Mazda 3 vs VW Golf

lambada

lambada

lambada

Associate
Joined
23 Apr 2014
Posts
32
After months of research I've shortlisted the VW Golf VII 1.4 TSi 122 PS manual and the Mazda 3 2014 2.0 120 PS automatic saloon to become my next vehicle. I'm a 33 yr old male based in Malta where I use A/C for 6 months of the year and cover 6k miles annually. I will be buying the car brand new and intend to keep it for about 8 years.

I much prefer the looks of the Mazda but I have some concerns about it i) no opportunity to test drive it before buying, ii) some reviewers have said that it needs to be revved hard to perform thereby causing high levels of engine noise, iii) it comes on 18 inch wheels which might make the ride a bit too firm. It is about 600 GBP cheaper than the Golf and comes with leather seats + bi-xenon headlamps + advanced keyless entry which the Golf does not.

I don't have the opportunity to test drive the Golf either but I did test drive the Leon with the same engine and was impressed with the refinement. I did notice a bit of turbo lag though.

If it makes any difference, my current car is a 1997 Civic VTi with the 1600cc 158 BHP engine.

Which would you buy and why?? At this stage I'd rather not receive recommendations for other vehicles or variants of the VW Golf / Mazda 3. Thanks!
 
Last edited:
I'd personally buy the Golf I think.

Presumably Malta is pretty darned hot half the year, hence using the AC. That leather will be all sticky and uncomfortable for that period.

The Mazda is a 2.0 (don't know how they manage to only get 120 PS out of it), whereas the Golf being a 1.4 will be far more economical. I'm guessing on such a relatively small island, you wont get the chance to stretch it's legs much, so having the smaller 1.4 should be much cheaper to run.

I would imagine an 8 year old Golf will be worth no less than £600 more than an 8 year old Mazda, so the initial purchase price difference should be regained on the other side.
 
The 1.4 TSI 122PS TSI engine is a sweet engine, been driving one for the last three years in my Mums Golf. She actually had a Mazda 3 1.6 Takura before that and the Golf is just better than that in everyway.
 
Those TSi/TFSi engines are decent little engines :) Was recently in the turbo 1.4 polo, cracking little car :)

I'm with the above tho, Leather in Malta? No Thanks, you'll be burning yer ass each time you sit down unless a cars kept underground refridgerated and away from the heat :p
which from my holidays over there is pretty damn hard xD
 
I had a new Golf Diesel for the weekend a few weeks back, whilst very comfy and will get you from A to B without much fuss, it was just so dull. The Mazda if their past cars are to go by will be a fun car to drive, but it being a N/A petrol then I would expect it to be revvy, much like your current Civic, except it's an auto. Mazda also looks much more nicer and would be the one I would go for, never had any issues with leather on hot days then again the UK exactly isn't hot for long periods to be an annoyance. The Golf would probably be in the Garage getting fixed more than the Mazda too.
 
lemonade said:
I had a new Golf Diesel for the weekend a few weeks back, whilst very comfy and will get you from A to B without much fuss, it was just so dull. The Mazda if their past cars are to go by will be a fun car to drive, but it being a N/A petrol then I would expect it to be revvy, much like your current Civic, except it's an auto. Mazda also looks much more nicer and would be the one I would go for, never had any issues with leather on hot days then again the UK exactly isn't hot for long periods to be an annoyance. The Golf would probably be in the Garage getting fixed more than the Mazda too.
Click to expand...

A diesel Golf is going to be boring but the TSI/TFSI is a great engine. Not sure why you think it will wouldn't be reliable.
 
Duke said:
A diesel Golf is going to be boring but the TSI/TFSI is a great engine. Not sure why you think it will wouldn't be reliable.
Click to expand...

I'm not talking about the engine itself, the diesel engine is fine for what it is, (although I don't like diesels or turbos), the handling is good too, but rest of the car is just meh, horrible pedals, typical vdub clutch with the foot pump action, clunky gearbox, the gas pedal must be electric as there is no mechanical feeling to it, and the steering is as lifeless as a fish on a plate, just no connection between the car and driver.

As for reliability because they have a terrible record, local garages pretty much deal with Germans cars these days. Pretty sure the TFSI had engine problems, the new SkyActiv engines in Mazda's also have issues.
 
lemonade said:
I'm not talking about the engine itself, the diesel engine is fine for what it is, (although I don't like diesels or turbos), the handling is good too, but rest of the car is just meh, horrible pedals, typical vdub clutch with the foot pump action, clunky gearbox, the gas pedal must be electric as there is no mechanical feeling to it, and the steering is as lifeless as a fish on a plate, just no connection between the car and driver.

As for reliability because they have a terrible record, local garages pretty much deal with Germans cars these days. Pretty sure the TFSI had engine problems, the new SkyActiv engines in Mazda's also have issues.
Click to expand...

You've just described pretty much every new car on sale today tbh.

The mk7 is a very nice all rounder imo. Never been in the new Mazda but on looks alone I'd have the vw every time.
 
Had two mazda's both ac went wrong for leaks, mates mazda 6 ac is no longer working.

I think the golf would be more robust for something so important on a day to day basis.
 
Thank you all for your feedback. I'm going to address some points which were raised.

Mazda fuel consumption - 5 mpg less than the Golf but only because the Mazda is an automatic. The manual version returns the same mpg as the Golf.

Leather seats - my dad had black leather seats in his car for 12 years and never complained about them being too hot in the summer so I'm not concerned.

Resale value - Yes, I agree that the Golf will hold its value better.

Mazda engine - the 2014 Mazda 3 engines are different from the ones in the previous model so there's not much point in comparing with the previous model. Interior is also radically different.
 
Still think I'd go for the Golf. For a start, I wouldn't like an auto in a slow car like either of those, and to lose fuel economy for the privilege, no thanks.
 
xs2man said:
Still think I'd go for the Golf. For a start, I wouldn't like an auto in a slow car like either of those, and to lose fuel economy for the privilege, no thanks.
Click to expand...

Dealer still hasn't confirmed if he can get me a manual Mazda. Might be an option and will obviously be cheaper. Never driven an auto but I think I'd find it pretty convenient here because of the traffic.
 
I had a go in a 63 plate Golf 1.2 TSI 105PS in the weekends, it was a automatic, engine felt very gutless until the turbo kicks in which feels like forever, not helped being an auto, otherwise a very sedate and eay to drive car, the suspension setup was odd though, it was firm yet rolled around the corners more than a Touran I had a while back, I actually enjoyed the Touran more!
 
I've test driven both the new Mazda 3 120 PS manual and also 122 ps Golf Mk 7 manual, not much in it performance wise to be honest but the Mazda did need to be worked harder. That's nothing new to me though as I was going from an old Mazda 3 and their NA engines. The Mazda was nicer inside (and out, the new saloon model looks lovely) though and came with more spec as standard.
 
Why does the Golf win hands down?

It is honestly no different to other hatchbacks out there, the Kia Ceed is just as good if not better for example.
 
Lemonade - thanks for your feedback on the golf. The 122 PS Leon which I tried was responsive enough so I assume a golf with the same engine would be too.

Jano - how do ride quality and engine noise levels compare between the two cars? Which would you buy if you had to pick one of them?
 
It was a while ago so I'm a little sketchy, driving position was better in the Mazda, as was the ride quality. I was also in the Sport Nav model and the dealer mentioned if I went down to an SE-L Nav ride quality was noticeably better and there was very little difference in spec. Noise levels were worse in both compared to my old Mazda 3 but they were very very good at dampening sound, so much so that you barely heard the engine anyway. You had to rev the new Mazda for it to really be noticeable.

To be honest I found the golf pretty boring, interior felt cheaper and the seats weren't great. I didn't have as long in it as the dealer spend most of my time in it in a petrol station as he hadn't filled it up. As you can imagine I wasn't impressed. In manual form the Golf was slower than the 3 but not by much, there really isn't too much difference between the two in performance levels, but that obviously changes once you go for an auto.

In the end, I bought an F20 1 series BMW 116i auto :P
 
^ That reminds me the Golf has a very odd cabin ambience, it feels like being in a plane, and my ears feel like they are blocked and in the dual carriageway when I was doing 50 and over their is a plane like drone noise, it's odd because the interior feels dampened but then you have this odd plane like noise and ambience.

I also found the seats very uncomfortable, they are very hard, same with the diesel golf and the touran, the pedal positioning and height is also uncomfortable especially coming from a Honda that has the best ergonomics, the brake pedal sits very high and is far too over assisted.

I like the soft rubbery material they had on top of the dash and binnacle, very nice and squidgy, even though it looks like cheap grey plastic, it is nice, the rest of the interior is average and what you will find in 99% of other cars in the class.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom