Vibe/ Matrix v. PT Cruiser v. ZX5 v. Protege5 v. Elantra GT v. Aerio SX

nippononly · April 2003

it will soon be available without waiting lists and mark-ups, then?...

jbollt · April 2003

...is available now with discounts AND rebates. It varies by what region of the country you are in.

boggse · April 2003

The Turbo that is.

Hankr · May 2003

I drive an Aerio and just rented an Elantra for 5 days. Overall, the Elantra impressed me, though not to the point where I'd choose one over the Aerio.

The Elantra design felt "old-school", low seating and more-difficult ingress / egress. Maybe its just me getting old, but I prefer the more-upright, taller Aerio design. Aerio just felt less confining.

Elantra engine was smooth and acceptably quiet, but its lower torque was noticable relative to Aerio. Aerio just has more oomph (gently) accelerating from 30-35 MPH in high gear... more tugging power. Elantra required frequent downshifts.

Elantra interior materials (plastics and upholstery) a tad nicer, Aerio switchgear tactile feel and ergonomics a tad better. Aerio stereo notably better.

I discounted Elantra in my purchase decision due to lackluster crash tests. If Hyundai improves in that area, they'll be right there with all the segment's competition.

dmc1648 · May 2003

I bought an Aerio SX one month ago this upcoming Saturday. I was looking to go in a very different direction from my 97 Sebring Convertible. I spent several weeks researching and test driving sporty hatchbacks. My top choice was the Focus SVT. I had a strong desire to stay under $20K though and I couldn't find an SVT in that price range within 700 miles of me. The rest of my choices in order based on the whole package and price were the Aerio SX, Focus ZX5, Vibe, Matrix (with the 180HP versions top choice), Pro5, Elantra GT.

I'm loving the Aerio. I think it handles great, is peppy, and is extremely roomy. It lacks convenient driver area small storage, but is otherwise very clever in its use of space. It has an amazing array of features for the price. My biggest complaint is that it doesn't offer a moonroof or sunroof. I plan to get one aftermarket. After driving a convertible for a few years, it's hard to adjust to not having the sun on my head.

gkxp · May 2003

I have owned 41 cars thus far. In this class of cars I have owned a Hyundai Elantra, Chevy Prizm, Honda Civic, Chevy Cavalier, Ford Escort, Honda Insight, Dodge Neon, etc. I didn't think it would be at first, but after driving it, I believe the Aerio is the best in this class hands-down.

First of all, I have read people "complaining" about the interior of the car. What?? The seats are velour black and ultra firm/supportive and the entirely black interior is excellent. Very Euro and nice to do away with the vanilla (plain, boring) gray and beige interiors. My first thought in this interior was very Germanic (almost exactly like VW Golf). Even the assist handles in the headliner retract very slowly and there is a center rear retractable headrest like VW, Mercedes, BMW and Audi (obvious Germanic Inspiration). There is 104.7 Cu. Ft. of room (more than Full-Size Chevy Impala) and this really shows in the ultra comfortable seating all around and in the back (even for me, I am 6'1"). The CD Player, while no Rockford Fosgate, is very good for stock equipment.

Second, the powertrain. I have a 2003 with the 145HP, 136T engine and I believe it to be faster than the next fastest 2003 Hyundai Elantra I traded in for this. I'm sure the Cavalier with the new EcoTec (140HP/150T) is also fast, as is the Nissan Sentra's 2.5L SER engine, but the Suzuki is definitely near the top of the heap in this class with that motor. The trans is very responsive and doesn't seem to "hunt" for the right gear as much as my Elantra did and is far better than the Neon, Escort and other compacts I've had.

Third, my favorite, the digital dash. I have read that this is very 80's and Nintendo-like. I don't get that, does that mean that standard dial gauges are pre-historic Henry Ford-Era?? Why do all the new HIGHEST-TECH Hybrid Cars like the Insight and Prius sport digital dashes then?? Having owned an Insight, the dash on this Suzuki is nearly identical and I wouldn't doubt that Honda and Suzuki may get these from the same source. This dash set-up is the simply the best in class.

Finally, The appearance of the exterior is speculative and we all have our opinions of all cars. While appearing tall, I like the easy entry/exit and high small SUV-like seating position and of course the cavernous amount of interior room the high stance provides. The ride is very smooth and controlled, I would say best in class tied with the Corolla. Of course, this means the handling suffers a bit due to the 14/15 inch rims. IF ride quality would not be affected, I would suggest Suzuki up the ante to 16" wheels.

The timing chain is a maintenance plus as is the 7 year/100000 Mile FULLY TRANSFERRABLE (not like Hyundai/Kia Warranties) Powertrain Warranty.

I would just suggest to anyone shopping the class to just take my suggestion and check out these cars in this topic and the others in the class and check out the Aerio last. I'm sure some will be very impressed with this obscure brand they may have never thought of, but that is why Suzuki has to work harder than the others and make a better car. Feel free to write me if you have questions.

baggs32 · May 2003

"I have read that this is very 80's and Nintendo-like. I don't get that, does that mean that standard dial gauges are pre-historic Henry Ford-Era?? Why do all the new HIGHEST-TECH Hybrid Cars like the Insight and Prius sport digital dashes then??"

My Dad's 87 Taurus had an all digital dash. That might be where they're coming from with the 80's reference.

I think the Caprice had it back then too. So it's not exactly "new" or "high tech".

gkxp · May 2003

I didn't know the Taurus ever came with the digital dash. I had a Caprice and that definitely did come with a digital dash. I know 80's technology is not new. Aren't dial gauges found in most cars from like the 1930's or something? So an advance of 50 or so years in technology seems somewhat "HIGH TECH" to me. The only more advance info set-up would probably be GM's HUD (Heads Up Display), I believe that came out in the 90's.

boggse · May 2003

The reason that many people prefer analog gauges is that they not only communicate the current reading, but also the rate of change.

For example: I am accelerating from 0-60. A digital speedometer will tell me how fast I am going at a given moment, but I don't have a visual cue to tell me how quickly my velocity is increasing. With an analog gauge, how fast the needle moves communicates to me the rate of acceleration.

I'm not sure whether the Taurus or Caprice ever came with digital gauges, but I do recall my father's '82 Lincoln Town Car having one, as well as a trip computer which puts everything I have seen since to shame. The downside was he never learned to use it. I had to program it for him (I was 9 years old).

lngtonge18 · May 2003

I think the complaints about the interior has to do with the quality of the materials and the unusual styling, not the colors. The color combination of the interior is nice and European, but the quality of the materials suck (I definitely am not reminded of any european car when I touch or look at anything inside the Aerio). None of the plastic used is soft to the touch and the fabric is a major lint catcher and shocks you everytime you get out of the car. The door handles are rough to the touch as is the thin steering wheel rim, the dash is hard as a rock and sounds hollow if you tap it, the cheap fabric on the door panel began showing wear after only 5k miles, and the hard door panel was very uncomfortable to rest your arm on. The lack of storage is annoying and closing the doors emits a cheap, tinny sound. Both front door panels buzzed loudly on my car and I also encountered a loud dash rattle a few times. To say I was disappointed in the interior quality of my Aerio would be an understatement. On the plus side, the front and rear seats are extremely comfortable, visibility is good, the stereo has good sound, and the interior is very roomy. Otherwise, the Aerio is seriously lacking compared to other cars in the same class.

By the way, the 145 horse engine is very unrefined, coarse, and loud. It is nowhere near the top of the class in power either. The Corolla, Neon, and Elantra all outaccelerate it and the 120 hp Lancer matches it (all cars had a manual tranny). The car really should be faster then what it is. It was spunky off the line but lost power at higher revs and felt slow on the highway. Not to mention the obnoxiously loud wind noise and the suspension that was sometimes harsh (best in class ride? you are kidding right??). Fuel economy on the highway was a disappointment as well. 29 mpg is the best I ever saw in my car after 9600 miles.

Anyway, that's my take on this car. I think it's a bad idea to look at all other cars before the Aerio, because that would maximize its major shortcomings and really make it look bad. The Aerio is a good car if all you want is a very roomy well equipped inexpensive car, but there are much better choices out there for little to no extra money. I was very happy to get rid of my Aerio.

gkxp · May 2003

I guess that would be your opinion on this then. Again, I have OWNED a majority of the cars in this class and have DRIVEN everything else, so I come from a different position on this. I had a 2003 Elantra and look up the horsepower in their brochure, for mine there was no rating because Hyundai had overestimated the 140HP they claimed the 2.0L Motor produced and that actually it was closer to 130HP (I thought 133 to be exact or 12 less than Aerio). Maybe the turbo Neon (at $20K) outaccelarates it, but not the 132HP standard Neon (again, I had a previous generation lighter-weight Neon with the DOHC 150HP motor) and what about Dodge's future reliability? Everytime they try to pit a Viper against other supercars in its class, it has some type of failure that causes it to break down and is unable to compete. My Prizm had 125HP, I believe the new Corolla has that same VVT-i Engine in it and is good for 125HP also, making it 20HP shy of the Aerio. I had thought the basic Lancer was one of the slowest cars in this class due to a heavy curb weight and low HP (I will check this out) unless you are pitting the $25K Lancer Evolution to the Aerio. Maybe you are comparing other manual transmission cars to the Aerio (SX Wagon does 0-60 in 8.3 seconds with manual) with an automatic and this could explain why you think it is slower.

I agree the interior materials are not to the exact degree of quality as VW, but the Aerio is not $20000 as is the Golf. And, I think the material quality comes very close. I would disagree about the seats though, the velour on the Aerio seems to me to be identical to Golf's.

The ride to me is as good as the softly sprung Corolla. The Chicago area uses salt for winter and with the vast temp changes, there are potholes all over. The Aerio seems well controlled and stable on rough surfaces as does the Corolla. These 2 seem to be built for ride as opposed to the Focus and Protege, built for mini-BMW-like handling.

Hankr · May 2003

I drive an Aerio and am quite pleased.

The interior design and materials are average... below Civic, Corolla, Protoge... above Elantra, Neon, PT (base), Focus. Aerio's seat design and comfort are a notable high-point, as is the tactile feel of the switchgear. Interior storage and hard-plastics are its low points.

The digital dash is purely subjective... it took me 2 or 3 days to get used to it and now I like it just fine. I sure don't need an analog dial to tell me whether I am accelerating or decelerating. Clock, outside temp guage (nice feature) and stereo all easy to see and access.

On the road, I'd again call it average. It rolls more than most, but that is (to me) an acceptable price to pay for the higher seating hip point and tall roof that make ingress and egress so easy. Getting into and out of Neons, Elantras and Protoges is a hassle... they're LOW. I could not live with themn on a daily basis.

Last is price... if one equips all these cars at a high level and equally (AC, PW, Remote Keyless, Cruise, CD, Power Mirrors, etc.), then they fall generally into 3 price levels (Real-world prices after rebates)...
High End ($16K): Golf, Civic, Corolla / Matrix, PT Cruiser
Mid Price ($14K): Protoge, Sentra
Low End ($12K): Aerio, Focus, Cavalier, Elantra, Neon.

Given price is so important in this segment, I submit that the Aerio is the best buy. Focus may be there too, if one believes (as I do) that Ford has gotten the bugs out of a basically very good car.

icvci · May 2003

the Aerio is not $20000 as is the Golf

Edmunds TMV for a new Golf is $15,665.

I'm glad you like your Aerio. But given a choice 100 times, I'll take my Protege5 everytime. Only the P5 will make you smile when you drive.

boggse · May 2003

"I sure don't need an analog dial to tell me whether I am accelerating or decelerating."

Sounds like the Aerio is perfect for you then. Personally, I will stick with the analog gauges in my Protege5 and Miata.

nippononly · May 2003

for corolla LEs that have all the items listed above except cruise is $14,8 right now. Add the cruise at $250 and you have a $15K car. Plus, that is for an auto, for manual subtract $800.

I would say there are really two groups, for the cars actually listed in the header of this thread. Suzuki and Hyundai are the $12K cars, with Hyundai at a large power deficit (but just redesigned) and the others around $15K, with PT and Matrix slightly more. All of these are pretty inexpensive. I think, having driven many of them and bought the Matrix, that you get what you pay for in the driving experience of the Suzuki and the Hyundai, but as far as interiors I would say it is a wash - they are all pretty good, but all firmly planted in the economy class.

lngtonge18 · May 2003

I guess you need to pay closer attention to the numbers. The Corolla has 130 hp and the Elantra has 135. The Aerio GS 5 speed was just tested by Car and Driver and posted a 0-60 time of only 8.8 seconds, which was slower than the Neon, Corolla, and Elantra. The supposedly underpowered Lancer was tested at 9.1 seconds in that same test and 8.9 seconds in another one. Edmunds did a comparison test of small wagons and the Aerio SX 5 speed posted 9.1 sec from 0-60 while the Matrix did it in 9.0, despite weighing exactly the same and having a smaller engine with 11 less hp and 10 less lb ft of torque. In other words, the Aerio is nowhere near as fast as it should be. Either the gearing is too tall or the slow to rev nature of the engine and the lack of high-rpm power limits its performance potential. Having the highest hp rating is all fine and dandy, but if it doesn't have the performance numbers to back it up (as in the Aerio's case), than it means nothing.

As for the comparison with the Golf, you can buy one for 15,600 as someone posted above (with standard side and head airbags, power everything, alarm, and ABS!; a longer bumper-to-bumper warranty as well). I paid 15,559 for my Aerio and got much lower material quality and less standard safety features in the process. The current big rebates on the Aerio help the value equation but when you look at the competitors, it offers nothing but more room for the same price.

I'm curious why you traded in you Elantra? Did you have problems with it or just wanted more room? How much of a bath did you take when trading it? The reason I ask is I think it's funny how you got rid of your 03 Elantra for an 03 Aerio and I got rid of my 03 Aerio for an 03 Tiburon. I also noticed that ramblin_mo just traded his 03 Aerio SX for an 03 Elantra. I find it interesting that there is so much cross-shopping between these two brands.

ramblin_mo · May 2003

Traded 03 Aerio SX, for Elantra
Why?
Gut wrenching jolts at highway speed hitting expansion strips, potholes, bumps.
Skittish ride, blowing around in high wind.
Fabric was worn by diver window after 3 months. This was where I uncomfortably rested my arm.

Static shocks on exiting. Black fabric shows dirt badly seconds after cleaning. Cleaning bug goo off the huge front bumper every two days.

Overdrive lock out on automatic transmission until the engine reaches operating temp. This really was annoying. The salesman said I should bring it in for service. He thought it was defective and not standard feature.

Wife hated the Aerio, it was my commuter car so I didn't care what she thought. Wish I had listened to her! We both like the ride and the look of the Elantra.

I think the Aerio will be a very reliable car. I still like the radical look. The ride made me get rid of it.

gkxp · May 2003

The Protege 5 is an excellent car. The handling is class-dominating (along with the Focus). The exterior styling is fantastic also. My only complaint with it and Focus, Corolla, Civic and VW Golf (base), Sentra (base), Neon, Elantra, Matrix/Vibe (base) and Lancer is "WHERE'S THE BEEF?". Really 115-135HP is OK but for the class, I prefer the 145HP of my Aerio and the 165HP of the Sentra SER or the 150HP of the PT Cruiser (even though the latter 2 cost more). Most of these cars have strong points like the Protege and its handling or the Civic and its fuel economy, but before all else (except build quality of course), I would want power first and then build in handling, ride quality, comfort, etc.

Being an American, I really don't need (or want) to row gears because gas here is only $1.50 a gallon, so all my 0-60 observations are based on AUTOMATIC TRANS Cars (as most Americans drive) not manual trans cars like most people in gas-expensive/third world nations seem to drive. Please remember to compare manual to manual and AT to AT when comparing 0-60 times (as C/D may not). Lancer is probably 9.1 to 60, with 5-speed trans VS 9.3 to 60 with AT for the Aerio. I know it is sometimes hard to find AT times, I have subscribed and read almost every article in Car and Driver and Motor Trend every month for about 10 years now, as most of the time they seem to test and post manual trans times in the back of the mag and for comparisions (sometimes against AT-equipped cars).

I know the Focus SVT, Lancer Evolution, Subaru WRX, Neon SRT-4, VW Golf GTI/Jetta Turbo/V-6, are also all in this class and are all great cars, but are so costly ($20,000+), why wouldn't you just buy an Altima 3.5L V-6, GTP, Accord EX V-6 or comparable? Whereas, in this class, my Aerio S was only $11500 (without $500 owner loyalty coupon I had for previously owning a Grand Vitara) and offers a great car with a bit of power at 145HP.

So I can buy a Golf for $16K, about $5K more than I paid for my Aerio for 30 less HP. While I admit that blue gauges are nice and so is the Golf's multi-adjustable seat, these features along with the softer-to-touch plastics are not worth $5000 to me. Isn't the Golf still made in Brazil or has production moved back to Mexico? Either way, I would also think that the Suzuki being made in Japan suggests better construction/reliability. If it were "made in Germany" I could come closer to justifying that $5000 price gap.

I traded my Elantra because, it seemed very flimsy after the 20K miles I put on it. It suffered from loud wind noise (and other creaks/rattles all the time) at highway speeds. The fabric on the driver armrest was coming off. The motor was also very noisy at idle (even with timing belt?) despite oil changes every 3K. Also, after awhile of driving it, I really got sick of the plain gray interior with the peach and pinkish colors blended into the seat fabric too. It was definitely slower when new and at 20K than my brand new (and not broken in yet) Aerio S (both had AT). Also, I checked at Hyundai's website and I guess they have now settled on 135HP as the "official" horsepower, down from the 140HP they had claimed prior (and 10 less than 145HP in the Aerio). One thing that was far better though than Hyundai had advertised was the gas mileage. With the Elantra, I averaged a Civic/Corolla-like 32MPG AVERAGE! This was quite a pleasant surprise, but not enough to get me to want to keep the car. Not to bash Hyundai, I did have a 2.5L V-6 Sonata (and another less pleasant new 4 cylinder Sonata) before that I really loved and had very few complaints about. The Tiburon seemed upscale to the Elantra to me when I sat in it, but I didn't drive one yet. I didn't like the fact that there are no side moldings/protection (against door dings) on it and several other new coupes on the market.

Oh well, this is just my opinion for this compact class, I enjoy reading all of yours and we all have to agree on one thing, EVERY one of these cars is vastly better than the best compact cars any company put out in the eighties and most of the nineties (although I miss my '99 DOHC 150HP AT Neon). You have to love the fierce competition going on with the automakers these days.

fndlyfmrflyr · May 2003

$1.50 per gallon? Wow, wish it was that price around here. A couple of months ago it was almost $2.40 around here. Down to about $1.90 now.

Still, with heavy traffic an automatic transmission makes sense, even with high fuel prices.

gkxp · May 2003

Yes, now in the Metro Chicago Area, gas is around $1.50 a gallon area for regular at premium stations (BP, Mobil, Shell), but it is a little more downtown. That $2.40 (now $1.90) must be in California, I thought I had heard about ultra-high prices there. The highest I remember 87 octane costing here ever was a few years ago, $2.20 or so a gallon and this was when I had a Camaro Z28 that required premium (93 octane) at $2.40/$2.50 a gallon!

I agree that a big part of my decision to drive AT-equipped cars is the rush hour traffic and traffic in general. Even though I have owned stick cars before (Insight, S10), I found stick to be horrible to drive in the metro area. I may own a manual if I lived in a very desolate (rural) place and never needed to drive in dense traffic.

lngtonge18 · May 2003

At $11,500, the base Aerio sedan is a pretty good deal. I was just trying to make the point that nicer cars can be bought for the price I spent on my Aerio SX. I was also trying to get across that the Aerio's 145 hp does NOT translate to class-leading performance. The numbers have proven that accleration is average for this car and car's that "didn't have any beef" are faster (all my numbers were 5 speed against 5 speed so they were plenty fair). Don't be fooled by the big hp number. If you are satisfied with the performance of your Aerio, great. Just know it's not as fast as you think and horsepower numbers aren't everything. I was very impressed when I drove my friend's 03 Elantra GT 5 speed. That engine accelerated faster and ran smoother brand new than my 03 Aerio SX 5 speed did after 9k miles and yet it's rated at 10 less hp.

(p.s.: That $5k for the Golf buys way more than what you stated. You would have added power locks, remote keyless entry with alarm, 8 speaker Cd system, anti-lock brakes, side-impact airbags and head airbags, 15" wheels and full size spare, 4 wheel disc brakes, better interior materials, a longer bumper-to-bumper warranty, and way better resale value. I guess all those features weren't on your list and thus not worth the extra money? You must admit, the Golf packs a great value for 15k and easily trumps the Aerio GS and SX.)

fndlyfmrflyr · May 2003

Good guess. SoCal has high fuel prices and two of the cars use premium. Regular is about 20 cents less at around $1.70. Even diesel fuel is expensive at close to the price of regular.

I enjoyed driving a manual transmission car until traffic became so heavy. My last manual car was a Mazda 626 turbo and the last two years ('94 and '95) it just sat in the garage most of the time while I drove an automatic.

I'd love a PT GT manual, but it would probably not be used much because of the traffic. Fortunately, our auto version is fun to drive too.

On the topic, the P5 is great if the roads are smooth, the E-GT is better than one would usually expect, Ford reliability and recalls make me look elsewhere, The Vibe/Matrix needs the coming turbo motor if one wants an automatic, Have not been in an Aerio so have no opinion, and then there is the PT.

DC rebates help on the cost end, but it is on the expensive side compared to the others, For us, the added performance of the GT, the quality of materials inside, and the ease getting in and out, front and back, while being more user friendly for us (always covered "trunk" area and easily removable fold down seats) justified the added cost of the PT.

Any of the others can be a better dollar value depending on how important certain features are to the buyer.

jontyrees · May 2003

"Don't be fooled by the big HP numbers", "it's not as fast as you think". Who's being fooled? How fast does gkxp think it is? I'm reading various 0-60mph times thrown around, but in the C&D mini-wagon comparison test, the Aerio SX was the fastest non-180hp Toyota engined car in the test at 8.3secs, ahead of all the others mentioned here. It also had the most cargo capacity if I recall correctly. OK, I know they hated it, and ranked it dead last, but that's another story...

Let's give gkxp some credit here - he's owned 40-odd cars, (not 40 odd cars), and I think he's capable of recognizing a good car/great value when he owns and drives it.

I love mine, and have addressed a couple of it's shortcomings easily and cheaply. (Mousepad wrist gel support on the the drivers door for elbow padding, small neoprene sack attached to tunnel in passenger footwell for more "cubby" space).

icvci · May 2003

I'm not going to tell you you shouldn't love your car. They do that in the links below.

http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/comparison/articles/92555/page017.- html

http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/comparison/articles/100022/page022- .html

Did you really add mouse pad gel for comfort? I don't see where there is any real-world advantage to your added horsepower. IMO Less than half a second over the P5 doesn't make up for the fun you lose in everyday driving.

revka · May 2003

Well, let's not overlook that the Aerio SX made it onto Edmunds' Consumer Most Wanted and Editors Most Wanted lists for wagons under 15K. ;-)

Revka
Host
Hatchbacks & Wagons Boards

lmp180psu · May 2003

I would hope that the Aerio would win in a category where its' only competition is the Kia Rio Cinco wagon. It would be impressive if the Aerio sedan was competitive in the small sedan category, but it isn't. It is all a matter of perspective; it is not that hard to place 1st in a competition among 2, yes 2, entrants.

icvci · May 2003

I'll post to that!

Beating out the Kia...yippie.

gkxp · May 2003

No real world advantage to 10-30HP in the compact class? I know we are not talking about adding this small amount of horsepower to a Viper (or similar muscle-car), but in this class of cars, 10-30HP is A BIG DEAL!

After 1200 miles now, I agree that more storage space for the Aerio would be nice. I have averaged 30MPG through 2 fill-ups now with the AT. Also, I think this Aerio may have the one of the quietest motors at idle I've ever had/heard. I think only my Insight (shut off at stops) was quieter. I am crazy about the comfort of the driver seat. I am a route driver (use my car) for a living and spend 10-12 hours a day in the car and this seat does not cause me fatigue after sitting on it for all that time. The Aerio's seats would be perfect for long drives.

I think if you HAD to pay close to MSRP ($15/$16K) for an Aerio, you would probably have a few better alternatives out there at that OTD Price. I would say Sentra LE,SER for one, but at the $11K I paid, it wasn't worth $4000 more for 20HP with the Nissan.

No, at $16K I still don't think the Base Golf is a good deal. Isn't the soul of a car its engine/transmission? The 2.Slow in the VW is underpowered and, unlike Civic, there is not even a economical reason like gas mileage for this 115HP sluggishness (23/29MPG??). Resale Value would mean since you paid $16K, you will probably get $12K-$13K if you traded it the next day as with my Aerio which I paid $11K for would be worth $8-9 for trade-in value (Golf Trade-Value may hold closer to sticker price, because there were no/little incentives when you bought it. AKA you GET (at trade time) what you PAID for. So you paid more-and you get more for the Golf-no miracle there. As for the few extras, does the base Golf have Power Windows, Digital Dash, Outside Temperature Gauge (not to mention the extra 30HP) and was it manufactured in an Industrial Nation (known for quality-control) or a Third-World Country? The Suzuki Powertrain Warranty (7YR/100K) is better than VW's. Also, hasn't VW suffered from a host of recalls lately? I like the blue gauges though, maybe if the Base Golf had a 21st Century Engine and was "made in Germany"...

lngtonge18 · May 2003

Are you actually reading my messages? I have proven to you the Aerio holds no performance advantage over those cars you are stating have 10-20 less hp. You obviously are one that simply looks at the horsepower # and automatically assumes it's better. Not so in the Aerio's case. In fact, Consumer Reports stated a con to the Aerio was slow acceleration when equipped with an automatic.

Secondly, I just stated in my last post that the base Golf comes standard with power windows (new for 2003)! By the way, what good is the outside temp gauge when it is grossly inaccurate (the only time mine was close to accurate was first thing in the morning while parked in the shade)? It's sort of a cool feature, but not really worth anything (is a temp gauge more important to you than safety features???). Your point about third world countries is? You obviously don't have a problem buying Korean made cars so what makes a Brazilian made car any worse? By the way, I owned a 1987 VW Fox back in 1999 that was built in Brazil and that car was very well built and extremely reliable. It had no rattles whatsoever and a nice solid thunk to the doors, compared to the multiple rattles I endured with my brand new Aerio. The 7yr/100k powertrain warranty is nice, but what are the chances you will actually need to use it? The 3yr/36k warranty is very inadequate and judging by my experience, Suzuki saves a lot of money by leaving it there. Suzuki has consistently rated at the bottom in quality surveys so I don't see why you feel they are so much better.

I will have to agree with you on the Aerio's seats. They are some of the best in the business, right up there with Volvo's well known comfort! I hope you don't take my comments as an attack against your decision to buy an Aerio. I'm just voicing my opinion that the Aerio is not a competitive car in the economy class based on my ownership experience and driving some of the competition. At the rock bottom price you paid, its a good car, although I would still have to choose the Elantra over it.

gkxp · May 2003

OK, the VW has power windows. The Aerio is 8.3 seconds to sixty with manual (I can't find solid AT stats, everything rates class with manual). SIMPLY PUT- What beats it in this class/price range? Certainly not the Golf with the 2.0L with 5 Speed or Automatic. My Outside Temp Gauge functions accurately, so for me, it is a fully valid option. Despite lacking the side airbags, the Aerio is ultra-safe and achieved Best Pick" from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety after achieving the institutes highest possible overall crash test rating.

The Aerio weighs 2600-2700 lbs and has 145HP. Do power/weight ratios mean anything? Just about everything in this class weighs about this, but has fewer horsepower. I realize coefficient of drag may play a minor difference, but the Aerio is aerodynamic. I also realize that automatic transmission performance can vary (seems GM and Mercedes Benz build the best), but I notice very little lag in between shifts with my Aerio so I would doubt it is any less efficient transferring power than most other transmissions in this class/price range.

I would say Korea is a notch-up on the "industrial nation" (South Korea is not a Third World Nation) list as they makes "their own" cars whereas Brazil or Mexico have no car companies. Some other VW owners at TDICLUB.com were very bummed when Golf Production went to Brazil in 2000/2001.

Consumer Reports is certainly not the end-all of reviews (first time I've ever heard "slow"??), but they are entitled to their opinion. I thought the last issue I looked at rated several VW's poorly with many full and half-filled black dots in the model reliability ratings from prior years (so basically their advice was to avoid them).

The Elantra is a solid contender in the class/price range and was a good car for me too. I just, personally, feel the Aerio edges it out with the additional power, digital dash and black cloth interior (vs. gray with peach/pink hues on Elantra GLS). The Elantra GT with the graphite leather interior is much better than the GLS in my opinion.

lmp180psu · May 2003

...numbers for an Aerio with auto( but also with AWD )at 10.3 seconds. It ranked 7th out of 8 cars, ahead of only the Saturn Ion in its overall ranking .

Here is their summary of the Aerio:

  Ups: Easy to get in and out of, plenty of headroom, strong standard four-cylinder, large trunk, available all-wheel drive.

  Downs: Almost no interior storage, cheap interior plastics, slow with automatic tranny and AWD, no side airbags available.

  The Bottom Line: A distinctive-looking newcomer that lacks the polish to knock off the class leaders.

Here is the link to the whole comparo:

http://new.edmunds.com/reviews/comparison/articles/100022/article- .html

I think it does support ingtonge18's point about hp numbers not being the "be all, end all" in terms of performance. With the exception of the 165hp Sentra at 7.7 seconds, the Aerio was competitive given the weight of the AWD, but it is not a clear winner as gkxp is saying.

But it is bad when a Saturn Ion with a 5 speed auto and similar hp is only .4 sec faster than the Aerio with AWD.

baggs32 · May 2003

I'm not an Aerio fan myself (I'm actually shopping for a P5, ZX5, or 6i) but I'd like to add that if I were interested in AWD it would probably be my first choice. The Matrix/Vibe twins just don't cut it in that department.

Usually a manufacturer will increase engine power in AWD models to compensate for the extra weight. I'll never understand why Toyota/Pontiac decided to offer the weakest of the three engines in the AWD twins.

nippononly · May 2003

In Vibe/Matrix, it is the same engine in all but XRS models, but in the AWD the exhaust is routed around the AWD hardware, which causes additional back pressure and a consequent loss of 7 hp.

gkxp, after horsepower/weight ratio, the single biggest factor affecting a car's performance is the way it is geared. It is perfectly plausible that the Aerio with its extra hp will still be the slowest in acceleration, if it has tall gearing (which some manufacturers do to keep engine revs down, to boost fuel economy above what it would otherwise be).

Hankr · May 2003

Geezum people... these are ECONOMY CARS! It;s like arguing about which girl in a roomful of ugly girls is "prettiest". They're ALL ugly, (and these cars are ALL slow).

But as to choices, for me, it was an Aerio for comfort, value and reliability. For you, its Protoge5 for handling and looks. For another, its Civic for refinement and gas economy. All have their strengths & weaknesses.

Someone else said it... these are all very capable cars... we're lucky to have such choices.

baggs32 · May 2003

"In Vibe/Matrix, it is the same engine in all but XRS models, but in the AWD the exhaust is routed around the AWD hardware, which causes additional back pressure and a consequent loss of 7 hp."

I was wondering how the same engine was less powerful in the AWD. Thanks for clearing that up.

Maybe they should have just routed the exhaust under the rear suspension as they did with the Camry. What a joke that is.

Side pipes would be cool too.

Hankr · May 2003

I have subscribed for 30 years and value their assessments.

But I do dismiss anything they have to say about Suzuki. There is still a product disparagement suit pending by Suzuki against CU stemming back to CU's late-80s "testing" of the Samurai.

Before anyone immediately jumps to CU's defense, I suggest they visit Suzuki's media site for an overview of Suzuki's case. It appears quite possible, in the words of the Appellate Judge's recent ruling for Suzuki against CU's motion for summary dismissal, that IN THIS CASE Consumer Reports may have "rigged" the tests. It looks like the case may go to jury trial.

Given this ongoing and expensive litigation, I find it plausible that CU, even unintentionally, may find it difficult to be truly objective concerning Suzuki and its products.

nippononly · May 2003

now you're talking! I would like to see twin pipes like Viper - one each side - with a less restrictive cat so that hp would actually be INCREASED in the AWD...not to mention the glorious look that would give! How come they never do original things like that?????

gkxp · May 2003

10.3 seconds to sixty for an AT and "AWD" equipped Aerio is NOT what I was looking for. All the added weight of AWD and ANY economy car and the 0-60 time will be much worse than it normally would be.

I agree Hankr that most cars in this class are slow overall (what a shame). And if you do want something in the class with power (like the PT-GT) it costs you $21K OTD and that puts you in the range to buy a nice V6 midsize. If the rebates get better on the Sentra, I think my next car may be a 2004 Sentra S (formerly LE/about $15K). They have finally added black cloth to the interior color to replace that awful grayish/beige that was used in 2003 and prior. I guess that is the best value I can get for a little bit of speed and when incentives get better later this year or early next, I'll buy one.

lmp180psu · May 2003

"10.3 seconds to sixty for an AT and "AWD" equipped Aerio is NOT what I was looking for. All the added weight of AWD and ANY economy car and the 0-60 time will be much worse than it normally would be."

I was just trying to give an example of an Aerio with an auto, since you said most publications list figures for manuals only. Sorry it wasn't exactly what you were looking for. I know that a car, especially an economy car, with AWD will have slower 0-60 times than one without. As I said before, 10.3 is a respectable time given the added weight of AWD. I'm glad I don't have a Lancer

I agree that the Sentra LE( S) is a very good buy with a 0-60 time of 7.7 with an auto. That is better than a late 90's Maxima, and other late 90's V6's from Honda and Toyota.

lngtonge18 · May 2003

Ok, Let's try this one last time. Car and Driver tested an SX 5 speed at 8.3 sec from 0-60. They also tested a GS sedan 5 speed at 8.8. Mototrend tested an SX 5 speed at 8.7. Edmunds tested an SX 5-speed at 9.1. As you can see, there is a wide variation in performance for this car. If you take an average, you get 8.7. Now, lets look at the Corolla. Car and Driver tested a CE 5 speed at 8.2 from 0-60. Motortrend tested one at 7.9. Take an average, you get 8.05. Hmm...seems to me the Corolla is a half second faster than the Aerio, despite having 15 less hp.

Granted, I honestly don't care about whose car is faster. I just have an issue when someone says a car is better because it has more hp and is faster, when the numbers don't back that theory up. I also find it odd that someone would complain that other economy cars don't have any beef when the numbers prove otherwise. That was the only point I was trying to make in bringing up the 0-60 numbers. But, do enjoy your Aerio. It does have its strong points, but imo the engine is not one of them. I truly hope yours is a much better car than mine was. Curiously, how do you handle trading cars so often? You must lose a ton of money buying a new car every year or two, especially when you are trading economy cars with poor resale like Hyundai and Suzuki.

baggs32 · May 2003

"How come they never do original things like that?????"

Probably because Soccer Moms would burn holes in their stockings every time they exited the vehicle.

The rest of us just have to suffer I guess.

gkxp · May 2003

I had a 2000 Prizm with AT and the VVT-i engine and I would swear that my Aerio is faster. Wasn't the previous-generation Corolla also lighter than the current one? I wish we could get accurate hard numbers on these cars with AT.

PRACTICE makes perfect! I have been driving for about 10 years and have had a total with this Aerio of 41 cars (several old junks when I started driving). Part of the reason I trade so often is I put 6000-7000 miles a month on my cars driving to and from work (65 mile commute daily, 1 way) and I drive FOR my job also (about 200 or so miles average a day).

The big keys to this trading for me are a TON of constant Research, Buying Low, Selling High. Also, living in a large metro area (Chicagoland) helps with all the competition. By the way, I also have to search out most competitive dealerships and I LOVE TO HAGGLE!

gkxp · May 2003

With this high mileage I drive and the fact that we only have 1 car in our family and I cannot afford to be without it, so it must be 100% reliable (new, newer). I also don't want to spend any additional money on repair/maintenance (except oil) either and so this constant trading every 20K miles or so makes for no out of pocket expenses except for the cost of the depreciation of the car.

jontyrees · June 2003

Yes, indeed, I really put a gel pad from a computer mousepad on the "ledge" of the drivers door where I rest my elbow. I think it was $6.99, and it's very comfortable - much better than the hard plastic underneath it. It's black, so it's pretty unobtrusive visually.

I've done a few things to my Aerio - some cheap, some not, and it makes me smile when I drive it. I installed a fairly extensive stereo system, with a subwoofer built in to the cargo floor (<$100, did it myself with stuff out of my old car), added leather seating and door panels($100 on ebay, $400 for installation), attached a little black and red neoprene sack to hold my sunglasses, etc ($8), installed a daisy-chained ground wire kit ($39), dropped in a K&N replacement air filter into the existing box($34.95), and next week I should be receiving a set of springs, bushings and rear sway bar that will dramatically alter the somewhat "tippy" handling characteristics ($340).

Any time you buy a car, you're going to have to make some compromises, especially in the economy class, but this car is working out very well for me. I don't know why people feel the need to continually criticize a particular car, even when there are current owners repeatedly saying "I like it, it's a good car".

I like it - it's a good car.

nippononly · June 2003

HEAR HEAR!

To each his own...if there was one car that was clearly, factually best, what would be the point in there even being a wide variety to choose from? Everyone has individual needs and tastes.

tictac2 · June 2003

After three months of comparing, test driving, shopping and haggling, I finally decided on the Suzuki. The one I bought is a 2003 SX demo with 2200 miles, Pearl White, Auto, ABS, AWD(wasn't looking for but decided to get), tint, roof rack, alarm, center armrest(a definite necessity) and I got out the door for $16K. I feel pretty good about the deal I got and love the car so far(going on three weeks now). I decided on the Aerio over the Elantra GT because of looks and insurance rates(10% lower for the Aerio). Thanks again to all who post on these boards for helping with my decision. I will keep you updated on how it goes.

Has anyone had issues with washer fluid running down the hood when using the windshield washers? It seems to spray a small amount on the hood initially. But seems to continue to seep out of the nozzle on the hood for a while after use as well? Not a big issue, but the blue fluid really shows on the white paint.

nippononly · June 2003

no elantra available in AWD, eh?

bob5e · June 2003

Suzuki is now offering a $4k rebate on Aerio's through 6/30. How does an Aerio GS w/AWD, ABS, and Auto sound for $13,795? Has anyone found a better price in the West?

revka · June 2003

You may also want to post (copy/paste) your question in our Aerio SX discussion. Good luck.

Revka
Host
Hatchbacks & Wagons Boards

nippononly · June 2003

that must make it the cheapest AWD vehicle available new right now, bar none!

Vibe/ Matrix v. PT Cruiser v. ZX5 v. Protege5 v. Elantra GT v. Aerio SX

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles