Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Given my clarification, do you want to rethink your post?
And Consumer Reports cannot state the predicted reliability of the Accent and Rio given that not enough owners have turned in surveys.
Do you honestly think that the Rio and the Accent would have knocked the Echo out of the top spot if enough responses were received? No one really knows, but I think it would be doubtful.
And you can bring in all the what ifs you want, but face facts and deal with the reality of the situation. In small cars, the Toyota Echo ranked first in predicted reliability in Consumer Reports New Car Buying Guide 2002 and the Hyundai Elantra ranked next to last.
P.S. Did the other M/T Echo have ABS? The Echo tested by Car and Driver had good brakes but it had ABS. Apparently, without ABS, the Echo doesn't stop too good. That's a good example of how ABS contributes to better stopping distances even on dry pavement, contrary to what most people think.
I have no idea on the ABS. I do know that Consumer Reports also tested a manual Echo and it stopped in a decent distance. Again, I don't know if it was ABS equipped or not. I also know that I had to do a panic stop at a speed much greater than sixty miles per hour and it did not feel like it took a long distance.
I guess we can sum up your position that you would rather own a car you are more likely NOT to be driving because it is in the shop than a car you are more likely to be driving and not in the shop?
And I will admit that the editors of Motor Trend found the Accent to be a better driving experience. That does not mean I agree with them.
Don't you think you should get Backy to admit that the owners of Echoes, evidently, reported [to Consumer Reports] a lot fewer problems than did owners of Elantras?
1) Opinions from large groups of owners.
2) Opinions of one or just a few owners.
3) Opinions of auto reviewers who keep a car a long time.
4) Opinions of auto reviewers who have a car on a short term basis.
This is where you tell me that the Echo MAY have better reliability.
"Regardless, Hyundai is closing fast in reliability..."
This is where you tell me that the Accent MAY have good reliability. What's the difference?
If someone has been burned by a badly manufactured car (ahem, Cavalier) and wants a realiable car, Which one is more likely to be reliable? You tell me that Hundai is gaining on Toyota and that the Echo MAY be a reliable car. If you have lots of miles to drive and only car about reliability and don't want the hassle of an unreliable car which one is going to get choosen?
Backy, you made a statement sometime back that implied the 2002 Accent ranked higher in the JD Powers survey than did the 2002 Echo. If you have a source, would you please post a link?
If someone told me, "Hey, the guy is incompetent in certain areas, but you can still trust him," I would not feel very reassured.
Well, what do actual owners say about the body and interior quality of the cars?
According to the JD Powers consumer site (http:///www.jdpower.com), the Accent scored three out of five stars in this area. This means its body and interior quality did not really stand out.
Hey, this must mean the Echo did really, really bad. Right? WRONG!
The Echo scored five out of five stars in this area. This means its body and interior quality is among the best.
why bother people will think what they want . you can't measure reliability by what this mag says and what that survey said . it is all hit or miss . if jd powers sent surveys to ALL new car buyers then u could use the info . but they don't . they might at best send them out to 10% and i think thats alot . you can't get a real feel for that few . Major loves his echo , and he has a right to . you are just wasteing your time and efford
In case you didn't read my earlier post, I did acknowledge the ECHO's top rating for predicted reliability in CR's Small Car class. I said "The ECHO's showing in CR's list for Small Cars is impressive,...". Based on CR's latest survey, the ECHO came out better in predicted reliability than the Elantra. That is a fact. I don't dispute facts. As you said, no one really knows if the Accent and Rio would have knocked the ECHO out of the top spot for Small Cars. Maybe next year those cars will be included in CR's ratings and then we'll know.
I don't recall making a claim that J.D. Powers ranked an Accent above an ECHO. I remember doing some kind of post a long time ago regarding J.D. Powers' online comparator, and I think one of the cars was the ECHO but I don't remember what the other car was. It might have been the Elantra; I don't think it was the Accent. If you find my post maybe you can refresh my memory.
Here is how I rank opinions:
1) Opinions of people I personally know and respect.
2) Opinions based on statistical evidence from a large sample; i.e., opinions backed by facts. Surveys that are based on subjective questions, e.g. J.D. Powers and CR's, are of some value but are tainted by the subjectivity of the questions.
3) Opinions based on first-hand, everyday use over a long period of time, e.g. like the long-term tests from Edmunds.com and other reviewers.
Other opinions aren't really worth that much to me except for entertainment value and to start a discussion.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Ok, now that I got that out of my system, let's move on. Whether you want to believe a professional over your own views is your right. However, keep in mind these people do this for a living. They drive cars that cost thousands more then the Echo and Accent and thus have access to much nicer, higher quality cars. They know quality when they see it and they know when a car has bad handling traits. The fact they were impressed with the Accent's quality means something, so does the fact they found the Echo's suspension unsettled. This wasn't the only test that found problems with the Echo's build quality either. If it was, it would give me pause. However, Car and Driver complained of much lower build quality then what they expected from Toyota. Two tests with similar findings leads to a common theme.
I never said there was a large group of owners who claim the Accent is higher quality then the Echo. What I did say is that a lot more people are turning to the Accent and finding a car worthy of buying. In 2001, the Accent outsold the Echo by a wide margin. Sales mean something. People wouldn't buy it if it was junk. I put no stock whatsoever in what jdpowers says or CR. They simply don't poll enough owners to mean anything. I never got a JD power quality survey for my Accent nor my Lancer. I did get a JD power survey on the sales experience and service experience for the Lancer, but that's it. Out of curiousity, are you referring to the initial quality survey, or the one after a few years of ownership? If the latter, they most likely are referring to the pre-2000 Accent, which did have lower build quality. Last time I looked on there (about a year ago, before they started charging to see stuff), they had no new info on the 00-01 Accent because too few people responded to the polls. That tells you something right there about their validity. Anywho, this debate could go on endlessly. You like your Echo and hate the Accent. I hate the Echo and like my Accent. We will just have to leave it at that.
News: Regular News: Articles Edmund.com
As far as subjective things like how it rides and whether the seating position is good or not, i can't say because I'm not you but I don't like the Accent. Then again I'm overweight I have short legs and a tall spine. If I say a car isn't comfortable then it doesn't matter much to the rest of the world because my demographic is so small (GRIN)
I know personally if I were to buy a Korean car Hundai is top on my list.
On a side note does anyone know which Korean car has a tall roofed hatchback with pivoting front seats? I saw this at a car show and for the life of me I can't remember what car it was. I can't find any site that lists that as being an option. It wasn't a figment of my imagination it was at the autoshow in MPLS and it has to be either a Daewoo or Kia because they were in the same room together. (along with the conversion vans) Did I actually see this or am I nuts?
And I admitted that Motor Trend chose the Accent over the Echo. AGAIN, that does not mean I agree with them.
Lng, you seem to be arguing so strongly that professional auto reviewers know what they are talking about than I guess that means you agree the Suzuki Aerio deserved the last place finish that Car And Driver gave it in its recent comparo?
Pro:
Excellent headroom
Lots of Features
Cool Swiveling seats
useful folding backseats (35/30/35
Good legroom in back seats
Con's
Front seats felt cheap (real squishy)
driving position was low in a tall car
Plastic felt "cheap"
Doors made "poing" noise when closing (door metal vibrated like a drum)
Anyway take it with a grain of salt. This was in Feb and it was one of the last things I looked at. Not that it matters anyway us guys in the USA will never see it now.
Again, did you write Motor Trend? Did they make a correction? Or are you employed by Miss Cleo?
BTW, if I made as many mistakes as Motor Trend, I would be very quickly out the door at my job.
As far as how much all this talk is affecting me, the answer is very little to not at all. I am extremely, extremely difficult to upset offline and even more so online.
The findings of Motor Trend, Consumer Reports, Edmunds, etc., are all just grist for the mill.
Sorry guys, but you [people who post in this thread] are just entertainment to me.
Seriously though, I agree with everything Car and Driver said about the Aerio, except for their subjective findings on how it looks. If you read the article, you can clearly see they liked how it drove and had numerous positive things to say about it. I pay more attention to what they actually say about the car then what its ranking is. That said, they made a big boo-boo on how they rated the Aerio. Their rating didn't match all the praise they gave it and putting a car at the end because you hate how it looks is silly to say the least.
And finally, my answer is no to all your questions regarding the misprint. However, it only takes common sense to recognize that they did not mean to mention ABS on the Rio. Common sense says that if the Rio had ABS and the brakes were locking up, they would have mentioned how quality control was severely lacking on the Rio and how the ABS system completely malfunctioned. In other words, they would have blasted the car for a major mechanical malfunction. Every car test that I have read that involved mechanical failures immediately brought the failure to attention. Plus, they don't mention paying extra for the option and don't list it in the stat sheet. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
Going across, the ratings are for the '01 Accent, the '01 ECHO, the '02 Accent, and the '02 ECHO:
Mechanical Quality: 2 3 2 3
Features and Accessorites Quality: 3 4 3 3
Body and Integrity Quality: 3 4 3 5
Performance: 2 2 3 3
Creature Comforts: 3 3 2 2
Style: 4 4 2 3
I am having trouble figuring out why these ratings changed so much from '01 to '02. The only ratings that were the same from one year to the next were for Mechanical Quality. But the Accent and ECHO did not change between '01 and '02. So why should the rating for the ECHO's Features and Accessory Quality decline from '01 to '02? Why should its rating for body and integrity quality improve? How come the Performance ratings for both the Accent and ECHO magically improve, when there were no powertrain upgrades from '01 to '02? How come the ratings for Creature Comforts magically decline for both cars, when there was no change in options? And most interestingly to me, why did both cars' Style ratings drop, the Accent's significantly so, when there were no changes to the style? To me, numbers like these bring out the subjective nature of the J.D. Powers surveys. What do you think?
Another thing that bothers me about J.D. Powers' IQ surveys is that it does not reflect long-term reliability, which to me is more important than how a car holds up over the first 90 days of ownership. There were a dozen vehicles that took first, second, or third place in the 2002 IQ survey but are rated worse than average or much worse than average in predicted long-term reliability per CR. And some models that scored very high in CR's survey, like the ECHO, PT Cruiser, Protege, G20, Maxima, Avalon, I35, Millenia, Lexus GS, Land Cruiser, and MPV, did not show up in the IQ winner's list. Given this discrepancy, which survey is a prospective buyer to take seriously? The one that celebrates the Corvette's class-leading quality, or the one that shows that it is one of the worst cars for predicted long-term reliability? Or do we take an intersection of the two surveys, meaning we all run out and buy a Toyota (not the ECHO) or Honda, or a large American car?
Or maybe we go out and buy the car we like driving the most, that also fits our budgets?
And of course the JD Powers IQ survey does not address long term reliability or dependability. JD Powers has other surveys for that. The results for one of them (I forget which one) are published in November.
I didn't see them mentioning this about the other two cars. It would be reasonable to believe that no lock ups occurred with the Accent or the Echo.
Or is this omission another case of sloppy, incompetent (to use "your" word) editing?
BTW, you are right that the Rio did not have ABS, but I did not rely on a guess to make that determination. I went to Carsdirect.com and I was able to equip a Rio for the exact same price that Motor Trend listed the price of "their" Rio being. ABS would have added about $400 to the price.
As far as what we consider the car mags to be (entertainment first), I bet that is not what they consider themselves to be or want themselves to be viewed as.
And in doing their job, isn't how they view themselves more important than how we view them?
Since you equate good sales of the Accent with the idea it must be quality since "people don't buy junk", I guess that means you think the Yugo was quality too.
Isn't that really that a definition of subjective? That is, two different groups of people evaluate the same cars (different units, yes, but same powertrain, engine, and features) using the same criteria, and coming up with markedly different results? If the awards were objective, i.e. fact based, would they not come up with the same answers for both years? And Style is not the only subjective category in the survey; what I maintain is that <i>the entire J.D. Powers survey is subjective, just as the entire CR reliability survey is subjective, because they both ask for opinions vs. basing awards and ratings on purely objective criteria. I'm not saying that it is a horrible thing that the surveys are subjective, just that those who read them should be aware of that.
Also, I'd say it should be more important to the editors of MT about what we the readers (customers) think about their magazine. We pay their salaries and their stockholders, after all.
As to how they view themselves... have you read an MT lately, cover to cover? The jokes? The snide editors remarks in the Letters to the Editor? If it's not entertainment, it sure isn't news.
Yes, MT is the topic of discussion right now, but I've noticed no one else tends to make 4 (or more) posts in a row on a topic as you tend to do when someone has made a negative comment about the ECHO.
To know if the JD Powers survey is subjective would require our knowing exactly what questions they ask and how they ask them. If JD Powers simply asks about problems with the power train (or other items), than different cars being the object of the questions would explain the difference. Or do you think that one car is built exactly the same as the next as they roll off the assembly line?
You can make the questions about many of the areas in the JD Powers survey objective ones. But you can't make the questions about style objective given this is an inherently subjective matter. That is my point.
As regards to MT, I think they want to view themselves as an authoritative automotive information source presented in an entertaining fashion. I think their snide comments shows how they view us. Now, if their snide remarks leads to a significant drop in circulation (which would mean a drop in prices they could charge in ads) and they are shown the reason why, the snide comments will stop.
Anyway, perhaps they should have asked actual owners of the cars in question.
I have had my car since December of 2000 and it now has over 37,000 miles on it. Do I still enjoy driving it? You betcha. Does it still drive like it did when I first bought it with 55 miles on the odo? Yep.
As for mentioning locking brakes, I have read many articles that had concerns with it. It's rather common. It's just that some cars have poorer front-rear balance, brake modulation, and brake fade and therefore lock their brakes up easier. Car mags only mention it when it significantly lengthens the stopping distance. I guarantee you the Echo and Accent locked their brakes too, just to a lesser extent. I know my right front brake locks up quite easily, especially if the road is wet. By the way, the type of tire can also significantly impact a car's tendency to lock its brakes. The smaller the tire, the easier it is to lock the brakes, because the footprint is smaller and they have less traction. Performance oriented tires also decrease lockup because they have better traction then touring tires.
Yes, I agree, it would be possible to frame objective questions for the J.D. Powers surveys. For example, they could ask about Performance in this way:
Please accurately measure your vehicle's performance, using the techniques described on the back page of this survey form, in the following categories, and then rate them on the following scale:
Acceleration, 0-60: 5 = under 6 seconds; 4 = 6-6.9 seconds; 3 = 7-7.9 seconds; 2 = 8-8.9 seconds, 1 = 9 seconds or more.
Stopping distance, 60-0: 5 = under 130 feet; 4 = 131-140 feet; 3 = 141-150 feet; 2 = 151-160 feet; 1 = over 160 feet.
Slalom time: ... well, you get the idea.
I'm not so sure how one would frame objective questions to categories like Creature Comforts. What would be an objective measure of comfort?
I have purchased or leased 11 new vehicles in my life. I have never been sent a J.D. Powers survey. (Hmm... who gets those surveys, anyway?) Perhaps someone who has seen a survey can tell us whether the questions on that survey are along the lines of my examples above, or if they are more like this:
Please rate your vehicle in the following categories:
Acceleration: 5 = Excellent, 4 = Very Good, 3 = Average, 2 = Below Average, 1 = Poor.
Braking: 5 = Excellent, 4 = Very Good, 3 = Average, 2 = Below Average, 1 = Poor.
...
I would be very surprised if the J.D. Powers survey's questions were of the objective type as I tried to demonstrate above, due to the difficulty of coming up with objective measures for these categories and the effort it would take respondees to accurately and consistently take those measurements.
I have, however, responded to many CR reliability surveys, so I know for a fact that they are totally subjective.
I am glad you are having a pleasant ownership experience with your ECHO. Ditto with me and my Hyundai. But I guess everyone else is supposed to discount our experiences because they are opinions of single individuals?
In short, I have never been polled by J.D. Power, Zogby, or Nielsen and know not one soul who has. I have completed the CU questionaire many times.
2003 Corolla CE 4-door 5-speed: $13,855 MSRP
2002 ECHO 4-door 5-speed, equipped as close as I could get to the Corolla without adding extra stuff like cladding, but still without power mirrors, CD, and tachometer: $13,120 MSRP
So my theory goes, people go to their Toyota dealer looking for a small car. Do they choose the ECHO, or for $735 more buy a Corolla, which I think most people will agree is a lot more car?
No wonder Toyota had to create SCION--they've effectively killed off their low-end Toyota model with the new Corolla. Yes, there will be those buyers who want a bare-bones car with Toyota's reputation for dependability, and those people will be attracted to the ECHO (if they can look past the styling). People who want a Toyota with some creature comforts will jump for the Corolla, while those looking for the lowest price-per-feature will look at Hyundai/Kia.
On the surface the new models look nicer, are larger and generally nicer going down the road, though in the Civic's case, you can feel where they saved the money (the suspension).
The Echo is near the end of its life-cycle, and so the newer (and cheaper to manufacture) model Corolla is very close in price. It was the same in 1998 when the then-new Corolla came out and was very close in price to the Tercel; the Tercel didn't sell well that year, and was replaced soon after by the Echo, which was considerably less expensive. For the 02 model year, we had prices nearly overlap between the incoming Camry and the outgoing Corolla. Its just manufacturing efficiency in the newer models, nothing more.
by Andrew Fishkin.
Your premis is a load of tripe, "nothing more".
-love train
I hope they take Ford's ill-implemented IDEAS and implement them using Japanese QUALITY!
Meade