Focus vs. Mazda 3

[06Roush]

Originally Posted by macdaddyslomo

then something is wrong with his car.....sorry, but a stock 2.0 focus is NOT a faster car than a 2.3L Mazda 3...it's a fact

Mazda 3s 0 - 60 = 7.97 secs

Ford Focus ZX3 0 - 60 = 8.6 secs

these are times repeated by R & T, Autoweek, C & D, etc

you think you and you're buddy conduct a better test ?

ok i'm not trying to start any thing i was just voicing my views of the three. and as for something being wrong with his car i don't think so. i mean i have ran an svt and only got beaten by a half a fender. so the little d20's are nothing to shake stick at. also i have had my car weighed and it was 2680 with the full interior and my two 12's so there is a nice little weight difference there. i mean dont get me wrong i like his car alot, its a very nice car. but i am just not to impressed with it, yet.

[Arkaign]

Originally Posted by macdaddyslomo

where is this idea that Mazda 3's are heavy ???

Mazda 3s curb weight = 2760 lbs

Focus ZTS 2.3L = 2739lbs

Focus ST 2.3L = 2685lbs

Edmunds puts the Mazda 3 Sedan at ~2950lbs.

[macdaddyslomo]

Originally Posted by Arkaign

Edmunds puts the Mazda 3 Sedan at ~2950lbs.

really ???

what's this ???

http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vdpconta...1/pageNumber=9

edmunds showing the mazda3s at 2696 lbs

fyi...edmunds is hardly infallable

[turbovation]

Originally Posted by 06Roush

ok my 2.0 dura will walk my best friends 07 2.3 3. trust me we have proved this point many a many times. mine is a hatch tho. not a sedan. the only i have an intake and a cat back(still running both cats.) and he has an intake. i walk off and leave him by about 3-4 cars. depending on how much i spin tires.

Does he have an automatic, Roush?

[06Roush]

nope 5 speed.

[turbovation]

driver mod.

[Jmaczx4st]

I have messed around with Lastrites abit all from a roll. I can say that from a roll the focus has no chance at all. From a dig though it would be good until about third and the Speed made boost. After that might as well hang it up.

[Focorec]

Originally Posted by five-speed2.3

well, we took a generic $30 cone filter, and stuck it on the end of the tube where the maf comes from. i liked it cause it was like a short ram, no real chance of water getting in the motor. and we left the bottom part of the box on there to kinda hold the filter in place. yes kinda ghetto, but if you dont wanna spend $300 on an intake.

I was taking your advice and started to look into a CAI. I saw somewhere that says using an aftermarket air intake could put your engine at risk of damage cuz it might not filter out all the dirt particles. It lets in much more air so larger particles or more particles can get in. Whats the deal?

[five-speed2.3]

Originally Posted by Focorec

I was taking your advice and started to look into a CAI. I saw somewhere that says using an aftermarket air intake could put your engine at risk of damage cuz it might not filter out all the dirt particles. It lets in much more air so larger particles or more particles can get in. Whats the deal?

well, that might be true, but not much. i cleaned mine after 8k miles (two oil changes for me) and there was barely anything on it. i dont think it lets in too much more. nothing that will hurt your engine in the long run. same being true for standard paper filters, in my moms explorer i use to change the paper every oil change, and it looked very clean. now i have a K&N filter in there.


i would suggest, however, if you plan on spending the money to buy one, that you look into an SRI, or a Short Ram Intake. it sits higher in the engine bay, and while it is still a great improvement over what you have, it doesnt carry the same risks as a CAI. such as hydrolocking.

[jdiaz]

mazdaspeed 3 will win everytime.
unless it's an svt with a blower or one with a turbo..