Comparison Test: Minivans  
 

Introduction

Vehicle Details

10th Place

9th Place

8th Place

7th Place

6th Place

5th Place

4th Place

3rd Place

2nd Place

1st Place
Evaluations

 

7th Place: Mazda MPV

 

The MPV is an aging design that had some obvious shortcomings even new. It is noticeably shorter in length and narrower than the others here, which helps its handling and maneuverability, but limits interior space. Agile handling was made possible only by sacrificing ride comfort, and the 3.0-liter V6, the only available engine, is not powerful, refined, or fuel-efficient. It’s inexpensive, but it lacks the safety, luxury, and convenience features found on many competitors. The MPV may be discontinued in the US after the 2006 model year.

 

The MPV has a stiff, jittery ride that does not absorb road imperfections well. But a combination of this suspension tuning and the MPV’s relatively small size help it be one of the more agile minivans, but it still feels more like an average family sedan in this regard than a fun minivan. The steering isn’t especially responsive or communicative, which adds to that feeling. Acceleration is adequate off the line, but the MPV’s relatively small V6 struggles at higher speeds. Wind noise is well-suppressed, but there can be excessive engine and road noise. Fuel economy is unimpressive, especially considering the MPV’s smallish engine.  

 

Inside, the MPV has high, firm, and supportive front seats, though they are somewhat narrow and there could be more head space. The second-row seats need more legroom, and are too low and flat. The third row is narrow even for two passengers, and while it is a bit higher than a Ford Freestar’s, it is similarly hard and cramped. It folds into the floor in one piece, yet this action is less cumbersome than even in some newer models. The cargo well behind the third seat is conveniently shaped, but the van’s width limits cargo volume to less than any of the others in this class. The dash is well-assembled from high-quality materials, but doesn’t have the upscale feel of some newer minivans. The gauges are clear, and the instruments are conveniently laid out and simple to use. Drivers sit comfortably, and have good visibility. Entry/exit is easy enough to the first two rows of seats despite a somewhat high step-in, but accessing the third row requires fighting through a narrow passage to the small third row. When the two second-row captain’s chairs are mounted together as a bench seat, getting in and out is easier than using the center aisle. As in the Ford Freestar, the MPV uses a hand-operated parking brake mounted on the floor between the front seats, unlike in the Ford, the small center console folds out of the way to allow access to the rear seats, and the brake is closer to the driver’s seat.

 

The MPV did not excel in crash testing. Although NHTSA awarded it five stars for both the driver and for the front passenger in its frontal crash test, and five stars for both the driver and for the second row passenger in its side crash test even without the optional side airbags, it was only Acceptable in the IIHS offset crash test (a low score in that test for a current design) and was Poor in the IIHS side crash test without the optional front-seat side airbags (it was not tested with them). Its front-seat head restraints were also Poor. NHTSA did not evaluate the MPV’s rollover resistance.

 

The MPV reviewed here was the least expensive vehicle in this group, at $26,950. However, it is lacking many of the features that have come to be expected in current minivans. There is no stability control, no side airbags for anyone but the front-seat occupants, no heated seats, no power liftgate, no power passenger’s seat. Some niceties like power down second-row windows and a remote starting system are included, but there is nothing unique to this class.

 

Overall, the MPV suffers from age and from factors that plagued it from the start. Since its 2000 introduction, more safety, luxury, and convenience features became the minivan norm, as well as greater interior versatility and interior luxury. Most minivans have also improved in power and fuel economy since then. And the MPV’s relatively compact dimensions have always given it a much smaller interior than the competition. All this stacks up against a reasonable price and decent maneuverability, making the MPV minivan that’s not as well-rounded as the class leaders, but at least, unlike the vans that finished below it, has something unique.

 

NEXT: 6th Place

 

 

The Basics:

 

 Vehicle Reviewed:

 2006 Mazda MPV

 ES

 3.0-liter V6 (200 hp)

 5-speed automatic

 $26,950

 

  Pros:

-Price

-Agility

-Ergonomics

-Compact Exterior

 

 Cons:

-Interior Space

-Ride Comfort

-Refinement

-Fuel Economy

-Cargo Space

-Acceleration

-Available Features

 

 Overall:

The MPV is not well-rounded, but its relatively compact exterior dimensions at least offer a reason to consider it.

  

  

IFCAR Home

Reviews

Pricing

Other Sources

Top Picks

Vehicle Info

About IFCAR

Contact IFCAR

© 2006, Institute For Consumer Automotive Research