Economy Sedans (~$16k-$20k)

doohickie · August 2005

I wasn't trying to "guess correctly". I merely gave my opinion, which is no more or less ''correct" than that of Edmunds.

pat · August 2005

I'm thinking cti is referring to my "challenge" when I opened this discussion.

zoomzoomitis · August 2005

Concerning this latest article, I'm ready to jump! Have been reading these various threads now for sometime (very similar demographics to backy & doohickie...so VERY similar it's scary! Kid's future sled, the "Mrs.", value for the dollar etc. etc.). Was reeeeeeeally honing this decision down to which year-end model Elantra I was going to buy in the next month or two...until this article. Now it's happening again - I'm being pulled back to my disease - zoomzoomitis! I can't shake it.

As a super satisified owner of a 2000 Protege' LX with 173,000 blips on the radar (and still merrily Zoomin' BTW!), ol' Mary the Mazda has about run her course in the household this Fall... me thinks. Turning into a pumpkin maintenance-wise in a couple thousand miles since I don't want to put the bucks into such a high mileage roadster. Thus the need to enter "The Zone" (kinda like the twilight zone but with car salesmen! I think ya'll know what I mean). Have researched backwards, forwards and upside down so much so that I'm starting to know these cars better than the yahoos sellin' 'em. Anyways, had finally decided on the "dated" (the author's word, not mine) Elantra GT hatch...I think. Looking for a nice commuter (ride, decent gas mileage, "value", hatch-functional/practical etc.). Want the ABS. Would much prefer the 5spd over the auto. Could care less about the leather or the sunroof which tosses in the GLS hatch as a valid choice since you can option ABS without the sunroof which is not the case on the GT. But the GT in my area does tend to be in numerous supply in this setup whereas the 5 door is very limited. Supply and demand on year end models does enter into this equation. Best I've seen for a 2005 GT hatch (w/pkg #8 - "the works") - about 15K (auto)/14.3K (manual) give or take a dumb dealer fee here or there. Which brings me too...

Fifth place out of seven (Argh!!!!) and of course the car I've been tryin' ever so much to put outta my mind (simply based on cost at this point) comes in #1 just about across the board in this article! Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh!!! I'm going mental fella's! How do you guys justifiy spending $3000 to $4000 more on a comparably equipped "Zoomer" that in your heart of hearts you know is truly an outstanding and superior automobile to the South Korean entrant in this field? Do we bite the bullet and see if my favorite car company will finally put a reasonable rebate on the 3 this Fall, close my eyes and sign the painful papers or do we roll the dice on this 5th place finisher? Damn, why'd they have to write that article...and why did I read it?!!!!!

Going crazy! :mad: :confuse:

...I don't even know which icon to pick!

mdaffron · August 2005

... that the 3 was criticized (mildly) for its lack of cupholders compared to another entry.

Lordy, it's got SIX! This is a car, not a Coke machine!!!

Meade

iluvmysephia1 · August 2005

to jump in this clean pool of car enthusiasts, looking for a bargain and a value and a good influx of sport. Good review, very well-written and entertaining. I enjoyed the reference to food along with fine economy cars, too.

It's nice to see the whole package being researched and written about. After reading this review I would only say that the Spectra looks even a better bargain and a better buy than I knew it to be before reading the article. And the well-honed bodystyle? Absolutely unbeatable IMHO! Kia has once again proven that their bodystylers are stylin' and smilin.' I would state it this way, if I had the software program and the clay modeling setup, the new Kia Spectra would be a great final product for a smart and stylish little sedan. Well done, my South Korean friends!

The Mazda 3 tries in the stylin' department, yet falls woefully short of the Kia. Where it turns a certain way in it's lines, it should have turned another way. It still suffers from that Mazda "blocky-chunky-itis" that I can spot even with a big 'ole roast beef sandwich in front of me and Guess Who classics blaring in my ears. Mazda should get a 'B' for trying, though.

All in all a good review and a must-read for y'all. Enjoy.

igor2 · August 2005

use the employers discount price and look at the focus...

I know people call me "all american" but truly, the focus offers the same value, and quality, and with new engine, new interior and 4 body styles, it is only second to the utterly expensive Mazda..

you can get a 3 door (ZX3 SES ) with almost every option for 14k (i got mine for 13.5 with college grad discount) If you want a five door, tag a grant and a half on top of that. I think that still beats elantra...

then again, I didn't all your other posts in other forums, so I don't know ll of your needs.. but I just wanted to put this out there..
And n the end, i didn't listen to my friends either when I bought the Focus. (they all have the 3's)

Igor

mdaffron · August 2005

"Blocky-chunky-itis" is in the eyes of the beholder. You should know, with how long you've been posting here, that posts about "looks" are taken with a grain of salt. To each his (or her) own!

And "where it turns a certain way in its lines"? Well, at least the Mazda's lines are straight! Seems Edmunds found the Kia to be a little "out of round," with comments such as on the exterior, both the hood and trunk lid were misaligned.

Mazda3 "falls woefully short" of the Kia in the style department?

There's nothing revolutionary going on in the cabin when it comes to design, which editors described as "clean, if uninspired," "a bit plain but tasteful," and "basic, functional, very reasonable."

Mazda should get a 'B' for trying, though.

Well, you're just a fellow student here. The teacher gave it an A+. Kia's got some homework to do.

Meade

iluvmysephia1 · August 2005

may have given it an 'A' for many other reasons, and not for stylin', though. Kia smashes the 3 handsomely in the stylin' department, hands down.

The Mazda was heaped with praise in the driving categories, which it very well may deserve. If I can't get past the looks, I look no further though. When paying as much as one does for a new car, I want it to look great. When it's all packaged and bowed the Kia Spectra is my overall best choice. The Spectra powertrain is solid, too, and the comfort of the cabin and low noise levels are very impressive. There's just way too much to like and not nearly enough to not like with the Spectra-meister.

ctalk · August 2005

The Edmunds "teacher's" may have given it an 'A' for many other reasons, and not for stylin', though. Kia smashes the 3 handsomely in the stylin' department, hands down.

Maybe you should re-read the review because no where can I find Edmunds bash the 3 in styling.

But, styling is subjective and in your opinion (not edmunds) the Spectra smashes the 3 in styling.

IMO the 3 is the best looking car in the group.

"Beautifully styled, the 2005 Mazda 3 was the only economy sedan in the test that got us excited just walking up to it in parking lots."

"Editors were unimpressed by the Spectra's sheet metal, but there's nothing offensive about it."

*If you look at the Editors evaluation Category Mazda got 9.1 and Kia got 6.9 in exterior design.

z71bill · August 2005

Don't get tied up in knots by some ranking - it is only one tool that you should use to decide which car should be your new ride.

I like to read them (the reviews & comparisons) - but have never every based by final decision on which car ranked 1st (or last)

Look at the rating - how the points are broken down - they base 10% of the score on PERSONAL RATING and another 10% on RECOMMENDED RATING - it looks to me like these are pure fluff -

Feature Content 10% - big difference in the way the cars were optioned - the Cobalt didn't even have power windows - how did they pick the model that was used?

The PRICE and FUEL ECONOMY factors only get 25% COMBINED? Why only 5% for fuel economy? Why only 20% for price? These are economy cars shouldn't these ratings be weighted higher?

Do the % they used match your needs? It sounds like you care more about $$. So lets change the rating to match (what I think) is more important to you.

If I change the purchase price weighting to 40% and fuel economy to 35% and give all the other ratings 5% the order changes to TO/FROM in points and FROM/TO in ranking

Mazda 80.8/84.3 and 1/4
Civic 87.8/76.5 and 2/1
Kia 84.8/74.0 and 3/2
Ford 80.7/73.0 and 4/5
Hyundai 79.4/68.0 and 5/6
Cobalt 82.1/66.5 and 6/3
Suzuki 75.4/61.6 and 7/7

The question is what is important for you - go take a test drive - actually negotiate the price - and make the decision based on that - not some ranking.

mdaffron · August 2005

But do any of you agree with me that the Cobalt at the top of the following page looks more like a close-up photo of a Hot Wheels car than a life-sized car?

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/ViewModelDetail/make=Chevrolet/model=Cobalt

I honestly think it's a cute car! There is just SOMETHING about that photo!

Meade

inajoong · August 2005

i don't know which trim mazda3 you are looking for....
but for just a little more you can probably get the base 06 hyundai sonata.
or maybe for about the same price get the 05 sonata.

just my 2 cents.

mdaffron · August 2005

Best I've seen for a 2005 GT hatch (w/pkg #8 - "the works") - about 15K (auto)/14.3K (manual) give or take a dumb dealer fee here or there.

Umm, I just visited Hyundai USA's website and "built" a 2005 Elantra GT (whose MSRP starts at $14,849, btw), selected a 5-door, 5-speed GT, added your package 8 ($1,445), and accepted (could not change) a $545 freight charge. Total came to $16,839. Dunno where you saw $14,300, but I think you need to add about $2,500 unless Hyundai is rebating the heck out of these things right now -- if they were, they should be letting you know on their website!

My 2005 Mazda3 5-door had a sticker of $17,600 when I bought it in April. My dealer knocked the price down to MSRP and I paid about a thou less than that. But to compare MSRP to MSRP, your Elantra GT hatch is really only about $800 less than a Mazda3 hatch.

Now, do what Edmunds says. Go out and buy one.

:P

Meade

z71bill · August 2005

What do you mean by "My dealer knocked the price down to MSRP"

Their starting price was above MSRP? Or do you mean invoice?

mdaffron · August 2005

Bill, are you following me around again? :P

Good catch. I had MSRP and invoice on my brain.

I meant invoice.

NO ONE pays MSRP, right?

:P :P

Meade

smith20 · August 2005

Dunno where you saw $14,300, but I think you need to add about $2,500 unless Hyundai is rebating the heck out of these things right now -- if they were, they should be letting you know on their website!

The link below is the rebate page that has a link on the front page of their website.

http://www.hyundaiusa.com/about/promotion/SalesEvent/index.html

But to compare MSRP to MSRP, your Elantra GT hatch is really only about $800 less than a Mazda3 hatch.

Wouldn't that be a fully loaded Elantra GT and a base model Mazda3 hatch . . . and the Mazda is still $800 more expensive to start (at MSRP). Furthermore, the option list for a Mazda3 is very long, and very expensive.

zoomzoomitis · August 2005

Thanks guys for the comments/questions on my recent rant. Lil' clarification I think is in order though.

Meade, first and foremost, you are an absolute hoot to read and not just on this board. From the $500 "one week late" episode in April to TGIF burgers, most entertaining. Keep on...talkin' & zoomin'.

Now on your question as to my #'s. Just on the surface comparing my MUCH desired car, the '05 Zoomer3 v. what my kid calls "The Duck" (as in ugly), the '05 Elantra. Only considering the hatchback versions of these cars as my wife is convinced she "needs" the funtionality of a hatch. Personally I think it's bull but you know how far that argument will get me. Soooo, looking at the GLS 5 door v. GT 5 door. Specs, prices, blah, blah, blah. Then seeing the aforementioned "article". Sheeesh! No matter how I size 'em up, that zoomer is thousands more, not hundreds. Again comparably equipped. I'm talkin' the 5 door with ABS, leather, sunroof, give or take auto as I want the 5 speed and prefer NOT to spend the $800 in that department. That car is in the 19k range (auto since there seems to be more of them about) before TTL. Same equipped Korean version, 14-15k range. That's all. I think alot of it has to do with the rebate. Mazda is currently offering nothing and rightfully so as theirs is the successful car as far as sales goes. Hyundai is offering $1250 (soon to go up I would imagine.). That said, the Elantra is equipped with much more standard equipment than the average economy car. That, I think, is why that car company, Hyundai, has risen as far and as fast as it has but that is another topic.

Now, as far as Edmunds says, "Go out and buy one.", like you I can "afford" more but the practical/rational side of the brain in me jumps up and yells "Wait!". Want and need are two entirely different animals. Want the cherry red RX-8...heck for that matter, WANT the rip-roarin' red Viper. What I need is simply a safe, reliable commuter. Man, does that sound like middle age or what?! Young and dumb once and oh how we paid for it at the dealer. Not quite the aged wise one yet but quickly getting there.

Movin' on. Igor, the Focus thing. I'd "Buy American" in a heartbeat if the cars were truly made in America. I'm not 100% certain of this but the Focus production lines go thru Mexico, land of the illegal immigrant. Not interested. Nice car but not made in Dearborn anymore.

Movin' on again. z71bill, I think you're right. In that article the assessment is somewhat subjective in the weighting for scoring purposes. Noted. Takin' it with a grain of salt and awaiting the "dance with the salesman" test drive phase.

Smith20: "very long, very expensive" (list of options on the 3). Exactly.
inajoong: Sonata's brand new. Suggest waiting for the bugs to pack bags.

Shew! Think that's it, I think. Great feedback all. 'Preciate it.

PS Meade, does your money tree out back grow on fertilizer pills from the local nursery or does your success hinge on the watering? Mine doesn't seem to be producing like it used to. Zoom Zoom.

mdaffron · August 2005

I regard the Mazda3 hatch as loaded from the get-go. I purchased mine with no options other than wheel locks and a rear bumper "step plate". Sure, leather's not standard equipment ... neither is it on the Elantra. But for anyone to say the Mazda3 hatch is "stripped" in its base form denotes they haven't checked the list of features. The 3 hatch is already in "s" form and there aren't very many things it doesn't have (I'm talking about things that are traditionally "options" on cars like air conditioning, power windows/doors/locks, remote keyless entry, alloy wheels, etc., etc.) Sure, the Hyundai comes with those features standard and more for your money.

Where the Hyundai falls short is in the performance and handling department. It continues to amaze me how people can get emotional over seat coverings and cupholders, completely ignoring the most important aspects of the car. It can have all the cupholders in the world and smell like a Wisconsin dairy barn all day long, but if it doesn't entertain me on the road, I could care less for the other amenities. And btw, I'm also talking about more important things like active safety -- which is just as important as passive safety (ABS, air bags, etc.). So many Korean car cheerleaders here rave about all the standard passive-safety equipment on these cars, but they never consider the fact that the Koreans have left active safety -- i.e. the power and handling to get out of harm's way -- out of the equation. If you don't think active safety is important, or you believe I made it up, then you haven't kept up with the leaders in this field -- the Saabs, Volvos, BMWs and Porsches of the world.

To me (and I'm aware I'm not everyone), the Mazda is worth the extra bucks because it's a car that I -- and most people who choose to buy it -- simply love to drive. The Hyundai is more an appliance -- a comfortable, well-equipped, conservative-if-a-little-quirky-looking economy car. Excitement is really not part of Hyundai's image -- by the looks of the cars they produce, it seems they're going for the upscale luxury look at a bargain price, especially in the Elantra and Sonata. The Mazda is in a completely different class that's still a bargain at the price that's on the sticker.

Hyundai has been in this country since late 1986, and in the 19 years it's been here, price for what you get has always been its message. That's important to those of us who push the Kellogg's Froot Loops aside in favor of the cheaper but similar Kroger Fruity Rings. But some of us do in fact have enough leaves on our tree (sorry zoomzoom) to occasionally leave the Wal-Mart aisles and splurge on something that has some character, which I believe Hyundai lacks.

Some like to twist numbers on comparison tests to weigh the results in their favor. That's fine, as long as they realize that what's most important to them is not most important to other people. If price and mpg were the most important things to all of us, we'd all be tootin' around in Hyundais and Kias. Some weren't considering Hyundais, Kias and Cobalts when they bought their 3; they were comparing the 3 with more expensive competitors that still fell short. As for me, I wanted the most performance and fun I could get and not break the $20,000 barrier. Nothing came close to the 3, and I stayed a good $3,000 under that barrier -- so I feel I got a bargain.

It's funny that in this country, journalists put the Mazda3 up against the cheap econoboxes and then say things like "it's in a completely different league." In Europe and elsewhere, they put the 3 up against offerings from BMW, Volkswagen and even Alfa Romeo -- I wonder why.

For the record, I've owned two Hyundais -- the last of which was traded on my first Mazda. I've never looked back -- unless you count looking in my rearview mirror. One of my coworkers has a newer Hyundai, and I've been around town in it. Nice vehicle -- but uninspiring. It does everything OK. If that's what you want, then by all means get one.

Meade

backy · August 2005

* What if Edmunds had tested the Elantra GLS, base model with automatic, instead of the loaded GT? It is clear Hyundai didn't get many extra points for the leather interior, purple gauges, fog lamps or other equipment that comes on the GT, and the editors didn't seem to like the GT's suspension that much. Then you would have had a comfortable, well-equipped car that lists for about $14.5k including destination charge--or almost $2000 less than the Spectra. Yes, in that configuration the car would not have had ABS or moonroof or alloys or leather or even a CD player. But some other tested cars didn't have those features (except CD), and a nice CD stereo can be had for under $200. Recall it was the GLS that came in 2nd just behind the Civic in the last comparo. Would the lower-priced model made up enough in the value equation to take 3rd--or even 2nd?

* What if Edmunds had considered other sedans in the $16k-$20k class? For example, how about the Sonata GLS, which comes in right at $20k for a very nicely equipped sedan that has more room, comfort, and standard safety equipment than any car in the comparo? The Malibu, G6, Altima, Mazda6, Optima, Galant, Accord, Camry, Verona, Impreza, Corolla, and New Jetta are all available under $20k. How would the Impreza with its AWD fared? Or the New Jetta? Or the V6 Verona?

mdaffron · August 2005

(And those of you who know me might think I'm off my rocker to actually defend Chevrolet here) ...

But what were the Edmunds editors smokin' to put a BASE Cobalt up against the likes of the Mazda3 in "s" trim level? They smear Chevy for failing "to deliver a complete package."

Well, DUH! :confuse:

They even admit to having purchased the stripper model, but then they go on to criticize it:

At $16,435, our base trim Cobalt was the second-least expensive car in the test, but it was also the only car of the seven without power windows, power mirrors and cruise control. Despite its other flaws, had it offered a few more luxuries, the Cobalt could have landed in fifth place.

Well, Edmunds (Lord and fellow Mazda3 owners, don't strike me down), the Mazda3 doesn't have power windows in its base trim EITHER! If you'd entered a base Mazda3i sedan in this competition, the performance results would've been a little different too -- instead of being a close call, the Cobalt would've trounced the 3 by a long shot! Step the Cobalt up to the next trim level and guessssss whaaaaat -- power windows, locks and cruise are standard, Edmunds.

I just don't understand the choice of trim levels here. If you're going to use the top-of-the-line 3 model with the best engine and features, then why not use the top-trim model from everybody's line? If you're going entry level, then use the base trim level across the line.

If you'll excuse the analogy, I was really interested in reading a comparison of a 12-ounce Porterhouse and a 12-ounce Sirloin. But Edmunds decided to compare the Porterhouse with a Big Mac for some reason.

That wasn't fair to the Cobalt.

Meade

P.S. I'm curious too. Why was Toyota completely left out of this? Corolla not new? Well, the Civic and Focus aren't either ... and what about the Vibe/Matrix?

jkobb · August 2005

I pretty much agree with everything you said Meade. I do have the Elantra 05 GLS, and I like it very much. Its a very comfortable ride , gets decent gas mileage and has all the options I need at a good price . It does what I want it to do, although I agree that the Mazda 3 is more sporty and a real nice car too.Appearance is subjective and I don`t think it looks quirky , frankly I think they look pretty sharp. Overall you gave a very good and solid reasons for choosing the Mazda 3 without slamming the Elantra , I like that . Good thought out response,and happy trouble free motoring to ya. zoom,zoom. Jim

mdaffron · August 2005

Nothing against Hyundai here. My most recent Hyundai was far from recent; in fact it was a 1988 Excel GL 5-door that cost me $7,100 off the lot (I still have the sticker). This was back in the days when Hyundai had nowhere near the quality it does now -- in fact the engine and tranny in my Hyundai were Mitsubishi products. That car got me through college AND pizza delivery during college -- and I racked up more than 115,000 miles on it in only four years. One transmission problem 3,000 miles out of warranty -- they met me halfway and I paid $400 -- I was a little steamed a couple of years later to learn that Hyundai later issued a recall on the problem I had, but too late, I didn't own the car anymore -- in any case, one $400 repair was the only problem I had with that car in more than 115,000 miles. Sure, it could hardly get out of its own way and had very little in the creature-comforts department (no a/c either), but it was cheap, reliable transportation that did everything I asked it to do.

Just remind me to NEVER buy a car without a/c again, but if for some reason I do, NOT to choose charcoal gray as an exterior color. I went through a lot of soaked shirts in that car!

Meade

smith20 · August 2005

It's hard to say because as Meade points out that the Cobalt got slammed for not having enough features. Maybe it would have faired a bit better with a higher price and more features. It's hard to say . . .

backy · August 2005

... instead of being a close call, the Cobalt would've trounced the 3 by a long shot!

I seriously doubt that. I've driven the 3i vs. Cobalt back-to-back and it was no contest in favor of the 3i. The Cobalt does have a smooth, quiet ride, but then so does the Elantra for a lot less money. The 3i has far superior handling, interior, shifting (with 5-speed), fuel economy (based on CR tests), and of course has the zoom-zoom. The fact that the Cobalt is an ugly cuss factors into it to, for me at least.

mdaffron · August 2005

Well, I meant the Cobalt would've trounced the 3 as far as acceleration goes.

As far as the rest ... well, after all, it's still a Chevy, whose current motto is, "We'd give 'em away if we could ... wait, we're doing that. Please buy our cars so we can keep our jobs."

I just hope they're prepared for what happens when they finally do end this "employee pricing" thing. If they thought sales slumped before ... wow, ain't nobody gonna be in the showroom in January buying a $20,000 car they could've bought for $16,500 last month!

Meade

dpat · August 2005

Maybe it would have faired a bit better with a higher price and more features. It's hard to say . . .

Given the breakdown of the scoring given in the last page of the review, we can get a fairly good picture of where a higher trim cobalt would have placed at a minimum. I posted the following paragraph on the "can GM survice" thread yesterday:

Let's take a Cobalt ls for example. An ls with automatic transmission has an MSRP of $17,335, slightly less than the elantra that was tested. Looking at the subcategories in the last page of the review, if we reduce the cobalt's price score to the level of the elantra, and increase the cobalt's content score to the 66.6 that appears to be pretty standard in this comparison (seeing that the review complained about not having power windows, power mirrors, cruise control, a center console container, and a center armrest, all things that are present in an ls, this seems pretty reasonable to me), we get a total score of 72.5 - past the elantra, and very near the focus and spectra. And that's assuming no increase in the other categories from having a much better equipped car. If, for argument's sake, we assume that the added content and upgraded seats add just 5 points to each of the personal rating, reccommended rating, and evaluation score, we get a final score of 74.5 - a very respectable 3rd place behind mazda3 and civic.

smith20 · August 2005

Basically, I see it this way . . . and I am merely explicitly laying out with an example what may be obvious (I know I have stated this kind of opinion numerous times in the past). The Mazda3 is a better car and for the better car you pay a premium. So at the same time it is the best choice and not the best choice depending on each buyer's preference. Meade you (and other Mazada3 owners like you) made the best choice for you because driving the best car in this segment was your priority and now you have the satisfaction every day of having the best driving experience. For me, last year we paid about $14k OTD for an Elantra GT, which I believe was around $4,000 cheaper than a Mazda3 I priced out. In the past year some of our notable expenses have been a $1500 second computer, $1300 for airline tickets to Alaska, and $600 (this one is not fun, but important) for getting my wisdom teeth removed. So what we gave up in driving experience was compensated by the $3400 of non-car goods and services throughout the past year we paid for with the saved difference.

So we're both making the best choices under different set of priorities.

backy · August 2005

Good point. What this review doesn't take into account is that you can get a nicely-equipped Forenza or Elantra with nearly all the utility of the more expensive as-tested cars for $10-12k--or thousands below the likes of the Mazda3 or Civic. Or going the other way, you can get a really nice mid/full-sized sedan like the Sonata for about the same price as the Mazda3 and Civic. So the "best" really does depend on one's priorities--and budget.

newcar31 · August 2005

I'd get a base version of the Mazda3 before I'd get a loaded version of any of the cheaper competitors, even if the base version is more expensive.

I look at it this way:

In a way, the price of the base Mazda3 is being subsidized by the people who pay around $20K for a Mazda3. With the base model, you're still getting fundamentely the same car....the same transmission, same chassis, everything that makes the Mazda3 the best.

mdaffron · August 2005

You don't get the same engine, wheels, brakes, etc.

But I do get your point.

Meade

iluvmysephia1 · August 2005

"you pay what we pay" bloated sales ploy, well, they have already addressed that problem and are going to lower all of their prices across their lineup as soon as the sale ends, which is coming right up.

The lines to buy will dry right up and this will be their response. It'll be interesting to see how much they lower their prices. BTW-this won't be a temporary price drop, it will be permanent. Or as permanent as car price drops go, if you know what I mean.

Didn't the Edmund's comparo's also not like the Elantra GT's red and purple dash lights and how they clashed with the green speedo lights, or something like that? Hummm, I guess sometimes it's the intangibles that make the difference, eh? :surprise:

backy · August 2005

Yes, those purple dash lights and green clock clash terribly! I don't know how I can even stand to be in my GT for one minute! And it just does not go with my nice blaze orange suit! I really need to sell that car and get a Mazda3, Civic etc. before the Fashion Police get me! :P

jkobb · August 2005

You crack me up Backy . And where does one get a Blaze Orange suit.

iluvmysephia1 · August 2005

thanks for that LOL! We're thinking along the same lines!

Oh, and just know that the Edmund's comparo kings and queens are mirroring the magazine's testers, too. It seems like the real big problems are often mentioned in today's competitive car world...problems like offsetting colors like that on the Elantra GT...I just hate it when my speedo colors start colliding with my Elantra's clock colors. I love it.

newcar31 · August 2005

I think it is kind of messed up that the dash lights don't match on the Elantra, and no, I'm not a fashion police officer. Hyundai obviously didn't do that because it looks good, they did it because they're too cheap to change all of the dash lights.

mdaffron · August 2005

Looks like the sale might be ending a little earlier than planned ...

http://www.freep.com/money/autonews/sales24e_20050824.htm

Meade

z71bill · August 2005

The reasons for the lowering the MSRP - rather than keeping the rebate - is in part to look better in COMPARISON tests like the one Edmunds just did. They (almost) always use MSRP to compare price - did they even take the rebates that were available (on the Hyundai) into account?

GM also got positive feedback on the no haggle aspect of the employee pricing promo.

Finally GM has also said that many car shoppers are using the internet to compare cars & narrow the search down to 2 or 3 cars that will actually get a test drive. (big surprise! those GM marketing folks are sharp!)

By lowering the MSRP - and reducing the discounts/rebates (actual price will be about the same) they hope to get more people into the dealership because now the MSRP will stack up better against the competition. At least until the competition does the same thing. Which should be about 1 week.

winterm · August 2005

I would just like to say that this comparison makes me sick. I just bought a Cobalt LS. I can't believe they compared the Cobalt base with the fully loaded Civic and Mazda etc. If they compared a Cobalt LT with leather most of the disadvantages would disappear. Like not having an arm rest, alloy wheels, power windows and mirrors and uncomfortable seats. Also the price would still be less than the Civic by being around 19000 dollars. Edmunds should be ashamed of this review.

mdaffron · August 2005

Maybe it's time to restate my post from last week.

Which editor(s) should we direct our AIM-9 missiles at?

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/aim-9-dvic406.jpg

:shades:

Meade

smaria · August 2005

Just to add to the discussion:

Edmunds calculates what it calls "5-year True Cost to Own" numbers for each car. These numbers take into account the estimated costs of depreciation, insurance, taxes, fees, financing, fuel, maintenance, and repairs. Here are some of Edmunds' numbers:

"base" Mazda3 S Hatchback AT: 5-year cost of $31,887. This comes down to $28,920 if you take away the "finance" charge (i.e., if you pay with cash).

"base" Elantra GLS Hatchback AT: 5-year cost of $31,407. Take away the finance charge and you get $29,216.

So, if you look at the full ownership cycle (buying a car, driving it for 5 years, and then trading it in) the Mazda3 hatchback is possibly only $400-$500 more than a base Elantra. And the Mazda3, in addition to having more horsepower and being more highly rated, comes with features that the base Elantra does not (such as cruise control, alloy wheels, etc.). If you're not financing your new car purchase, the Mazda3 does even better, coming out cheaper than the base Elantra over 5 years! One of the reasons for this is that the Mazda3 has a lower percentage depreciation and is cheaper to insure than many of the competitors.

I know that Edmunds' "True Cost to Own" numbers are only estimates, but they challenge the assumption that an Elantra will actually save you $4000-$5000 over the long run. Maybe it'll save you $1000-$2000 (if you take into account return on money saved in the bank over 5 years and the $1250 rebate), but probably not $4000. Of course, an Elantra will temporarily save you $4000-$5000 during the first year of ownership, since that's the difference in what you'll pay up-front for the 2 cars in "base" form. Since you don't realize the true 5-year cost until you get the trade-in money back (i.e., 5 years later), some people may be unwilling or unable to make the additional up-front "investment" in the Mazda3. (Yes, I know that any car is a bad investment, but my point is just to compare the short-term vs. the long-term costs).

*Waiting for someone to completely slam Edmunds' True-Cost-To-Own numbers as unfounded and biased*

backy · August 2005

I have a few quibbles on the True Cost to Own, e.g. it doesn't take into account owner loyalty rebates (which are frequently around $1000 for cars like the Elantra and Spectra) and sometimes seems excessive on certain charges such as maintenance. The main issue I have is that it is a five year cost of ownership, not a ten-year cost of ownership. Since I will own each of my present cars for at least 10 years (including hand-me-downs to children), there are some factors that are much different, in particular, depreciation differences are less of a factor. Also that $5000 upfront difference has that much more time to build interest or do other work for me.

sandman46 · August 2005

I couldn't agree more with what the article said about the Mazda 3. We've had our silver S since July 1st and absolutely love the car! It does feel like a larger more upscale car and the 2.3 liter engine really "zoom zooms"! The EPA figures for city/highway mileage were lower than the Corolla and Jetta we also considered, but we knew this going in. Still love the car.

The Sandman

mdaffron · August 2005

Backy, you are among a very tiny minority here. I don't know many people who keep a car for even five years anymore. So the Edmunds cost of ownership thing may not apply to you, but it certainly applies to most people.

And while Mazda doesn't have an advertised "loyalty rebate," I was presented with my Mazda3 at invoice back in April before I even opened my mouth because of my preferred-customer status at my dealership. That was worth about a thousand bucks right there.

That's why it's better to just compare MSRPs here. There are many factors that come into play when you buy a car, and even if you think you're getting some kind of discount, the dealer might have rolled his loss back up in your trade-in allowance. Also, rebates aren't forever -- what's $2,500 this month could be $3,000, $1,000 or even nothing next month.

Hard to compare apples to apples when one of 'em's covered with caramel -- just remember that those sweet coatings on the outside may be hiding a sharp wooden stick!

Meade

z71bill · August 2005

Just use the true cost as a rough guide -

BTW - Depreciation is purchase price of the car minus the amount you sell it for (or trade in allowance you get for it)

So if you have a $5,000 difference in purchase price between two cars and you plan to keep the car a long time (like 10 years) there is a good chance that the value of both 10 year old cars - will be about the same (almost nothing!). There will not still be a $5K difference that is for sure.

So the difference in depreciation will actually be GREATER in total rather than less.

$20,000 purchase price - 1,500 sale of 10 year old car = $18,500 depreciation

$15,000 purchase price - 1,200 sale of 10 year old car = $13,800 depreciation

mdaffron · August 2005

Although we did dock the Mazda a few points for its big price tag, it's worth it. The car's extra features justify the bigger spend. Things like its 160-hp, 2.3-liter inline four, the largest and most powerful engine in the test. If you instead choose the 148-hp, 2.0-liter engine in the base i model, you'll save $3 grand right off the bat.

So maybe if we all kept in mind that the Elantra's engine (2.0-liter, 138 hp) is more comparable to the smaller Mazda one (which still has more horsepower), we could bring the two cars that much closer together by comparing the well-equipped 3i to the Elantra.

Meade

volvodan1 · August 2005

I believe the ES was the top trim line, while the LX was the mid trim and I think DX the base model.

mdaffron · August 2005

Mazda used these designators right up until the Mazda3 came out. To get us back to the topic at hand, Mazda now uses "i" and "s" to distinguish its trim levels. The Mazda3 hatchback in the Edmunds comparison test doesn't carry the "s" designator because it's only available in "s" or top-of-the-line trim with the associated 2.3-liter engine, power everything, larger wheels, etc., which are shared with the Mazda3s sedan.

The sedan is available in "i" or "s" models.

Meade

backy · August 2005

What is the list price of the '05 Mazda3i equipped with power windows/locks/mirrors, side air bags, A/C, and height-adjustable front seat? And what would be a typical selling price, including rebates?

sammidog · August 2005

For context I am retired senior citizen shopping for a second car to save miles on my minivan which I'll use for long trips. I am highly concerned about mpg, both for cost and conservation reasons. But price is important because I'll squeeze my retirement budget to buy a new second car. I've thoroughly researched via Edmunds these five: Elantra, Spectra, Corolla, Civic, Mazda3. (Like a previous commenter, I don't understand why the Corolla wasn't in the mix of economy cars reviewed.) Anyway, tomorrow (Aug. 26) I'm proceeding to all 5 dealers to test drive the models I chose (my requirements were auto, AC, and cruise control). I've received price quotes on all five. I'd like to make some comments based on my research and then pose a question or two for readers (most of whom must be way younger than me) to respond to, hopefully before I go off for my tests.

I would like to keep this car 10 years, if I outlive it. We'll drive around our small town, do round trips into the nearest big city (Minneapolis/St. Paul - 150 mi RT), drive regionally short day trips and that's about it. Though I will drive the Mazda3 to see what the buzz is about, I think it's mpg's alone would rule it out for me, if not the price tag. I don't need class and oomph. I'm focused on the Spectra/Elantra choice. Mostly because of the great price and incentives now available. But I am concerned that the real mpg's will not be nearly the EPA estimates. Please, anyone, tell me if you are getting 30 mpg or better on any of these cars in my list!

Which brings me to the Civic. This seems to have the best shot at getting 30+ mpg in overall driving but I was still a bit shocked that the one week test only produced 25 mpg, though the best in its class. I confess to having an iPod so that little gimmick got my attention. I have a quote of $15,550 for the LX from a local dealer. No other incentives. The quote on the Corolla was $15,336 and their EPA ratings are comparable to Civic. But the Corolla isn't in the review mix here.

So bottom line, I am going to look hard at the Spectra/Elantra pair, which all reviewers seem to agree are good buys for the money. I have quotes of $15,204 and $14,403 respectively before incentives of rebates or low APR. But again, I'm leary of being disappointed with the gas mileage. Am I being unrealistic to expect one of these cars to deliver 30 mpg in most driving conditions? So I might have to spring for the Civic, which certainly measured up in the review.

So, guys and gals out there who love this car talk, I'd love to get your opinions and especially any real experience with mpg's. Thanks for helping an old guy think this through. I'll have the weekend to ponder a decision after the test drives and I'll be visiting this forum to see what you have to say. :confuse:

backy · August 2005

I think the Corolla might fit your needs best. It has excellent fuel economy (better than the Elantra and Spectra) and a smooth, quiet highway ride (better than the Civic's), which would be good for your long trips over the pot-holed byways around the Twin Cities. The main thing to check for on your test drive is the driving position--for ALL drivers of the car. Reviews have noted (and I've personally experienced) that the driving position is uncomfortable for taller drivers, and even for medium-sized drivers (I'm only 5'10"). So take it on a long test drive. If the Corolla doesn't fit, I think the Civic is the next best bet. The Elantra and Spectra have really nice highway rides, but they get a few mpg less than the Corolla and Civic. Additionally, Consumer Reports got very good real-world fuel economy on the Mazda3i, and its highway ride is good also (not as smooth as the Corolla's, but much better handling). So you may want to drive the 3i also. It is a very nice car, as evidenced by the sterling reviews from Edmunds.com et. al. Good luck with your car shopping!

P.S. You definitely can get over 30 mpg on the Elantra on highway driving. I easily get mid-30s on my automatic Elantra and upper 30s to over 40 on my 5-speed on long drives. The Spectra should be similar (same engine) but I don't have personal experience with it on long drives.

Economy Sedans (~$16k-$20k)

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles