Low End Sedans (under $16k)

lleroi · May 2002

the leasing logic-i'm not sure how the numbers would work out.There seem to be arguments both ways on the high miles car.Ive just never had much luck squeezing big dollars out of high mileage cars.I'm guessing a Honda or Toyota dealer will wholesale these cars and make a low trade in offer-considering the price diff to begin with I'm not sure there would be an advantage.

ziglifler · May 2002

no i said 50% after 2 years sucks . your the one that brought resale into it . 54% , 55% whats it matter . at close to 50% lose it sucks period .
and yes if your car has little to no options on it the resale is gonna suck no matter what the maker is on the most part .

dude sometimes it is best to drop things because all your doing is showing how narrowminded you are on the subject . get off it already

backy · May 2002

with lleroi on resale. It's a bigger issue for the owner who puts few miles on a car and trades every 2-4 years. And these are typical leasing candidates. For them, if they don't plan on buying the car at the end of the lease, it makes more sense to buy a car with the highest possible resale value, which should equate to the highest residual value and the lowest payments. Case in point: recent ads in my local paper for Civic DXs for $99/month with about $1800 total cash up front, for a 36 month lease. Accord LXs were $199/month. The residual (not advertised) is probably hideous, but it's a low payment if you want a new car every 3 years.

If you check out Edmunds.com's TCOs, you'll see the biggest differences in depreciation in the first year. Owners of Korean cars and some others get killed in the first year, then after that the differences aren't as big, such that the five-year TCOs are pretty close to cars with higher resale values. So Korean cars are not a good value if you intend to keep one for only a year or two or three.

majorthomecho · May 2002

I sold my Escort a couple of months back and it had over 150,000 miles on it. I have no idea what I could have gotten for it. I just know what I did sell it for and that was very little. I did so because I have the Echo and I sold the Escort to a farm hand employed by my mother and stepfather.

majorthomecho · May 2002

If I could ignore my desire for high quality and ignore my desire for great fuel economy numbers, I could see myself buying an Aerio GS, but how easy would it be to change the things I don't like?

I think it would be pretty easy to swap one gear shift knob with another, but how easy would it be to swap the rubber boot surrounding the gear shift lever for a leather one?

I dislike the orange over red tail light covers. How hard would it be to buy after market light covers that are red over orange and change the wiring so that the appropriate portion of the tail light comes on at the appropriate time?

freddy_k · May 2002

How do you reconfiger the interior so that the seat isn't in such a horrable position? Am I the only one who fount the odd seat up high, steering wheel down low configuration rather bus like?

majorthomecho · May 2002

I did not notice that. But that brings up a question. Given the increase in "tall sedans" is anyone making racing seats for these cars that can be easily swapped for the seats presently in a "tall sedan?"

lngtonge18 · May 2002

If you find the Aerio's seat position odd, you ought to really hate the Matrix's seat position. I drove one over the weekend and decided to mark it off my list. I love the Matrix from a styling standpoint and its roomy and the seats comfortable, but good lord, what were they thinking with the driving position and driving feel? The steering wheel might as well be directly attached to the instrument pod considering how short the the actual column is. The gear shift is too far away for those with short arms (I don't buy the usefulness of center dash mounted shifters), but the pedals are too close. My legs felt a little scrunched up when positioned to reach the steering wheel and gear shift comfortably. The large dash combined with the short windshield and large A pillars made the view out seem confined. Driving it honestly felt like piloting around a 4000 pound minivan with firm shocks. It just felt a lot bigger then what it was. The chrome accents were irritating me under full sun, not to mention they made snapping sounds when you touched them and there was a rattle coming from the center of the dash (very un-Toyotalike).
Anyway, back to the Aerio's driving position. The Aerio is the opposite of the Matrix. The steering column is long, the shifter is properly placed, the A pillars are out of the way, the dash design is slim and non-confining, and the windshield is large. I find the Aerio's driving position to be great! The steering wheel does appear to be out of place, with how it protrudes so far from such a small instrument pod, but in actuality, it seems high enough to me in relation to the seat and we are the same size (I'm 5'6", 120#). I think I have my car search narrowed down to the Protege5, Aerio SX, Tiburon, and Lancer OZ. Decisions, decisions....

shrique · May 2002

I know personally of the vehicles that you listed I would choose the P5...of course I already did. I know that if I can find a comfortable seating postion in that car anyone can. I have a long back, short legs and I'm not particularly svelt.

I agree with you on the Matrix seating position. Considering it's a taller car they shouldn't have had the dash so close to the driver. It feels really confining. I've sat in all the other cars i just havn't driven them. The Aerio I was not too impressed with of course I don't like digital dashes much but that's my opinion. The Tiburon isn't my style. The Lancer I know nothing about except for specifications. IMHO I think the P5 is the prettiest in a boy-racer kind of way.

The June Car & Driver has a good comparo with the Matrix XRS, Vibe (not GT), Aerio SX, Protege5 and the Focus ZX5. ( I think I got them all) It's got good statistical information on them all.

majorthomecho · May 2002

I thought you already had a Lancer OZ. Are you thinking about getting another one?

Regarding the C&D comparo, the Aerio SX came in last while the Protege5 came in first. There was a sixth participant and it was the PT Cruiser.

freddy_k · May 2002

Is the Matrix a Pontiac, or is the Vibe a Toyota?

newcar31 · May 2002

the vibe is a Toyota.

lngtonge18 · May 2002

Yea, I'm considering getting another Lancer OZ. This time it would be black with a 5 speed. My current one is silver with an automatic. I drove the 5 speed and absolutely loved how it drove. The shifter had a nice feel to it and the clutch was very smooth. I already know I like the car's looks and performance. The only thing hindering my decision is the pronounced non-adjustable lumbar in the driver's seat. It's a bit too uncomfortable for me. I have some concerns with the Protege5. My friend has a 00 Protege LX, and while it's been reliable, the dash looks a tad outdated (the steering wheel on the 5 is awesome however, as are the white gauges) and the engine isn't the smoothest idling unit. His also seems rather bouncy on the highway, which is the downside to the sporty handling. I have also heard a lot of complaints from Protege5 owners of lots of wind noise and annoying rattles. But I definitely think the Protege5 looks bitchin

majorthomecho · May 2002

You spent that much, were seemingly concerned with performance, and you got a manual? Man, what were you thinking? If you are putting up with the Lancer's seats now, wouldn't the seats in the manual Lancer be the same?

majorthomecho · May 2002

The Aerio GS will soon be available as front wheel drive and all wheel drive. If a person was going to buy an Aerio with the intention of tuning it, which set up (FWD or AWD) would make for a better base to use?

shrique · May 2002

The wind noise seems to mainly be from that roof rack they included. Once you take it off it's pretty quiet. I know personaly I haven't had any rattles on my car.

lngtonge18 · May 2002

Remember, I drive the Hyundai Accent. I only drive the Lancer occassionally. When I bought the Lancer, I was very limited in my choices. The 000 deal is only good on those Mitsus on the dealer's lot. There was only 1 OZ on the lot and it had an automatic (in fact there were no Lancers with a stick on the lot), which thrilled my partner. If I had my way, I wouldn't have bought anything but a stick, but this time I didn't get my way. Yes, the seats are the same. That's why I'm not completely sure I want to get another Lancer. I like the back of the seat to be flat; I HATE lumbar support and I don't understand why they didn't offer an adjustable one, like my cheap Hyundai has. Hyundai seems to make some of the most comfortable seats, even though they are firm. If I can get another Lancer under the 000 deal, I think I can overlook the lumbar problem though. Not having to pay for 2 new cars for so long gives me lots of time to pay off some bills (yes yes, I know I would be way upside down by the time I start paying, but oh well).

majorthomecho · May 2002

Simple solution. Just rip the seat out of your Hyundai and put it in your Mitsu. ; )

majorthomecho · May 2002

Lng, don't know if you read this magazine or not, but the latest issue of Import Tuner magazine discloses that they will be buying and tuning a Suzuki Aerio SX. Just thought you might like to know.

freddy_k · May 2002

ROTFLOL

Can't wait to see it!

majorthomecho · May 2002

People tune the Focus, the Neon, the Civic, etc. so why not an Aerio?

shrique · May 2002

It would look really strange with side skirts and lowered. (GRIN) Anyone with Photoshop want to craft something up? Maybe it would look good.

freddy_k · May 2002

I get amused by the money people dump into tuning any of those mentioned cars, but the Aerio, that is outright halarious. I don't care how fast you can make it go, the aerio is not for the tuning crowd. The dimensions of the car and seating position alone would keep boy racers away from this one. No this one is strictly for the people who want the most interior space for the least amount of money.

muffin_man · May 2002

If you saw the full size vans, minivans, and little box wagons that kids are into fixing up over here (Japan), you wouldn't be so surprised that somebody might want to fix up an Aerio.

iluvmysephia1 · May 2002

"fixed up" look to it. Kinda sorta, eh? Not a bad looker on the Internet but I'll reserve judgement until I see an SX(or regular sedan)in person. Who's eagerly awaiting the Nissan March mini-mite out next year? Anabody? Was it a 1-cylinder motor it's gonna have?

tazereli · May 2002

i for one would have zero interest in a car that has fewer cylindars that most motorcycles. cars like that are just way too dangerous to drive anywhere near a hiway. even 4cyl metros get me scared on the highway. if that nissan march is coming here it should be restricted to urban areas only. with 50 miles of hi way that i drive everyday, these tiny cars would get blown off the road like a gum wrapper. fi youre talking strictly gas mileage most compacts get good enough gas milage. for me that means a golf TDI. but for fun and decent mileage its the wrx.

majorthomecho · June 2002

Motor Trend has an article about seven cars for under $15,000. Anyone else want to discuss the results.

FWIW, the article title is misleading as a couple of the cars run for more than $15k.

protegextwo · June 2002

Boxes, Size Small:

Chrysler PT Cruiser

Ford Focus ZX5

Pontiac Vibe

Mazda Protegé5

Suzuki Aerio SX

Toyota Matrix XRS

http://www.caranddriver.com/xp/Caranddriver/comparisontests/2002/june/200206_comparo_boxes.xml?&page=1

OK, they are not sedans, nonetheless very interesting where they rated the Vibe/Matrix?

-Larry

backy · June 2002

Well, the MT comparo has the usual inconsistencies as do most of these comparos. Of course, the result of the low-end comparo where the Accent beat the ECHO and Rio must be wrong, right, Major? ;-) In the low end test, I noticed that the Accent and the Rio both took about the same number of top finishes in the individual categories, way more than the ECHO, yet the Rio came in last. Go figure. Also, I expect that the editors chose the vehicles first, then decided on their criteria. For instance, on the low-end cars they made a CD mandatory, yet not on the higher-end cars. I expect that was because the Civic LX doesn't offer a CD as standard, or even as a factory option. Then then made power locks mandatory on the higher-end cars, but not power windows. I figure that's because the Corolla CE doesn't offer power windows. I also can't figure out why they ordered automatics on the smaller cars and sticks on the bigger cars--seems like it should be reversed. Then they could have included the Corolla LE 5-speed instead of the CE, and it would have been closer in equipment level to the other cars. Personally, I wish they had included the Elantra GLS in the test. With an as-tested price of about $13,600, it should have fared the best in the value assessment, which seemed to be very important in this comparo. I think the Lancer got short shrift, ranking it last along with the Focus. Note that two of the three minuses they highlight are styling-related. The other cars' minuses are more performance-related. I also think they should do a better job of staying within their self-decided price limits. If the Civic and Focus are over $15K, either be honest about it and raise the limit, or choose other models (e.g., Civic DX or the Focus with fewer options). There are other cars they could have chosen that do fit under the limit, e.g. Elantra, Sentra, Neon, Aerio, and Protege DX.

How's that for a start?

muffin_man · June 2002

Of course, my subscription to motor trend just expired. Could somebody summarize (or list) the final rankings of the sub $15k test? Thanks.

backy · June 2002

Two groups:

$12,000-$14,000:
1. Accent GL
2. ECHO
3. Rio

Around $15,000:
1. Corolla CE
2. Civic LX
3 (tie). Focus SE
3 (tie). Lancer ES

Also, on my earlier post (which I typed too quickly), I meant to say that MT should have used the Corolla LE 5-speed instead of the CE, based on their original criteria. If they had used automatics for these cars, the LE would have been far above the $15,000 limit.

muffin_man · June 2002

You know, for the longest time I was planning to buy either an RSX-S or a WRX, and then for a while it was between a Miata and an MR-S. And lately I'm thinking, for all the money I would be spending, am I really getting something I would love? (and while I think I would love the Miata or MR-S, could I live with them?)

So I've found myself seriously considering a Hyundai Accent, and when it's paid off in 3 or 5 years, seeing what else is out there. And the more I've read about it, the more appealing it sounds, and the more I'm looking forward to the test drive.

Backy, thanks for posting the results. Did they say how all the cars would have finished if they had been one big group?

shrique · June 2002

The you can never get a consensus about a comparo? Someone always complains about the cars they did or didn't include and about what model they should have used. If you've read the letters to the editor they is always at least one where the editor jumps in and says that "getting a bunch of cars together to compare isn't as easy as it sounds"

Just a thought.

backy · June 2002

No, they treated the cars as two separate groups.

Before you spring for an Accent, you might want to look at the Elantra. In my town it goes for only about $500 more than the Accent after discounts and rebate, and that's with more features on the Elantra. The Elantra is much more car for the money.

majorthomecho · June 2002

Backy, you pointed out some problems that I had with the article. I feel they were not consistent within each part of the article and they were not consistent between the parts of the article.

An example of the first part is that at one point they stated the fit and finish of the Accent and the Echo were equal. Another later sentence seemed to reaffirm that to a certain extent. However, when it came time to give a grade for fit and finish, the Accent got a much higher grade than the Echo. If the fit and finish were equal, how is it that the grades were unequal?

An example of the second is that the editors seemed to give the Corolla [and Civic] points in the category of value because they would cost less to own particularly compared to Korean models [even though no Korean cars were in that part of the comparo]. Strange that the Echo does not seem to get any points for having a lower cost of ownership and it was being compared against two Korean cars. And Motor Trend says that the ultimate reason the Echo did not win was value.

And check out the What's Hot, What's Not section of the comparo. Two of the three strikes against the Accent were "performance" related while only one of the strikes against the Echo [and the Rio] was/were "performance" related.

Also, the Echo produced the best slalom numbers, but Motor Trend downplayed that. They complained that the Echo was unentertaining to drive fast.

Finally, the Rio stopped in the shortest distance the first time, but then they had trouble with the brakes locking up [and these were ABS]. Yet, the Rio got the best score in the brake category.

I could go on [and I will later], but I need to get ready for work.

freddy_k · June 2002

Because they are all full of crap. They complain about the wrong things, and commend the wrong things. They complain that this sports car has a tiny back seat, and that wagon doesn't handle well enough. They have no sense of priority, and have no idea what people are looking for in their cars. I hope nobody takes these things seriously enough to make a decision for them.

shrique · June 2002

You guys just continue to prove my point. Go out and write your own magazine and I bet people would complain about the very same things your nocking them for. (chuckle)

I read as many comparo's that I can. I take whatever info I get with a grain of salt, drive the cars and THEN make up my mind. Personally I like taking the "cons" that the mags come up with and comparing them to what I think when I drive the car. Sometimes they have a point and sometimes they are dead wrong. But then again that's my opinion

Chow(der)

backy · June 2002

we need to remember that mags like C/D, MT, and R&T are not in the News/Information industry, but in the Entertainment industry. Objectivity, consistency, and accuracy are not requirements for the Entertainment industry.

P.S. Majorthom, why are you complaining about how MT rated the Rio's brakes? We all know that one good stop is all we need from a car in its lifetime. ;-)

lngtonge18 · June 2002

Finally, the Accent has been vindicated in a comparison test and shown to be a good car and comparable to a Toyota! However, I feel I need to help clear up some of your confusion with the results:

First, let's discuss the fit and finish ratings. I think it has more to do with perceptions of Toyota and Hyundai quality then anything else. Toyota is always expected to be tops in fit and finish, but apparently, the Echo didn't live up to these expectations and was a dissapointment, thus the lower rating (might also have to do with the funky styling which they didn't like). Hyundai, on the other hand, is seen by most people as being junk, so the high levels of quality they encountered shocked them and made a big impression, thus the higher rating. They also stated in the verdict that the Accent matched the Echo in materials and assembly and in some cases beat the Echo. Those certain cases must have also raised its rating.

As for the Civic and Corolla value rating, what M/T was trying to say was that the greater expense for these larger compact cars might be worth it over the cheaper SUBCOMPACT Korean cars (like the Accent and Rio) due to their lower cost of ownership. Their actual ratings were based on how they compared to the other compact cars in the test. The Echo didn't enjoy the same plus because its $2k higher price didn't even include pw, pl, and pm like the Accent. This hurt its value rating a lot and couldn't offset its possible lower ownership costs.

As for the complaints regarding the Echo's suspension, it was panned not only for the fact it was unexciting to drive. It was said to have an unsettled front suspension that bounced and juddered over uneven pavement and freeway expansion strips. It's tires were also said to give up grip too quickly. They downplayed the higher slalom number because an unsettled suspension doesn't instill confidence and can scare less capable drivers. They mark down a car heavily for this feeling. It may have gotten higher numbers with a professional driver, but its unsettled nature can have the opposite effect with a non-professional driver.

Lastly, I think M/T made a mistake about mentioning ABS on the Rio. It wasn't mentioned as an option at the beginning and is not mentioned in the stats, therefore I don't think it had it. A car's brakes should never lock if it has ABS. If it did have ABS and the brakes were locking, they would have made a big deal out of the malfunction. They most likely rated the brakes higher because of the significantly shorter distance at the first stop. 24 feet is nothing to sneeze at and is a big difference. The fact that the brakes faded and locked up easier after repeated hard stops hurt it, but the brakes still performed better initially then the Accent and Echo and that counts. Honestly, how many times do you slam on your brakes for all their worth 5 times in a row? That first initial emergency braking situation is what matters and in the Rio you will stop a lot faster then in the other two. Thus its higher rating in the brake department.

jchan2 · June 2002

Did Motor Trend test a Saturn SL? My friend is going to buy a Saturn SL for under $12,000.

backy · June 2002

No. Maybe they tested it in 1990, when it first came out. It hasn't had a redesign since then. They'll probably wait and test the new Ion, the SL's replacement (at last!).

protegextwo · June 2002

"No. Maybe they tested it in 1990, when it first came out. It hasn't had a redesign since then..."

Now, that is funny! LOL!! :-)))

-larry

majorthomecho · June 2002

If the Rio that Motor Trend tested did NOT have ABS, then why did they clearly bring up the issue with the ABS? They are supposedly car guys. Does this mean that they might not know what they are talking about?

majorthomecho · June 2002

One thing I noticed in looking at the pictures in the article is that the Echo has the 3-in-1 stereo system. The other two vehicles don't have that.

Also, the Echo comes with height adjustable rear seat headrests. The others are fixed height headrests.

I tried to put together an Echo equipped the way the Motor Trend car was for the same price and I failed. I selected just the options [their car seemed to have] ala carte and I came up with an MSRP that was less. I selected the options as part of packages [getting more options in the process] and I came out with a car that was more than what they showed.

Would the fact they are in California and I am in the midwest have something to do with the difference in price?

lngtonge18 · June 2002

The ABS was a misprint. It happens. Has nothing to do with them being incompetent car people. Rather, they are incompetent proof readers.

By the way, are you including destination charges in your MSRP figures? M/T does that. That might account for the difference.

majorthomecho · June 2002

And I suppose their saying on the cover something about seven surprising cars for under $15,000 when only five of the cars were actually under $15,000 was just a misprint.

And how do you know the part about the ABS was a misprint? ABS is an option on the Rio, after all. Did you write the editors of Motor Trend? Did they publish a correction on their website?

Another thing I did not understand is how the automatic equipped Echo took so much longer to stop than the manual equipped Echo that Motor Trend tested a couple of years ago. Was the difference in weight that great?

Carsdirect.com includes the destination charges in the figures it provides so that does not explain the differences in figures.

majorthomecho · June 2002

Yes, let's listen to what editors of car publications (both print and online) say about cars and ignore any data generated by survey responses from actual owners.

After all, surveys from actual owners lead Consumer Reports to predict that the Toyota Echo is the most reliable, new car for 2002.

And it holds that distinction by a wide margin over the second place car.

The Hyundai Elantra was kept out of the basement only due to the presence of the Ford Focus.

backy · June 2002

Well, maybe not, maybe just really lousy proofreaders. Another example: they talk about the need for a rear anti-roll bar on the Lancer. Guess what the vehicle summary on p. 90 shows? Anti-roll bars front and rear on the Lancer.

Another thing I find curious. They note that "the Civic LX scored a near-miss on first place." When I tally their scores, I count six top scores and three ties for the top score for the Corolla, and two top scores plus two ties for top score for the Civic. That's a "near-miss"? In contrast, the third-place Focus has two top scores and one tie for top score. I guess they didn't consider that a "near-miss" for second place.

Majorthom, I am surprised you haven't mentioned yet that they complained about the ECHO's center-mounted speedometer, yet in the same magazine they reviewed the Mini Cooper S and somehow had no problem seeing its center-mounted speedometer (although they did gripe about all the information that is crammed into one place). But at least the Mini Cooper has a tach in front of the driver.

backy · June 2002

CR's top-rated car for predicted reliability for 2002 models is the Infiniti G20, not the ECHO, per the April 2002 Auto Issue. The Infiniti I35 and QX4 (SUV, but some think of them as "cars") also appear to top the ECHO by a slim margin. There are several other cars that have ratings just a bit below that of the ECHO. So to say the ECHO is the top car and holds that position by a large margin over the second place car is inaccurate. Also, to say that the Focus kept the Elantra "out of the basement" is misleading. The Elantra's rating was a tad below average, far better than the Focus' and better than about 50 other vehicles in CR's report. In fact, the Elantra scored better in CR's reliability report than did the Malibu and Corvette, winners of 2002 J.D. Powers awards for Initial Quality. Just shows that initial quality is not the only measure of a car, I guess.

Maybe we should not be so harsh to MT's editors on their proofreading after all, as we can all make mistakes once in awhile.

jimbeaumi · June 2002

Thanks for the CR clarification. As a reader of CR as well as the car mags -- I like all sides -- I am sooooo tired of people misinterpreting. Not only was the Elantra just below average, the brand's ratings are climbing rapidly. Also, one should note that the 2001 Elantra is the first year of the new model, so the customary three-year average isn't applicable. Further, the reliability ratings are weighted to reflect cooling and powertrain problems, and there have been many people on here commenting about shift-flare. Even though that fix is covered under warranty, it still could qualify as a "problem" in a survey.

Backy is also correct about J.D.Powers. Personally, I take with a grain of salt the awards for "Most Appealing Blue Mid-Premium Near-Luxury Car with Cupholders Built on a Tuesday in Poughkeepsie" and the like.

Low End Sedans (under $16k)

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles