That is true, I forgot that they make everything in Japan and don't have a factory here in the US.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't Mazda have a Mexico Plant where they produce the Mazda2 and Scion iA/ Toyota Yaris iA?

 

meh... I see the need for eco-boxes, but I will never have the need.

 

To some people, the Corolla fits them perfectly. Most people do not care about beam axles vs IRS. Its nice that the Mazda 3 has it, but I am not sure if it really matters you are really into driving. I will give Mazda credit, they do preach "Driving Matters" and the Mazda 3 does indeed deliver that. At the time of my purchase, Mazda did not offer their "Unlimited" mileage warranty. Perhaps that might of swayed in the direction of the Mazda. Although, I am nowhere near at the possibility of going over my warranty before the 3 years is over.

For what it is worth, I just did a direct comparison of the Mazda 3 and Corolla to get them equipped comparable in Canada SPEC.

2016 Corolla is $21,390.00
2016 Mazda 3 is $24,613.75 (17" in rims, moonroof, floor liners were added to get them equipped comparably)

I am sure there will be a few things for each car that one will have while the other does not.

 

I would argue that the sales of the Corolla are what they are because they have met the expectations of most buyers. Its not like the GM products in the past that have totally fall apart or leave people stranded. My Corolla for example has "met" my expectations for what a $19,000 car should provide, its has never really "exceeded" them nor has it failed to meet them. Our Matrix 2.4 XRS has exceeded our expectations and my hand-me-down 2004 4Runner has far exceeded my expectations. As for my former Lexus CT200h, I would say that it failed to me my expectations of what I was expecting.

 

what were you expecting from it?

 

what's funny is, I've never seen a commercial for either....I guess it's not needed? so basically zero marketing yet they sell like crazy.

 

For almost $40k, I was expecting somewhat better performance than a my Corolla of 134HP or of a Matrix which cost less. It was also not as quiet as I was expecting. And finally, it was smaller on the inside even thought the dimensions were almost the same as a Matrix. The Matrix is listed as 561 interior litres vs 405 for the CT. Also, remote touch is not at all very pleasing to use. Also, looking back now, I was slightly annoyed that there was some more required maintenance to do than a comparable Toyota Corolla or Matrix.

What the CT did introduce me to was the idea that I could live with a smaller car, and a hatchback could provide good flexibility as well.

 

Almost all your gripes with the CT would have been assessed on a thorough test drive, other than perhaps the sustained use of remote touch.

 

Correct. Mazda has a plant in Salamanca, Guanajuato, Mexico that builds the subcompact Mazda2. Despite being built in North America, the Mazda2 is not sold in the USA nor Canada. It was introduced in Canada in early 2015, but initial sales launch was delayed and eventually cancelled because Mazda did not believe that the 2 would sell in Canada (which has been quite welcoming of small hatchbacks).

Ironically, Toyota believes that it can sell a badge-engineered version of the Mazda2 sedan (as the Scion iA in the USA and Toyota Yaris Sedan in Canada), yet Mazda does not believe that it can sell the original north of Mexico.

Well said. Toyota and Honda (and Subaru) have evidently learned their audiences very well and know what to sell and still make a profit. The Corolla may be frowned upon by enthusiasts, yet it consistently sells well in the North American markets. Toyota must know that its buyers (hundreds upon hundreds of thousands of them) do not need independent rear suspension nor rear disk brakes, but are probably looking for a refined, fuel efficient engine in a roomy car; Toyota must be doing something right with the Corolla.

Internet enthusiasts may be wowed by specifications, believing that any car that offers the snazzy features must be a great car. But if a "great" car does not sell -- for any reason (including marketing or lack of marketing) -- then there must be something that is "wrong" (does not attract buyers). Automakers are businesses and the goal of any business is to make money, not to make a "great product" that does not sell.

 

No offense, Jill, but to be honest, I was not very impressed with the CT, either (and I did a full-review on one). It had some good ponts......the Nu-Luxe upholstery inside was superb (couldn't tell it from real leather to save my life), and, of course, it got excellent fuel-mileage. It had a couple of interesting paint-colors...I liked the brown and the Mustard-Yellow, and the typical Lexus mirror-like paint job. But, other than that, I thought it felt, rode like, and had the overall comfort and noise level (when the gas engine was running) of a 15K econobox.

 

Like I and others have said Sulu, just because a product sells the most doesn't mean it's the best. This is a forum of enthusiasts, and as an enthusiast Toyota doesn't have any products I would buy anymore, and I think that's a shame. It didn't used to be that way, Toyota used to make well built, nicely appointed cars that stood out from their competitors on their own merits also, and that's not the case right now IMHO. Used to be not only was a Camry the most reliable car in the segment, it was also the best car and that's just not the case today.

They made a lot of vehicles that led their classes and reached out to enthusiast buyers. The Cressida, the Supra, Celica, 4Runner. FJ. All Toyotas had industry leading interior materials and quality.

 

They still do sell vehicles which appeal to enthusiasts. GT86, Tacoma, 4Runner are good examples. Even the Prius has a very strong enthusiast appeal to a certain type of buyer.

 

The FR-S GT 86 is an example, but the Tacoma and 4Runner aren't nearly as strong as they were compared to the competition years ago. The Prius? I had a Prius, different sort of enthusiast. The Prius we had was the worst car I've ever owned by a mile.

 

agreed. GE sells a ton of boring plain refrigerators too which i don't consider great products either. but they sell because they 'met the expectations of most buyers'. i like to see market disruptions though. nokia cell phones 'met the expectations of most customers' too (make phone calls and text) until apple showed they could get much more and something much greater in function and design in an iphone. game over.