2002 Mazda Protege Reviews - Page 16 of 17

2002 Mazda Protege 5 2.0L from North America

Year of manufacture2002
First year of ownership2002
Most recent year of ownership2003
Engine and transmission 2.0L Manual
Performance marks 9 / 10
Reliability marks 8 / 10
Comfort marks 6 / 10
Dealer Service marks 4 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 6 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.6 / 10
Distance when acquired100 miles
Most recent distance10000 miles
Previous carMazda Protege

Summary:

A great handling annoyance

Faults:

Very wind noisy on hwy, especially from roofrack. And even without roofrack.

Low profile tires are $150 to replace per tire (I had to for 2 damaged by potholes)

Mileage is not as good as est. With 60% city, 40% hwy. Avg 22 mpg.

Roof rack whistles. Mazda does not have fix. Couldn't use rack.

Exterior dings very easily.

Parking bumps in city damage bumper paint very easily.

General Comments:

Acceleration is pretty peppy.

Handling is very good.

Hatch functionality is wonderful, especially with hard cover for hatch area.

Sound system is very good. Should be good in order to cover the wind noise on highway.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 14th January, 2003

29th Apr 2004, 06:24

I just purchased my Mazda Protege 5 and I haven't noticed the wind noise. When going 70mph it didn't seem to be as loud as my Lexus. The car handles great and it has great performance for a 2.0 engine. I don't think that any wind noise this car has should be a make or break decision about buying one.

11th Oct 2004, 19:06

Please spend some time shopping for your tires, with what is available on the internet from Tire Rack, etc, there is no excuse to complain about $150.00 ea tires!

28th May 2009, 20:49

I had 16" rims with 205/40/16's that I got for less than that price. Falken I think. It's like anything you need to shop around. The dealer (stealer) will certainly take liberties, inflating prices etc, as they only really make on parts these days.

It's a shame you gave the car, to someone who could glance at this forum, a bad rep over wind noise. Couldn't use the roof rack? Come on.

2002 Mazda Protege 5 2.0 gasoline (87 octane rating) from North America

Year of manufacture2002
First year of ownership2002
Most recent year of ownership2002
Engine and transmission 2.0 gasoline (87 octane rating) Semi-Automatic
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 6 / 10
Dealer Service marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 9 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.0 / 10
Distance when acquired9 miles
Most recent distance3700 miles
Previous carInfiniti I30

Summary:

An expensive-looking, $20K, miserly sports-car with 4 doors and a huge "trunk" area.

Faults:

Infiniti I30

It was a great car; I bought it with 40K miles, and drove it until 103K 2.5 years later (long commute). The main reason I got a new car was that the air conditioning compressor was going ($$$) and I would need brakes soon.

Protege5

Nothing yet, but I've only had it for 7 weeks.

General Comments:

Infiniti I30

It was plenty powerful, comfortable, but took Premium fuel.

Protege5

This is the best-handling car I've ever had (and I've had a couple that were pitched as being "sports cars"). With about 30 more horses, it would handle even better (for powering out of curves), and the car could definitely handle it. The SportAT lets you have about 75% of the fun of a stick, but the convenience of automatic (for when your mobile rings).

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 26th November, 2002

8th Apr 2004, 20:10

I agree with the comment about the Sportshift Auto transmission. It responds quickly on command and allows control of the engine revs. I drove an Acura CL 3.2 with the same type of Auto-Manual transmission and was surprised at how much slower it responded to shift lever movements. It wasn't nearly as fun to drive; despite having more power. That really made me appreciate my Protege5.

2002 Mazda Protege LX 2.0 NA from North America

Year of manufacture2002
First year of ownership2001
Most recent year of ownership2002
Engine and transmission 2.0 NA Automatic
Performance marks 10 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Dealer Service marks 9 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 9 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
9.4 / 10
Distance when acquired14 miles
Most recent distance10600 miles
Previous carMazda MX6

Summary:

This car is a Civic killer

Faults:

In the year that I have owned the car, nothing has gone wrong with it.

General Comments:

The car hugs curves with very little roll, if any.

The car magazines complained about the car's slow acceleration; I don't know what they are talking about.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 9th November, 2002

2002 Mazda Protege ES 2.0 from North America

Year of manufacture2002
First year of ownership2002
Engine and transmission 2.0 Manual
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.0 / 10
Distance when acquired1 miles
Most recent distance5000 miles
Previous carMazda Protege

Summary:

A cheap BMW

Faults:

None.

General Comments:

The Protege ES is the best looking small car.

The best features are great handling and great brakes.

One problem with the Protege is that it needs ten to fifteen more horsepower, although it has good midrange power.

The other thing that could be considered a problem, but one which I don't mind, is that the ride is a bit too taut.

If you want a comfortable, cheap luxury car buy a Corolla. If you want a cheap performance sedan, buy a Protege.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 3rd November, 2002

1st Dec 2006, 22:05

"If you want a comfortable, cheap luxury car buy a Corolla. If you want a cheap performance sedan, buy a Protege."

You're exactly right...it's a 4-door Miata. I keep thinking about getting rid of my '02 ES for something "nicer," but somehow I still have it. and I still love it.

Average review marks: 7.6 / 10, based on 64 reviews