What are the pluses and minuses of my two choices?

Mazda 3 new from the dealership, 2006, no upgrading
and minimal accessories. Or, Mazda 3, 2005, new from
dealership with added accessories (6 air-bags, central lock
system, alarm system, 4 electronic windows, alloy wheels.
The Mazda 3 2005 costs 280$ more than the simple 2006.
The car I purchase is to serve me for at least ten years.
Which is the preferable purchase? (the same upgraded)
Mazda 3 is sold now in 2006 for aprox. 1800$ more

And that price increase seems to be out of line ! Just a few years ago that amount could buy a complete car !

Cars with all the silly/useless bells and whistles do have less depreciation, IMO.
You really must decide on the value of some of these..

Here are some questions I would think about:

- Is the warranty any different between the two cars? Sometimes manufacturers change the terms of a warranty between model years.
- What are the other differences between the two years? $1800 is a good-sized jump in the price. Is there a different engine? More standard equipment? What would you be getting for your money with the 2006?
- Are you taking a long loan on this car? Longer than about 48 months and you'll be upside down on the loan for several years. This isn't a real big deal unless something happens to the car (accident, etc.) and it's not fixable. Because it's a year older, the 2005 likely will have a bigger spread between between the car's value and what you still owe.
- Do you actually care about these accessories? Extra airbags are nice, but if you wear your seatbelts properly, they're not that critical. Do you live someplace where an alarm system has value? Do you care about alloy wheels (items which are not very expensive to add after you've owned the car a while)? If not and you're buying a car you plan to drive for years, then the 2006 makes more sense financially.

Good luck. Either way, you'll have a fun car to drive!