Well made, fun econoboxes?

How do you expect these to be fun?

Would be looking at 2009 to 2014.

Currently drive a 2 door Tahoe.

Mazda 3 is a good choice. The Focus (not the ST or RS) pulls good too but you have to rev high it to get that power, the sedan is more lightweight than the hatchback.

>>17682754
More power and torque than a corolla or civic or sentra. Better brakes and suspension from my readings. Im not comparing it to like a 370z or something out of my price range.

mini cooper

>>17682763
Ford irks the heck out of me. How much lighter? It cant be significant can it? Hatch seems waaaay more useful.

>>17682783
No way! I want power, not a nimble clown car. And awful maintenance and repair costs.

Youre a smart anon. Mazda and Volkswagen have great compact cars offering larger 2.5L 4bangers. That is their selling point over the vanilla Civic/Corolla that only until recently, rocked little 1.6L and 1.8L that had to be redlined and screamed.

>>17682791
Like 150 lbs lol My '13 SE 5-speed Sedan is the lightest among all.

Practicality wise a hatch is way more practical, I was able to fit two large lounge chairs

>>17682746
>buying a new econobox
Just get a civic for 3k. Lighter and more tossable. If you're spending 20k+ you could get something much better.

File: Specs.jpg (1MB, 2080x1170px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2080x1170px

You're in luck anon, I'm in the market myself for a eco-sportscar. So pictured is my rough notes on 3 of the best choices in the segment.

Notes: The 2017 GTI w/DSG (or 6speed) has the most torque by far, and dealers are selling them for 3k under factory invoice. 30k car for 25k basically. Get the sport, avoid the sunroof in the SE or Autobahn.

>>17683048
>being this autistic
30k can get you a used 15+ Mustang gt 20k can get you a brand new memeboost

>>17682746
suzuki swift sport.

>>17683048
>financing a luxury item (new car)

>>17682746
The Mazda3 is better at handling than torque. The throttle response is a little lazy, which makes it feel less powerful than it is. Also for your criteria I'd look at a turbo 4 instead, like in the Civic and Golf.

>>17682746

Mazda 3's a good car. Well-built, good interior. The only downside IMO is that the engines are a bit lacking. I test-drove one a couple of years ago and it was really my only complaint (but a big one). I ended up getting a GTI and have no regrets.

If I had to DD the Mazda3 though I wouldn't feel robbed, especially for the prices you can usually have them at.

>>17683048
>sportscar

Those aren't sports cars

>>17683056
But then you'd have to tow a ferd everywhere

>>17682746
>doesn't even list a price range or budget

>>17682746
Wait for the 2019 Mazda3, it'll be way more powerful since SkyActiv-X is 18:1 compression + supercharged

File: 2017-08-08 17.35.24.jpg (2MB, 1542x1704px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1542x1704px

Get a 5th gen jetta tdi. 16 second quarter miles bone stock and lots of torque between 1500 to 3000 rpm.

>>17687411

that sounds like it'll eat gaskets monthly

>>17687430
Current SkyActiv is 14:1 and can be turbocharged, and those are decently reliable. Mazda engines are a lot different than others, being Atkinson cycle instead of Otto cycle, and these new ones are supposed to be compression ignition. I'm sure Mazda has done a lot of testing to make sure it's reliable.

>>17682746
>>17687446

i was thinking about looking at the 3's too, only problem is in my area all the decently priced ones are the sad little 2.0's