2004 to 2020 Mazda 3 Forum and Mazdaspeed 3 Forums banner
1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,313 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
What would be quicker? This may be in the wrong section so I apologize if it is. I figured since it said "and performance" this is the place. I cant really find any stats on the 2.0 M/T because all the tests are with auto's it seems like. I'm guessing the 2.0 M/T can do like a 8.0-8.5 0-60? 2.5 6 M/T does like 7.5 0-60 so figure the auto will add a bit of time to that. Seems like a close race to me. Thoughts?
 

·
zoom~
Joined
·
848 Posts
In day to day commute scenario, it wont matter whats faster.

The faster car is a used speed3.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,313 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
In day to day commute scenario, it wont matter whats faster.

The faster car is a used speed3.
clearly lol. I was just wondering because it seems really close.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
701 Posts
On pure speculation, I would think the 2.0 manual would feel faster because you would have better control of the power band depending on your own personal shift points. I haven't personally driving the 2.0 manual or the 2.5 auto, so I wouldn't be able to say for sure. But I have the best of both worlds. A 2.5 manual. WOOT!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
219 Posts
Like previously mentioned the 2.0 may feel better since it's manual, but in reality I still believe the 2.5 auto will be faster than the 2.0 M/T, you can use the sport shift to be in control of the gears on the 2.5, but it just isn't the same feeling as a true standard car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
279 Posts
I'll bet on the 2.5. Someone put together a race.

+1..

When i was test driving the cars... I drove a 2.0 m/T only one in manual on that lot... and then followed it with a 2.5 auto...

It was night and day..

I quote our conversation after driving the 2.0....

"
friend: did you give it gas?
me: I had my foot to the floor every chance i got.
friend: hmmmm


Lolz... auto would win.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,313 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
friend: did you give it gas?
me: I had my foot to the floor every chance i got.
friend: hmmmm
The 2.0 is a dog unless you shift at redline.... Then its still not fast but surprising for what it is, or atleast I think it is.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
78 Posts
I've only modded the stock airbox, removed the resonator, and advanced the timing at the crank position sensor on my 2011 2.5 and I can't seem to help spinning the tires some when I take off from almost every light. If I really smash the gas down I can light the tires up no problem. The 2.5 is your better bet. It's not like they make anything for this car anyway, so whats the point in worrying about making it much faster than it already is LOL

If you can drive manual and you don't have to worry about a wife or g/f then spend the extra bucks and buy a Speed3. I know I would have.

Dawud
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,313 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
I've only modded the stock airbox, removed the resonator, and advanced the timing at the crank position sensor on my 2011 2.5 and I can't seem to help spinning the tires some when I take off from almost every light. If I really smash the gas down I can light the tires up no problem. The 2.5 is your better bet. It's not like they make anything for this car anyway, so whats the point in worrying about making it much faster than it already is LOL

If you can drive manual and you don't have to worry about a wife or g/f then spend the extra bucks and buy a Speed3. I know I would have.

Dawud
Not having traction is bad for racing lol. But what did you do to your airbox?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
410 Posts
2.5 auto.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,313 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
I found a 0-60 vid on a 2.5 auto and I'm getting from 7.8 to 8.2 so lets say 8. I know the 2.0 M/T is around 8.5. My 3i is stock except I ditched the steelies for some 17 lb TSW's. Doubt that'll help.... Still think a race should be put together :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
78 Posts
Not having traction is bad for racing lol. But what did you do to your airbox?
Yeah It does suck for racing, but I blame it on the crappy tires that came with the car. Will upgrade when they are done with :)
As for the airbox I unbolted the bottom section and cut it wide open, but left the support mounts in place. I inserted the stock air filter inside a panty hose to keep large debris from entering the pleats. I will probably upgrade to a K&N someday, but not to concerned. The car feels much better as it should with an open intake.

Will try and grab pictures.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
157 Posts
I would be down for a race but I think it wouldn't be fair since I have the heavy speed rims on my 2.5
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,313 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
I would be down for a race but I think it wouldn't be fair since I have the heavy speed rims on my 2.5
But they look so sexy
 

·
On that college budget
Joined
·
5,278 Posts
I would be down for a race but I think it wouldn't be fair since I have the heavy speed rims on my 2.5
And I have the 2.0 MT in the same area. Plus my subs add extra weight so you would win and my tires are getting worn :). But, I think I'll remove my subs if you actually want to test it out. I'm sure you would win. We could then try without my spare tire and such, see if it makes a difference.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
165 Posts
I have the 2.5l and raced a 2.0L a few weeks ago but idk if it was M/T or auto...I definatelyyyyy won and my 2.5 is auto...unforntunately lol with no engine mods
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top