Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Low End Sedans (under $16k)

1545557596075

Comments

  • csandstecsandste Member Posts: 1,866
    When I bought my '01, everything was pretty muted and dull. Car looks good in red. The lens shapes (which I don't particularly like) seem to merge into the body with that color.

    Followed a GT hatch today and still wish they had sedan lights. If I was a Hyundai product planner I would have put on some Ricer-Nissan Altima type clear lenses to differentiate the GT's.
  • dclurkerdclurker Member Posts: 57
    So, let me guess.....you saw this red GT, fell in love, made a deal on the spot, and then spent the rest of the auto show guarding it. ;-)
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Not quite. I did fall in love with it, but I didn't know the GT I bought was actually the one from the Auto Show until AFTER I bought it. But that is a long story, one that I documented ad nauseum in the Hyundai Elantra 5-door discussion.
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 19,256
    "Subtle? It's not supposed to be subtle! It's called a GT"

    that's why i thought it was funny that you thought a rear spoiler was too 'showy'!
    2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • iluvmysephia1iluvmysephia1 Member Posts: 7,704
    Not quite within an hour, yes, I had to rest up a bit after a grueling schoolweek. Nice to catch up on my 'Low End Sedans' reading.

    After looking at everyone's pictures(I already knew how those rigs looked like anyway but it's fun to re-browse through them for freshen-ups, eh?)I gotta tell ya somethin'. Kia body designers are tops in the business. No kiddin'. For all of rroyce's constant putdowns of any type of HyunKia vehicle I still like Kia the best. I've been Kia-sizing since May of '99 and whenever a car comes along to make me want to stray(be thinking Scion tC here, I really like that new rig)Kia produces a new vehicle that I latch back onto for futures lists(here's where all of your minds ought to be thinking '05 Kia Sportage 2.0L 4cyl. w/5-speed tranny!!)

    Oh, I still like the Kia Spectra body wrap better than Elantra. The rear of either rig is kinda plain, though I prefer Kia's pushed-up treatment better than the Elantra's look. As for the front end, well, it's all Kia Spectra up there IMO. Kia body designers have done it right, ever since the lowly '88 Ford Festiva hit U.S.shores with that cute little styling body, eh? Keep it up Kia!

    Y'all know that Ford engineers assisted Kia with original Sportage undercarriage design, right? It was that "real truck-like" ladder frame Ford helped them produce. Nice little relationship those two companies had in the 80's. Of course y'all know that Kia designed and built the Ford Festiva, right? That car still holds a pretty decent reliability reputation even to this day.

    2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick

  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    I think you mean Ford Aspire. I'm pretty sure the Festiva of the late 80s wasnt a Kia.

    ~alpha
  • iluvmysephia1iluvmysephia1 Member Posts: 7,704
    what was it's introduction year to the U.S., 1988? Anyhoo-it was built by Kia Motors of South Korea. Yes, that Kia. It's true.

    2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick

  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 19,256
    i agree with you. i rented an 'aspire' one time.
    i did not enjoy it at all, but that's old news.
    2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • csandstecsandste Member Posts: 1,866
    At that time Kia was the best of the three Korean automakers. They had the goods when the Lemans (Daewoo) and Hyundais were sucking.

    The Festiva was engineered by Mazda and was essentially a Mazda 121. The Mazda 323 of the same era had a very similar dash layout to the Festiva.
  • lawman1967lawman1967 Member Posts: 314
    The Aspire was also largely designed by Mazda, again the 121 rebadged. The Aspire was really just an example of a new model getting bloated and ruined by changing regulations, kind of like MGBs with big rubber bumpers.

    I owned a 1994 Kia Avella (the Korean name for the Aspire) in South Korea and it was a terrific little car. It didn't have the fun and tossable handling of the Festiva (Kia Pride in Korea), but it was just as quick, far more stable at speed and generally went about its business as well as any small Mazda would, only a bit smaller.

    The Korean model lacked airbags and doubtless other heavy safety gear, and in Korean trim, did 0-60 in I'm guessing about 10 seconds with the 5-speed. It also had power windows and a tachometer in the dash, options I don't think were offered on American Aspires.
  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    The late 80s Festiva was a Kia, then I stand corrected. But I was under the impression it was more Mazda.

    ~alpha
  • iluvmysephia1iluvmysephia1 Member Posts: 7,704
    largely a Mazda design(per posts #2935 and #2936-great to get input from those that owned those rigs!). I was going on my own feeble memory. The 1988 Ford Festiva was the first car I seriously considered buying for my first new car. I didn't end up buying one but almost pulled the trigger. I ended up buying a used 1986 Mercury Lynx station wagon in 1989 from Budget Rental Car for $4995 with only 10,000 miles on it. Decent car but nothing standout-ish about it at all. It actually caught fire in the steering column on me. Insurance largely picked up the tab of rebuilding my Lynx.

    My first new car purchase ended up being a 1994 Ford Escort wagon(the only problem ever with it was a cracked manifold gasket at around 50,000 miles-fixed for free under Ford's warranty). Decent rig it was, really.

    2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick

  • occupant1occupant1 Member Posts: 412
    The Aspire "SE" hatchback could be had with a tachometer. You occasionally see the clusters for sale on eBay. The 1995 base Aspire I had was terrific, but alas, a rebuilt wreck, and the dealer could not produce a title after nearly 3 months, so he had to buy it back. Gave me a nice 1997 Accent GS for the same price, also rebuilt, with a title, but alas, I wrecked IT 6 days later. Ended up with a 1988 Colt Vista wagon after all was said and done, go figure.

    I like the new Rio. Local dealer is offering the stripper (5-speed, no PS, no AC, no radio) for $5888. They have several. The other dealers have the same cars, same MSRP, but want $7995 or similar. So I bit, and lo and behold, my credit SUCKS, so I still need $3000 down. But the buyer's order shows $5888 as the sale price and the only questionable fees were the $43 for the title (title fee is $33 in this state), $50 for a documentary fee, and $289 for a "consumer services" fee. The $289 one is supposed to include some oil changes and tire rotations and offers bird-dogs if I refer someone who buys a car, $50, $100, $150, stuff like that. All in all, $6751.31. Wish I had it in cash, I'd be driving a Blueberry Rio right now.

    Here's the rub. This dealer says to add AC to the car is $2500. I figure it this way. Buy the $5888 car, take it to another dealer, have the AC put on for what I hope to be half that. I wonder if they'd even do it to a car sold by a competing dealer. I mean, the one dealer got screwed by having his bluff called on a non-AC equipped car, used for bait & switch tactics (no one in Texas buys cars without AC), but the other gets to make labor and parts profits on the AC install. Everybody wins, except the selling dealer, right?
  • iluvmysephia1iluvmysephia1 Member Posts: 7,704
    It will debut next month at New York City's Auto Show. I just looked at a picture of it from the rear-side view and it looks great. It will offer a 1.6L 4 cyl. engine only but, thankfully, a 5-speed manual tranny or an automatic. It is a tad wider and a tad higher than previous Rio's. Check it out and see what I mean.

    2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick

  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    I immediately thought of you when reading CR.org tonight!

    In an upcoming issue, the Hyundai Elantra GT will go head to head with a Chevy Cobalt LS, a Ford Focus ZX4 SES, the Honda Civic EX, and Saturn ION 3.

    The full reviews are not available yet, but members can view the overall scores of all compact sedan for rankings/ratings. The Elantra tested struck me as fairly pricey: $17,589. I'm guessing that was the only way that ABS found, with a high option pkg. Hyundai seems to be all about passive safety, but has been very reluctant with ABS- heck, the Accent just added it to the options list this year.

    Personally, I would have liked to have seen a Mazda 3 S and Suzuki Aerio in the mix, as the 3S has never been tested and the Aerio is a good deal different than when CR last visited it.
    ~alpha
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Well that's cool. I suppose it won't be before the May issue, since the Annual Auto Issue is next. And of course the Elantra is due for a redesign later this year, so it might be a long time before CR gets around to testing it again. But it will be interesting to see how the older designs (Civic, Focus, and Elantra) compete with the newer GM cars.

    It looks like they will be testing automatics, given the price of the Elantra. Too bad for us stick lovers, but I guess it's best for the majority of the marketplace. The GT is available with ABS/TCS sans moonroof, but for whatever reason they decided to go with the fully loaded models--maybe other cars besides the Civic EX had a moonroof. If they equip all cars equally (actually impossible given leather and TCS are not available on the Civic), the Elantra could still end up stickering lower than all the others. But that doesn't matter in CR's ratings.

    Since they are testing sedans here, it wouldn't make sense to include the Mazda3s. But I expect the Mazda3i will still rank at the top of CR's list after this review. It's already bested the Focus, Civic EX, Elantra GLS, and ION. I am very curious to see how they rank the Cobalt. They usually put a lot of store in rear-seat room, so it will get dinged for that. Here's how I predict they will rank the cars:

    Focus ZX4 SES
    Civic EX
    Cobalt LS
    Elantra GT
    ION 3

    The Focus beat the EX before and the Civic hasn't changed significantly since CR's last test. I think the Cobalt and Elantra will be very close in their rankings, but they will probably give the Cobalt the edge because of its exceptionally smooth and quiet ride. But who knows, the Elantra could offset that with better seating accomodations.
  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    A few points- my guess, and what I posited in my last post, is that to get an ABS equipped Elantra, they probably had to go with a fully loaded, top option pkg model. ABS is extremely rare on the Elantra in these parts.

    I'm not sure I understand your comment on the Mazda 3S. Its a sedan or hatch, and although I didnt state it, I meant sedan. I would just like to see how they view the sharper handling, stiffer ride, stronger acceleration of that model compared to the 3i they tested. Due to the bias toward practicality, the basic trim/engines of some models are preferred. And, I would have like to have known the overall MPG for the 2.3/auto.

    You were almost right about the ranking. The Elantra finished ahead of the Cobalt, which fared only midpack overall- the synopsis (which Im guessing will appear in the April Auto Issue) pointed to the Ecotec's raucous sound, somewhat disappointing fuel economy (but also very strong acceleration), as well as a cramped backseat. The highs for the Cobalt were listed as Ride and Acceleration, and the vehicle's score for Materials Quality/ Fit/Finish (whatever CR calls) was a big improvement over the Cavalier.

    ~alpha
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    I have been told by Mazda salespeople that the 3s has the same suspension as the 3i. I suppose it's possible they didn't know their own cars, but if true I don't see how the ride and handling would differ signficantly between the 3i and 3s--unless you go for the 17" wheels option on the 3s sedan. I don't recall if the 3i that CR tested had 16" or 17" wheels.

    I've had no problems finding Elantra GTs with ABS in my area. In fact, I've seen more with it than without it, in both the ABS and ABS+moonroof packages. I've even seen several GLSes with ABS. It's a lot better than a few years ago, when CR first tested the Elantra. Back then, ABS was very rare on the Elantra GLS.

    I agree with CR's comments on the Cobalt. I'm not surprised the Elantra topped it--I did say I thought they'd be very close and maybe the Elantra would edge it based on factors like seating.

    P.S. Apparently the pages you are looking at are for members only, I can't find them on the CR site.
  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    Backy, indeed, I was under the impression that the s and i had different suspensions. Still, given the different engine, gearing, tires, equipment... for the same reason that you wanted to see the GT tested, I would still politely request CR to test the 3s. The 3i (both 5M and 4A)tested by CR actually had the 16 inch alloys.

    I guess ABS is still unpopular in the NJ/NY/CT area as compared to the Northern Middle US.

    Yes, the pages I am looking at are members only, which is why I wrote: "The full reviews are not available yet, but members can view the overall scores of all compact sedan for rankings/ratings"

    ~alpha
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    It could be that ABS is more popular in the Northeast, thus fewer ABS-equipped cars on the lots as they would go first.

    Maybe CR will test the 3s along with the new Jetta, Civic, and (hopefully) Elantra early next year.
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 19,256
    when i bought my focus last may, abs or side airbags were hard to find, both were impossible.
    there were plenty of cars to choose from, though. my car sat on the lot for quite a while. of course it wasn't rallye red (light tundra) :)
    2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • dclurkerdclurker Member Posts: 57
    After reading this article, I think maybe large trucks and SUVs should be banned (I'm kidding...sort of).

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7088736/
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    This poses a challenge for Consumer Reports. Their policy is to not recommend any vehicle that gets a poor score on a crash test. Taking these tests into account, the only small car that CR could recommend right now is the Corolla. (They won't recommend the Cobalt until it's proven to have at least average reliability. Maybe they could still recommend the Civic since it wasn't tested.) It will be interesting to see what they do about it...

    Keep in mind that almost all of the tested cars were designed AFTER the new IIHS side-impact test was developed. In fact, the Cobalt may be the only tested car that falls into that category. So it's not at all surprising that all the cars fared poorly. But the fact that the Corolla and Cobalt were able to do OK gives hope that other small cars will be able to pass the test in the future. And several small cars will be redesigned soon, including the Civic, Sentra, and Elantra (Neon goes bye-bye soon).

    P.S. I noticed something odd about the IIHS side impact test. The barrier is shaped like a large SUV or pickup truck's front end, supposedly to be more realistic. But the barrier, moving at 31 mph, weighs 3300 pounds. How many large SUVs or pickups do you know that weigh only 3300 pounds?
  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    Two things: "Keep in mind that almost all of the tested cars were designed AFTER the new IIHS side-impact test was developed."

    I dont really agree with that statement. Design takes a long time, and this test was first made public in June of 03, with the test of the small sport utes. Very few of the vehicles on the roster of tested small cars was actually DESIGNED after June of 2003, and only a few were actually intro-ed after that date- the Cobalt, 3, redesigned Spectra and the Suzuki Forenza.

    I agree, it will be interesting to see how CR handles this information, however, CR still recommends all the mid-size cars that fail the IIHS side impact- the Camry (w/o side airbags) and all Sonatas among them. It seems that CR is more forgiving, and provides mfrs more time to comply- in 1995, when the frontal offset testing began, cars were not noted for Poor showings. That only really started happening in the late 90s, from what I recall, and CR usually cites only performance that is an exception- such as the Chevy Venture being the only minivan that had horrid offset scores.

    When I read the IIHS description of the barrier, I tend to think compact/midsize SUV, as 3300lbs is hardly "large" as you point out, backy.

    A few notes- of all the small cars tested, only the Mazda 3 had a structure worthy of the "Acceptable" rating. A few, including the Ford Focus were rated "Poor". Most were rated "Marginal", including the top-ranked Cobalt and Cavalier. Given the structure rating, I can understand why Ford didnt retest with side airbags, but cannot fathom why Mazda chose not to provide the IIHS with an airbag equipped sample.

    ~alpha
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    You know, it would have been better if I had typed what I really meant to type, which is that the cars were designed BEFORE the test was announced. Boy, it's funny what sleep deprivation can do to a person...
  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    I hear that. Nevermind my first comment :)

    ~alpha
  • iluvmysephia1iluvmysephia1 Member Posts: 7,704
    get some sleep! And then come back at it with a vengeance!

    2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick

  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    zzzzzzzzzzzzz... whah??? .... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    CR removes cars that scored "poor" on the recent IIHS side impact crash tests from its "recommended" list--including Focus, Elantra, and Mazda3:

    http://cdn.consumerreports.org/static/0504pic2_f.html

    I don't have my April Auto issue with me, but does that leave just the Corolla, Civic, Prius, and Impreza as recommended small cars? And the Impreza will get the side impact test soon. For some reason the IIHS is waiting until the '06 Civic comes out to test that car. (Interesting they didn't also wait for the redesigned '06 Elantra, which is also due out this fall.)
  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    You called it first my friend. From the looks of that brief article, Id say that right now, CR is recommending only the Corolla with side airbags, and is waiting for reliability information on the Cobalt. Although not mentioned specifically, I cant understand why they would continue to endorse the 2005 Civic, whose side impact is undoubtedly 'Poor'. With respect to waiting for the Elantra, Hyundai has not gone public with a redesign for the Elantra, and I havent seen any hard confirmation that we're getting a new Elantra this fall. In comparison, Honda has stated publically the new Civic is due early fall and has shown a concept. The same could be arugued for the Sentra- one is due early next year, though unconfirmed.

    CR was fast with this one- but why the waiting? The Altima technically shouldnt have been recommended in the last review.
    ~alpha
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    I'm not so pessimistic that the '05 Civic (with SABs) would get a "poor" score on the IIHS side impact test. It did very well on the NHTSA test (but so did many other small cars). Must be that Honda told the IIHS when the '06 Civic will be available so they decided to hold off, save a car or two.

    It will be interesting to see if this affects sales of Cobalts and Corollas at all. Chevy has had to slap a rebate on the Cobalt already, and even the Corolla has a $500 rebate.
  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    I have no doubt the Civic would be rated poor without side curtains- if you look at every single passenger car (non-SUV) tested by the IIHS in this test, ALL that lack inflatable head protection are rated a 'Poor'. The Civic's double 4 star NHTSA impact, for me, doesnt translate into any thing exceptional for the IIHS test, given that vehicles like the Elantra still failed.

    Looks like Subaru and BMW/Mini got the IIHS to agree to putting off the test as well...

    ~alpha
  • ericf1ericf1 Member Posts: 54
    The Cobalt Coupe is looking relatively attractive to me now over the Elantra GLS 5-door.

    Isn't the only redisigned Hyundai for '06 the Sonata?

    The Impreza would fail miserably as it doesn't have side-impact bags of any sort.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    There's LOTS of new Hyundais coming for '06. Of course there's the new Tuscon (with std. SABs and SACs, ABS, stability control), already out. Then the Sonata. Then due this summer, the Accent. Then due by end of the year (according to automotive press) the all-new Santa Fe and Elantra. An all-new XG replacement (the TG) is due late this year or early next year also. And a Hyundai version of the all-new Kia Sedona is rumored.

    P.S. The all-new Kia Rio, which reportedly shares the platform with the Accent, has standard SABs and SACs. It will be the lowest-priced vehicle with that equipment when it rolls out this summer. I expect the Accent will be similarly equipped, or else it would not be competitive with its cousin (also witness the Tuscon and its cousin the Sportage, which have identical safety equipment standard).
  • spectramanspectraman Member Posts: 255

    Backy said:

    P.S. I noticed something odd about the IIHS side impact test. The barrier is shaped like a large SUV or pickup truck's front end, supposedly to be more realistic. But the barrier, moving at 31 mph, weighs 3300 pounds. How many large SUVs or pickups do you know that weigh only 3300 pounds?


    I wonder if the lighter weight (3,330 lbs) is to help compensate for a barrier that doesn't crumple and deform like a real SUV would be designed to do?

    Real crumpling/deforming of the striking vehicle would expend some of the extra energy a real 4,500+ lbs vehicle would possess, right?

    The official IIHS website says this about their moving barrier:

    The test configuration resulting from this research is a 31 mph (50 km/h) perpendicular impact into the driver side of a passenger vehicle. The moving deformable barrier that strikes the test vehicle weighs 3,300 pounds (1,500 kg) and has a front end shaped to simulate the typical front end of a pickup or SUV.

    I wonder if IIHS knows that their barrier doesn't deform quite like a *real* SUV (which are usually designed specifically to deform and expend energy), and thus they intentionally lowered their striking weight?

    Any engineers out there that might want to speculate on this one?

    -SM
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 19,256
    my guess is it because recommending a vehicle without the latest 'safety' features available, can result in possible legal liability.
    "they recommended it as safe, but my poor (insert loved one here) was killed. if it only had (insert technology here), they would still be alive."
    2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    I really hope that is NOT the reason ("Those people at CR made me buy that car!"). Other publications recommend cars that don't have great crash test scores all the time. I think it's more that CR has a stated policy for recommending cars and they realize they need to be consistent on that policy or look like idiots.
  • 204meca204meca Member Posts: 369
    I am interested in a used Ford Focus ZX5 Premium with all options (including SAB & traction control). I have no idea how difficult it will be to find one. I am wondering if there is a site that I could go to that would list production numbers and installation rates of various options for the 2003 & 2004 Ford Focus.

    Thanks
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Statistics indicate that size matters, so by the numbers you would have the safest car by getting the largest car. No doubt that SAB do help in saving one's head in such accidents, but if you are really worried about an SUV hitting you the only real total defence is to get another large beast. A large Crown Vic can be had for a reasonable price. I currently have a Corolla and Miata which are both products of the '90s, so while I am sporting around and saving gas all the while, I am assuming some risk. As for results from SAB tests go, we all know that data could change from test to test if they crash say three of the same model, or crashed them at a slightly different angle or speed, so I would not be all too eager to go out and challenge some SUV in a demolision derby. Go out, have fun, and keep safe as possible while enjoying life on the road. The next car I buy will likely be larger, and will be 5 star (4star minimum) front and side impact. As for SUV side impact passing, well that would be a good thing, but not a deal breaker if every other test passed in deciding on a car. If the government was really looking out for the little guy, they would never have allowed all the SUV and trucks on the road which are not for commercial use. Now they are trying to make the little cars stand up to big bullies, which is not going to happen.... well happen 100%, let's say. Size matters.
  • npaladin2000npaladin2000 Member Posts: 593
    I'm going to buy a Kenworth tractor, if size matters so much. ;)
  • csandstecsandste Member Posts: 1,866
    Try this on for size.

    http://web.utk.edu/~blfletch/suv.html

    "We buy Kenworth semi chassis and build SUVs on them. Shown is the
    Dominator model, which includes the eight rear wheels for handling those trips
    to Sam's Club.

    FEATURES:
    - Fits under MOST bridge underpasses.
    - The first SUV to be rated in Gallons per Mile by the EPA
    - Meet interesting people while waiting in line at Interstate Weight Stations.
    - When kids do the arm signal, you get to honk that really cool air horn!
    - Get a big rush when your Firestone tires blow out.
    - Lots of road-hugging weight for occupant protection, the ULTIMATE in safety.
    - Can seat 20. Go ahead, take the WHOLE soccer team.
    - Can tow your camper, yacht, a trailer-load of frozen pizzas, or even your house!
    - Yours for under $200,000 ($100,000 for truck chassis + $100,000 standard SUV
    markup)"
  • npaladin2000npaladin2000 Member Posts: 593
    Hmm, I wonder what it's crash test ratings are? :D Maybe the IIHS should take it into account when crash-testing small cars? :D
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    I was disappointed at the low-end cars on display at the Greater Twin Cities Auto Show yesterday. No future cars on display--not even some that have been shown at other auto shows, like the '06 Civic and '06 Rio. It was clear what the focus was on at the show: SUVs, trucks, and large cars. For example, Ford had a huge display but had one Focus there--a ZX5 SES.

    Chevy at least had two Aveos and several Cobalts. I was brave enough to sit in the back of the Cobalt 2-door and found I had to bend my neck to fit. Also I learned some new contortionist tricks while climbing out. The back seat is definitely only for small kids or adults you hate.

    The Hyundai and Kia areas were pretty quiet. They didn't show off any of their new metal except the Tuscon and Sportage. Hyundai had a couple of Accents (much roomier rear seat in the $10k 2-door than the $15k Cobalt) and three Elantras--including two GTs in the same color. Kia had a Rio and some Spectras. I sat in the Spectra5 and gave it a close inspection. The back seat was nice and roomy, with great headroom (take that, Cobalt!). I thought it would be nice, though, if for $15k Kia would give you a center console.

    Mazda had several 3's on display but nothing new on the floor except a Mazda6 GT. I didn't see any Sentras at the Nissan display, but to be honest I walked through there pretty fast. Dodge had a Neon--get 'em while you can, they are not long for this world (thank goodness). I thought the best values on the floor were the DC minivans, which with the $500 auto show rebate are starting under $15k (hey, low-end minivans!), and under $20k for loaded full-size models with Stow-n-Go, power doors, 3.8L V6, alloys etc.

    Toyota had a few Corollas, including an S model in red (anyone else think the new Jetta looks a lot like the Corolla, but with really bad panel gaps and a really ugly grille?). Honda had several Civics, including the Hybrid, which was getting rapt attention in these days of $2.10 gas (the Prius on display was busy also). I sat in an EX 4-door and noted the good room in the back seat and the quality interior bits, but the sticker was almost $19k! For that kind of money, I'll take an Accord LX or Mazda6 V6 and keep the change. Or you could almost buy two Elantra GLSes.

    For me, Suzuki had the best-in-show for the low-end cars. They had the new Reno on a pedestal, and samples of the Forenza S sedan and LX wagon, and the Aerio S sedan and SX 5-door. Just from the sit-test, I thought the Forenzas and Aerio S were the values of the class--under $14k list for comfortable, well-trimmed, well-equipped, roomy small cars. The interiors were nicer than Cobalts and Foci costing $3-4K more. I thought the Forenza wagon was an especially nice package. Cars like the Cobalt, Focus, and Mazda3 (and even the Elantra GT) will out-handle and out-run the Forenza, but for hauling the family and groceries around town in comfort and style the Suzukis are hard to beat.
  • george_sgeorge_s Member Posts: 6
    I'm in the midst of buying an '05 Elantra GLS (dealer is having trouble getting his hands on one with ABS, natch), and the side impact test results gave me pause last week - I was about to give up and switch to a used Corolla or something. My salesman gave me a printout of Hyundai's response (I haven't seen this on any of these boards yet, so if it's a repeat, I apologize):

    Hyundai
    We were disappointed to learn of the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety's (IIHS) recent poor rating for the Hyundai Elantra in the Institute's side impact test. It is important to note that the rating is based only upon the IIHS criteria for rib deflection and viscous criteria. Ratings in the Jan. 20, 2005 test show results for the Head, Neck, Shoulder, Pelvis and Left Femur were in the Good Range, as defined by the IIHS. The rear passenger Head Rating was Acceptable.

    The Elantra fully complies with the U.S. government's FMVSS 214 Side Impact Protection requirements that involve a side impact by a 3,000-pound deformable barrier moving at 33.5 mph. After testing by the U.S. government's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), the Elantra has earned ratings of 5 Stars (the highest rating possible) for the Front Seat and 4 Stars for the Rear Seat. This rating was given after testing in which there is a side impact by a 3,000-pound moving deformable barrier traveling at 38.5 mph. We would also note that this speed is higher than that of the side impact testing by IIHS, yet the Elantra received excellent scores in the government test.

    Hyundai appreciates the efforts of IIHS to improve vehicle safety. In this case, we feel confident that the Elantra is a safe vehicle as demonstrated by its excellent performance and high ratings in the federal government side impact crash tests.

    (the full article is at www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7081584 with other automaker's responses)

    Based on the above and after looking at the test results in at the NHTSA site, we (my wife and I) decided to forge ahead with the Elantra. The Elantra's numbers on NHTSA are pretty comparable to, and in some cases better than, for the Corolla. We'll just use that peppy engine to spend as little time in intersections as possible. :-)
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    You will save a lot in the long run buying a Corolla or Civic. And gas mileage is super great with a Civic HX where some people have been know to hit high 40s to 50 on the freeway; and we are talking with one engine. I saw a Corolla on the lot for $14k brand new, and if memory serves me right the Civic is about that price. Back in 1998, I got around $1k off on a Corolla, but could only get Honda to come off the stick by $500. In theory, if the Korean cars do hold up well for 10 years, and you had the car that long, maybe you can beat a Japan model, but it is not likely. All the good news on reliability for Korean cars is based on 90 day satisfaction or maybe a year or two. Go back to say 2000, just a sort 5 years back, and it is a different story. Look up a car in JD Powers for 2000 and look at the Long Term. I think you could consider a Mazda3, but they are having a few issues with this 2 yr. old model. Consumer Reports shows it as trouble free. If you look at the boards here, it is somewhere in-between. Maybe it is already safe to buy, or perhaps next years model, which is coming up in a few months. The SUV side impact test, if that is a concern, did not look pretty with the Mazda3. Other tests of the Mazda3 did look OK. Here is another idea - Buy a one year old used Mustang V6 for under $13K. Good crash tests, but fairly high insurance rates - oh well. Lots of style and so basic, if should be low cost to work on. Just a thought.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    A few comments and corrections to your post:

    * CR shows the Elantra to be at least average all the way back to '99, the earliest year in their current reliability scores report. The '03 and '04 are rated above average for reliability.

    * CR does not show the Mazda3 as "trouble-free". It does rate the Mazda3 as above-average in predicted reliability for part of one model year, '04. This is not the same as trouble-free.

    * If the car is to be owned only 2-3 years, you can come out better financially with a Civic or Corolla because of their higher resale values. If you're going to keep the car many years, the Elantra will do better because of lower initial purchase price, e.g. $9995 for an Elantra GLS in my town vs. $13,995 for a Corolla CE (dealers in my town don't advertise Honda prices, just lease payments).

    * The Elantra is no slouch with fuel economy. I get upper 20s in stop-and-go in-city driving, and low 40s cruising on the highway in my '01 GLS 5-speed. The newer Elantras are a bit better in fuel economy due to their VVT engine. I can get mid-20s in town and upper 30s on the highway even with an automatic in my '04 Elantra GT. And that is with 11-23 more hp than in the Civic, and much more torque.

    On the idea of buying a used Corolla... be sure to get one with the side air bags and side curtains, which the Corolla that got an "acceptable" score in the IIHS test had. I don't think side curtains have been available in the Corolla that long. Without those extra bags, the Corolla's score was "poor", like the Elantra and every other small car they tested except the Cobalt. The Cobalt is a pretty nice car too, so you might look at that option. But its reliability is unknown, and I expect it will have steep depreciation like other GM cars.
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    On page 89 of Consumer Report, look up Mazda3 for year 2004, and it looks perfect to me. These are direct numbers from the survey and not C.R. opinions. That said, maybe those questioned did not complain about the car that much. Who knows how these surveys go. And as to their actuality, that is blind faith in Consumer Reports.
    On page 87 see how the Hyundai Elantra did in the survey in for year 2000 -- not too bad, but not Japan quality. Also look into JD Powers going years back, say 2000 for Hyundai. It is on the Internet. I have no way of knowing if Hyundai will be a good 5 year or 10 year car to own. Just saying that a 90 days or even a year improvement is notable, and honorable, but is not the same as say 20 to 40 years of quality control. I do like all those extras on Korean cars which cost you on other makes, and some of the styles which are showing some imagination. Noticed that you can find cars which are not looking top heavy and fat butted with Hyundai and other Korean makes. This is a good thing. As for recommending a used Corolla, I would not do that. I did mention a used Mustang, which is a good value. It is a 5 star crash rated car, and with RWD should be cheaper long term to repair. Not sure about all this side air bag stuff. No doubt if an SUV is gonna hit you broadside, it would be nice to have on board. Even with one, I bet most cars are pretty much crushed by these monsters, which I fault the government for not only allowing, but giving tax breaks to encourage more sales. They, trucks and SUVs, great for ranch use, or commercial use, like construction, but raise hell on the road. Too long a stopping distance, too heavy, and too top heavy. I am sure people will have fun driving the Elantra, or any other small car. Light weight and spunky is fun. Enjoy, and share the road with the bullies ;-)
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    I think you have a misconception about the CR reliability scores. Red dots don't mean perfect, or no problems. They mean fewer problems were reported than for cars with lower ratings.

    No, Hyundai doesn't have a 40 year record of high reliability for their cars. Who does? What were Toyotas and Hondas like 40 years ago? (or Mustangs for that matter) To me, it's more important what kind of car a company is building now, not 20-40 years ago. The quality improvement program over the past five years at Hyundai is quite a story, which is well documented on the Web if you have some spare time and want to read about it. Still, that program is so recent that buying a Hyundai today does take something of a leap of faith--which is why they continue to offer their long warranty.

    Mustangs from 2001-2004 do have a 5 star NHTSA rating, but only for frontal impact. Side impact is a mediocre 3 stars, bettered by the Elantra, Corolla, Civic, and many other small cars. (For 2005 the Mustang gets 4 stars for the front seat in the side impact test.) The Mustang hasn't been tested yet by the IIHS, so we have no idea how it would fare in those tests, which are more severe than the NHTSA's. At least with a car like the Corolla or Elantra, you know what you are getting. As for reliability, the Mustang is a shade better since '99 than the Elantra, but the Corolla and Civic have better records than both.
  • ericf1ericf1 Member Posts: 54
    Spectra5 isn't that cheap- automatic tranny is $1k! Add ABS to that you're talking $17k+. Same applies for the Mazda3. You're forced into taking an upgrade if you want ABS and side airbags.

    I do like the look of the Spectra5 more than the Elantra or Cobalt, but those two cars seem to be better overall deals.

    How did the Spectra5 score in the safety tests? I know the normal Spectras scored dismally, and the Spectra5 is based on a slightly different platform isn't it?
Sign In or Register to comment.