had to commute in conditions like that, I’d buy a Prius and call it a day.
One of my COALs was also a Mazda. An ’89 Protege 323. I bought it used for $1600 with 79,000 miles on it. Twin-cam 4-cylinder. 4-wheel disc brakes. 5-speed stick. Black with a grey interior.
I LOVED the way it drove! It finally departed at around 160,000 miles when the engine only ran on 3 cylinders.