Mazda 3 2019 long-term review

Mazda's clever new hatchback has lots of kerb appeal, but what’s it like to live with? We're finding out over six months

*Why we’re running it: *To see if Mazda’s bold claims about its revolutionary Skyactiv-X tech ring true

-Month 4 - Month 3 - Month 2 - Month 1 - Specs-

-Life with a Mazda 3: Month 4-

*Mazda earns another fan - 18 March 2020*

Former Autocar road tester and current bloke on telly Chris Harris recently called the Mazda 3 “the most interesting looking and sounding family car to launch in the past year”. From somebody who doesn’t hold back his distaste for many modern cars, that’s some praise. I have to agree: few models in its class look and feel so special.

*Mileage: 7432*

*Back to the top*

*Uncovering useful infographics - 11 March 2020*

The mild-hybrid (MHEV) Mazda 3 has a display that you get on full-hybrids, showing the juggling of battery and motor – although the battery can never solely propel the car. The most interesting MHEV trait is a little boost when upshifting. The display also tells you when you’re in compression ignition mode, which it usually claims to be until about 5000rpm.

*Mileage: 7230*

*Back to the top*

--

-Life with a Mazda 3: Month 3-

*It’s got the look - 19 February 2020*

A few weeks ago, I caught one of my neighbours ogling the 3 for a good while. He’s now got one on his drive. Desirability sells and, from the looks I’ve been getting, the svelte Mazda can be flogged on that alone. It got me thinking: with sub-£30k coupés all but dead, this is probably the closest you can get to something like a VW Scirocco these days.

*Mileage: 6446*

*Back to the top*

*A comparison with the high-rise, but similar, CX-30 is revealing - 12 February 2020*

Gone are the days when a new car competed with three or four core rivals in the same class.

Ever-expanding ranges and niches that don’t remain so for very long mean most mid-sized metal is cross-shopped between two or more car categories now – even within one brand itself.

So when Mazda launched the similarly sized, priced and positioned CX-30 crossover hatch-cum-SUV, we thought there was plenty of merit in living with it for a week to compare it with our long-term 3. And indeed there was.

The maker hasn’t gone to great lengths to disguise the CX-30’s platform relation. The design similarity is clear, though to our eyes the crossover trades a good chunk of the hatchback’s tight proportions and clean elegance with the adoption of plastic body cladding and a more upright stance. Interestingly, instead of making the SUV variant bigger as is usually the case, it’s actually 70mm shorter in length than the 3. Mazda claims this, along with the higher driving position, makes it easier to manoeuvre around town – and we’d agree with that claim.

An unsurprising negative, however, is that rear seat space suffers. Given our 3 isn’t exactly generous in rear proportions, the significant leg-room reduction means a six-footer would look decidedly glum squeezed behind the driver. In all other respects, the interior is faithful to our 3: smartly styled and intuitively designed. In fact, there’s very little from the inside to make you think you’re in a high-riding variant – the driver’s seat sits an inch or so higher, if that.

Mechanically, there’s little difference. Both cars are powered by the 178bhp Skyactiv-X petrol engine, although the CX-30 here features all-wheel drive (also optional on the 3). With a relatively slight 57kg weight penalty (add 71kg to that for the all-wheel-drive car), performance feels broadly similar, and indicated fuel economy on our week-long test managed to match our 3’s figure, despite the all-wheel drive.

But there’s a distinct difference in the dynamic character of the two cars. Unlike some makers who feel the need to stiffen up the SUV version to counter for the higher centre of gravity, Mazda seems to have relaxed the CX-30’s spring rates, meaning a softer ride in combination with squidgier, larger-diameter tyres. It’s more comfortable over pitted Tarmac than the 3, but the tradeoff is floatier body control and a reduced feeling of agility and composure in the bends.

Would I have the CX-30 over the 3? Personally, no. I enjoyed it, however, and there’s no question that it’s one of the more engaging and characterful cars in its class, but the lower, lighter and (crucially) far prettier 3 always wins out for me.

Back to the 3 itself, which was in the wars before Christmas after contact with a particularly brutal pothole. It actually knocked the steering wheel off-centre, so we had to take it to a tyre fitter to get the alignment sorted. While that straightened the tracking out again, it didn’t do much to fix the background humming noise from the front tyres between 40mph and 65mph. Our hunch is that we lost a wheel weight in the impact, so we’ll have to book it in again to get that sorted. In the meantime, we’ll be using that age-old temporary fix of turning up the radio a bit.

*Love it:*

*Goes like it looks *The 3 is, to our eyes, far prettier than the CX-30, but it’s also more fun to drive. We know which one we’d pick. 

*Loathe it:*

*Hard over potholes *The CX-30’s softer set-up would’ve been likely to cushion the impact of the damaging pothole more. 

*Mileage: 5979*

*Back to the top*

-Life with a Mazda 3: Month 2-

*Mazda’s instruments hit all the right notes - 15th January 2020*

You can tell Mazda is run by car enthusiasts, not bean counters. It’s evident in details such as the 3’s instruments, which are superbly clear and legible. There’s a traditional engine temp gauge, too, and I like the fuel range warning. When it drops below 20 miles, the ‘miles to empty’ counts down one mile at a time. Perfect for those of us who relish a bit of fuel light bingo.

*Mileage: 4709*

*Back to the top*

*Our car has an uncanny knack of humiliating its driver - 8th January 2020*

Having now recovered from my learner driver stalling tendencies detailed in my last update (I haven’t stalled the Mazda in weeks), I’ve now plumbed new depths of idiocy by managing to run the 3’s battery flat not once but twice in the space of two weeks.

The first time I was confused. Walking towards the car on my way to work, I reached for the handle to activate keyless entry, but nothing happened. A tap of the button, not a sound. My first thought was a dead key battery or locking issue, so I prised out the physical, emergency lock key, which is surprisingly tricky to slot into the door and use.

On discovering that the interior lights didn’t work, too, I realised exactly what had happened. After an apologetic ‘I’ll be late’ message to the boss, I called Mazda assist, who arrived within the hour with some jump leads (I’d just moved house and left mine behind). It turned out I’d somehow nudged the light stalk switch from auto to sidelights when getting out the night before and not noticed.

Amazingly, I did it again not long after, but this time I was prepared with a portable jump starter. I was feeling particularly sheepish until my colleague informed me he’d done the same with the Mazda. I then learned from Twitter that a few others had had a similar experience with 3s on test. The culprit? Everyone agreed the ‘lights on’ buzzer was far too quiet to be noticed. Given how clever car systems are these days, it’s amazing the car doesn’t know the battery is running flat and kill the lights itself.

Anyway, with these episodes behind me, I’m settling quite comfortably into life with the svelte Mazda. Despite a layer of winter grime and a less than distinctive paint job, it still draws admiring glances, but it’s the cabin that does it for me. I think it’s a best-in-class combination of fit and finish, simplicity of operation and design nous. Cold weather has uncovered a couple of light rattles, but it’s an early production model and I’ve driven far pricier stuff of late with worse interior noises.

Despite being full of praise for its design, I can’t help feeling a touch underwhelmed by the much-lauded Skyactiv-X motor. Economy hovering around the 43mpg mark is respectable but not exceptional given my motorway-heavy commute, but my issues are more with refinement. I love a good engine note as much as the rest, but the 2.0-litre unit’s gruff tones between 2 and 4000rpm (ie where you spend most of your time) can grate on occasion, with a diesel-like knocking noise sometimes rearing its head on part-throttle.

I’ve also had a request from a reader to comment on the 3’s torsion-beam rear-axle set-up, which he describes as “cheap and nasty” compared with the previous car’s independent rear. It’s a fair (if strong) point, but unfortunately it’s increasingly becoming the norm: even Mercedes’ A-Class comes so equipped in lesser specs, and Ford’s latest Focus is (as of last year) torsion beam only on everything except the 2.0-litre diesels. They are not only cheaper to make but far more space efficient.

Is it a negative for the Mazda? Not according to our road test of this very car, which praised its handling and found minor fault with secondary ride comfort, likely due to the larger, 18in wheels.

*Love it:*

*Infotainment *Touchscreens are so 2019 – a well-executed rotary click wheel like this is infinitely more intuitive when you’re driving, and the menus are a doddle.

*Loathe it:*

*Engine noise *Pleasant at higher revs when you do want to hear it, but too gruff at lower revs when you don’t. More sound deadening, please.

*Mileage: 4192*

*Back to the top*

-Life with a Mazda 3: Month 1-

*Like being a learner again - 4th December 2019*

That feeling of embarrassment at stalling at a junction has returned with the 3. It was happening daily at first, and I breathed a sigh of relief when I found out other colleagues had suffered the same indignity. A slightly abrupt clutch action aside, most of the blame can be placed on us for being so used to the low-down grunt of turbo motors.

*Mileage: 2850*

*Back to the top*

*Welcoming the Mazda 3 to the fleet - 27th November 2019*

It’s generally been accepted for several years that, bar the odd bit of fiddling, combustion engines have largely peaked in terms of internal development. So when a company came along claiming a genuine innovation, we sat up and took notice. So much so that a first drive or week-long loan wasn’t sufficient: we needed to see this car’s ability to perform in a variety of scenarios over a longer period.

That car is the Mazda 3. Yes, as you’ve likely read if you regularly thumb through this magazine, the humble, rather left-field hatchback is the first model from the humble, rather left-field Japanese brand to make use of its groundbreaking Skyactiv-X engine tech. While six months is hardly a full verdict into its long-term reliability, we’re hoping to uncover the good and the bad of this innovative system (and the car it’s attached to) as the miles pile on. And pile on they will, with the 3 pushed into service for airport runs, long-distance trips and – more regularly – my 80-mile round-trip commute.

Missed all the fuss about Skyactiv-X? Well, here’s a brief explanation. The engine uses something other manufacturers have been unable to perfect for decades: compression ignition (like that used in the diesel combustion process) of petrol. Under light loads, a lean fuel and air mixture is pushed into the cylinder under a very high 16.3:1 compression ratio. It won’t ignite like this alone, however. So as the piston compresses the lean mix, a small amount of a richer fuel mixture is squirted towards the spark plug.

As this ignites it increases pressure further, in turn igniting the leaner mixture filling the cylinders, burning it more cleanly and efficiently. Give it the beans, however, and the system switches to a conventional petrol combustion process.

To achieve this the Mazda makes use of a supercharger, but that isn’t there for the power gains – simply to supply enough air to keep the lean burn process going. If that fearsome complexity isn’t enough, the 3 also gets a 24V mild-hybrid system that harvests energy when slowing down and uses it to assist acceleration.

Lost interest? All you really need to know is that it’s a naturally aspirated petrol engine that makes 178bhp, emits from just 100g/km of CO2 and promises 50mpg in the real world. Witchcraft made real by Mazda’s boffins.

However, there’s more to Mazda’s Ford Focus rival than clever stuff under the bonnet. For starters, the svelte looks have already won favour with the vast majority in the Autocar office. The old model was hardly ugly, but at a stroke it’s made to look lumpen and clumsy by the curvy, clean and minimalist lines of the new model. The proportions, too, mark it out from rivals: that strikingly low bonnet, the low roof and steep rake of the rear window, and the chunky C-pillar give it a distinctive identity, as do the neat front and rear light clusters.

It all means that, in my view, this is the prettiest car in its class, and despite my disappointment that we weren’t getting a Soul Red one, I’m happy with the combination of Machine Grey, black wheels and, especially, the burgundy leather. Ah yes, that interior: another reason to go for the Mazda over the more obvious class choices.

The first thing that strikes you on entering is the perception of quality brought about by everything you touch and interact with. Door cards and armrests are plushly padded, switchgear feels expensively hewn and damped and the material mix is far more Mercedes than Mazda. It’s really impressed everyone who’s been on board so far.

And unlike our now departed long-term A-Class, which I personally felt was more about superficial chintz than actual substance inside, the ergonomic execution seems near-perfect. Niggles will no doubt emerge as the months tick by, but a thousand miles in and I’m struggling to find fault.

There are physical buttons for the things you use regularly, such as the climate controls, simple music functions and some driver assist features. But even the functions that are buried in the infotainment are easily accessible, as Mazda (along with BMW) is one of the last to keep the super-intuitive rotary click wheel, which combines with simple, clear menus to make every task a doddle. Other manufacturers, take note: your cars are getting more frustrating to operate because of the over-reliance of touchscreen fingerprint magnets and dodgy voice control.

Not that the Mazda is lacking on the kit front. Our GT Sport trim is one rung below top spec, and it’s crammed with features like heated leather seats (electric on the driver’s side), a heated steering wheel, a 12-speaker Bose sound system, a head-up display – the list goes on. You don’t need to splash out on our spec, though: even base models get LED headlights, traffic-sign recognition and – amazingly – radar cruise control. The Mazda’s keyless entry is great, too, allowing you to lock the car with a swipe of the door handle – useful, as the key isn’t the most pleasant thing to behold.

Complaints so far? We have to nitpick. The driver’s seat doesn’t quite go low enough for a truly sporting feel, while I can already see there will be some complaints from those in the back due to the shortage of head room. If that’s all we can whinge about, then it’s a great start. Time well spent with the car will dictate whether the gushing reports continue to flow.

*Second Opinion*

I couldn’t wait to try out the new Mazda 3, having been blown away by its fantastic design. Turns out the interior is the real star: it looks superb, feels lovely and works seamlessly. Must admit, I felt a tad let down by the Skyactiv-X engine, because I expected diesel-like torque, but it did prove frugal. 

*Kris Culmer*

*Back to the top*

-MAZDA 3 2.0 180PS GT Sport specification-

*Specs: Price New* £26,675 *Price as tested* £27,545 *Options *Machine Grey metallic paint £670, burgundy leather trim £200

*Test Data: Engine* 4-cyls, 1998cc, petrol *Power* 178bhp at 6000rpm *Torque* 165lb ft at 3000rpm *Kerb weight* 1411kg *Top speed* 134mph *0-62mph* 8.2sec *Fuel economy* 48.7mpg *CO2* no WLTP data available *Faults* None *Expenses* None

*Back to the top*