@@lovegames9892 models from y. 2017 noise solved :)also dashboard rechanged, own 2019. super satisfied..drivin at 100 mph on highway and can talk normaly, yep they done it! :)
The lack of a turbocharger is *exactly* why I bought the 2 over the Polo and the Fiesta. I have it in the 115hp level, though. 0-60 in 8.5 seconds, perfect throttle response and one less thing to break down in the long run. Couldn't be happier!
@@MM0SDK lol I have a small car with turbo too and it always surprises me when the turbo kicks in! It's an 800kg car so a little power would pull it :D
I recently picked up my 2016 1.5 Skyactiv-G 90 Sport. First impressions are as follows: -It looks stunning. They're good looking cars in general, but imo the 16 inch alloys really lift it. -The interior is a lovely place to be. Sport adds touches like nicer dials and a stitched leather dash. I think the front seats are also upgraded, as they have stiff side bolsters that really hug you in, not unlike the Recaros in a Fiesta ST, though mercifully they're quite a bit more comfortable and feel very supportive. I get the impression that a long journey would be pretty pain-free. - The infotainment is excellent. Very simple to navigate, and the control dial on the centre console works smoothly. The DAB radio is one of the least frustrating I've used, and it hasn't cut out on me once. The speakers aren't the greatest (I reckon the thin door cards might have a part to play in that), but are perfectly acceptable. - It's great fun to drive. The throttle response is sharp, the brakes are strong but progressive, and the gearshift is exactly as pleasing as the reviews claim. As I've found on some other Japanese cars, the clutch is very light and quite springy, which took me a bit of getting used to, but that didn't take long. In terms of handling, it feels extremely planted, and the lack of body roll is quite remarkable. The steering is precise and weights up nicely at speed, though there is a little bit of free play. But nonetheless, it won't disappoint a keen driver. -The engine is a gem imo. It feels more than quick enough, and certainly doesn't need "thrashed" unless you're really hooning it. To make brisk progress, you just need to keep it in the power band; once the VVT kicks in at around 3.5k rpm, it pulls admirably. Bearing in mind it has a 7k rpm redline, I wouldn't exactly call that thrashing, more using the engine to its full potential (and NB, I averaged 52.8mpg on an hour's mixed run driving this way!) My previous car was a diesel, so I understand the appeal of a turbocharged engine's effortless low-down torque. But I didn't love having to change gear mid-overtake when it ran out of puff at 4k rpm, for example. The Mazda's power may require more effort to take advantage of, but I think it's much more flexible and rewarding in many situations. Negative points? Nothing yet that isn't nitpicking. The auto-wipers are crap, but find me a car that has good ones. I also can't work out how to activate the stop-start system, but I would turn it off regardless. From my short time with it, I think I've made a great decision. A very underrated little car that's already making me smile, and I'm sure will serve me very well for years to come.
@@lolmanzify Nope, I got a 2018 Polo 1.0. A family friend was willing to sell it for a price I could't decline, so I picked that one. Otherwise I would have taken the Fiesta
I saw this in a car show and fell in love with it. It's so stylish and I like the interior. Will mostly use it for city driving. Can't wait for it to come to Canada :)
Had the previous generation and I regret selling it. Probably the best car I have ever owned for fun, reliability and economy. I would have one again in a heartbeat!
Great review, was waiting for Carbuyers verdict on the new Mazda 2, especially since I drive the old one. I think it would be first on my list if I was to buy a supermini
Nikita Ind And there is no turbolag. Some turbocharged engines have a deadspot below a certain RPM where the turbo won't spool up which can be annoying in hilly cities when it dies in second. N/A engines respond much more linearly.
Yeah, i completly agree. I tried a Volvo C30, with a 2.0liter turbo diesel. In 3rd gear, on a hill, absolutely no power, had to put it in 2nd to climb it lol. With my E90 petrol 318i, in 3rd it just goes in a nice linear way :) N/A ftw.
Nikita Ind There's a 15% hill right where I live, it's quite short but by halfway I would be in 3rd when I was in my old Focus 1.8 TDCi but I now have a Mondeo 2.0 TDCi (same engine family as the C30) and I have to go much further before I can change into third. It's not power, the car is very powerful, it's the gear ratios are so different, having to be in a different gear doesn't necessarily mean lack of power...
Horribly distorted audio and some wobbly camerawork. On the upside, far less of the traditional CarBuyer massively overexposed footage. You win some, you lose some...
My average is 53mpg. and I’m not too careful how I drive. And where I drive there are many many uphills. So probably if you live where it's all straight consumption will be much better, even this is really good.
I'm 6ft tall. I went to sit in a 2015 Mazda 3 and had no feet space at the pedals. Then tried an CX5 and same problem. Then sat in a Mazda 2 and had perfect space for my legs not to mention I could sit behind the driver seat without being cramped. Funny how exterior dimensions mean nothing about interior leg room
@@morishogo144 It's just that car makers don't make all their models with the same interior legroom at the pedals (for the driver). For example, a Honda Civic has a lot of legroom at the pedals, while a Honda CRV has less leg room at the pedals. It's surprising because the CRV is bigger from outside.
Thinking of getting a 2015/16 model in a few years. Seems like a great choice. Anyone here able to recommend this car, or argue a better option for me instead?
I have this car 90hp, done 40 000 km in a year, had it for one year and a half now almost. It's easy, I think it's fun to drive, still not tired of the look, doesn't cost a lot in maintenance or insurance. Very happy with 2, hope to keep it for years, and right now I think I'll stay loyal to Mazda.
Mat: The opening is smaller. There’s a large boot lip to lift stuff over. Entry-level models don’t get split-folding rear seats. And you don’t get a flat load bay when you fold the seats down. Yooka: You don’t fucking say?
Maybe shift down next time ur tryna demonstrate pedal response m8, especially since this car's peak power output is 1000revs about the rest of the field in this range of car...
@@danbrookes2997 It's the same engine with reinforced parts and different ECU mapping to make use of the increased toughness. It has a steel crank as opposed to the iron one in the 2 etc.
thanx mazda, what a nice car it is. we car enthustics are still lucky thats there are still car manufacturers like, mazda, ford or alfa romeo, otherwise world would be really boring in the gray car empire of VW's and toyota's.
Daniel Soanes thanks for the reply! Hoping to get this car around next year or once my mk6 fiesta packs in. I'd much rather the Mazda 2 to a new fiesta or a polo anyway
Regarding turbo comments, you might be better of trying the Mazda rather than turbo engines, the turbo engines will also burn fuel, plus I was very unlucky in buying 2 cars with broken tsi engines, just saying the Mazda 2/3 is quick enough 90ps + engines less problematic
... Friend I just made myself a demo that belonged to VEHICULOS DEL CAMINO (agency in Medellin) ... Gran Touring LX Sedan (red mazda) ... 2020 model with only 4 thousand kms .....! I am happy ! ... and you know that I am fascinated by everything: it also has a CD system ...
What about endurance? Do u think that this Mazda 2 will "survive" for 15 years by doing 10 thousand km per year? Of course trying to mantain the excellent low consumption on both diesel and benzine.
hmmm there is something with the rear that looks not quite right, epsecially when viewed from an angle. and the wheels are too small and narrow for the bigger car. i liked the old one better, but the new one seems to have matured quite a bit where the old one lacked (harsh ride, no modern entertainment options, loud tire noise at higher speeds).
@@johnrobboe9103 it's just a feeling at the beginning maybe, the best thing for each individual is to test it. What others cars do you recommend ? Ford fiesta is not reliable, maybe a Polo
If your going to get this car you have to get the top model, with a HUD, better engine and much bigger wheels it completes the Car and blows the rest away.
The cheapest is probably the Ford Fiesta, its also the car I would choose because its small, fun to drive and easy to park. The Golf is more expensive than both the Polo and the Fiesta... Do what you can afford
thesecretofbeef same here. im keen for the mazda as it looks the best, but the german gearbox in the vw is far better, and it has a nicer accelerator pedal. Also the mazda has more power - around 82kW compared to the 64 kW vw. The i20 is amazing but a bit expensive
Look, i know that companies adopt a specific style for their cars, but they usually differentiate it a bit from model to model. A 3 series doesnt have the same kidney girlls as a 5 series. But god damn, Mazda is just selling the same car in different sizes. From the 2, to the 3, to the 5, to the SUV models, it's the same car!
Mate thats quite a bold claim. they are better looking than all the Volkswagens but just not quite as good as the fords with the Aston Martin grille. But the Mazda will last for ever.
J Ceresa Yes, its the same with every car you can buy today. But it also depends on your driving. My Mazda 2 (from 2008) needs 5,4l/100km in the prospect, but in reality we need 6,1l/100km here in south germany.
J Ceresa The Eurocycle (which all are based on even though they say manufacturer's) has gotten a lot of criticism for being too optimistic and easy for car companies to gain (hence the high gear ratios in some cars). If you're kind it is possible to match and even beat it. I've done it in several cars, but high speed (motorway), a lot of braking/acceleration or a cold engine will make it almost impossible. My record is 3.3l/100km in a car rated for combined 4.3/100km (2010 Golf+ TDI BMT manual) over 30km.
I love driving this car, dislike everything else. It is nimble, steering is sharp and predictable, the engine sounds good (for its class), it is easy to park and drive through narrow places, the driving position is just right, the ergonomics are awesome... However, the backseats are narrow and dark, it looks meh and it is just otherwise unappealing. But hey, great fuel economy for its agility!
I have a Mazda 2 and it is the worst car I have ever owned, 69 plate, low mileage. Absolute awful, the car is too light and bounces all over the road, the car has been checked and there is no fault. Flimsy junk, they handle badly, noisey, iStop is unreliable, suspension is too hard. Mazda have tried to make a sporty hatch and its a total failure. Waste of money.
it is so light because metal sheets are very thin and has almost no sound isolation. Bad thing is that thin metal parts will start rusting in 5 years.. And whole car will be unusable in 10 years, there will be holes in a body everywhere, specially bellow the car.
Tadas My Mazda 2 from 2008 is running for 113.000km so far and has not had the smallest problem. Also in almost every single durability-survey Mazda 2 (and Mazda in general) is right at the top of the list. So stop telling people shit pls.
averagejoe You're absolutely right. And the new Mazda 2 still have a good crash test result, because of it. The others (VW Polo, Opel Corsa, Skoda Fabia, etc...) are (at least) 100kg havier than Mazda 2.
I really don't like the styling of this thing. To be it's a step back from the outgoing 2 which really sharpened up the exterior compared to the old models. This is going back. It looks really nebulous and rounded, as though the designer couldn't really decide on a particular design language so just kinda mushed several together. It's exceptionally boring to look at.
