Regarding the first point, you're right, I did contradict myself there because mass is totally relevant to friction. I got tunnel-visioned because of the zero acceleration argument. Thanks for correcting and letting readers know what's wrong. I think it's important to give reliable information.

Regarding the second point, I didn't make that statement. You basically corrected the same erroneous statement that I corrected using the same argument you used.

 

When I said this, I was referring to a real world situation. When I said that F=MA doesn't apply in the real world, obviously what I meant was that there are many other factors to take into account in the REAL world (friction, gravity, etc). I believe that Conservation of Energy better explains this example (Suburban vs. Protege) than F=MA. When I used this example, I was hypothesizing that the Suburban had the same engine and transmission as a Protege. (someone would probably have to tow the suburban up to speed).

Perhap a better hypothetical example than Suburban vs Protege (as this seems to confuse the issue a bit) would be to use a Protege with one passenger (the driver) vs. a protege containing 6 passengers (a driver, 4 passengers, and one dude in the trunk). Assuming an average person weight of 200lbs, the full protege would weigh 1000lbs more than the other protege. Both vehicles have the same coefficient of drag, the same engine, and the same transmission. I believe that the additional weight of the loaded down protege will cause it to get worse gas mileage due to increased gravitational forces and friction.

Anyway - I still think that Corollas aren't that great. I notice one guy who keeps bringing them up in a bunch of threads saying that Corollas are better than Proteges. What's his deal? Did he buy a Corolla and yet can't find a Corolla board so he hangs around here trying to make himself feel better about his purchase?

Corollas

 

If they do have a Protege, it sounds like buyer's remorse. It is typically caused by people buying a car for financial reasons (price, financing, etc.) or didn't give the car a thorough test drive. I used to get these from time to time when I sold Mazda's. They would come back whining "it rides too stiff" or "it turns too fast" or "it gets lousy mileage."

Doing your research AFTER making a purchase is a big reason for buyer's remorse as well. We all know Mazda's don't look that great on paper... Honda's and Toyota's put out more power and get better gas mileage. However, peak power means nothing. Look at the Civic Si with it's peak of 160hp @ 6,500 rpm. They give you a whole 300 rpm to use that peak before you hit the 6,800 rpm redline. It's 0-60 time is 8.0 seconds. That's equivalent to the less powerful, iron-blocked MP3. And the Civic Si is only rated at 30mpg. Hmmm... The FS-DE doesn't sound that bad anymore. The 170hp Mazdaspeed Protege does that sprint in 6.9 seconds. What's the difference? The overall powerband. It is much better to get a broad spread of the power rather than a little bit of it from idle to 6,000 rpm, and then most of it between there and redline. On paper? Sure, it looks wonderful. In the real world? It's a different story.

 

Well said!

Besides the gas milage factor, I personally consider that the actual real world driving experience is the most important factor of buying the car.
It's how you feel when driving the car, and how you feel owning the car that matters.
I don't need numbers on paper telling and keep reminding me how great or poor the car is. All I need is the gas milage acceptable, the price is acceptable, and I feel good about driving, owning, and maintaining the car.

Well, maybe I have a too simple/naive mind after all.

 

On another board (I think Edmunds), we had a pretty good discussion on the FP-DE vs. the FS-DE. We even calculated optimum shift points. For the FP-DE, it was easy: redline. For the FS-DE, I believe we came up with 5700rpm. We determined that the FP really had a much better torque curve and more linear power, plus it was smoother and had quite a snarl (you should hear it with a CAI on it - Mustang GT drivers snap their heads to see, but then they want to play... I just pray for a very curvy road...) when pushed. However, the FS (with it's higher low-end torque) was just better because of the extra weight Mazda slathered onto the Protege in 2001.

On another note, I was talking to a contact I have at Mazda. He has seen the final production model of the 2004 Mazda3. He says it has design cues from both the Mazda6 and RX-8. In addition to the new engines coming along, it should be quite an awesome car.

 

Yeah... the mazda's quieter... until you hear the DAMN COLD ENGINE RATTLE in the protege!!!! God... I've been searching this site for a good answer (a non-do it on your own in your garage answer). Aparently everyone has this rattle problem... but no one seems to care about it.

 

Do a search for VTCS or was it VCTS. TheMAN posted excellent info on this along with photos. Once you see this, you'll know exactly why it's causing it.

BTW, I've never had the cold-rattle problem because I warm-up sufficiently. Idle for about 3 minutes and drive gently (below about 2000RPM) until the temp needle starts to move.

 

For most people with the problem, the rattle occurs during those first three minutes of idling and it goes away as the engine warms up. Myself and a few others have experienced the same problem with the 1.8L, although not as bad. On cold days, I get it while the engine is idling even after driving my two hour commute!

 

Hmmm, I wonder why it would rattle on idle after driving for 2 hours....

The mere presence of the butterfly valves is quite annoying, not just for the rattling sound, but for restricting horsepower, which I'm quite sure happens as a result.

This is just a theory. Please tell me if I should junk it . I think the rattle happens at a specific resonant vibration frequency and this resonant frequency point varies by not only temperature, type of lubrication, etc. but also by how the engine was broken-in. It seems empirically that most people experience the rattle from 2000-2500 RPM on cold days.

My car was broken-in using old school method and it has 6000 miles on it. Currently, the temp here about 23 deg. I haven't heard [knock on wood] the rattle yet. Perhaps I haven't racked enough mileage yet.

 

This theory sounds good to me. However, the '99-'00 ES models are not equipped with VTCS. I can say that the rattle has gone down considerably since I replaced the flimsy stock intake with the Injen CAI. I had a theory about the purge solenoid valve which made it's noisy presence known when to was moved from its mount on the old intake to a bracket on the firewall. It operates at the same RPMs the rattles occur. I moved it to a bracket on the intake manifold to let the engine mounts absorb the vibration. The rattle is still there occasionally, but it is much less frequent and noticeable than it was before. For me, the rattle has only occured during idle under electrical load (600-700 RPM) and during warm-up with RPMs between 1,000-1,500.

 

What everyone here has to realize is that it is impossible to define "force". As a wise man once wrote:

"Force is the mechanical Nature-picture of western man, what Will is to his soul-picture and infinite Godhead in his world-picture."

Science was theology's handmaid for too long and now, like theology, Science is dead. Scientific theory is bull****, only actual experimentation has validity. Put the same motor in a Suburban and a Protege and drive on level ground. Guess which one get's the best mileage. The rest is hot air.

 

I can't believe I just spent the last hour reading all the posts in this thread ...and what sticks out most in my mind

Facist-penisheads!

 

I just did the exat same thing

LOL... i geuss some things just stick out in threads....and facist ***** heads sticks out alot

also I want to find out alot more about the 1.8L vs the 2.0L engines....I'm really into this topic for some odd reason.

 

I would really like to see this thread on the other board...if you are ever able to find it....then please hook me up with a link....damn need to solve this fp vs fs thing

sorry for double posting...but i couldn't find the post to qoute from before

 

But you canīt discount scientific theory... I think itīs the basis for coming up with actual experimentation. You have to have some sort of theory (even if not well formulated) before you do experimentation.