The spyshots were right all along. This is the hatch version of the 2015 Mazda3. We’ll get an official look at the car today at 2:30 PM EST, along with technical details. Europe will get 1.5L and 2.0L gasoline SKYACTIV motors making 99, 118 and 163 horsepower respectively. Expect the 2.0 to make it here, along with the 2.5L engine in the CX-5 and Mazda6. Europe will also get the 2.2L diesel used in the 6, which would be a real treat, and a nice rival to the Golf TDI. No weight figures have been announced, but the new 3 should be a good deal lighter than the current model. No word on a sedan model either.
EDIT: The North America spec 2.0L makes 155 horsepower. No word on a North American diesel. The i-ELOOP regen braking/capacitor system will power the car’s entire electronics, as well as an all new HUD system. Production will take place first in Japan, then in Mexico starting in Spring, 2014. Sales start in September. Sedan to debut in 2 weeks. Weight should be down by a couple hundred pounds, wheelbase is up 2.4 inches while overall length is down by 1.8 inches.
I sure hope there is a sedan model because that hatch is horrible (and this is coming from someone who usually likes hatches)
It looks like someone took the front of the Mazda6 (which I love) and grafted the back end of a Lancer Hatchback onto it
It looks very tasteful to me, but Mazda will be proactively killing itself off if it doesn’t offer a sedan model in this very important segment. Americans are still hatchback-averse, primarily because hatchbacks (that don’t say MINI or FIAT across the back) seem to shout “economy”.
The back end is to my eyes very attractive in the hatch configuration.
Agreed. That’s one very nice arse on that car.
You’re right, its ghastly beyond belief. What little cargo space that was left, seems to have totally vanished. I never dreamed I would say this, but I’ll be seriously looking at a Jetta wagon for my next machine; or maybe a Forester. Either way, I am disappointed.
:-(
I am not a fan of the hatchback, because it has no cargo room. Try to carry four people and cargo in a sedan, it will be tight, but will fit. Not so much in a hatchback.
??
Wheelbase per wheelbase, how could any hatchback possibly carry less than its sibling sedan?
Even these dismally denuded new ones have at least marginally more cargo space than the sedan by virtue of the fact that the volume behind the rear seat is greater than that of the sedan’s trunk.
But I’m ready to believe that the perverse styling impulse to shrink and rake forward the rear window may have changed that.
I make the same argument against some hatchbacks. By some hatchbacks I mean the Golf, in comparison to the Jetta. Admittedly, it does not pass the wheelbase per wheelbase criteria – Golf is shorter than Jetta by about 3″. I would have to do some research to see if there is another example where the hatch is less practical in most cases, or if the Golf/Jetta is a corner case.
Given identical wheelbases, it would be pretty hard to make a hatch that carries less than its sedan sibling.
@Mandelorian, have you seen the inside of the hatchback in person?
The looks are totally subjective. I personally like the new Mazda3 hatch but I never liked the current one. The current and last generation hatches looked like a car that can’t decide if it wants to be a wagon or a hatch. It was much closer to a wagon. The new 3 also looks a little better than Focus. I like the Focus mid and rear sections, but the front end is too vanilla and cheapish looking.
ezeolla, other sites are reporting that Mazda will reveal the sedan soon. I expect to see info on it in 4-8 weeks. Also, they’ve said that specifics (like mpg) should come out at that time, too.
Looks like a baby Volvo.
Sure does. I like that.
You may be more right than you know. The Mazda 3 and the Volvo C30 were both built on Ford’s Global C platform. They are practically kissing cousins.
This is a ground-up redesign isn’t it?
This Mazda3 is built on the same platform as the CX-5 & Mazda6. So, not “ground-up” per se, but definitely unique to Mazda.
Love it. Like the interior, love the mileage (43+MPG?). Finally a replacement for my 06′ 3. I like the red also.
I’ll take the sedan though. With a 6 speed. Ahhhh…
Good things do come to those who wait……
I’ll need to see it in person to make sure, but it think this is positive – much better looking than the old car, shades of Alfa Guilietta and (weirdly) BMW Z4 in the design. The interior actually looks better done than that of the new Mazda6.
The major difference between this and the 6 interior is the screen. They have obviously taken to heart the criticism of the small screen size. If it is like the CX5 and 6 then it will be a high quality, tasteful interior. I hope it is roomy enough for 4/5 people (so not like the Focus!)
True, that small difference makes a big impression though, as does the aluminium dash strip rather than that maroon thing in the ‘6.
Agreed, they should add an aluminium strip option to the 6 – should be easy to do.
The strip in the 6 depends on the paint color. Obviously, the red ones have a red strip, but I think the rest have piano black.
The fact that they already have multiple options, a brushed aluminum one should be quite easy.
The current options on the 6 are either the black or red (only when you have red paint, one of six available colours). An aluminium finish would be a nice option, since it can look very dark in the cabin (even with the red, since it is quite a dark finish).
I actually liked the screen in the current generation Mazdas. Whatever the new 3 comes with, it will be obsolete 1-2 years later, as is the case with any other car. In the current CX-5, I can just buy an adapter kit and install an aftermarket Navi head unit. Don’t like it? Change it a year later. In the new 3 you’re stuck with that unit and its bugs forever.
I have a similar concern, except I just do not want a touch screen in any form. But, we have no idea if that screen are standard equipment or a part of a technology package. The pseudo-HUD does seem to be an extra for higher trims.
It’s possible that the base 3 will have a more standard stereo, and if so, that would mean you could pull out the tablet screen and install a regular system (with enough effort).
Why are all the other auto news sources referring to this as a 2014? Even the attached pictures say it’s a 2014
Because it will be launched later this year, rumour has it in September. The fall is usually the time the next model year is assigned. CX5 and 6 had their model year changes early for exceptional reasons (new model or powertrain upgrade). Otherwise they would have waited to the fall.
So, all the other news sources are wrong by calling it a 2014? Hmm…
No I am agreeing that it is a 2014. I had just noticed Derek calling it a 2015. If they made it a 2015 then it would be a long model year (much like they have that problem with the CX5 and 6).
Yeah, those two and a quarter year long years can really bite, especially come tax time
If they make it to market before Jan 1, it has to be a 2014. If it slips past Jan 1 (like the 6 did), then it has to be a 2015.
I will honestly admit I didn’t expect Mazda to get it out on time, so I thought it would be a 2015. Derek may have the same thinking.
I guess the new “in” thing in interior design is the tacked on look of the nav screen. Are they preparing us for a future where we have to bring our own tablet and plug it into the dash?
Part of that is it’s closer to eye level and so less dangerous to take your eye off the road to look at it.
But I’m sure another part of it is that it looks less awkward than a giant hole in the middle of the radio and HVAC controls if you don’t option in the nav system.
As a Ford Sync owner (2012 Focus) that’s exactly what I think the next step should be. Looking at the various attempts by manufacturers to integrate a large screen into the IP, I conclude that it can’t really be done — so just stick it on top of the dash like we used to do with our TomToms. And yes I think there’s a compelling case to be made for having a standard kind of dock for smartphones/tablets that will interface with the car for nav, music etc.
That would be great. There is no way car companies will figure out how to build an entertainment as usable as Apple, Microsoft, google and other professionals. A typical tablet costs under $500 and there will be a new better version every couple of years.
Looks very good in some of the photos, in the article cover photo it looks a little dorky. But it will answer the two main criticisms of the current model – exterior looks and interior looks/quality. So assuming it has good fuel economy, well priced and good handling dynamics it should be at the top of the compact class – much like the 6 and CX5 are.
There will be a sedan model because as others have said it is a large market here in the US and not that expensive to add on.
Having the 2.5 engine gives them a warm hatch – 180hp, before the MazdaSpeed version comes.
I wonder then the new Mazda 5 is coming now we have the bones it will sit on released.
Lacks “dat ass” of my 07… I wonder if you will only get 20k miles out of a set of tires with this one too…
I had an 07 as well and remember having to replace the tires at 20k miles. I got rid of the car with 40k miles on it and the tires looked like they would need to be replaced within the next 10k miles. I don’t know why that car ate through tires. Although I didn’t exactly takes many turns slowly
Aggressive suspension geometry and alignment, to encourage that non-slow turning.
Worth it
And spec’ing sticky, performance tires instead of low-rolling resistance, touring tires.
My Protege5 went through tires consistently at 30k mi. I swapped wheels to get a longer wear life tire, and so far these new ones have gotten 40k mi with plenty still left in them.
I’ve been getting 40K+ out of tires, and that is with some toe out in the rear end for autocross purposes. Don’t know why others have issues with tires.
My 02 Protege ate tires as well. Probably just how Mazda sets up their suspensions.
Switch out the smiley grille and I wouldn’t argue if you told me it was the next generation Impreza that Subaru went to last year instead of the blocky one.
Over styled and generic at the same time.
Until I see proof that Mazda has addressed the corrosion issues, one of these will never see my driveway.
Agreed.
Also, as far as the styling is concerned, just wanted to chime in with YUCK.
Nice car but can we have some pictures of one that didn’t have its roof flattened by a boulder please? Especially in the rear where the cargo space is supposed to be.
I love, love love, love hatches which makes this all the more painful.
From reports the cargo space has increased.
I don’t doubt it. That’s what’s so disgusting, the increase only gives you this. Just a bonsai-ed shooting brake.
I must be missing something because I don`t understand your complaint. They have managed to increase both interior space and cargo space in a 2 inch shorter vehicle (wider though). So the looks haven`t hit space.
Where did you get specs from? The extra width better translate to shoulder room, or else it is a big problem. These C-segment cars taking up lots of space in lanes and parking spots despite being cramped (Focus) is unfortunate.
As for the interior room, you can have more measured cubic inches of space while being less usable. The rear glass is going to offset the main advantages of a hatch – the ability to carry tall and bulky objects.
@mike978
Rear visibility and height of the hatch opening have been so greatly diminished in all hatches since 2010.
We have an ’08 Rio5 that I can get a 55 gal. waste container into and shut the hatch. I take small loads of yard waste to the dump that way.
No way could I do that with the new Rio5 or this Mazda. But I want to replace the Kia for my wife soon and a Mazda3 is one of the cars I’d like her to test.
Should become a moot point for me as should the sequestration scare pass for my department I’ll buy a Grand Caravan and then I won’t care if the our second vehicle can only fit my 4’11” wife and her Baggallinis.
I agree the rear visibility could be an issue. I made my comments on usable space based on what autoblog and whatcar.co.uk mentioned – the longer wheelbase, greater width both of which have lead to more shoulder room and more rear legroom. Assuming headroom is acceptable (and I don`t think Mazda would make a basic error like that) then the new 3 should have more interior room than the current one. The cargo space has increased by 10 litres (UK measurement).
It still looks like someone face when they go “durrr I’m stoopid”, usually imitating someone fairly intelligent.
That back end looks utterly useless while the front looks like an uglier, stupider Dart. Now I’m just waiting for the Miata to get this same “cooporate grille” tacked onto it.
Positives? I bet it’ll be fun to drive for a somewhat bigger FF.
Lets wait for the actually tests and reviews because Mazda don`t normally make elemental errors like being useless functionality.
True, even the RX-8 was pretty practical interior wise, I’m just expecting a hard time backing up those new Mazdas.
I expect visibility to be on par with a panel van.
The one thing that stands out is how hard it is to decipher how long the front overhang is from the angles given. Most of the angles seem to accentuate the overhang, which is there, I suppose, to make space for the long-tube exhaust manifold required for the active scavenging needed to keep the high-compression SkyActiv motor happy.
Other than that, looks very nice. Very curvy. Interesting interplay of lines on the flanks that you won’t see anywhere else. I like the subtle interplay of parallel and intersecting waves on the flanks. Much more interesting than the rather generic rising shoulder on most cars nowadays.
Overhang is caused/necessitated by the fact that FWD cars perform best with the engine over or in front of the front axle. The long exhaust caused the increase in hood length & the setback of the passenger compartment (cab rearward).
With the SkyActiv engine, the intake is in front, the exhaust is in the back. The long exhaust header forces the front axle forward away from the firewall, which is good for weight distribution and styling. The Mazda3’s front overhang appears shorter than average.
This will sell very well (for a Mazda), even in hatchback form. Looks quite nice to me, and Mazda is miles ahead in driving dynamics compared to their Japanese & Korean rivals.
Very nice looking new 3. I owned a 2006 and loved it. The interior is fantastic IMO. Beats the hell out of the interior in the ST that sits in my driveway. So simple, so clean.
I’m wondering if there will be a Speed3?
My assumption is that they would have a Speed 3 and probably a Speed 6. Not just because they have a driving heritage to support but they need a new Skyactive engine for the next gen CX9. Since that engine would produce somewhere in the 280hp region (like the current CX9) that engine can then be spread over other, high profit models like the Speeds.
Interesting insight about using a future CX-9 engine in speed versions. I’ve heard that the 2.2L diesel is going to find a home in the CX-9 (fuel efficiency is its biggest flaw), but that engine doesn’t have that much power. Mazda has said there will be no new V6s, and also that the SkyActiv engines aren’t intended for boost, so I’m not sure where a new, high power engine will come from, unless they plan to keep a turbo’d, non-SkyActive engine in the stable.
I expect the Speed3 to take a year off and then come back. I think it would be wise for them to make a Speed6, but they may be too scared by past (lack of) sales.
I can certainly see a diesel for the CX9, but it would still need a gasoline engine. CX9 sales are sizable for Mazda and the transaction price is probably close to twice that of the 3 (their largest seller).
Would it be possible to have a 3 or 3.5L skyactive I-4? They have 1.5, 2.0 and 2.5 already. I assume the engines would be large but technically is it possible?
A Speed 6 may be more likely now there is no V6 model. But the Speed 3 is the most likely because it sells OK in Europe (where a Speed 6 wouldn`t as much).
Yup. Looks like a Mazda. Oh and it’s got what? i-ELOOP? But look at that grill!
That’s a nice looking car. I hope they bring it over in that shade of red. I’ve seen Mazda 6’s running around town in a similar shade of red and they are absolutely stunning.
That red is called “Soul Red” and it is available on the CX5 and 6 now in the US so would seem likely it is available on the 3 in the US.
Whatcar.co.uk has a good article on the car. It is for sale in December in the UK. If the US does get it a month or two later then it could be a 2015 after all!
An Australian site claimed that it will be released there just after the new year. From the internet chatter, it seems the US will be one of the first to get it (in Sep/Oct).
They did mention the sedan at one point in the press release:
“Yet such style is not without purpose as the five-door and sedan models achieve best-in-class coefficient of drag (Cd) at 0.275 and 0.255, respectively, when equipped with i-ELOOP and an active air shutter.”
And if the 2.5L SKYACTIV has fuel economy on par with the new 6, I’m seriously interested.
I would assume the 3 with the 2.5 engine would be a bit better than the 6 since it is lighter and possibly even more aerodynamic.
I don’t see how i-ELOOP would help the aerodynamics, thats just a regenerative braking system.
The active air shutter wouldn’t be neccesary if the styling was a bit more practical oriented.
I’m guessing the i-ELOOP and air shutter are just bundled together in an option package. (If you have the air shutter, you also have i-ELOOP, even if the latter doesn’t really affect drag.)
Why don’t the air shutters stay closed?
They sound like something that could’ve been integrated with the cars design from the get-go.
For cooling purposes when you’re tooling around town.
i-ELOOP has nothing to do with aerodynamics, it is an energy system that helps reduce fuel usage and improve fuel economy. The active shutters also save fuel, hence why they are bundled together.
“The i-ELOOP regen braking/capacitor system will power the car’s entire electronics…”
What could possibly go wrong?
Is there a word if the new Mazda 3 will be sold with the new 2.5L engine from Mazda6?
Yes it will.
Will it still have the same hp or will they detune it?
Press release says 184hp @ 5700, 185 lb-ft @ 3250. Believe that’s the same as in the 6.
Its around that yea, thanks for the quick response.
I’ll definitely trade in my 2010 Mazda3 HB for this when it comes out.
Me too!
I’m on a 2011 HB, I also had a 2006 HB, I love this car, now with the new 2.5 liter, should be a blast to drive…and no…I don’t care about MPG, let me enjoy myself!
I like it overall, but the rear glass is too steeply raked. I liked the Protege5 and ’04 to ’08 Mazda3 – closer to a mini wagon. I don’t expect this hatch to be especially useful, and rear visibility looks brutal.
Sedan please. Though I have concerns about how that rear door is going to look on a sedan.
If people want a wagon then the Mazda 5 would be the option. The 5 could take on the Jetta wagon, with the added benefit of holding 6 if necessary.
The current 5 just looks hideous, so something along these lines would be a great improvement.
The Mazda 5 is (correctly) marketed to the “please don’t make me buy a van, but my family needs one” crowd. Mazda really doesn’t have anything resembling a wagon anymore in the US, which is a shame. Because of their low market-share they can’t take risks on niche vehicles, otherwise we’d probably have the Mazda 6 wagon here already (which I would happily purchase.)
I’m still driving a Protege5 and it’s now one of the most uniquely shaped/sized vehicles on the road. The closest equivalent is probably the outgoing Audi A3.
From the A-pillar back, it looks great.
From the A-pillar forward, it looks pretty good.
Unfortunately, those two sections appear to be from different cars.
Very nice. Mazda seems to be by far the best Japanese company out there right now. They make decent looking cars that are fun to drive. I think if you are into hatches – I look at the GTI first. But they get pricey. At a lower price point this is probably the one to get.
If you like a sedan – I think the Dart is the best looking but the powertrain is too pathetic. So with the 2.5 liter – that’s probably the best option in that segement as well.
I agree, they have shown it is possible to manufacture reliable cars that look good, drive well and are fuel efficient. Some of the pro-“good engineering” crowd should be pleased – no CVT, low weight, no turbo charging and achievable EPA fuel economy.
What’s so great about the E-Loop system? It certainly won’t make the brakes work any better, and brake feel is what I really care about. When I want to drive a car that turns on a generator instead of applying brakes to disks, I drive a Toyota Prius. In a Mazda3, I expect a nice linear brake feel.
“Braking”, not brakes. The system simply scavenges energy from the rotating drive shafts while breaking.
Capturing energy from braking means that the alternator doesn’t always need to spin, which means less parasitic losses and more power to the wheels.
Not convinced yet of Mazda’s new design direction. The original Shinari concept car that led to the Mazda6 and the CX5. The concept car was a long and low car and its design translated well to the Mazda6. The tall CX5 surprisingly as well. But those same lines make the Mazda3 look less than sporty with too much of a rounded look. The characterless hood compounds this as does the very upright grill.
I actually like the last generation’s design, it’s aggressive and unique. I think Mazda took the criticism too close to heart and toned down their design language too much.
The interior though is a success and big improvement over the design direction in the Mazda6 and CX5 which is much too conservative with an awful double din aftermarket look to the navigation system.
I think this looks brilliant and if it drives as well or better than my current 3, I’ll probably have one in the garage for commuting.
The current front end should be a keeper for the line: elegant, readily identifiable, and avoids the “top slit” styling many others use. After a couple gens of “front maws” the current iteration adds a sophisticated look to every vehicle.
You are right. It should be Mazda’s equivalent of Alfa’s split grill or BMW’s kidney’s.
Mazda3 vs. Alfa Romeo Giulietta
There is some resemblance, like the Mazda3 better because its front axle is further forward.
Mazda3
http://www.autoblog.com/photos/2014-mazda3-live-reveal/med/#photo-5992912/
Alfa Giulietta
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2b/Alfa_Romeo_Giulietta_front-1_20100704.jpg
So, as owner of 2011 Mazda 3 Hatch – seems like mine has more useful trunk space and the reviews for the new Mercedes CLA (with same media screen stuck on the dash like some after-thought) are not to friendly (Tom-Tom, anyone?).
Regardless, very Alfa Romeo of Mazda. Have to compare to the new GTI next summer.