Mazada 6 1.8 / Passat 1.4Tsi

peace2804

Hi all,

I opened a thread a couple of days ago about the Passat 1.4Tsi 122bhp, I am currently looking at similar cars:
- petrol car as they are not expensive
- big ish car
- reliable
- good mpg
- 10K budget
- automatic ( preferably )

I found a couple of automatic Mazda 6 for around my budget, I only found manual passat but that doesn't bother me.

What are your thoughts about these two cars? Pros and cons? What is the best version to go for (I think there are different versions for the Mazda6)? Can you think of any similar cars that you will pick instead of the 2 that I mentioned?

Do you know any good mechanic that can check a used car before I buy it? How much does it cost?

Thanks in advance.

shooter88

If your looking for good mpg and do a lot of driving diesel is the way to go

peace2804

I only do about 10k a year, petrol should be fine for my usage.

JohnBoy26

A Honda Accord is better and a nicer car than the two cars your looking at imo.

peace2804

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

A Honda Accord is better and a nicer car than the two cars your looking at imo.

Honda accord is indeed a nice car - don't know much about it's engine - but it's a much more expensive car than the 2 that I mentioned, it's way beyond my budget of 10K, nonetheless will keep an eye on this option. Thanks.

bazz26

All the Mazda 6 autos here are 2.0 litre not 1.8 litre.

peace2804

bazz26 wrote: »

All the Mazda 6 autos here are 2.0 litre not 1.8 litre.

Thats right, just checked that now, how does the 1.8 compare to the 2l in terms of reliability? I heard lots of good stuff about the 1.8 but didn't check reviews for the 2L yet?

@81C

Accord vtec all the way oh yeah.

2nd would be the mazda,

Last would be a VAG car, simply too much trouble these days.

OP convert to LPG and depending on the price you can get it but @81C /L and 30 mpg works out as cheap as an 60 mpg diesel without the noise.

You can get great deals on good low mileage petrols. No way will I go back to diesel.

rocky

Between those 2, the passat... because the automatic gearbox is a DSG .

Mazda probably still has a slushbox... and doesn't have a turbo...

rocky

rocky wrote: »

Between those 2, the passat... because the automatic gearbox is a DSG .

Mazda probably still has a slushbox... and doesn't have a turbo...

I must admit I'm not a DGS fan at all, too much lag and hunting for gears.

Ford's powershift is supposed to be better.

Nothing like Audi's multitronic. Super smooth. Even the CVT in the Prius is much better I find than the dsg, even though the prius has lag, I could contribute that to the 2 different power trains.

maybe they have improved, maybe the 7 speed is better , but the reviews tell me it hasn't.

rocky

never heard of hunting for gears in a working DSG. lag? 8ms gear changes...

And no, ford's PS is supposed to be sh1te in comparison.

Bobo78

In my opinion I would go for the Passat 1.4 tsi because it should be better in terms of mpg plus it has 6 gears unlike Mazda 6 which has 5 gears which makes Passat more quieter and more economical car.
And Passat is more comfortable car.
And it's not like Mazda 6 are completely bulletproof like boards make them out to be.

rocky

rocky wrote: »

never heard of hunting for gears in a working DSG. lag? 8ms gear changes...

And no, ford's PS is supposed to be sh1te in comparison.

Well I can't speak of the powershift as I've never driven them, but I have the DSG and I can say that without the manual function it would have driven me insane. Especially hill or mountain climbing, it would be in a ridiculously low gear where for instance Audi's multitronic would be in the correct gear as it has a sensor that sensed you were going up or down hill.

There are also rampant failures of DSG boxes world wide and VAG were forced by court order to offer 10 year 100,000 mile warranty in the United States and China.

It isn't so bad having the semi auto option, but as a full auto IMO and that is my opinion, DSG sucks based on my experience.

Bobo78

Bobo78 wrote: »

In my opinion I would go for the Passat 1.4 tsi because it should be better in terms of mpg plus it has 6 gears unlike Mazda 6 which has 5 gears which makes Passat more quieter and more economical car.
And Passat is more comfortable car.
And it's not like Mazda 6 are completely bulletproof like boards make them out to be.

Well maybe for refinement the passat would be better but the tsi isn't supposed to be the most reliable engine.

Id still consider converting to LPG no matter what petrol you get!

One car people over look are the Fiat Bravo T-Jet's that are a great engine and don't give much trouble at all.

peace2804

Deleted User wrote: »

Accord vtec all the way oh yeah.

2nd would be the mazda,

Last would be a VAG car, simply too much trouble these days.

OP convert to LPG and depending on the price you can get it but @81C /L and 30 mpg works out as cheap as an 60 mpg diesel without the noise.

You can get great deals on good low mileage petrols. No way will I go back to diesel.

Accord vtec sounds fantastic indeed, don't know much about LPG engines, need to check them a bit, thanks for the advice.

peace2804

Bobo78 wrote: »

In my opinion I would go for the Passat 1.4 tsi because it should be better in terms of mpg plus it has 6 gears unlike Mazda 6 which has 5 gears which makes Passat more quieter and more economical car.
And Passat is more comfortable car.
And it's not like Mazda 6 are completely bulletproof like boards make them out to be.

Agree that the passat 1.4 tsi is an economical engine, as much as I love the Passat, their confort and also their durability as much as I think that the interior is always a bit flat and simple, it's nice as there is nothing wrong with it but I find the interior of the Mazda 6 and the Honda accord better imo.

peace2804

peace2804 wrote: »

Accord vtec sounds fantastic indeed, don't know much about LPG engines, need to check them a bit, thanks for the advice.

Oh yeah go with the vtec and convert to LPG, the vtec engines I believe need an additive mixed with the LPG for the valves, but your installer will advise you on that.

most other engines I believe don't need the additive ?

Stallingrad

Deleted User wrote: »

but the tsi isn't supposed to be the most reliable engine.l.

The 122bhp is fine, there were issues with supercharged versions of he 1.4 but he OP is not considering those.

Stallingrad

Stallingrad wrote: »

The 122bhp is fine, there were issues with supercharged versions of he 1.4 but he OP is not considering those.

Still though does anyone think the vtec sounds a lot better than the tsi ?

CianRyan

Get an Accord EuroR, 2.4l VTEC couch. :cool:

Out of the first two I'd have the Mazda, small displacement turbo engines can be a nightmare.

rocky

Deleted User wrote: »

Still though does anyone think the vtec sounds a lot better than the tsi ?

That's the sound of euros leaving your pocket...

JohnBoy26

rocky wrote: »

That's the sound of euros leaving your pocket...

Sometimes the sound of the tsi can do the same :pac:

creedp

Deleted User wrote: »

Id still consider converting to LPG no matter what petrol you get!

Dont know much about Lpg either but I assume you have to put a tank in the boot and if so that must severly limit the boot space which if you have a couple of kids is never big enough in the first place.

NobodyImportant

I would be a fan over an overstressed 1.4 trying to pull a car the size of a Passat around.

The Mazda will be the more reliable car in the long run, the Passat is better looking and nicer to drive on long distances.

creedp

NobodyImportant wrote: »

The Mazda will be the more reliable car in the long run, the Passat is better looking and nicer to drive on long distances.

While I have no doubt the Passat is efficient and relatively reliable I cannot bring myself to like the look of the current model. I would go as far as saying they conform to a child's attempt to draw a car for the 1st time - 3 square box design with wheels. However, I'm sure the inside is nice.

Tea 1000

NobodyImportant wrote: »

I would be a fan over an overstressed 1.4 trying to pull a car the size of a Passat around.

The Mazda will be the more reliable car in the long run, the Passat is better looking and nicer to drive on long distances.

The Passat might be a bit more comfortable on long distances, but it's not nicer to drive. The Mazda is a much more engaging and competent handling car.

NobodyImportant

When driving long distances, you want comfy seats and decent ride quality. Who wants a good handling car on a boring motorway?

I'd pick the Mazda btw.

Tea 1000

NobodyImportant wrote: »

When driving long distances, you want comfy seats and decent ride quality. Who wants a good handling car on a boring motorway?

I'd pick the Mazda btw.

Basic seats in the Passat are worse than the Mazda seats. Ride quality fairly equal on both. Handling better on Mazda.
There are only 4 long trips you could be doing in this country which are motorway all the way!

creedp

creedp wrote: »

Dont know much about Lpg either but I assume you have to put a tank in the boot and if so that must severly limit the boot space which if you have a couple of kids is never big enough in the first place.

They can put a tank in the spare wheel well. You would loose no space, apart from the spare wheel, but you can use a can of foam.

I would find the savings more than worth it to be honest, especially when you see the bargains 2nd hand petrols go for with nearly half the mileage of diesels.

I personally would find that not having to buy a rattle box diesel a major +.

rocky

rocky wrote: »

That's the sound of euros leaving your pocket...

Ha ha yeah, true, all the more reason to convert to LPG then, depending on the price you get.

Which would you rather, the sound of a vtec or rattle and vibration of a diesel ?

The vtec engines need some kind of additive for the valves though when running on LPG, it's around 10 Euro's a bottle and I don't know how long it lasts ?

Bobo78

[QUOTE=NobodyImportant;83277353]When driving long distances, you want comfy seats and decent ride quality. Who wants a good handling car on a boring motorway?

I'd pick the Mazda btw.[/QUOTE]

I completely agree with this point.
Passat is way better for motorway driving, while if you do a lot of driving on narrow bendy roads Mazda 6 would probably be better.
I dont agree that Mazda offers better ride quality I v driven both Passat 1.4 tsi as well as 1.6 fsi and Mazda 6 1.8 petrol 2008 and found Passat's suspension, quietness, refinement to be way better thatn Mazda 6 especially for motorway driving.
Another thing that I find that I don't like about Mazda 6 is that Mazda 6 steering is too light for my taste and when I drive on nice new motorway it's very easy to swerve to left and right in between the lane because of the light and very responsive steering.
Even had passengers who said Passat rides better than Mazda 6.

rocky

In day-to-day driving, a turbo petrol will feel much better than a NA. Let's face it, the sound of the 1.4TSi or the Mazda 2.0 (is it?) won't set the world on fire, and for the Vtec sound (debatable if it's nice or not) you need to be at 5000+ RPM (not actual value, but itsgotsta be high), who drives like this daily?

Tea 1000

Bobo78 wrote: »

I completely agree with this point.
Passat is way better for motorway driving, while if you do a lot of driving on narrow bendy roads Mazda 6 would probably be better.
I dont agree that Mazda offers better ride quality I v driven both Passat 1.4 tsi as well as 1.6 fsi and Mazda 6 1.8 petrol 2008 and found Passat's suspension, quietness, refinement to be way better thatn Mazda 6 especially for motorway driving.
Another thing that I find that I don't like about Mazda 6 is that Mazda 6 steering is too light for my taste and when I drive on nice new motorway it's very easy to swerve to left and right in between the lane because of the light and very responsive steering.
Even had passengers who said Passat rides better than Mazda 6.

Passat has much better insulation alright, so feels more refined. But on a bumpy road it's just a little unfinished feeling.
And as for the Mazda actually turning when you moved the wheel, that's exactly what a good handling car does! The Steering in almost all VAG cars is horrifically numb.

CianRyan

The 1.8 Mazda sounds quite nice if very quiet. Cut a silencer and it'd be sweet.

VTEC is closer to/ over 6000rpm. Very high.

rocky

rocky wrote: »

In day-to-day driving, a turbo petrol will feel much better than a NA. Let's face it, the sound of the 1.4TSi or the Mazda 2.0 (is it?) won't set the world on fire, and for the Vtec sound (debatable if it's nice or not) you need to be at 5000+ RPM (not actual value, but itsgotsta be high), who drives like this daily?

Not many drive like that daily I suppose, but it would be nice when you need the power, and way better than the sound of any diesel.

Having said that the 1.4 TSI would probably give more torque, maybe not more but having the turbo might make the peak torque come in earlier in the rev range over the vtec and make for more relaxed driving without the need for high revs. It's more about torque than HP, hp being just a measurement of power. That being said the TSI with the supercharger would have a great torque band, but it's a troublesome engine.

The Honda or Mazda thought would probably be the ones to convert to LPG, I think the TSI engines are very expensive to convert due to being direct injected.

CianRyan

CianRyan wrote: »

The 1.8 Mazda sounds quite nice if very quiet. Cut a silencer and it'd be sweet.

VTEC is closer to/ over 6000rpm. Very high.

The VW's aren't too far behind, it's where the torque comes in is what matters. Think HP to go faster and torque to accelerate faster, you need more horsepower to go faster and or to accelerate faster And this is where the turbo and or super charger come in.

The gearing in the gearbox is a different story

rocky

I drove a Golf 1.2 TSi 105HP over a weekend, 4 adults + baby + luggage, it returned 6l/100km and felt very nice on acceleration, Like you say power figures are just peak power and for a NA engine that's very high in the rev range.

Nice looking curve for the 122bhp, max torque from 1500 RPM



I found on wikipedia for the Mazda 2.0l:
1998 cc; 110 kW (150 hp) @ 6500 rpm; 187 Nm @ 4000 rpm

For the Accord,

R20A3 (2.0 i-VTEC) 2008- 1,997 cc (1.997 L; 121.9 cu in) I4 SOHC i-VTEC (R20A3) 156 PS (115 kW; 154 hp)@6300, 192 N·m (142 lb·ft)@4100 (95RON)

Barr

peace2804 wrote: »

Thats right, just checked that now, how does the 1.8 compare to the 2l in terms of reliability? I heard lots of good stuff about the 1.8 but didn't check reviews for the 2L yet?

I would like to know this as well. It is rare enough to find a 2L Mazda 6 unless it is an auto.

rocky

rocky wrote: »

I drove a Golf 1.2 TSi 105HP over a weekend, 4 adults + baby + luggage, it returned 6l/100km and felt very nice on acceleration, Like you say power figures are just peak power and for a NA engine that's very high in the rev range.

Nice looking curve for the 122bhp, max torque from 1500 RPM

Imagine the Nissan Leaf with 280 NM Torque form 0 rpm ?

Or the Chevy Spark EV with 542 NM from 0 ?

rocky

I'm too busy burning through world's oil reserves to imagine a Leaf

rocky

rocky wrote: »

I'm too busy burning through world's oil reserves to imagine a Leaf

Stick up a wind turbine and drive for free.;)

I must admit instant torque is addictive and a completely different experience.

Bobo78

Tea 1000 wrote: »

Passat has much better insulation alright, so feels more refined. But on a bumpy road it's just a little unfinished feeling.
And as for the Mazda actually turning when you moved the wheel, that's exactly what a good handling car does! The Steering in almost all VAG cars is horrifically numb.

I guess it all depends of individuals tastes in what they prefer.
I personally prefer Mazda 6 design of the car but prefer built quality and feel of VW and I agree that Mazda 6 is way more fun car to drive and to thrash around corners but Passat is quite capable as well it's just not as entertaining as Mazda.

Bobo78

Bobo78 wrote: »

I guess it all depends of individuals tastes in what they prefer.
I personally prefer Mazda 6 design of the car but prefer built quality and feel of VW and I agree that Mazda 6 is way more fun car to drive and to thrash around corners but Passat is quite capable as well it's just not as entertaining as Mazda.

Why would people buy a car that you can trash around corners ? Most cars are capable of cornering at safe speeds.

That reminds me of journalistic reviews of where handling seems to be the most important thing in a car. Where they get in and drive it wrecklessly for a few miles to have fun, they don't have to live with it

To be honest my preference is a suspension than can absorve the broken Southern Kildare tar and chipping dirt roads, handling comes bottom of the list for me. You really got to be driving like a maniac to consider most cars handling to be bad.

Interior would also be where I think the VW would win, the new Passat interior that is the CC like interior.

But hey it's different stroks for different folks !

Tea 1000

Deleted User wrote: »

Why would people buy a car that you can trash around corners ? Most cars are capable of cornering at safe speeds.

That reminds me of journalistic reviews of where handling seems to be the most important thing in a car. Where they get in and drive it wrecklessly for a few miles to have fun, they don't have to live with it

To be honest my preference is a suspension than can absorve the broken Southern Kildare tar and chipping dirt roads, handling comes bottom of the list for me. You really got to be driving like a maniac to consider most cars handling to be bad.

Interior would also be where I think the VW would win, the new Passat interior that is the CC like interior.

But hey it's different stroks for different folks !

You don't buy a nice handling car to thrash the crap out of it. A well sorted chassis is rewarding at all speeds. For me it's the most important aspect of the car. I have a few criteria that needs to be met, after that I just judge on the way the car drives.
If the car is not communicative, then I may as well just get someone else to drive it. Or a robot. What's the point?

Ded_Zebra

Have the people who say that a passat (b6 and b7) doesn't handle well actually driven one???

We had a 2007 1.6 fsi and although it was slow it was very rewarding to drive. Steering told you exactly what was happening under the front wheels and very sharp to turn in yet the ride was still comfortable enough. I haven't driven a 6 and it may well handle better but to say that the passat is numb is a lie IMO.

Tea 1000

Ded_Zebra wrote: »

Have the people who say that a passat (b6 and b7) doesn't handle well actually driven one???

We had a 2007 1.6 fsi and although it was slow it was very rewarding to drive. Steering told you exactly what was happening under the front wheels and very sharp to turn in yet the ride was still comfortable enough. I haven't driven a 6 and it may well handle better but to say that the passat is numb is a lie IMO.

I've driven many, extensively, and you're wrong. There's no more that can be said really. As I said before, most people on here simply don't understand what they are talking about but are convinced they do.

Stallingrad

As a Passat owner having driven the Mazda6 there is no doubt the suspension on the 6 feels more firm, the car is more sporty feeling (nice gearchange) than the Passat if that is your thing. Also a good deal more engine and road noise. But the B7 Passat is far more comfortable and refined, and it's steering and handling, while not sporty are well resolved. The car does not wallow and the steering is nicely weighted and direct, yet still a bit numb like nearly all systems these days. Oh, and the door slam on the Passat is far nicer too.

If you stuck on some Barry White and bred a Passat and Mazda6 you would get a Ford Mondeo.

langdang

Stallingrad wrote: »

If you stuck on some Barry White and bred a Passat and Mazda6 you would get a Ford Mondeo.

But who would be the daddy?

CianRyan

Sure wasn't the last six basically a Mondeo?

Tea 1000

Stallingrad wrote: »

As a Passat owner having driven the Mazda6 there is no doubt the suspension on the 6 feels more firm, the car is more sporty feeling (nice gearchange) than the Passat if that is your thing. Also a good deal more engine and road noise. But the B7 Passat is far more comfortable and refined, and it's steering and handling, while not sporty are well resolved. The car does not wallow and the steering is nicely weighted and direct, yet still a bit numb like nearly all systems these days. Oh, and the door slam on the Passat is far nicer too.

If you stuck on some Barry White and bred a Passat and Mazda6 you would get a Ford Mondeo.

I'd agree, it doesn't wallow around like the B5.5 before it. It's very well sound insulated, and a complete overall product. It's exactly the tool that it's owners ask it to be, it doesn't excite, but doesn't under perform either, grip levels are very decent. I think the B7 picked up a nice bit over the B6 in terms of interior, as I always thought the B6 was a let down. You're also correct in saying that the steering is numb like almost all of them, not many cars have decent steering these days. But the Passat is exactly the car as we described, and it doesn't provide feedback via the chassis or steering. That's not in it's list of "things to do".
The 6 is the most agile of all the FWD saloons, the chassis is excellent - even better than the Mondeo's, and though the older 6 was not that well insulated compared to the germans, the newer one was much improved. It's still not much firmer than the Passat, and over some bumpy surfaces the 6 suspension actually copes better, that's what I like most about it. The only thing I'd change about it is to give it the Ford's steering, which I think is just better weighted. But the 6 is a different league to the Passat for communicative driving. The thing people fail to realise is that you don't have to be thrashing a well sorted car to enjoy it.
As a side note, the new 6 is supposed to be as refined if not more so than the Passat. Haven't driven one yet though.

Tea 1000

CianRyan wrote: »

Sure wasn't the last six basically a Mondeo?

Not really.