I'll add to your toyota is overpriced:
 
whats up with the matrix vs vibe pricing?
 
and xrs vs a gt costs nearly 1000 dollars more, for what? i've tried to find what makes the toyota 1000 dollars more, but I haven't been able to.
 
both are nearly identical, yet the GT comes with leather seating surfaces, and the matrix claims to have EBD, which I'm un-sure of in the vibe.

All the reviewers had basically the same opionions of the cars, they just used different language in their essays. Very consistent opionions.
 
It is really disappointing to see what Toyota did, or didn't do, to the Corolla. Toyota made the impression this model would be a a new model with a fresh design. I don't think I have read single complimentary review of this car, anywhere.
 
The Civic turned out to be the BMW 3-series of the econo class (i.e. is first or second place in every measurable category). The looks are a bit polarizing though.
 
I have never driven the Mazda 3. I would like to though, and will be interested in the new model once they address some of the current models NVH issues.

Really cool article Karl - a great read.

So what type of Consumer Comparison is next? I'd be interested in seeing some kind of small wagon or hatch comparison with the Matrix/Vibe, Chevy HHR, Nissan Versa, Dodge Caliber, stuff like that.
 
Also like the interviews with all the consumers, pretty cool.

"The common reaction to expert editorial opinion is something along the lines of, "Yeah, that's just because all automotive journalists are really just frustrated race drivers, or at least biased enthusiasts, who care more about carving corners and soft-touch interior materials than real-world consumer needs." These consumer comparison tests are pretty much annihilating that argument"
  
Wow. Here's how IL would've rated these cars: #1 Mazda3 #2 Civic #3 Corolla. The 3's ride is extremely busy with 17" wheels and the consumers made note of this in their evalutation. The autowriters would've praised such a lively ride and questioned why every other economy car doesn't handle like a poor man's BMW.
 
Regardless of the supposed congruence between the average Joe and "expert" opinions in easily predictable comparison tests, in the overall scheme of things, it doesn't really matter. The Corolla will continue to be a selling success no matter what Edmunds, Motor Trend, Car and Driver have to say. Reputations are built over time(as I have been told numerous times), whether they be positive or negative, and the droves of people who continue to drive "dull" Toyotas will continue to buy them in the future. Toyota sold 52,826 Corollas last month compared to 53,299 Civics so seems to me that regular consumers think they are evenly yoked. There are certain families who will only buy a certain brand (usually Honda or Toyota) no matter what. I was just told of a person who's wife wants a new Pilot and he's considering the purchase despite the fact that he hasn't even seen the new model. Why? Well because he owns a previous generation Pilot so the new one has to better and even more satisfying.
  
The question should be what relevance do car tests really have? How many people make decisions based on these tests? Do they even matter outside of the reader body of enthusiats? Is anyone going to set up cones and drive their car around an empty parking lot? I think not.

"I've long felt that many Toyota products sell as much or more on reputation and perceived quality than on any real-world, verifiable superiority."
For the most part, I agree with that statement. However, these types of tests do not factor in long term reliability. Based on my personal experience with Toyota, the reputation, over the long haul, is well earned. We have owned several Camrys, all have been much more reliable over the long term than any of the domestics we owned during the same time frame. Now the caveat; all the Camrys were driven by my wife. The difference could be in the way I drive versus the way she drives.
And based on articles and comments on this site and others, Toyota seems to be slipping.

I agree with daytona_500. With all of these reports out now about people downsizing their vehicles, lets see a comparison test of the smaller cars on the market with supposedly good utility. How good is their utility overall and compared to each other. Will people discover that the HHR would be adequate for their needs instead of their Tahoe? I'd also like to see how the various offerings measure up against each other, HHR, Mazda 3 hatch, Matrix/Vibe, and so forth.
 
You could probably leave the Caliber at home though... : )

"The common reaction to expert editorial opinion is something along the lines of, "Yeah, that's just because all automotive journalists are really just frustrated race drivers, or at least biased enthusiasts, who care more about carving corners and soft-touch interior materials than real-world consumer needs." These consumer comparison tests are pretty much annihilating that argument."
 
Wow, that is a stretch. First of all I have NEVER seen a comparison in which the civic beats the 3 so I'm lost as to how the consumer results prove that automotive journalists are on target. If all automotive journalists are on the same page I must have missed it because there seems to be a diversity of opinions out there. Almost every magazine that has compared the Viper to the Z06 feels the Z06 is superior but IL ranked the Viper higher. Most publications feel the 2008 Camry is an also ran but MT declared it best in class. C&D and IL claim the Accord is nearly perfect but MT has said its been surpassed by the new Malibu.
 
I dont see how the results of the consumer midsize car comparison jive with IL's resuls except that both declared the Accord the winner. The consumers said the Malibu was a CLOSE second to the Accord and a few people liked the Malibu best. IL declared the Malibu a nice effort but a distant 3rd behind the perfect Accord and 2nd place Altima. The consumers didn't seem to find many qualitative differences between the Malibu and accord but IL made it clear the Accord was superior in almost every way and was never in danger of losing it's top spot.
 
In summation, the results of these two consumer tests do nothing to prove that automtive journalists perfectly understand the will of the people. The fact that Toyota is the most successful import brand in the US shows that what consumers value has little in common with what auto scrives value. That said, Toyota vehicles look average when compared directly to competitors. Fortunately for Toyota most of their flock doesn't bother to examine all options and blindly buy Toyota. They may consider a Honda, but thats about it.

"The question should be what relevance do car tests really have? How many people make decisions based on these tests? Do they even matter outside of the reader body of enthusiats? Is anyone going to set up cones and drive their car around an empty parking lot? I think not."
 
They arent that relevant and thus Toyota just laughs whenever its vehicles do poorly in comparison tests. People will accept results from a car magazine that fit their preconceived notions but if they fail to ratify those notions they will ignore the results. If comparos show imports constantly beating lowly domestics those results may be used as proof of standing in the automotive world. If a Toyota finished poorly people will simply say "but that test doesnt include legendary Toyota quality and resale value. I care more about reliability than sharp steering, good looks, quality materials or handling".
 
Numerous vehicles that have been praised by the press have floundered (mazda6, Mazda5, Golf/rabbit, Magnum, GTO, SRX, etc.) while Toyota continues to sell record numbers of mediocre camrys and corollas to folks that could care less about styling and handling. As long as millions of folks buy into the concept that only Toyota and Honda can deliver a reliable car they will be able to produce ANYTHING and sell it easily. The new 6 is going to be better than the Camry in every single way and will be lucky to acheive 1/5 of camry sales.

"People will accept results from a car magazine that fit their preconceived notions but if they fail to ratify those notions they will ignore the results."
 
For once, 1487 knows from which he speaks.

90.2% vs. 60% (Mazda3 vs. Civic)
 
In the 2006 comparison test of the Mazda3 and Honda Civic, those were the results given by the editors here. The Mazda3 absolutely stomped the Civic, and was being mentioned as clearly the superior car in just about every sentence.
 
I completely agree with the comment by chavis10 and 1487. There really isn't much more that I can add to them. I'll echo the same statements that I have before: Having sold cars (including Mazda at every dealership I have sold at), I have found that, in general, consumers find Mazda products too stiff and too loud. They prefer softer, quieter cars... dynamics are some of their last thoughts. However, that badge on the hood is usually more important than any other trait. And because of these, Toyota will continue to laugh all the way to bank for many years to come.

I'm surprised to hear the Corolla is "pricey." Is that new with this generation? A few years ago all my friends were graduating from college and buying Corollas - mostly because you could get one with A/C and the S's cosmetic kit for $15,500, and you couldn't seem to get a Civic with A/C for the same price (a few bought Mazda3's, but not many because the key 'performance' figure in most of my friend's minds was mpg). No one I know ever bought a Corolla XLE though.
 
I hope some of the non-Honda/Toyota companies realize how many people look at mpg ratings [i]first[/i] (even two years ago) and then look at the rest of the car. Having a larger standard engine isn't necessarily a good thing.

"The question should be what relevance do car tests really have? How many people make decisions based on these tests? Do they even matter outside of the reader body of enthusiats?"
  
You'd be surprised - I subscribe to 6 car magazines and read the Edmunds blogs daily, so you can inagine that the various tests influence my automotive decision making. I am known among my clients, coworkers, friends, and family to be a psychotic car enthusiast. Many of these people come to me for my opinion when they are looking to purchase a car. Do they always take my advice? No - but they do pay attention to what I have to say.
  
I am only one person, but my opinion plays a part in 5 - 10 car purchases in any given year. Assuming that my situation is not unique, I would argue that these sorts of comparison tests have relevance well beyond the core body of readers.

SOW for compact sedans? I am surprised that you guys managed to do this with straight faces for the whole time...
 
Why not give them the keys and let them drive around Metro LA for a day? I am not saying the ranking will be different but I'll bet that's what 99.9% of the people use their compact sedans for...
 
Just for your info, the last time I went to track day at SOW the car that doesn't fit that place the most was mine, and I drive an IS350 with Eibach springs...

jstandefer - I completely agree on the Mazda comment. Mazdas are for true driving enthusiasts, but Nissans tend to strike a better balance, particularly this newest generation. Honda's a close #2.
 
Speaking of that - let's hope that a Nissan is included in the next rotation of stuff. Or maybe a Hyundai.
 
1487- I always find your efforts to magnify statements made on the margin to make the domestics look better. Most of the time, you end up more or less repeating what's already been said. I highly doubt there are anywhere near as many domestic-haters as you make it seem, either in journalism or on these boards.

Well, Karl, I'm surprised, even shocked, that the Honda Civic won. Having driven both in 2007, I preferred the Mazda 3 hands down! Granted: the Mazda 3 I drove was the GT model....and I drove the hatchback, so I found it spacious and luxurious. But the Mazda 3 just felt nicer to drive. Besides, I hated the dash design of the Civic....I thinkk the exterior styling is also ugly on the 4-door and looks far better on the 2-door......the only reason I would choose a Civic over a Mazda 3 is fuel economy!
 
I'm also very surprised some of them found the Mazda 3 noisy (although Chavis10 has alluded to a noise problem in the past). When I test-drove them, I rated both the same in the quietness department. I found both cars annoyingly quiet!.....my Protege5 sounds so much better!
 
I also felt you had the wrong demographic testing the vehicles. Only one guy was 27 (he also chose the Honda!), and one woman 35, but the the others were in their 40s or higher.....one was 68! As far as I know, Americans over 40 overwhelmingly prefer the mid-sized class! Since the Civic (apart from it's terrible dash styling) more closely behaves like a mid-sized car, it's no surprise it won!
 
Actually, the consumer comparison is not that consistent with expert comparisions. Just about every comparison test I've read from Edmunds' and Motor Trend places the Mazda 3 above the Civic.
Although I would say that the results are consistent with your personal opinions (and those of CR): you have in your KARL ON CARS blog consistently rated the Civic higher than the 3. So I would say you probably have a better understanding of what consumers want. What is your secret, Karl? :) Share, share..... :)
 
Karl, I will show this test to my friend who recently bought a Corolla. When he was buying, I tried to get him to consider the Mazda 3 and the Civic. No, he wouldn't: "Toyota is the best...they're very reliable....Mazda's aren't reliable!". Well, he should read this....LOL! But then maybe I shouldn't show this to him: he loves his Corolla!
 
Personally, I would rate Mazda 3 a comfortable 1st, Civic second and Corolla 3rd. (I've driven the prev-gen Corolla but not the new model.....all indications are that the new one isn't better, anyway!)

I'm not convinced about Mazda's reliability, and I say that as the owner of one. They're not that great at getting good mileage out of small engines, either. They're only perfect for the 10% of us who put the drive above those things... but Honda's not far behind in that aspect and they're clearly superior in reliability and mileage. And anyone who likes dolphins should like the Civic sedan's styling.
 
It was refreshing to read the mother of four saying that the Civic would work for a family of five or smaller. I grew up that way and it wasn't ideal, but everyone else seems to think you need a Suburban once you have three kids!

You know looking back, there was a comparison between the Mazda 3 and Honda Civic done back about two years ago, where the Mazda 3 kicked the Civic's butt so its interesting to see how the consumers overwhelmingly went with the Civic here.
 
Karl I got a few questions for you.
 
1. Roughly how many responses for the comparison test did you get?
2. Did you hand pick these six people?
3. Any idea what kind of vehicles will be featured in the next consumer test?

"It was refreshing to read the mother of four saying that the Civic would work for a family of five or smaller. I grew up that way and it wasn't ideal, but everyone else seems to think you need a Suburban once you have three kids!"
 
Here here!! I agree completely carlisimo.
 
I still wish that the Lancer was involved in this test. Also, it would have been nice to see an American small car - Cobalt, or something like that.
 
The new Civic is pretty ugly imo, but I haven't driven one so I can't speak to that aspect.
 
"People will accept results from a car magazine that fit their preconceived notions but if they fail to ratify those notions they will ignore the results."
 
Oh, the irony.

"For once, 1487 knows from which he speaks."
 
well if you say that it MUST be true. Lord knows that there are only two types of opinions out there: yours and ones that should be dismissed. I wish I lived in a bubble where I never encountered ideas that weren't 100% congruent with my own but alas I don't have that luxury. I would hate to know what happens at Edmunds.com if someone disagrees with you although I'm sure that rarely happens based on how you belittle and insult those who disagree with you here.
 
" I highly doubt there are anywhere near as many domestic-haters as you make it seem, either in journalism or on these boards."
 
You arent reading enough material. Give me a break. In the current issue of C&D they contradict an earlier review of the initial Cobalt SS by saying the steering is "still numb" and indicating the first car was a mediocre effort. C&D absolutely gushed over the first SS and praised its handling, braking, engine AND steering feel. They also comment on the "dopey" wing even though the Sti and Lancer have similar spoilers. Its kind of similar to the "new" conventionial wisdom that the Aura was a half baked effort even though there was effusive praise when the car was new. Ever since the Malibu came out the press has been Aura bashing as if its not 95% similar to the Malibu. I've been in both cars and with the exception of the dashboards the cars are virtually the same. Its like the media has a rule that says you cant admit that GM has more than one competitive sedan on sale at one time.

1487... I would add, though, that i've seen edmunds pull the same thing.
 
go find the first drive of the new 2009 fit. Makes it sound like the current fit is a crap bucket, when every review until then praised the car.

"go find the first drive of the new 2009 fit. Makes it sound like the current fit is a crap bucket, when every review until then praised the car."
 
yeah that is very common. Typically you only read complaints about a preferred model (usually import) when the new one comes out. The old accord was perfect until the new came out and suddenly you heard about the shortcomings of the old one.
 
What I was referring to is total contradiction and C&D is famous for this. In their first drives or road tests they will praise a model only to contradict their earlier statements in a comparison test. With regards to cars like the Fit I think its more of an omission of faults because the author is so enamored with the car. Once the replacement model comes out they will acknowledge faults of the old car. For C&D to say the Cobalt's steering was spot on only to now say its "numb" and disconnected is just ridiculous. If you follow C&D you know they make fun of any letters that call them out on inconsistency and then print 5 other letters from people telling them they are the greatest thing since sliced bread. I've called them biased for years but now others are up in arms and saying they are in league with BMW because the M3 beat the GT-R. No one should ever be shocked at a BMW coming in first in that magazine regardless of the caliber of the opponent.

"Once the replacement model comes out they will acknowledge faults of the old car. "
 
In some cases, perhaps flaws with the previous model are not apparant until the new one corrects them. As for the contradictions, I cannot comment. I, for one, think the Cobalt SS looks pretty sharp, even if everyone on the block has one.

another enjoyable comparision test! it's a lot of fun to watch the video interviews & "regular person" thoughts.
 
I think Edmunds has something unique and really looks to be trying to help the buyers make informed choices.
I really enjoy the blogs as they seem much more candid and these consumer comparos are a lot of fun. I hope you guys continue with more of them!

"It was refreshing to read the mother of four saying that the Civic would work for a family of five or smaller. I grew up that way and it wasn't ideal, but everyone else seems to think you need a Suburban once you have three kids!"
 
Agreed. I grew up that way too, in a far smaller car: 1979 VW Golf! Nobody thought the car was small!
 
I agree fully with the others that once a new model is released, the old model is treated by the auto journalists as some crap they never liked. The 2009 Mazda 6 First Drive article on InsideLine is a perfect example!
 
Carlisimo, as a Mazda owner I think they're reliable. (But then the Protege has been one of Mazda's most reliable cars, so I may be using an atypical example.) The only non-typical thing I've had to do is replace one of the door locks.....but all the "critical" thinks have been reliable......my car is a MY 2002.

I have an '02 Miata. The critical things have been reliable, but that'd be true in any 4 year old car (except maybe an early Focus). I've had a number of little issues, including the door locks. I haven't replaced those though, because they only stop working for 3-4 weeks at a time. Then they work again.
 
My parents had an old 323 that didn't do so great. Until recently they always bought 10+ year old beaters, and the Hondas and Toyotas always did great, especially with the little stuff like interior trim bits. The 323 and the Nissans we've had... not so nice inside at that age. After driving old Corollas and Tercels, I was surprised to buy a 2002 higher-end car and find more things going wrong than in those Toyotas. And that's fine with me, I'd still choose the Miata. But I don't tell people that Mazda reliability is up there with the Big 2, nor that I'm a normal consumer.
 
As for mileage, I get 25mpg max from a 1.8L, 142hp engine that requires premium, in a 2350lb car. It's a 6-speed that's tightly wound, but it doesn't rev any higher than the 4-speed manuals I used to drive. The Mazda3 disappoints too. 4mpg fewer than the Civic on the highway, in exchange for an additional 8-10hp that few 3i shoppers are going to care about. I think most people in this segment look at mpg numbers before hp.

Excellent review format! I hope Edmunds uses this format for other car catagories too.
 
Regarding the influence of car reviews, I'm more likely to test drive a car that gets good reviews while it's unlikely that I'll test drive a car that consistently finishes near the bottom. There are too many good cars available to waste time driving inferior ones. I have a positive bias toward Honda and Nissan, but good reviews for some new GM models like the Malibu probably merit a test drive. Generally poor reviews for Chrysler midsize cars probably means that the only time I'll "test drive" them is as a rental car.

I'd rate them this way:
 
1. Civic (overall great package, styling may be a little too futuristic)
 
2. Corolla (a little Japanese Buick, new model = over priced)
 
3. Mazda 3 (sporty but long of tooth, disappointing fuel economy)
 
I'm a 51 year old living in the midwest, driving a Mazda 626, Toyota Sienna, and Plymouth Neon (all from 2001). I've owned Honda (2), Toyota (3), VW, Nissan, Saab, Chevy, and Ford. Quality of dealership in this small market is critical. Of these 3, Toyota is clearly at the top and Mazda is just as clearly at the bottom. Depreciation must also be considered in the intelligent ownership decision and Mazda would obviously trail Honda and Toyota.
 
At my age comfort is nice and most of the time I'm driving like grandma, but I'm not dead yet either so sportiness does count for something.
 
The new Corolla engine is an improvement, but the rest of the changes from the previous generation Corolla is disappointing. The fuel mileage of the Mazda 3 is is no better than 80% of the market out there, and so is a deal breaker with current gas prices. Civic looks a bit dull, but is completely competent car and a most logical choice (unless perhaps one looks at the Fit).

Wow, Carlisimo, that's some experience! I have never driven that many cars. In fact, my current car ('02 Protege5) is the first car I've owned!
 
Back when I was little (late '70s, '80s) growing up in West Africa, Nissan (well, Datsun) and Toyota were considered the most robust cars..........both reliability and longevity-wise. They were routinely used for commercial purposes: as taxis, mini-busses and pickup trucks. Some European cars (eg. Peugeot, Mercedes, some VW) scored high on the longevity list, but not necessarily reliability. Honda was a non-entity until the '90s, and Honda don't have commercial vehicles, so they don't enjoy the reputation for toughness that NIssan and Toyota enjoy.
 
In talking about Mazda reliability, well, I didn't exactly mean to say they had legendary Toyota/Nissan/Honda reliability, but simply that they're reliable to the point where I wouldn't hold reliability against them......I've been annoyed at having to replace my door lock, but I haven't had to do any other unscheduled maintenance....knock on wood!
 
With the Mazda 3's fuel economy, I think it's more of a strategic/engineering decision than the car being bad econocar. I believe Mazda intended for the Mazda 3 to slot between the Corolla/Civic and and entry-level midsized car: faster/sportier while offering not as much fuel economy. (Why else would they 2.0L and 2.3L engines with no advanced V-TEC-like technologies instead of a miserly advanced 1.8L.) Hence, I don't hold the Mazda 3's relatively bad fuel economy against it........if fuel economy is the utmost priority I will go for the Civic and the Mazda 3 wouldn't be on my list at all.
Unfortunately for Mazda, the market appears to consider all three cars to be in the same class....and who can blame them when the Mazda 3 is not larger?
 
Lastly, I've always had a theory that older cars were more solidly built than cars these days are. I mean, I've seen cars, including our own Datsun, take serious abuse of terrible "roads" and overloading in my childhood. Somehow, I always doubt modern cars can withstand that kind of abuse. I also have the feeling that modern cars cannot last for 30 years, whereas cars built in the '60s and '70s could. Karl, what do you think?

"The question should be what relevance do car tests really have? How many people make decisions based on these tests? Do they even matter outside of the reader body of enthusiats? Is anyone going to set up cones and drive their car around an empty parking lot? I think not."
 
Chavis, I for sure made my decisions based on Edmunds, MSN Autos and Car-and-Driver reviews when I was buying my '02 Protege5. Edmunds and Car-and-Driver rated the Protege very highly, and I liked its styling a lot more than the Corolla or Civic. I didn't know much about reliability, but MSN Autos had given the '99 to '03 models full points for reliability. Lastly, I talked to a friend who owns an '02 model, and he said it was reliable! It's fuel economy was on the low side, but still manageable. (The more economical Civic was pricier, anyway, and not as sporty or stylish......the Mazda was more worthy of my money.)
 
"Is anyone going to set up cones and drive their car around an empty parking lot? I think not."
 
That is the whole point! Edmunds tests my car for me so I don't have to! Just like EPA estimates are a guide, Edmunds slalom and other tests are a guide for me.....at least they tell me that my car will handle well!
With Edmunds having done the hard work, all I have to do when I test-drive is to make sure the cars is comfortable enough and I like it! Without Edmunds car buying would be much harder!

black, theres very few cars from the 70's on the road today,
 
even fewer from the 60's. The ones you see have generally been babied. or restored

"In some cases, perhaps flaws with the previous model are not apparant until the new one corrects them. "
 
In a market this competitive that argument doesnt hold water. If a car like the Accord has too much road noise it will be apparent as soon as you step into a quieter competing car. You dont need Honda to debut a new Accord to figure out the old one lacked sound deadening. Journalists play favorites with car brands and nameplates. In some reviews they will tell you straight up they doubt certain cars based on the nameplate and plan to love other cars based on the same thing.
 
"The Mazda3 disappoints too. 4mpg fewer than the Civic on the highway, in exchange for an additional 8-10hp that few 3i shoppers are going to care about. I think most people in this segment look at mpg numbers before hp."
 
You are correct but the media ignores the 3's mileage due to its handling. Compare the sales of the 3 to the corolla and civic and that will show you how the public's opinion lines up with the media's opinion. I like the 3 a lot, but it falls short in some critical areas (ride quality and mileage) that mean a lot to compact car buyers. Journalists dont pay for gas and place the most value on steering feel and handling so they could care less about the 3's lack of efficiency and thus it wins virtually every comparison.

"Quality of dealership in this small market is critical. Of these 3, Toyota is clearly at the top and Mazda is just as clearly at the bottom."
 
mcmanus , I'm guessing that relates to your personal experience. I believe it to be more dependent on the dealership and it's owners than with a particular brand. For any given brand, there are good dealerships and there are evil dealerships.

^Interesting. I've been driving Toyotas since 1999 and have never been pleased with their dealerships (in four cities and two states). Just one of the reasons both our new cars will not bear the stylized "T." That said, I agree that dealership quality can vary considerably from market to market.

"....but it falls short in some critical areas (ride quality and mileage) that mean a lot to compact car buyers."
 
1487, is ride quality really a "critical area" for compact car buyers? Using me as an example, NO! Ride quality is a much more important issue for a family or luxury vehice........but in a compact car all I want is adequate ride quality: if it doesn't "beat me up" it's great, especially if it offers class-leading sportiness! A compact car is a trade-off, really.
 
I think the reason the media "ignores" the Mazda 3's fuel economy is that in general "enthusiasts" and "experts" have different priorities from normal people. I've always given the example of movies........most of the movies I like would get a C or worse from movie critics.
In the Mazda 3's case, I think the media "ignored" its fuel economy because it offers more power and sportiness....and while the fuel economy is still slightly disappointing, it's not bad at all for its performance!
 
I think the Mazda 3 is not an econocar for those with mileage as their main priority. The Civic and Corolla are not its direct competition. The Lancer is.

Yes, my dealership comments were meant to apply only to this area. We have the state's largest Toyota dealer and for good reason. They sell Lexus and Scion as well. The Honda dealer was spun off from a Chevy dealer and sold years ago, but sales/service attitudes have slipped. Mazda is sold from a GM dealership with all the ineptitude and apathy towards customers that I've come to expect from fat, lazy, dull GM.
 
Mazda 3 engines are simply supplied from major share owner Ford. These engines are only one of many examples of reviewers that can praise a "borrowed part" in one car and not offer even faint praise for it in another car (that they don't much care for).

I've never thought of the Mazda 3 as a step between Civic/Corolla and something bigger/better. When I think along those lines, the cars that come to mind are VW Rabbit/Jetta or maybe Subaru Impressa.

McManus, Mazda only use V6 engines from Ford. They build their own 4-cyl and rotary engines. (I think Ford's 2.0 L is a modified Mazda 2.0 L.)
 
In terms of status/prestige, the Mazda 3 is not a step above the Civic and Corolla. But in terms of performance, levels of equipment, and maybe even price range, I definitely see the Mazda 3 (and the new Lancer) as a step between Civic/Corolla and something bigger/better.

Blackadder, the 2.3L in the 3 is a Mazda design, but that engine is built in two plants, one in Mexico, and one in Japan. That same basic engine is used in the Fusion, Escape, Ranger, Milan, Mariner, Tribute, Mazda3, Mazda5, Mazda6, B series, and CX7. Some, like the 5 and CX7 get only Japanese built engines,but last I heard the 3 and 6 used engines built in both places. I believe the 2.0L in the Focus is still based on a Ford of Europe design, not a Mazda one.

I've test driven all three of these cars.
  
Civic. Wind Noise. Whoever designed that little window in front of the doors should be fired. I can't believe the wind noise that came out of that spot. Road noise, when is Honda gonna realize that you don't need to hear every inch of those tires running against the pavement, The split dash- I hate it. Plus, those gigantic air vents in front, blowing air into your chest all day. The front end looks like a Cylon, keep waiting for the red light to move back and forth.
  
Mazda3. The best interior of the bunch EASILY. Feels like an old BMW 3 series. Of course, the rattle around the steering column was a put-off for a new car. If you are worried about fuel economy, you don't understand what this car is all about. Think 1990 BMW 3 series.
  
The Corolla. Quiet, very solid body. Cheapest looking interior of the bunch. Door panels that are plastic from window to floor. I can see why Toyota held it off for a year, too bad they didn't improve the cheap 1990 economy car look of the interior. Steering from a '74 Monte Carlo, dead to the world. Ugly front end; but not as bad as the Camry. Cruise control is a "option". WAAAAAAY overpriced. I don't know how anyone can justify it. Toyota needs to get away from the retarded forehead look that plagues all their new front end designs.
  
Best car? a 2003 Mazda Protege. Not a rattle or squeak. Handles like a dream. Too much tranny and engine noise at highway speed, but at half the price, I was impressed. I felt one with the car, light and easy to drive, great feedback, fun.