Jump to content
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    Quick Drive: 2017 Chrysler Pacifica Hybrid

    Sign in to follow this  

      You got minivan in my hybrid! You got hybrid in my minivan!

    Chrysler isn’t the first, let alone the tenth automaker you would think of building a hybrid vehicle. Yet, they stunned the world last year as they introduced a plug-in hybrid version of the new Pacifica minivan. It currently holds the title of being the only full-size hybrid minivan sold in the world. On paper, the Pacifica Hybrid makes a good case for itself. Being able to travel up to 33 miles on electric power alone and returning a combined fuel economy figure of 83 MPGe. But how does it fare in the real world?

    • The Pacifica Hybrid’s powertrain is comprised of a modified version of the 3.6L V6 that runs on the Atkinson cycle for improved efficiency; two electric motors and a 16-kW lithium-ion battery pack. Total output stands at 260 horsepower.
    • Even though the Pacifica Hybrid is about 600 pounds more than the standard model, it doesn’t feel like it. The instant torque from the electric motors moves the van at a very brisk rate when leaving a stop. The gas engine will kick on when the battery is depleted or when more power is needed such as merging onto a highway. The transition between electric and hybrid power is barely noticeable. When the gas engine is on, it has more than enough power to get you moving on your way.
    • An odd omission from the Pacifica Hybrid is being able to switch between electric and hybrid modes like you can do in other PHEVs. The van will automatically do it. This is a bit disappointing as some drivers would like to conserve battery when driving on a highway for example.
    • The key numbers to be aware of are 33 miles and 84 MPGe on electric power, and 32 MPG when running on hybrid power. During my week, I was able to go about 34 miles on electric power alone and saw an average of 32 MPG for the week. Considering how big and heavy this van is, these numbers are quite impressive.
    • Recharging times for the Pacifica Hybrid are 2 hours when plugged into a 240V outlet, or 16 hours for a 120V outlet. FCA is right on the money for the 120V time as it took around 16 hours for the van to be fully recharged. 
    • There isn’t any difference between how the Pacifica Hybrid rides and handles to the standard Pacifica. Both exhibit a smooth ride, no matter the road surface. Going around a corner is not a big deal as body roll is kept very much in check.
    • There are only a few things that separate the Pacifica Hybrid from the standard model. Aside from the charging door, the hybrid gets a different grille and wheel design.
    • While the Pacifica Hybrid is designed to carry families, you would think differently after sitting inside. Our Platinum tester was kitted out with leather on the seats, contrasting stitching, and an abundance of soft-touch materials. This interior gives certain luxury cars a run for their money.
    • No matter where you’re sitting in the Pacifica Hybrid, there is plenty of head and legroom on offer. Comfort is also a major plus point as all of the seats provide excellent support for long trips.
    • One downside to the hybrid powertrain is the loss of the Stow n’ Go seats for the second row. That space is taken up by the large battery pack. At least you can remove the second-row seats, but be prepared to have another person help you as they are heavy. At least the third-row seats do fold into the floor.
    • There isn’t anything different with the 8.4-inch UConnect system aside from the usual screens you would expect on hybrid such as a power diagram. This system is very simple to operate, but the lack of Apple CarPlay and Android Auto leaves us slightly disappointed. Thankfully, this will be addressed with the 2018 model year as both become standard across the Pacifica lineup.
    • We also had the chance to try out UConnect Access. This smartphone application allows you to check on how much charge is left on the battery, set up a charging schedule, trip information, remote lock and start, and vehicle location. While it is nice to have a key information within easy reach, it takes a long time for the application to pull it. We found on average that it took a good minute or two before updated information would arrive.
    • For all of this tech, it comes at a price. The base Pacifica Hybrid Premium rings up at $41,995. Our Platinum tester came to $47,885 with an optional panoramic sunroof. That’s a lot of cash for a minivan, even one with a hybrid powertrain. But with the Platinum, you’re getting everything - navigation, rear-seat entertainment system, heated and ventilated front seats, and a ton of safety equipment. There is also the $7,500 federal tax credit and other incentives from various states that might sway some folks. But those only come into play when it comes time to do taxes.

    Disclaimer: Chrysler Provided the Pacifica Hybrid, Insurance, and One Tank of Gas

    Year: 2017
    Make: Chrysler
    Model: Pacifica Hybrid
    Trim: Platinum
    Engine: 3.6L V6 eHybrid System
    Driveline: eFlite EVT,  Front-Wheel Drive
    Horsepower @ RPM: 260 @ N/A (Combined)
    Torque @ RPM: N/A
    Fuel Economy: Gas + Electric Combined, Gas Combined - 84 MPGe, 32 MPG
    Curb Weight: 4,987 lbs
    Location of Manufacture: Windsor, Ontario
    Base Price: $44,995
    As Tested Price: $47,885 (Includes $1,095.00 Destination Charge)

    Options:
    Tri-Pane Panaromic Sunroof - $1,795

    Edited by William Maley

    Sign in to follow this  


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Very cool info, nice job on the writeup, learned some new stuff. Families who like their mini vans should love this.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I've seen some video reviews of this, and they are all very positive.  Would be nice if it could go more than 33 miles on pure electric but for such a big vehicle its overall economy numbers and road manners are excellent.  Pretty expensive for what people expect a Chrysler minivan product to cost though, that might be its biggest hurdle.

     

     

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The electric range and fuel economy numbers are really impressive, but $47k for a Chrysler minivan is a lot, especially when after 2 years these will probably sell for $20k or less on the used market.  Chrysler's depreciate like crazy.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    nice writeup.

    I have been tracking many things Pacifica as our T&C lease is ending soon, and its been darn close to default that we may get into a Pacifica lease.  The hybrid is attractive to me for same reasons as it would be to many.

    The main downsides to me are the loss of Sto N Go (which even if you only use a time here or there can be a big loss).  The increased weight to me is a concern, although William does speak to that here.  At least heavier equates to better winter traction.  And there are other little things where the hybrid is disadvantaged to the gas version.

    Wishes come true with Apple CarPlay and 4g wifi for 2018.  The Uconnect and touchscreen updates are huge for 2018 as well.  Carplay is 75% of the time buggy and frustrating in my Malibu, but you still get used to using it.  I would not want another car without 4g wifi in car.  We use it a lot, my kid especially loves it and it helps save on the phone data.  The Uconnect in 2017 has been quite problematic and so the updates promise to make things better with that.

    Probably the most frustrated of Pacifica customers have been the hybrid intenders and (few) owners.  Many have ordered them for a year ago or so, and still have never been delivered.  There were stops and starts on the sale, and for long periods you could not buy one.  The technical problems that caused this likely seem to be identified.  But whether you can still can the one your ordered is still a problem.  Many have tried to cancel their orders and that has been an issue too.  Many have sat at a dealership waiting LONG periods of time to get fixed.  I think when we actually see 2018 hybrids it will be a telling moment.  those who have or have driven the hybrid love it...apart from the big teething issues.

    The gas version has had its share of teething problems too.  So the choice is not easy.  pacifica forums has great resources to learn what's up.

    Despite that, i think if you were thinking about getting a 2018, i would not hesitate, and i would get in line to find out when you can get one.  We'll probably go for the gas version; the only other alternatives I am considering are the Traverse or Enclave for 2018 (but those are more $$$$).

    Edited by regfootball

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    4 hours ago, smk4565 said:

    The electric range and fuel economy numbers are really impressive, but $47k for a Chrysler minivan is a lot, especially when after 2 years these will probably sell for $20k or less on the used market.  Chrysler's depreciate like crazy.

    Really? A two year old plug in hybrid that is $47K will sell for $20K? Are you high? I want you to look here at what finished just below the Toyota and above the Honda minivan. 

     

    82847A49-4603-4BDC-8149-797F3EA5872F.png

    Edited by surreal1272
    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    21 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

    Really? A two year old plug in hybrid that is $47K will sell for $20K? Are you high? I want you to look here at what finished just below the Toyota and above the Honda minivan. 

     

    82847A49-4603-4BDC-8149-797F3EA5872F.png

    Regardless of what reviews say, a 5 year old Odyssey or Sienna will still sell for $20k, because it says Honda or Toyota on the front, and people know it will be reliable.  Maybe not 2 years, but give the Pacifica 3 years and they will be under $20k.  Chrysler resale value is abysmal.  There are currently 2015 Town and Country Touring's for $20k on auto trader, those both had a base of $32k.

     

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    toyota reliability is a fallacy-the brand has been recalled so frequently in the last decade they installed revolving service department doors on their dealers. Too many other choices to risk getting burned.

     

    VIa autotrader & my zip, the cheapest Sienna from '14-15 is $18K, and the cheapest T&C is $20K.

    Edited by balthazar
    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    10 hours ago, smk4565 said:

    Regardless of what reviews say, a 5 year old Odyssey or Sienna will still sell for $20k, because it says Honda or Toyota on the front, and people know it will be reliable.  Maybe not 2 years, but give the Pacifica 3 years and they will be under $20k.  Chrysler resale value is abysmal.  There are currently 2015 Town and Country Touring's for $20k on auto trader, those both had a base of $32k.

     

    “Regardless of what the reviews say”. Do you hear yourself? You said two years at $20K and you were wrong. Even at three years, you are wrong. Kelly Blue Book has it above the Honda at 36 and 60 months and not being too far behind the Sienna. You are also attempting to compare an older model T&C, which isn’t made anymore, with a much newer and far better Pacifica, so your argument holds no water there either. The Pacifica is night and day better and the value shows for once. This is just another domestic slam by you. The funny thing here is that the Odyssey has a pretty shoddy history in the reliability department so you’re even in the loop on that either. Feel free to reference the many power train issues of the older models that have only recently been addressed.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    9 hours ago, balthazar said:

    toyota reliability is a fallacy-the brand has been recalled so frequently in the last decade they installed revolving service department doors on their dealers. Too many other choices to risk getting burned.

     

    VIa autotrader & my zip, the cheapest Sienna from '14-15 is $18K, and the cheapest T&C is $20K.

    Like I said, it’s just more domestic slamming bull$h! by him and he cant even admit he was wrong on all fronts.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    1 hour ago, surreal1272 said:

    “Regardless of what the reviews say”. Do you hear yourself? You said two years at $20K and you were wrong. Even at three years, you are wrong. Kelly Blue Book has it above the Honda at 36 and 60 months and not being too far behind the Sienna. You are also attempting to compare an older model T&C, which isn’t made anymore, with a much newer and far better Pacifica, so your argument holds no water there either. The Pacifica is night and day better and the value shows for once. This is just another domestic slam by you. The funny thing here is that the Odyssey has a pretty shoddy history in the reliability department so you’re even in the loop on that either. Feel free to reference the many power train issues of the older models that have only recently been addressed.

    My dad had a 2001 Odyssey that he put 224,000 miles on, and had fewer repairs and less money spent on that than he did on his 07 Hyundai Entourage or his 2011 Dodge Caravan that he has now.  The Caravan has by far been the least reliable and it only has 70,000 miles on it.  The Odessy had less repairs over 7 years than he has spent in just the past 1 year on the Caravan actually.

    And a trip to auto trader or any car dealership shows Toyotas and Hondas with high resale value, and FCA products on deep discounts.  Even if the Pacifica is a much better vehicle, it is style a Chrysler which in the minds of most people = unreliable.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Hondas tend to be decent, but your example is still only anecdotal.

    My buddy's family has a Honda CR-V, I think it's a '16- they all hate driving it. Visibility & servicing are nightmarish. They have a circa '02 Ford-Mazda Tribute, which they are reluctantly parting with come next inspection because of an exhaust manifold leak not worth the cost of the repair. Looking at a CX-5 for a replacement there- not Honda.

    Anecdotal.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    @smk4565

    Did his automatic transmission fail in his Odyssey?

    Did he have ball joint problems? (that could be only a Quebec thing or any other place where pot holes are a problem)

     

    Because if you say yes to either of those things, especially the first one...and then it becomes hard for me to believe these words from you:

    44 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

    My dad had a 2001 Odyssey that he put 224,000 miles on, and had fewer repairs and less money spent on that than he did on his 07 Hyundai Entourage or his 2011 Dodge Caravan that he has now.  The Caravan has by far been the least reliable and it only has 70,000 miles on it.  The Odessy had less repairs over 7 years than he has spent in just the past 1 year on the Caravan actually.

    Anecdotal:

    Ive had many acquaintances that had automatic transmissions fail in their Odysseys, Accords, TLs and CLs of that time period. Many of those people changed that transmission twice.

    Also...those same autos also had ball joint problems...but so does other makes...pot holes in Quebec resemble mini Yucatan craters in the Spring time.

     

    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    38 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

    @smk4565

    Did his automatic transmission fail in his Odyssey?

    Did he have ball joint problems? (that could be only a Quebec thing or any other place where pot holes are a problem)

     

    Because if you say yes to either of those things, especially the first one...and then it becomes hard for me to believe these words from you:

    Anecdotal:

    Ive had many acquaintances that had automatic transmissions fail in their Odysseys, Accords, TLs and CLs of that time period. Many of those people changed that transmission twice.

    Also...those same autos also had ball joint problems...but so does other makes...pot holes in Quebec resemble mini Yucatan craters in the Spring time.

     

    The transmission started slipping around 200k miles, I don't think he ever really had it fixed because at that point, why bother.  He is a painter so he commonly carries 1,000 lbs of weight in his van, and does a lot of city driving too, so they are hard miles that he puts on.  I don't think he ever had a ball joint problem, I did replace 2 ball joints on my Mercedes, but that was $480, not the end of the world for a 95,000 mile car, and that is the only suspension related repair as of yet.

    Yes it is one situation and anecdotal, but look at the used car market, and there are a lot of 200,000 mile Hondas and Toyotas selling with some value.  I know 2 people that had an Acura CL, they got about 150-70k miles out of them before the transmission and mechanical issues really started to surface and then they dumped the car.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    So...all this anecdotal evidence...including a Jalopnik article...

    Who do we believe?

    Who do we believe?

    Who. Do. We. Believe.

    To try to win an internet discussion in trying to outsmart one another to try to convince one another that Honda's transmissions of this era dont self destruct...

    And we even have an admittance of a failed transmission...but at the time of when a car dies of old age anyway...

    Jalopnik's article goes a step further in admitting there was transmission problems...but NOT WITH THIS van...

    Wink Wink...

     

    Un.

    Belieeeee.

    Vaaaa-bull!

     

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Well there is an example of an Odyssey with 246k miles and still running strong.  I am not a Honda fan, but there are a lot of high milage Hondas out there, so they must do something right.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    5 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

    Well there is an example of an Odyssey with 246k miles and still running strong.  I am not a Honda fan, but there are a lot of high milage Hondas out there, so they must do something right.

    Yeah...I own a Honda product...they are pretty effing reliable...

    Problem is...The MAJORITY of V6 AUTOMATIC transmissioned Honda products in that era that existed in 1999, 2001, 2002 all the way to what? 2005-2006? erhad HUUUGE deficiencies. CATASTROPHIC failures of the expensive kind...

    I really dont care for the few and far between outliers...

     

    Edited by oldshurst442

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    5 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

    Yeah...I own a Honda product...they are pretty effing reliable...

    Problem is...The MAJORITY of V6 AUTOMATIC transmissioned Honda products in that era that existed in 1999, 2001, 2002 all the way to what? 2005-2006? erhad HUUUGE deficiencies. CATASTROPHIC failures of the expensive kind...

    I really dont care for the few and far between outliers...

     

    So don't buy a Honda from that era. 

    Regardless, Odyessy's have good resale value, while Chrysler products do not. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Regardless, resale value is for sheeple...

    I dont buy cars in hopes when my car is 10 years old Ill possibly get 100 bucks more.

    Admittedly that Honda V6 automatics of that era is shyte...what resale do YOU wanna talk about?

    You said it yourself....

    12 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

    So don't buy a Honda from that era. 

    I wont!

    So...that  makes that era of Hondas...with me at least...less than ZERO!!!

    So...where does Chrysler fit in on this then when on agreement, Honda aint perfect and their cars are prone to failure too?

     

    Edited by oldshurst442

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The issue I had was when you mentioned a 2001 Honda Odyssey trying to use THAT as a reliable Honda product trying to dismiss Chrysler...

    WRONG Honda product is alls Im sayin' to prove that point!

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Either way, the Pacifica will probably tank in value just like every other FCA product.  So pay $47k now, and in 3 years time, over half that will be gone.   There are 2017 Pacifica Touring-L's on Auto trader right now for $24-25,000 and the MSRP new without options is $34,495.   That is $10,000 lost in 1 year, so I don't think it crazy for me to think a Hybrid will drop down to $20k in 3 years.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Jeeps certainly don't "tank" in value and they're FCA products. Challengers also look pretty solid in value.

    But everything drops alarmingly in value, generally speaking, in the first few years. Some high-end luxury sedans end up losing their buyers $60K in 3 years on depreciation alone. Buying anything, automotively, brand new is a losing race.

    Buy what you need/like, or whatever split there pleases you, and that's about the best one can do.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    16 minutes ago, balthazar said:

    Jeeps certainly don't "tank" in value and they're FCA products. Challengers also look pretty solid in value.

    But everything drops alarmingly in value, generally speaking, in the first few years. Some high-end luxury sedans end up losing their buyers $60K in 3 years on depreciation alone. Buying anything, automotively, brand new is a losing race.

    Buy what you need/like, or whatever split there pleases you, and that's about the best one can do.

    Wranglers hold value, maybe Grand Cherokees, I think Compasses and Renegages will drop faster, but the Jeep brand has appeal so it keeps resale doing fairly well.

    Any expensive car drops in value, unless it is a collectable, because the super rich get a new one every 2 years and the other 99% can't afford those cars.  But I think cost of car ownership is a big reason why these  flying drones and self driving cars will replace about half the cars on the road in 15 years.  People will just quit buying cars because there will be a cheaper, faster way to get around.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    6 hours ago, smk4565 said:

    My dad had a 2001 Odyssey that he put 224,000 miles on, and had fewer repairs and less money spent on that than he did on his 07 Hyundai Entourage or his 2011 Dodge Caravan that he has now.  The Caravan has by far been the least reliable and it only has 70,000 miles on it.  The Odessy had less repairs over 7 years than he has spent in just the past 1 year on the Caravan actually.

    And a trip to auto trader or any car dealership shows Toyotas and Hondas with high resale value, and FCA products on deep discounts.  Even if the Pacifica is a much better vehicle, it is style a Chrysler which in the minds of most people = unreliable.

    And? Those year Odyssey’s are what I’m mainly referring to. Those years are on every used car avoid list out there so if your dad’s did great, then he is in the minority. Feel free look up the many issues with those. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Similar Content

    • By William Maley
      It feels weird to be writing a review of the previous-generation Mazda3 when the new model is currently sitting out front at dealers. But I find this situation to be unique because I had the chance to explore a 2019 Mazda3 to get some first impressions while working on a review of the 2018 model. This gives me a chance to compare the two in certain aspects, along with pondering the question of whether or not the previous model is still a good buy.
      Despite the new model taking the styling up another level, the outgoing model is still a looker. From the bold front end with a large grille and slightly angled headlights, to sculpting running along the sides, the 2018 3 still stands out in the compact crowd. The older design also allows for slightly better rear headroom and a larger area of glass for improved visibility.  But the new 3 holds a significant edge over the old model when it comes to the interior. The modern design and use of high-quality materials really help boost Mazda’s ambitions of becoming something more premium. But the 2018 model I found to have a slightly easier center stack layout and more interior room. One item I didn’t get the chance to play within the 2019 Mazda3 is the infotainment system. Aside from boasting a larger screen, Mazda has also dropped the touchscreen functionality. The latter has been a big issue on some of the recent Mazda vehicles I have driven, including the 2018 3. It is difficult to figure out which parts of the screen are touch-enabled and which aren’t. The system is also beginning to show its age somewhat as the system showed some slowdown in certain areas such as connecting to my phone via Bluetooth. Under the hood of the 2018 model is either a 2.0L or 2.5L SkyActiv-G four-cylinder. My tester had the latter which produces 184 horsepower and 185 pound-feet. This engine can also be found under 2019 Mazda3, albeit slightly tweaked - 186 for both horsepower and torque. I find the Mazda3 to be the best application for the 2.5 engine. The lighter weight of the vehicle allows the 2.5 to provide a smooth and quick acceleration for most situations you find yourself in. However, the 2.5 feels like it is running out of breath when going above 70 mph, making passing and merging onto a highway slightly difficult. Where the 3 really shines is down a twisty road. Very few vehicles can match the sharp handling characteristics on offer. The suspension keeps the vehicle level when cornering and quickly respond to change in direction. Steering is quick and features a nice weight when turning. Ride quality is slightly rough with a fair number of bumps coming inside. Some of this can be attributed to the 18-inch wheels fitted on my tester.  Should you consider a 2018 Mazda3 when the bright and shiny 2019 3 is available now? I can only give a half-answer as I haven’t driven the 2019 model yet. But having sat in one, I can see why someone would consider it. The impressive design inside and out can make you believe you’re driving something from a luxury brand. The 2018 model still has some things going for it such as having slightly more interior space, similar fuel economy figures, and dealers beginning to lower prices on them to get them out. As I am writing this (May 5th), I have seen dealers in my local drop prices by $1,000 to $3,000 on 2018 models. Right now, I would be willing to pocket the extra cash and go with a 2018 Mazda3. Disclaimer: Mazda Provided the 3, Insurance, and One Tank of Gas
      Year: 2018
      Make: Mazda
      Model: 3
      Trim: Grand Touring
      Engine: 2.5L SKYACTIV-G DOHC Four-Cylinder
      Driveline:  Six-Speed Automatic, Front-Wheel Drive
      Horsepower @ RPM: 184 @ 5,700
      Torque @ RPM: 185 @ 3,250 
      Fuel Economy: City/Highway/Combined - 26/35/30
      Curb Weight: 3,098 lbs
      Location of Manufacture: Salamanca, Mexico
      Base Price: $24,945
      As Tested Price: $28,035 (Includes $890.00 Destination Charge)
      Options:
      Premium Equipment Package - $1,600.00
      Soul Red Metallic Paint - $300.00
      Scuff Plates/Door Sill Trim Plate - $125.00
      Rear Bumper Guard - $100.00
      Cargo Mat - $75.00

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      It feels weird to be writing a review of the previous-generation Mazda3 when the new model is currently sitting out front at dealers. But I find this situation to be unique because I had the chance to explore a 2019 Mazda3 to get some first impressions while working on a review of the 2018 model. This gives me a chance to compare the two in certain aspects, along with pondering the question of whether or not the previous model is still a good buy.
      Despite the new model taking the styling up another level, the outgoing model is still a looker. From the bold front end with a large grille and slightly angled headlights, to sculpting running along the sides, the 2018 3 still stands out in the compact crowd. The older design also allows for slightly better rear headroom and a larger area of glass for improved visibility.  But the new 3 holds a significant edge over the old model when it comes to the interior. The modern design and use of high-quality materials really help boost Mazda’s ambitions of becoming something more premium. But the 2018 model I found to have a slightly easier center stack layout and more interior room. One item I didn’t get the chance to play within the 2019 Mazda3 is the infotainment system. Aside from boasting a larger screen, Mazda has also dropped the touchscreen functionality. The latter has been a big issue on some of the recent Mazda vehicles I have driven, including the 2018 3. It is difficult to figure out which parts of the screen are touch-enabled and which aren’t. The system is also beginning to show its age somewhat as the system showed some slowdown in certain areas such as connecting to my phone via Bluetooth. Under the hood of the 2018 model is either a 2.0L or 2.5L SkyActiv-G four-cylinder. My tester had the latter which produces 184 horsepower and 185 pound-feet. This engine can also be found under 2019 Mazda3, albeit slightly tweaked - 186 for both horsepower and torque. I find the Mazda3 to be the best application for the 2.5 engine. The lighter weight of the vehicle allows the 2.5 to provide a smooth and quick acceleration for most situations you find yourself in. However, the 2.5 feels like it is running out of breath when going above 70 mph, making passing and merging onto a highway slightly difficult. Where the 3 really shines is down a twisty road. Very few vehicles can match the sharp handling characteristics on offer. The suspension keeps the vehicle level when cornering and quickly respond to change in direction. Steering is quick and features a nice weight when turning. Ride quality is slightly rough with a fair number of bumps coming inside. Some of this can be attributed to the 18-inch wheels fitted on my tester.  Should you consider a 2018 Mazda3 when the bright and shiny 2019 3 is available now? I can only give a half-answer as I haven’t driven the 2019 model yet. But having sat in one, I can see why someone would consider it. The impressive design inside and out can make you believe you’re driving something from a luxury brand. The 2018 model still has some things going for it such as having slightly more interior space, similar fuel economy figures, and dealers beginning to lower prices on them to get them out. As I am writing this (May 5th), I have seen dealers in my local drop prices by $1,000 to $3,000 on 2018 models. Right now, I would be willing to pocket the extra cash and go with a 2018 Mazda3. Disclaimer: Mazda Provided the 3, Insurance, and One Tank of Gas
      Year: 2018
      Make: Mazda
      Model: 3
      Trim: Grand Touring
      Engine: 2.5L SKYACTIV-G DOHC Four-Cylinder
      Driveline:  Six-Speed Automatic, Front-Wheel Drive
      Horsepower @ RPM: 184 @ 5,700
      Torque @ RPM: 185 @ 3,250 
      Fuel Economy: City/Highway/Combined - 26/35/30
      Curb Weight: 3,098 lbs
      Location of Manufacture: Salamanca, Mexico
      Base Price: $24,945
      As Tested Price: $28,035 (Includes $890.00 Destination Charge)
      Options:
      Premium Equipment Package - $1,600.00
      Soul Red Metallic Paint - $300.00
      Scuff Plates/Door Sill Trim Plate - $125.00
      Rear Bumper Guard - $100.00
      Cargo Mat - $75.00
    • By Drew Dowdell
      FCA US Reports April 2019 Sales; Quarterly Reporting of Sales to Start in Q3

      Jeep® Grand Cherokee and Jeep Compass post new April sales records Ram pickup notches best April ever as sales rise 25 percent Overall Ram brand sales reach new high     FCA US to report sales quarterly starting Oct. 1 May 1, 2019 , Auburn Hills, Mich. - FCA US LLC notched four U.S. sales records for April, highlighting consumer demand for the company’s brands despite continued softness within the industry.
       
      FCA sold 172,900 vehicles in the month compared to 184,149 vehicles for the same period a year earlier. Retail sales accounted for 129,382 vehicles and fleet accounted for 25 percent of total sales. On a year-to-date basis, fleet accounted for 27 percent of total sales.

      The Jeep® Compass and Jeep Grand Cherokee both reported April records as sales rose 10 percent and 23 percent, respectively. This was the second consecutive month Grand Cherokee set a record monthly high.  

      The Ram brand achieved its fourth consecutive month of record sales for the year, as April sales rose 25 percent to 53,811 vehicles. Ram pickup sales also had their second consecutive month of record sales with 49,106 vehicles sold.

      "April marks the start of the spring selling season and we anticipate strong consumer spending as we move through May,” U.S Head of Sales Reid Bigland said. "The industry may be shaking off the first-quarter sluggishness, but shoppers are coming into showrooms and buying. We sold more than 300 Jeep Gladiators, which are now starting to arrive in showrooms across the country, and we expect our Gladiator count to continue to rise, reflecting both ongoing demand and the fulfillment of the 4,190 orders taken in early April for the 2020 Gladiator Launch Edition."   

      See the attached table for the breakdown of brand and nameplate sales.

       
  • Social Stream

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. Burns
      Burns
      (31 years old)
    2. Cengiz Arslan
      Cengiz Arslan
      (51 years old)
    3. Chuck78
      Chuck78
      (41 years old)
    4. Future_GM_CEO
      Future_GM_CEO
      (36 years old)
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • My Clubs

About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×
×
  • Create New...