Mazda review a major letdown

Re : A luxury drive at an affordable price,

Stephanie Wallcraft, Oct. 17 I was disappointed with a review of the Mazda3 Sport GT 6MT by writer Stephanie Wallcraft.

My biggest beef is the comparison to other vehicles, which the reviewer states are the Ford Focus, Kia Forte and the Volkswagen Golf. What about the Hyundai Elantra GT or the Honda Fit?

The Mazda is well out in front of all of them. The reviewer made mention under “performance” that several competitors achieve similar or better performance with smaller displacement engines. My question to her would be, where would you find such vehicles?

The Golf is not a fair competitor as it’s not naturally aspirated; it has a single turbo strapped to the engine to assist with output. The Kia Forte is pushing 173 hp but look at the rpms. Who drives at 6500 rpms? Apparently Forte drivers do. The Ford Focus is boasting 160 hp and once again at 6500 rpms. The Mazda3, which the reviewer describes as underpowered, is naturally aspirated and is pushing 184 hp at only 5700 rpms.

Now, horsepower is great, but without torque you don’t have much. The Kia Forte has 154 @ 4700 rpms, the Ford Focus has 146 @ 4450 rpms and the Mazda3 has a whopping 185 @ only 3250 rpms. The Golf has 200 @ 1600 rpms but, as I mentioned before, it has a turbo strapped to the engine which isn’t really a fair comparison.

With regard to fuel consumption, the Mazda3 does have the best “combined” fuel consumption over its competitors.

One key feature of this Mazda with the six-speed transmission is a display that prompts one to change gear either up or down, in order to gain optimum fuel consumption. Therefore, Mazda’s Zoom Zoom combined with the lovely Canadian term “give ’er,” are handled easily by the Sport GT 6MT which uses 11.5 litres per 100 kms (25 mpg Imperial) for urban driving.

Thus, this Skyactiv Mazda is better than most cars and probably as good as a Prius, but with a lot more fun for the times when one must accelerate. Ron Crowley, Lindsay, Ont. Re : Santa’s coming to town, which means racing seasons are too long, Norris McDonald, thestar.com/autos, Nov. 9 Your comments about NASCAR oval races being boring are spot on.

I consider myself a fan of most racing, but NASCAR on ovals is like a basketball game: all you need to do is tune in at the end for the almost inevitable green-white-checker finish and you’ve seen everything you need to see.

Usually, this includes the asinine “wrecking” of someone, although sometimes this wrecking is the cause of the green-white-checker.

Bring on more road races. The racing is much better. I suspect a circuit like Mosport would have much bigger crowds that at most of the ovals. Even more so when the Xfinity Series is racing. Mark Kidson, Toronto

Re : To readers, winter tires are the clear

winner on the road, Nov. 7 I keep reading all this paranoia about the advantage of snow tires over all season and all weather.

I have a nimble MKC (Lincoln) replacing a cumbersome SRX (Cadillac) on a three-year lease. I have always used snow tires, but the first year in my lease I did not change the all-season radial tires and had no problem.

One just has to drive carefully and keep a safety zone. Unfortunately, so many see this space as a way to get ahead and one loses the safety zone. Simone Russell, London, Ont.