If $13,000 were a hard ceiling and could not be breached one cent and safety was my number one concern overriding all others and I wanted to buy a compact or subcompact car, I would look at the 2001 Nissan Sentra XE. This is partially based on the belief that the Sentra XE would have the same offset crash test results as the GXE.
In all this talk about Edmunds and safety, I was concerned with two points. The first is if Edmunds is so concerned with safety and they really beat the Echo (unfairly) over the head about it, they sure picked two very poor cars for their most wanted. The point is safety only seems a paramount concern to Edmunds in certain situations.
My second point is I do not agree with Edmunds' $13,000 barrier and they did not explain how they came up with it to my satisfaction.
Can anyone tell me if they know how Edmunds came up with the $13,000 figure?
It is funny that Edmunds is so concerned about safety when it comes to the Echo and yet I just got done reading four articles about the 2001 Elantra GLS and not one mention about the poor showing of the Elantra in the IIHS test.
And Edmunds does not tell the whole story about the safety of the Focus in their review. It says that "NHTSA crash test scores are very good for a small car." This does not tell people that the hatchback (as we have discussed before) scored one star in protecting a rear seat occupant in a side impact crash.
Now contrast that with what they tell people about safety in the Echo review. "Toyota says that the Echo was engineered to provide crash protection that matches the larger Camry, and U.S. crash testing indicates that their design goal was met, as it scored well in National Highway Traffic Safety Administration tests. But remember, those test results are only good when comparing vehicles of the same weight."
Now if Edmunds misleads the readers about the Focus in a positive way, it misleads the readers about the Echo in a negative way. Yes, the frontal crash tests can only be compared within weight class, but the side impact crash tests can be compared between any two (or more) vehicles.
Yet more evidence that Edmunds holds the Echo to a different, higher standard than some of the other cars it reviews.
If I wasn't planning to ever use the backseat to carry people, the ZX3 would score high for safety on my list (half the voters did not have kids).
As far as comparisons with the Sentra XE, there are other considerations than safety for the ZX3 that give it an advantage, such as standard features like FM radio, alloy wheels, tach.
Regarding the Focus, Echo, and Sentra reviews and their coverage of safety, I would think that if the reader is interested in rear seat safety then they would buy the sedan, which did well. If not then at least they would get the side-air bags, which incidentally is not an option on the Sentra XE.
Randy, you made the accusation that my reviews of the Spectra and the Rio showed that I was biased. As "proof" you posted links to reviews by two other people.
I asked you to cite passages from my reviews that you think is evidence of my bias.
As far as that goes, if I were not concerned with carrying people in the backseat (and I really didn't care about safety), I would get myself a second generation Toyota MR2. Those things make even me (a low end car enthusiast) drool.
Just wondering what Lockheed Martin getting the defense contract instead of Boeing does to your job security. Will that affect your job at all or do you do strictly the commercial jets?
Given your response to my previous posts, I do not wish to get into a "see here's my proof"-"no it's not"-"it is cause"-"not because it isn't in this special instance/form/whatever I require" routine. I gave you evidence, I did not say I am going to prove it, much less to you.
the warranty and the heavier weight,it is clearly the better value.Even if the Elantra had a Pinto gas tank I would have to think hard before I chose the Echo.When you add in the free service and road side assistance the choice becomes even easier.Even with the perception of the realiability associated with the Toyota name and the earlier negative perceptions of Korean car reliability,the Elantra sales are skyrocketing.To me,this means it's not only Edmunds who sees the superiority of the Elantra.
I normally would spend some time elaborating. I choose not to do so this in this case. As I said I gave evidence, and the only reason for this was to provide a tiny bit of backing to my comment.
No conviction, but a FINAL word of thought for the review: balance.
I can see some logic in that choice, as both the frontal impact and frontal offset impact scores are pretty good (4's and "Average", respectively). But side impact safety is a total unknown. How about the Saturn SL, which has even better frontal impact scores (5's), the same overall IIHS rating, and avoids a 1 on the side impact scores (with a 3 front and 2 rear)?
One thing that did not impress me with the Sentra was the Average rating on structure/safety cage. There was more intrusion into the passenger compartment than, say, the Elantra. Also, without side air bags on the tested model, the dummy's hit hit the B pillar "producing a high head acceleration... indicating the possibility of head injury." Like I've said, it's not a stellar group for crash safety. It looks like no matter which car you choose, some body part or someone in the car is at risk. With the Sentra, your head will get bonked from the side. With the Elantra, the air bag will protect the side but if the front air bag deploys late as in the test, you'll hit the steering wheel. You'll likely get leg injuries (if the driver) on either the Sentra or Elantra. In the ZX3, the front passengers should fare well but get ready to call 911 for the rear passengers.
My personal view is that I am not as concerned about the poor IIHS showing of the Elantra as I would be if it had poor NHTSA tests. Why? This may sound weird, but I worry less about my safety as driver than the safety of the passengers (usually my kids). I have total choice in deciding to drive the car; the passengers do not. Also, I have lots of life insurance and really good medical insurance. :-] The excellent passenger front crash score and very good rear crash scores give me some peace of mind there. Of course, I'd like it better if the driver's air bag always popped on time and the seat track stayed put.
Re Edmunds.com pointing out that the crash test scores of a Camry should not be compared to that of an Echo--maybe they did that because Toyota itself made the comparison between the two in crash protection, which Edmunds may have seen as a no-no given the strict IIHS and NHTSA rules on comparisons of cars with large weight differences. And where is the inaccuracy in saying that the ZX3 has very good scores for a small car? Look at its competitors in the Economy class--it does have very good scores compared to them. But it would not have hurt to say, "The ZX3 has very good scores with the exception of the rear side impact score, which was poor." Whether that is bias or just an honest omission, who is to say?
is made of gold.I sure did not mean to imply that any precious metals were used in it's construction.As weight being a consideration of MY sense of overall value,this can be construed to mean something other then being constucted of gold.For instance,being pinned in between two semis on a rainy,windy interstate highway,I'll take the extra 500lbs or whatever.Also in a head on or offset crash with another moving object,I'll take the heavier car.Especially if the heavier car has more features,looks better,costs the same and has a better warranty. But,maybe less for more is better.
My Elantra is a soft gold color, other than that and the gold that may be in the air bag sensor contacts, I don't think there is any gold in the car--just lots of steel, plastic, fabric, glass, and, lest we forget... some cardboard.
is a defense contract and I work for Boeing's Commercial Airplane Division. Yes, it's not good news for Boeing but it also doesn't affect my job security. Still looks fine for me. I read an article online today at Boeing about Americans' fear of flying lingering on a tad bit. Fearful of the cockpit being intruded upon, fearful of security personnel not doing a good enough job, not good enough baggage check, etc. We're still afraid and I think a reasonable thinking person could understand. My view on flying right now? Go for it! Yes, I have an obvious reason for wanting things to get back to normal but I think the necessary changes are being made. It behooves the airlines to get on it now and make it safer. I've yet to see any drawing changes yet because it's not a model specific sweeping change yet. The airlines are subbing it out or having Boeing or BFGoodrich retrofit the deadbolted cockpit doors or the entire door is being redesigned and worked on quickly right now with strengthened bullet-proof materials, blah-blah-blah. I heard a blurb on the radio this AM that our fighter jets wouldn't have had enough time even if they'd been called right away to shoot down the 767-200's heading for the WTC. No chance for the 1st one at all but a better chance to shoot down the 2nd one. Our air defense system has been cut back so much and is ill-prepared to defend our own airspace. A planned attack such as on Afghanistan is another story. That can be done effectively but NYC was left wide open in her glory. Very sad. I would hope the story is different(if a similar event could ever be repeated). I don't know. Another thing I heard was some terrorists worked on their routine on an earlier flight. I don't know if they displayed their boxcutters or not but they got up out of their seats and practiced their moves walking here and there inside the plane during the flight. Wait a minute! Nobody said anything to a flight attendant or to anybody else. A girl observed it happening, didn't say anything but thought it strange. She called her friend who called the Shawn Hanady radio show(obviously a few weeks later) to share it the other night with the radio audience. Whoa!!! coolguyky7-the Celica was the car of choice in Hollywood for a real car race by celebrities. Actors can drive Celica's fast, now can't they? I agree-a good choice of cars for this purpose. The race promoters gave every star participating a stock Celica(as far as I know they were totally stock-just some racing paint jobs done to them). Yes, they looked great. Although the race was done on a steet track the winner was determined by lap times. At least one woman had a very respectable lap time and a handful of the men, too. A spin out or two but no bad accidents. Saw it in a car magazine several months ago. I also like Mazda's Miata(yeah, I know it's been around a long time but it's got staying power). BMW MiniCooper? Can't wait for the streets to gleam with them. My Sportage? It's the heaviest mini-SUV out there. Should it snow here in Washington this winter I'll transfer-pop it into 4-wheel drive. I've yet to take my baby into 'da woods. The excellent clearance will be nice. The comment about the bumber-to-wrap around wheel well trim perked my interest as I drive a Sportage. I think it's a feature. If you wish to put Kia down for that go ahead. It doesn't detract from the look of Mr.Sporty at all. Dig the proportional body lines of all Kia motorcars. They bodydesign cars the way they're supposed to be done. EVERY CAR in their stable has this good design, though. Not just a fluke model here and there. You know what I mean, Vern?
just wanted to give my thoughts and prayers to those econo car lovers and owners from the New York and DC area (and everyone else affected of course). Unfortunately I will soon be leaving the ranks of econo car owners soon as I have my eye on a WRBlue Subaru WRX wagon at my local Subie dealer. My Civic has treated me very well over the last 3 years but my recent promotion has enabled me to get the car Ive been pining for over the last 6 months.
...I am jealous. I wish I just got promoted. Good luck with your new car. You will love it. And you get bonus points for choosing the wagon.
After wading through all of the previous posts about quality and safety I half expected Jack Nicholson to make a post that read: "YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!"
This was included in an item titled "Fatal Accidents": ....."W. C., .., of ......, also was killed Friday morning while traveling.....after one of the wheels on her Subaru fell off. (Names and places omitted by me for privacy reasons). C. died instantly when her vehicle was struck by another car. A father and his two children in the other car were uninjured."
Before I went to bed last night, this thread had about 910 posts on it and this morning, it shows 874. This one is 875. What did we say wrong that about 35 posts got yanked?
Good deal to hear that the loss of the military deal does not directly affect you. I don't agree with your opinions on cars, but I don't like to see anyone suffer.
Easily understood: Jobs for Texas! Where did Big Oil Pres. Bush and Big Oil Dick Cheney live not long ago? Remember how VP Cheney hightailed it back to Wyoming to register to vote (where he had not lived for a long time) shortly before the election after his very lucrative severance from Halliburton? Maybe the Lockheed Martin plane is better...but we will NEVER know. Politics as usual. More people prefer to fly on Boeing planes than any other.
The point is, and you and Edmunds seems to not want to acknowledge this, that you CAN compare the side impact crash test results between ANY vehicle. Does not matter if the vehicles are my Echo and a Chevrolet Suburban. Of course, just don't ask me to let a Subruban run into my Echo. ; )
Also, Edmunds bills itself as where smart car buyers get information. Well, to be a smart car buyer, you need complete information. Edmunds is not giving that to us.
In their defense, at least they do provide the safety results for the Focus ZX3 in the section for safety ratings.
But their statements in the reviews of both the Echo and the Focus are misleading. Also, like I have said, I have read about four articles regarding the Elantra and there was no mention of its poor showing in the IIHS test.
Edmunds did not have to word the paragraph about the Echo they way they did. I don't think Toyota was holding a gun to the head of the writer saying for them to mention the Camry.
I honestly believe that the section was written in such a way to demean the Echo and downplay its relatively good crash test results.
I also honestly believe that Edmunds was still trying to validate its "Isaac Newton" comment present in the original review.
For those who don't know, before the tests were done, Edmunds made mention of Toyota believing that the Echo should do well in the crash tests. Edmunds had a very condescending statement that crash tests were not done so it was not known if Toyota was going to be able to refute one of Newton's laws.
This statement was still in the review months after the test results were in. A fact I (and others) pointed out.
When Edmunds revised the Echo's review, they did it in such a way to downplay the good test results.
It just seems that Edmunds attitude toward the Echo goes way beyond simple dislike.
Lockheed-Martin deal or I should say their acquisition of the Joint-Strike Fighter contract. Carleton1-you're dead on about jobs to Texas. With unemployment pushing upwards and Bush/Cheney(Cheney's a Wyomingan?)wanting to give to their homestate friends, yes, politics no doubt played a big role in this. Feedback from the dudes at Boeing I work with. Everybody looked at each other, lowered their heads a bit and looked at the ground for a second, then looked back up and softly muttered....doesn't bother me at all. After all-we work on the Commercial Airplane side of the house! Thing is is that it was a huge contract. Our side of the house is having it's own struggles right now as you all know. Boeing is always a cyclical industry but these times are tilting the table in a most insane way. Bin Laden IS really the black sheep of his RICH Saudi Arabian family, isn't he? When has the U.S. been in a battle where the radicals don't care if they die? They get to be with their God quicker if they die. Mr.major-your opinions and posts are always read and digested even though we don't always agree. As a matter of fact, do we agree with each other about anything car-related? Do you like Toyota's 'new world order' Celica? I figure if I praise Toyota's you'll agree with me on it. Eh? Too expensive or could one get a nicely equipped one for just under $20,000?
called Chevrolet Cruze. I found this story off a link jkobty posted in the Leganza site that was about Daewoo Nubira's racing attributes. Interesting article although I just looked at the pictures of the racing-fitted Nubira. Fits the part! Back to the Cruze. Loads of features including 4WD(I would think 4WD comes with an option package-the car undoubtedly is FWD normally)and room for the obligatory stereo and navigation system at your control. Go here to see:
It kind of reminds me of the little Chevy Sprint we saw for years that competed head-to-head with Ford's Festiva(yes, the Festiva was built by Kia and carries a good reliability reputation, dudes). An answer to BMW's MiniCooper? Smaller than MiniCooper? Developed with Suzuki with a Japanese release of the car and an American release. I WAS WONDERING WHEN GM WAS GOING TO ENTER THE MINI-CAR MARKET! This is big news, boys! No, I'm not going to adversely judge this little go-kart 'til I know a lot more about it. The sculpt-lines Kia employs are missing on the Cruze, yes I know. It deserves a further look if you like pocket-sized cars. Loads of playthings and features available on this pup. If anyone finds out a price on this little guy please post it. It's probably not yet released to the public.
I wish I could find the article again, but someone pointed out that, generally, car companies have the professional reviewers eating out of their hand.
Many reviewers get invited to ride and drives. That is where they spend a very short time with a new model. Many of these ride and drives are reached by the reviewer traveling on the car companies' dime.
Other times the reviewer is provided a car for a week.
If a car company does not like a reviewer's work, the reviewer faces the loss of the free travel and/or the cars. No product to review means the loss of their jobs.
I definitely don't agree with what Toyota did, but because of the "spam" comment in the Echo review, Toyota kept Edmunds from getting another Echo to review. After some negotiations, Toyota relented and Edmunds got the car. This situation is dealt with in the road test of the 2001 Echo article here on Edmunds.
This power that car companies hold over the reviewers means that many reviewers will write about the negative things in the best possible way.
Again, this is NOT simply my views on reviewers. This comes from an article about being a reviewer. I am going to try and track it down and see if I can provide a URL. I am thinking it is something that I saw here on Edmunds.
The point is just because someone found two reviews that don't share my opinion doesn't prove that I am biased. ESPECIALLY when the person expressing the opinion about my biasedness declines to point out specific instances in my reviews that he thinks proves my biasedness.
Iluv, if you want a Chevy Cruze, you are going to have to move to Japan or somewhere in Asia. There are a number of small cars developed exclusively for the Japanese and Asian markets and this is one of them, I believe.
But who knows, with the Chevy Metro/Suzuki Swift going bye bye in this country, maybe this could be the replacement. But if it is, where does that leave the Daewoo Lanos?
>>>The point is, and you and Edmunds seems to not want to acknowledge this, that you CAN compare the side impact crash test results between ANY vehicle.<<<
You are incorrect. I <i>have acknowledged in posts on this board that side impact crash test results can be compared--e.g. see #837. Please do not lump my opinions in with Edmunds.
My comment about you was made in reference to your defense of Edmunds contained in your post #866. Edmunds did not acknowledge that you can compare the side impact crash test results of a Camry and an Echo. The strict no no, as you put it, is only in regards to the front impact crash test results. There is no strict no no in comparing side impact crash test results.
See my point?
And post #837, geeze, that was 50 posts ago now and that is before the mysteriously disappearance of some thirty-five posts. I have an excellent memory, but that is a little beyond my capabilities.
I have a theory as to why the editors of Edmunds.com have come down more harshly on the ECHO than other small cars, such as the Accent. They discourage people from buying from both cars, but are more vociferous about it with the ECHO. My theory is that some cars engender love-hate relationships, due to their uniqueness in styling or some other major attribute. The ECHO is definitely a unique car, in multiple ways including styling and the dashboard layout. So people will tend to either love it for those features, or hate it. Another example of a vehicle like this is the Santa Fe. The Santa Fe is polarizing to many car reviewers, in fact Edmunds.com downgraded the Santa Fe specifically due to its styling, saying (paraphrase) "if you can stand the styling, this may be the SUV for you."
Then there are cars like the Accent, that have bland, inoffensive styling and the typical interior layout. They don't generate the same type of emotions as the unique cars. Thus they generate bland reviews.
As someone else recently alluded to here, whether or not a unique vehicle gets a positive review depends a lot on the luck of the draw of the editor. So someone who hates small, light economy cars and does not like the car's styling will give it a negative review, whereas another editor may absolutely love it. It explains the inconsistency in car reviews, e.g. one editor will think centered gauges is a great idea (especially if they are in a $128,000 BMW), while another thinks they are "dopey".
When I see reviews that attack subjective features of a car, I try to dismiss those comments as the editor's opinions and make up my own mind. For example, Car & Driver dissed the front end of the Elantra. I happen to like the way it looks. I also happen to think the ECHO is ugly, but I can see how some people would appreciate its unique styling. It can be fun owning a car that does not look like every other econobox on the road. That's one of the reasons I like my Elantra--it's different, but not too different.
I personally wish car reviewers would spend less time commenting on subjective qualities like styling, seat fabric colors, and option packaging, and concentrate on the important stuff like roominess, performance, and handling.
I don't know your age so I might be older than you, but I am not a senior. Have a number of years to go before I even qualify for the senior coffee price at McDonald's.
FWIW, Edmunds did not like the front end of the current Elantra either.
BTW, the critical reviews of the Echo seems to have been written by Christian Wardlaw, but a couple of other people have written articles. The Top 10 article that contains a factual error was written by someone other than Wardlaw.
When I looked at the Rio and the Spectra, I did not compare the quality of materials and acceleration to the Lincolns and Caddys I have driven. I looked at them and compared them (principally) to the Echo and the Escort that I owned. I also thought about the Rio and Spectra in relation to the other low end cars I have owned.
I do think that build qualtiy needs to be high whatever price the car is.
I guess I am talking about how well things fit together. For example, if I had a glovebox door that did not fit right, it would make me just as upset if it was on a $8,000 Rio or on an $80,000 Mercedes.
Now, I don't expect the materials to be the same on the two. For example, I don't expect that the Rio would have real wood trim.
My opinion has undergone an evolution. I used to not think this way, but why not think like this? Why not demand people do a good job no matter the product?
Let's look at Kia, for example. Don't the people who are on the line that builds the Rio get the same pay as the people who are on the line that builds the Optima?
And what about Toyota? Don't the people who build the Avalon get paid the same as the people who build the Echo?
It may be naive to think like this, but what's wrong with it?
You make an excellent point. However, do you think it is possible that the Engineers have less tolerance for gaps, fit, etc. in the Lexus than in the Corolla? Maybe not at Toyota so I should re-phrase it: Don't you think design engineers of companies that build inferior vehicles such as Yugo, Fiat, Trabant, Daewoo, Subaru, Volkswagen, etc. have lower expectations for quality of fit and finish than a premier quality builder of such vehicles as Toyota or Mercedes?
Lockheed Martin for jet-fighting, Boeing for comercial. Boeing just got tons of Federal Aid, and Lockheed got the contract...in either case these are two excellent US Companies. LM came in with beter value to cost ratios, and their product easily integrates with current military specs. What does this have to do over American vs. Japanese vs.European vs. Korean any way?
Major--I agree that the pieces should fit together well on any car even if the pieces themselves are not equal quality on cheap cars compared to expensive cars. (There is a reason for the price difference, of course.) It's a sign of good value if the bits are also of high quality, even on an inexpensive car--e.g., smooth switchgear on a Hyundai or a glossy paint job on a Daewoo, or the typical Toyota quality on the ECHO.
Carleton--I can't see how you can justify lumping Subaru and VW into the same category as makes like Yugo and Fiat in the "inferior vehicle" category, e.g. for fit and finish. Subaru and VW are widely recognized for superior fit and finish. Have you examined or even driven a new Subaru or VW lately? Have you read any reviews of those makes lately? Do you have any substantiation for your statement?
I think I have as much right as someone who buys a high end car to have a car free from squeaks, rattles, etc. I expected and got that in my Toyota and I would expect it from any car.
And Carleton, I agree that an engineer will probably have less tolerance for gaps in a high end product than a low end product, but should they?
Someone once posted that their low end car had a squeak. Another person posted that since it was not a Mercedes, what did they expect? I agreed with that second person at the time, but think I was wrong now.
I said it was an evolution in my thinking, but I may have been thinking like this longer than I thought.
Before I bought my Echo, I took a look at the Focus. The Focus had a very clear rattle in the back end. I told the salesman and he said that they all had a rattle. It was almost like he was saying, "It's not a Ferrari, what do you expect?" Well, I expect the car not to have a rattle.
In summing up, I think there are some areas that all cars can be judged together and some areas where they should be judged against those in their class.
Comments
My second point is I do not agree with Edmunds' $13,000 barrier and they did not explain how they came up with it to my satisfaction.
Can anyone tell me if they know how Edmunds came up with the $13,000 figure?
And Edmunds does not tell the whole story about the safety of the Focus in their review. It says that "NHTSA crash test scores are very good for a small car." This does not tell people that the hatchback (as we have discussed before) scored one star in protecting a rear seat occupant in a side impact crash.
Now contrast that with what they tell people about safety in the Echo review. "Toyota says that the Echo was engineered to provide crash protection that matches the larger Camry, and U.S. crash testing indicates that their design goal was met, as it scored well in National Highway Traffic Safety Administration tests. But remember, those test results are only good when comparing vehicles of the same weight."
Now if Edmunds misleads the readers about the Focus in a positive way, it misleads the readers about the Echo in a negative way. Yes, the frontal crash tests can only be compared within weight class, but the side impact crash tests can be compared between any two (or more) vehicles.
Yet more evidence that Edmunds holds the Echo to a different, higher standard than some of the other cars it reviews.
As far as comparisons with the Sentra XE, there are other considerations than safety for the ZX3 that give it an advantage, such as standard features like FM radio, alloy wheels, tach.
Regarding the Focus, Echo, and Sentra reviews and their coverage of safety, I would think that if the reader is interested in rear seat safety then they would buy the sedan, which did well. If not then at least they would get the side-air bags, which incidentally is not an option on the Sentra XE.
I asked you to cite passages from my reviews that you think is evidence of my bias.
Just want you to know that I am still waiting.
I guess you believe in "convicting" people in the Court of public opinion.
No conviction, but a FINAL word of thought for the review: balance.
Do you think the Elantra is made of gold or something? ; )
Night fellows, I think I am going to hit the sack.
One thing that did not impress me with the Sentra was the Average rating on structure/safety cage. There was more intrusion into the passenger compartment than, say, the Elantra. Also, without side air bags on the tested model, the dummy's hit hit the B pillar "producing a high head acceleration... indicating the possibility of head injury." Like I've said, it's not a stellar group for crash safety. It looks like no matter which car you choose, some body part or someone in the car is at risk. With the Sentra, your head will get bonked from the side. With the Elantra, the air bag will protect the side but if the front air bag deploys late as in the test, you'll hit the steering wheel. You'll likely get leg injuries (if the driver) on either the Sentra or Elantra. In the ZX3, the front passengers should fare well but get ready to call 911 for the rear passengers.
My personal view is that I am not as concerned about the poor IIHS showing of the Elantra as I would be if it had poor NHTSA tests. Why? This may sound weird, but I worry less about my safety as driver than the safety of the passengers (usually my kids). I have total choice in deciding to drive the car; the passengers do not. Also, I have lots of life insurance and really good medical insurance. :-] The excellent passenger front crash score and very good rear crash scores give me some peace of mind there. Of course, I'd like it better if the driver's air bag always popped on time and the seat track stayed put.
Re Edmunds.com pointing out that the crash test scores of a Camry should not be compared to that of an Echo--maybe they did that because Toyota itself made the comparison between the two in crash protection, which Edmunds may have seen as a no-no given the strict IIHS and NHTSA rules on comparisons of cars with large weight differences. And where is the inaccuracy in saying that the ZX3 has very good scores for a small car? Look at its competitors in the Economy class--it does have very good scores compared to them. But it would not have hurt to say, "The ZX3 has very good scores with the exception of the rear side impact score, which was poor." Whether that is bias or just an honest omission, who is to say?
But,maybe less for more is better.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Kyle
After wading through all of the previous posts about quality and safety I half expected Jack Nicholson to make a post that read: "YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!"
Happy low-end motoring.
....."W. C., .., of ......, also was killed Friday morning while traveling.....after one of the wheels on her Subaru fell off. (Names and places omitted by me for privacy reasons). C. died instantly when her vehicle was struck by another car. A father and his two children in the other car were uninjured."
Oh, host?
Maybe the Lockheed Martin plane is better...but we will NEVER know. Politics as usual. More people prefer to fly on Boeing planes than any other.
Also, Edmunds bills itself as where smart car buyers get information. Well, to be a smart car buyer, you need complete information. Edmunds is not giving that to us.
In their defense, at least they do provide the safety results for the Focus ZX3 in the section for safety ratings.
But their statements in the reviews of both the Echo and the Focus are misleading. Also, like I have said, I have read about four articles regarding the Elantra and there was no mention of its poor showing in the IIHS test.
I find that pretty disturbing.
I honestly believe that the section was written in such a way to demean the Echo and downplay its relatively good crash test results.
I also honestly believe that Edmunds was still trying to validate its "Isaac Newton" comment present in the original review.
For those who don't know, before the tests were done, Edmunds made mention of Toyota believing that the Echo should do well in the crash tests. Edmunds had a very condescending statement that crash tests were not done so it was not known if Toyota was going to be able to refute one of Newton's laws.
This statement was still in the review months after the test results were in. A fact I (and others) pointed out.
When Edmunds revised the Echo's review, they did it in such a way to downplay the good test results.
It just seems that Edmunds attitude toward the Echo goes way beyond simple dislike.
Hmmm, I did not know that airlines give people a choice as to who made the plane they are going to fly on.
I know the last time I flew, the ticketing agent did not tell me I had a choice between a Boeing and a McDonell (sp) Douglas.
How do you figure that more people PREFER to fly on a Boeing made plane?
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
http://www.autofan.com/newsdetail.asp?id=37
It kind of reminds me of the little Chevy Sprint we saw for years that competed head-to-head with Ford's Festiva(yes, the Festiva was built by Kia and carries a good reliability reputation, dudes). An answer to BMW's MiniCooper? Smaller than MiniCooper? Developed with Suzuki with a Japanese release of the car and an American release. I WAS WONDERING WHEN GM WAS GOING TO ENTER THE MINI-CAR MARKET! This is big news, boys! No, I'm not going to adversely judge this little go-kart 'til I know a lot more about it. The sculpt-lines Kia employs are missing on the Cruze, yes I know. It deserves a further look if you like pocket-sized cars. Loads of playthings and features available on this pup. If anyone finds out a price on this little guy please post it. It's probably not yet released to the public.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Sports cars, sports coupes, or whatever you call them really aren't my cup of tea.
I will say that I like the "batwing" Celica much better than the Tiburon.
The exterior design is much better, the interior materials are much better, the fit is much better, etc.
The back seat of the Celica is not bad for short trips, but I would not want to be back there (or in any sports car) for long trips.
Many reviewers get invited to ride and drives. That is where they spend a very short time with a new model. Many of these ride and drives are reached by the reviewer traveling on the car companies' dime.
Other times the reviewer is provided a car for a week.
If a car company does not like a reviewer's work, the reviewer faces the loss of the free travel and/or the cars. No product to review means the loss of their jobs.
I definitely don't agree with what Toyota did, but because of the "spam" comment in the Echo review, Toyota kept Edmunds from getting another Echo to review. After some negotiations, Toyota relented and Edmunds got the car. This situation is dealt with in the road test of the 2001 Echo article here on Edmunds.
This power that car companies hold over the reviewers means that many reviewers will write about the negative things in the best possible way.
Again, this is NOT simply my views on reviewers. This comes from an article about being a reviewer. I am going to try and track it down and see if I can provide a URL. I am thinking it is something that I saw here on Edmunds.
The point is just because someone found two reviews that don't share my opinion doesn't prove that I am biased. ESPECIALLY when the person expressing the opinion about my biasedness declines to point out specific instances in my reviews that he thinks proves my biasedness.
But who knows, with the Chevy Metro/Suzuki Swift going bye bye in this country, maybe this could be the replacement. But if it is, where does that leave the Daewoo Lanos?
You are incorrect. I <i>have acknowledged in posts on this board that side impact crash test results can be compared--e.g. see #837. Please do not lump my opinions in with Edmunds.
See my point?
And post #837, geeze, that was 50 posts ago now and that is before the mysteriously disappearance of some thirty-five posts. I have an excellent memory, but that is a little beyond my capabilities.
Then there are cars like the Accent, that have bland, inoffensive styling and the typical interior layout. They don't generate the same type of emotions as the unique cars. Thus they generate bland reviews.
As someone else recently alluded to here, whether or not a unique vehicle gets a positive review depends a lot on the luck of the draw of the editor. So someone who hates small, light economy cars and does not like the car's styling will give it a negative review, whereas another editor may absolutely love it. It explains the inconsistency in car reviews, e.g. one editor will think centered gauges is a great idea (especially if they are in a $128,000 BMW), while another thinks they are "dopey".
When I see reviews that attack subjective features of a car, I try to dismiss those comments as the editor's opinions and make up my own mind. For example, Car & Driver dissed the front end of the Elantra. I happen to like the way it looks. I also happen to think the ECHO is ugly, but I can see how some people would appreciate its unique styling. It can be fun owning a car that does not look like every other econobox on the road. That's one of the reasons I like my Elantra--it's different, but not too different.
I personally wish car reviewers would spend less time commenting on subjective qualities like styling, seat fabric colors, and option packaging, and concentrate on the important stuff like roominess, performance, and handling.
FWIW, Edmunds did not like the front end of the current Elantra either.
BTW, the critical reviews of the Echo seems to have been written by Christian Wardlaw, but a couple of other people have written articles. The Top 10 article that contains a factual error was written by someone other than Wardlaw.
I do think that build qualtiy needs to be high whatever price the car is.
Iluv is still around and he owns a Sportage now.
Perhaps a member decided to delete his or her own posts?
Pat
Host
Sedans Message Board
Do you mean you expect the same build quality from a $8000 Rio and an $80,000 Mercedes? How do you define "build quality"?
Now, I don't expect the materials to be the same on the two. For example, I don't expect that the Rio would have real wood trim.
My opinion has undergone an evolution. I used to not think this way, but why not think like this? Why not demand people do a good job no matter the product?
Let's look at Kia, for example. Don't the people who are on the line that builds the Rio get the same pay as the people who are on the line that builds the Optima?
And what about Toyota? Don't the people who build the Avalon get paid the same as the people who build the Echo?
It may be naive to think like this, but what's wrong with it?
Don't you think design engineers of companies that build inferior vehicles such as Yugo, Fiat, Trabant, Daewoo, Subaru, Volkswagen, etc. have lower expectations for quality of fit and finish than a premier quality builder of such vehicles as Toyota or Mercedes?
Just suck it up and buy American...
Carleton--I can't see how you can justify lumping Subaru and VW into the same category as makes like Yugo and Fiat in the "inferior vehicle" category, e.g. for fit and finish. Subaru and VW are widely recognized for superior fit and finish. Have you examined or even driven a new Subaru or VW lately? Have you read any reviews of those makes lately? Do you have any substantiation for your statement?
And Carleton, I agree that an engineer will probably have less tolerance for gaps in a high end product than a low end product, but should they?
Someone once posted that their low end car had a squeak. Another person posted that since it was not a Mercedes, what did they expect? I agreed with that second person at the time, but think I was wrong now.
I said it was an evolution in my thinking, but I may have been thinking like this longer than I thought.
Before I bought my Echo, I took a look at the Focus. The Focus had a very clear rattle in the back end. I told the salesman and he said that they all had a rattle. It was almost like he was saying, "It's not a Ferrari, what do you expect?" Well, I expect the car not to have a rattle.
In summing up, I think there are some areas that all cars can be judged together and some areas where they should be judged against those in their class.
I think quality should be universal.