Sick of Protege engine-bashing (automotive press)
 

WTF, I have read in Consumer Guide (http://auto.consumerguide.com/auto/n...m/id/20544.htm) and other sources that the Protege is supposedly underpowered. Give me a break!! A DX auto Protege is just as quick as a frigging overpriced EX auto Civic. It's also quicker than an LX Civic, you know, the one that YOU CAN'T EVEN GET ABS BRAKES ON (stupid Honda optioning!!). And as far as safety, the Civic gets better offset-crash scores than Protege, but it is also 130-180 pounds LIGHTER (give or take) than a Pro, depending on which model/options you get. Weight is one of the most important safety factors.

So what if our 2.0L engines are 11-13 years old in design. You want a car to pick on, how about the goddamn 2.0L JETTA or GOLF? These things are SO damn slow, especially the automatics. The new 2.0L Beetle Convertible does 0-60 in a wonderful 12 seconds. Why do these crappy 8-valve cars get off the hook? because they're German, and supposedly more "honky-yuppified" and above reproach?? GIVE ME A BREAK!!!

Thanks. Needed that. Love ya.

Relax dude. Take some deep breaths. :)

There's no point getting pissed over such things. They can say whatever they want. The important thing is that you have your Protege and you love it. :)

The fact is that many of us here think that it would be better if we had slightly more power (check some of the "what do u like/dislike about your pro?" threads).
If we had the 170hp versions that they are selling in Japan, it would be perfect!

yeh yeh fine douggie.....up my dosage, anger management, etc.

I do love my protege. Just felt like representing, is all. Peace.

just to add to the original post, VW's are made in mexico now LOL

jetta's and beetles are shit, they are overweight (3000+lbs) don't have much interior room, slow as hell, shitty gas millage, low HP and TQ, bad interior design, and they cost fukin 8 grand CAD more than the other ones in the same class

Thats funny about the bad interiors. I guess thats why journalists are always comparing other cars to the interiors of the VW products.

The interiors in VWs are quite nice and of high quality. The problem I think everyone has with them is the slight ergonomic problems. HVAC controls down low, poor cupholders, etc. Also they are known rattle-traps.

VW does make some good engines. I'd love to stuff a 1.8T into my Pro. Super mod-friendly. It even has plenty of power straight from the factory. The 2.0, though, is old, outdated, burns oil, wastes gas, and unrefined. Bah.

Just make sure you opt a 1.8T w/ the new coils. LMAO! What a mess they've got there.

dont bash VW just because our cars are slow. i kinda regret not getting a 1.8t, and i plan on getting one soon. they are just better cars and you gotta accept that. the media will bash proteges, and we just gotta take it. our cars are slow and theres not much you can do about it. if it bothers you that much get a faster car.

My point is that a 2.0L VW is much SLOWER than a Protege, costs more, is less reliable, and yet people ignore this because it's, well, "German" and yuppified, and that makes it all OK. A 1.8T is faster than a Pro, but also costs much more, so it goddamn well should be faster and better. No extra credit there.

Joe you are totally right. But at the same time Mazda should be stickin some more power into these things to try to complete the whole package. Bring in some from JAPAN. those babies fly.

Weak Engines
 

Sorry that article pissed you off, JoeT. I've long made known my stance when it comes to the FS-DE; I think it sucks.

I've never been a racer/ricer by any means-- I'm just an average fellow who can appreciate a powerful engine, but generally doesn't drive that fast, anyway, and more appreciate efficiency, quiet operation, and reliability. The current engine in the Protege only delivers ONE desirable characteristic: Reliability.

Aside from that, this engine is a raucous, irritating, comparatively primitive and inefficient design. It's got an outdated, heavy-ass iron block (compared to offerings from other mainstream Japanese auto makers) and no variable valve timing whatsoever. I've always been offended that Mazda has been satisfied keeping it in the Protege when this car deserves so much better, as do the people who have supported Mazda by buying their products.

And for all you naysayers who are going to get all pissy because I'm ripping on the FS-DE, you should consider that there's a reason this engine will be dropped by Mazda when the next generation Protege/Mazda3 comes out, and it's not because they're simply bored of it: This engine can't compete against those engines offered by, for instance, Toyota, Honda, or Nissan. The FS-DE is noisier, less efficient, and heavier than it should be, especially given that, for Christ sake, we're in the 21st Century, dammit. Consider the engine in the current generation Corolla-- It's a 1.8 liter that delivers the same horsepower as the Protege yet delivers 40 MPG on the highway. I'm not saying the Corolla is the ultimate car, but put THAT engine in the Protege and I'd be happy. THAT'S what the Protege should be delivering, but isn't. Why? Because nearly everyone else has moved on to better engines while Mazda hasn't. It's a simple as that.

Every time I fire up my Protege in the morning I can't say I enjoy listening to the sounds of a diesel engine-- And that's what it sounds like, you all know it: That VTCS rattle. I find it embarrassing, personally. Even after warming up the engine is always noisy.

I actually still enjoy driving the Protege around town-- I feel it's a reasonably zippy car, and many of us are familiar with how well it handles. That said, I honestly don't like the engine for all the reasons outlined above. I'll be glad to see it retired-- Good riddance. It should have been done 5 years ago.

Have you taken your Pro in for the "fix"?

While the FS-DE may not be the best engine in the world, I don't think that expectations of 40MPG and 250 plus horsepower at the same time are possible. Keep things in perspective. The 1.8T VW doesn't get great gas mileage, either but that's because it has 180 horsepower and a turbo.

OK TheMan, we are of one mind in this regard.
I drove the Corolla. Engine output comparable, better mileage, but noisy as FRIG-ALL under hard accelleration. If one likes quiet operation, I can't see him/her choosing the Corolla.
By the way, the rear suspension on Corolla, speaking of backward technology, eats large rhino nuts. I came out of a sharp turn while test-driving, and the car was very wavy. There was also a large dead center-spot in the steering that totally turned me off.

Oh yeah, I test drove the Corolla last year and I was suprised at how rough the engine was. My friends 93 Corolla was way smoother that that (maybe the engine is hasn't been broken in, but still didn't expect that kind of roughness from a new car).

As for driving sensation. The Corolla was like a$$. I didn't feel the fun in driving it at all for the entire test drive session.

Just realized that now we're bashing some other cars just to make us feel better... :)