Mazda 3 SP23??

Creampuff · 12-08-2007, 09:01 PM

Argueingwith a mate tonight, which is faster. I can't find any stats on the Mazda3 SP23 hatch auto '07 model. any one know o-100 or 400m times?
I am curious..thank you

XR8-260 · 12-08-2007, 09:08 PM

Wheels magazine performance data for 4spd auto Mazda 3 SP23 hatch:

0-100kph - 9.1 seconds

1/4 mile - 16.7 seconds

The '07 models come with 5spd autos so they would be a fraction faster.

Cheers.

falzoony · 12-08-2007, 09:15 PM

What are you comparing it with? not your xr6? there's no competition there.

Creampuff · 12-08-2007, 09:34 PM

yes, my XR6 with minimum mods....149rwkw. He wants a go next week so, I was curious how they really go?

BLOHSV · 13-08-2007, 12:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Creampuff

yes, my XR6 with minimum mods....149rwkw. He wants a go next week so, I was curious how they really go?

you will rip him to shreads.you will see him your rear view mirror.

V3RSAC3 · 13-08-2007, 12:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Creampuff

yes, my XR6 with minimum mods....149rwkw. He wants a go next week so, I was curious how they really go?

are you serious?? has the rice gone to his head?

Steffo · 13-08-2007, 12:57 AM

Ultra bad Wheels times aside, the Mazda 3 SP23 is good for about 7.8 seconds and can go down the 1/4 mile in about 15.5 seconds.

So... a stock BA XR6 will beat one comfortabley. Lightly modded, will beat it with ease.

XR8-260 · 13-08-2007, 01:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steffo

Ultra bad Wheels times aside, the Mazda 3 SP23 is good for about 7.8 seconds and can go down the 1/4 mile in about 15.5 seconds.

Are you talking about auto or manual?

Keepleft · 13-08-2007, 06:05 AM

23yo nephew has a late 2006 SP23, its clean and tidy, and goes 'okay' Zzzzzzz.

Planning a street race? See other threads.

photn · 13-08-2007, 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keepleft

23yo nephew has a late 2006 SP23, its clean and tidy, and goes 'okay' Zzzzzzz.

Planning a street race? See other threads.

i believe they intend on taking it to the Drag strip

2fishingdogs · 13-08-2007, 09:23 AM

What going out to Willowbank on Saturday

13-08-2007, 09:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steffo

Ultra bad Wheels times aside, the Mazda 3 SP23 is good for about 7.8 seconds and can go down the 1/4 mile in about 15.5 seconds.

So... a stock BA XR6 will beat one comfortabley. Lightly modded, will beat it with ease.

For the manual yes, but the quoted times are for the auto which is what his mate has

Steffo · 13-08-2007, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackLS

For the manual yes, but the quoted times are for the auto which is what his mate has

And the autobox won't take 14.3% off the 0-100km/h time and 7.2% off the 1/4 mile time.

XR8-260 · 13-08-2007, 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steffo

And the autobox won't take 14.3% off the 0-100km/h time and 7.2% off the 1/4 mile time.

True. There isn't much difference between auto and manual times in big engined cars like the falcon. But with small cars with no torque, the straight line performance difference is much more noticeable.

Steffo · 13-08-2007, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 3

True. There isn't much difference between auto and manual times in big engined cars like the falcon. But with small cars with no torque, the straight line performance difference is much more noticeable.

While that is true, it only is to a certain point. Modern automatics do not behave like autos of old and are far more efficient. And in many cases, faster then their manual counterparts.

The difference between an auto Mazda 3 and manual one would not be very big at all. I know it isn't in our Golf 2.0 FSI 6sp auto against the 6sp manual version. In fact, the auto feels (and is tested to be I believe) faster. And its an FSI, so its an automatic, not a DSG.

I've also driven an auto and manual LS Focus CL and they seem to be about on par with each other (4sp auto and 5sp manual) - and the Focus shares all of its drivetrain with the 3.

V3RSAC3 · 13-08-2007, 01:00 AM

so basically ... u need not to worry!!

McobraR · 13-08-2007, 08:48 AM

only mazda 3 u should be careful of is the MPS. pocket rockets them things are.

falzoony · 13-08-2007, 09:52 AM

15.5? well if they can do that, thats pretty quick, much quicker then I thought. I think in one Wheels a few months back, the BF xr6 runs a 15.5.
What size motors are they running these days?

13-08-2007, 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by falzoony

15.5? well if they can do that, thats pretty quick, much quicker then I thought. I think in one Wheels a few months back, the BF xr6 runs a 15.5.
What size motors are they running these days?

2.3L VCT 4cyl 123kw or so.

Same family engine as the Focus 2.0 and the Fiesta XR4.
My virgin run at WSID got me 16.2 with 107kw in the Focus, with the right launch theres definatly a 16.0.

Sam_Boss260 · 13-08-2007, 10:34 AM

See at Willowbank on Saturday Nathan...... just don't tell the missus.

UNR8D · 13-08-2007, 10:38 AM

they are a 2.3 4 cyl with about 125kw at the fly but they are fairly light and do have good gear ratio's which helps out, if it was an MPS you would want a moded XRT or typhoon to have a go esp if you were doing roll ons. :O track of course.

**PepeLePew** · 13-08-2007, 10:51 AM

Interesting drive in manual form. Flexible and surprisingly torquey. The ONLY N/A small cheap(ish) car that made my shortlist last time I changed over...

I'd like to see the manuals go head to head unmodded, it'd be interesting.

13-08-2007, 04:42 PM

True, I think Wheels test with 2 journos, no loading up the torque converter/4000rpm launches etc.

The mechanics of the auto does sap power and if its a 4sp, having less gear ratios makes power delivery not as efficient as it could be either.

Ives · 13-08-2007, 04:48 PM

Speaking of straight line, why only a straightline battle?

13-08-2007, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ives

Speaking of straight line, why only a straightline battle?

Too true. Depending on both drivers it can be a close battle. The torque of the Falcon vs nimbleness of the 3

Creampuff · 13-08-2007, 05:32 PM

just goes to show that my inquiry is not as silly as first suggested...thanks everyone for the input

sleekism · 13-08-2007, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wikipedia

[edit] Acceleration
The 0 to 60 mph or 0 to 100 km/h acceleration times depend on the type of transmission. In general, the manual transmission is faster in acceleration (not just because it is lighter in weight, but for the relative inefficiency of the torque converter in the automatic compared to the clutch in the manual).

Official performance figures for the European Mazda3 1.4 S, the lowest-powered model, are 0-100 km/h in 14.3 seconds, with a maximum speed of 170 km/h (106 mph). Wheels magazine reported a 8.7 0-100km/h time for the Australian 2.0 model in its May 2004 issue. The 1.6 CiTD 80 KW (as sold in the Europe) with a five-speed manual does 100 km/h in 11.6 seconds and has top of 182 km/h (113 mph) according to the spec's.

In its test results for the 2004 Mazda3 5-door with the 2.3 litre engine, Car and Driver magazine reported a 0-60 mph (0-97 km/h) acceleration time of 7.4 seconds and a governor-limited top speed of 190 km/h (118 mph).

Against an auto SP23 you are likely to put them back in their place but against a manual it would be very interesting.

What would be a real test is to put 4 other people in each car as that will be a real test as extra people in a Falcon makes a much smaller difference.

7.4 is pretty quick for the little Mazda and puts my Fairmonts 8.1 to shame but truth be told racing up mountains the Fairmont I daresay would beat the Mazda.

Both modified with the same budget the Mazda wouldn't stand a chance, simple mechanics as a larger capacity engine will produce more power cheaper.

Steffo · 13-08-2007, 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sleekism

Against an auto SP23 you are likely to put them back in their place but against a manual it would be very interesting.

What would be a real test is to put 4 other people in each car as that will be a real test as extra people in a Falcon makes a much smaller difference.

7.4 is pretty quick for the little Mazda and puts my Fairmonts 8.1 to shame but truth be told racing up mountains the Fairmont I daresay would beat the Mazda.

Both modified with the same budget the Mazda wouldn't stand a chance, simple mechanics as a larger capacity engine will produce more power cheaper.

You'd probably lose an up-mountain race and a dollar per dollar modification battle. The 2.3 Duratec is one of the most formidable four-cylinder engines in the world and the whole thing is far superior and more advanced in design to the Aussie six.

Now if your Fairmont is an 8... that's a whole different kettle of fish.

sleekism · 13-08-2007, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steffo

You'd probably lose an up-mountain race and a dollar per dollar modification battle. The 2.3 Duratec is one of the most formidable four-cylinder engines in the world and the whole thing is far superior and more advanced in design to the Aussie six.

Now if your Fairmont is an 8... that's a whole different kettle of fish.

I highly doubt that the Aussie 4L six would lose to the Duratec engine in a dollar per dollar modification (I did imply the Barra 190 but I believe my Tickford VCT would have a fair chance).
There are many papers on the subject and it simply comes down to the age old saying
that "there aint no replacement for displacement" simplya 15% increase (exhaust) to the SP23 is going to equal an increase of 17kw while an increase by 15% to my Fairmont is going to equal 25kw.
If you graph modifications on top of each other with the Fairmont against the Mazda you will find that the horsepower will increase sharper in the Fairmont as it is coming off a stronger base torque wise.
Sorry if I'm not being clearer but it is difficult to explain. If you give me 10 grand and a SP23 I will explain

Also while the Mazda has a strong raw acceleration figure this does not tell the whole story. From my own experience my Fairmont beat a TX3 Turbo in an uphill race . My theory is that since the Fairmont had a shorter and meatier torque curve it could roll on the power better coming out of slow corners...or maybe the TX3 was cactus.......either way the Fairmont felt fitter.

Not bagging SP23's either I am a big fan of them and wouldn't mind adding one to my garage.

Steffo · 14-08-2007, 01:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sleekism

I highly doubt that the Aussie 4L six would lose to the Duratec engine in a dollar per dollar modification (I did imply the Barra 190 but I believe my Tickford VCT would have a fair chance).
There are many papers on the subject and it simply comes down to the age old saying
that "there aint no replacement for displacement" simplya 15% increase (exhaust) to the SP23 is going to equal an increase of 17kw while an increase by 15% to my Fairmont is going to equal 25kw.
If you graph modifications on top of each other with the Fairmont against the Mazda you will find that the horsepower will increase sharper in the Fairmont as it is coming off a stronger base torque wise.
Sorry if I'm not being clearer but it is difficult to explain. If you give me 10 grand and a SP23 I will explain

Also while the Mazda has a strong raw acceleration figure this does not tell the whole story. From my own experience my Fairmont beat a TX3 Turbo in an uphill race . My theory is that since the Fairmont had a shorter and meatier torque curve it could roll on the power better coming out of slow corners...or maybe the TX3 was cactus.......either way the Fairmont felt fitter.

Not bagging SP23's either I am a big fan of them and wouldn't mind adding one to my garage.

Lots of displacement is great and all... except if you have stone age technology behind it. The Duratec's cylinder head mops the floor with pretty much any regular production engine until you get into the big dollar exotics. The Aussie six's... doesn't?

Stock on stock an AU Ghia with the VCT engine mops the floor with TX3 Turbo's. That's an early 90s/late 80s turbo 4-cyl that once made just over 100kW and today wouldn't anymore (age plus owner demographic who... don't take the best care) against a new, late model car.