Mazda3

npaladin2000

Ok that makes sense....the Focus SES, as the highest-line model might fare better than a Mazda3i, that one being the "low-end" one. Plus the Focus is probably a bit softer-riding and likely has a much higher feature level, since it's the high-end one. But let the record show that CR has yet to test a Mazda3s. An SES versus a 3i is really an unfair comparision, you know?

Such a nice reliable car too.

backy

Another curious thing about the Focus outranking the Mazda3i... CR noted which cars were tops in different categories. First, they noted which cars received very good or excellent ratings in all five of their major rating areas. The Mazda3i was in the list, the Focus was not. Then they listed the cars to choose if reliability is important to you. Again, the Mazda3 was there, the Focus was not. Then they listed the cars to choose if fuel economy is important. You guessed it: Mazda3 was there, Focus was not. And finally they mentioned which cars were the best pick if owner satisfaction is important. Yes, the Mazda3i was on that list, the Focus was not.

So the question is, how did the Focus score above the Mazda3i in CR's rankings of small cars? The Mazda3i even cost less, as tested. Note however that the score of the Mazda3i with a stick shift was at least as high as the Focus' (with automatic).

kyfdx

CR..

When they test cars, they rank them solely on how they perform, without taking reliability into account...

Then, if the reliability is at least average, they will recommend the car..

So, reliability is not a criteria for the ranking, only for the recommendation...

You really have to subsribe and read the articles.. It is much clearer then...

regards,
kyfdx

autonomous

Some of the earlier messages need to be clarified as they are providing an inaccurate picture of what CR has reported.

Consumer Reports recommends the 2005 Mazda3 in both manual and automatic transmissions. The tested model was the "i". The Mazda3 is at the top of the list of small cars with manual transmissions and is second for small cars with automatic transmissions. CR rates both with the highest reliability on par with Toyota and Honda.

CR notes the following positive comments for the Mazda3: Handling, fuel economy, interior quality, turning circle and for the manual it adds slick manual shifter. On the negative side, CR points to: road noise and small trunk.

In the section dealing with Used Cars, the 2004 Mazda3 has an impeccable record except for Brakes. Since CR rates used cars over many years based on a large survey (over 810 thousand survey responses!) this provides one of the best pictures of product reliability known. The auto industry covets these ratings (as shown by industry experts on Autoline Detroit).

By way of comparison, the Mazda6 has fared very poorly recently and is not recommended by CR.

Every product has problems; CR provides a way for minimizing the risk of being stuck with a lemon. Personally, I have found their ratings very helpful.

backy

How were the earlier messages inaccurate? You have in some cases restated the content of the earlier messages.

autonomous

Hi Backy, I did not mean to be confrontational just more descriptive.

The title “Mazda3 loses top rank in CR” is only true, as you point out, if we refer to the manual transmission. Since the Mazda3 is rated best in small cars with automatic transmissions, the title “Mazda3 receives top rank in CR” is both equally true and inaccurate.

Under the rubric of "loses top rank", others started citing potential deficiencies of the M3 (Ford has a higher feature level) and various problems (M3 has a/c problems …) as causes for the supposed slide in ratings. It’s important to point out that CR did not show these in their findings. CR rated “low” the Focus ZX4 SES interior quality. The a/c problem that some owners have experienced was not reported by the CR survey as a common problem. This is not meant to discount the pain of the owners without proper a/c but rather to accurately show what CR found.

By listing Mazda3’s superior fuel economy, reliability and owner satisfaction under the banner of “Mazda3 loses rank” some may question the credibility of CR and what was said after all?

What I think is plain is that Mazda3 is rated highly by CR. We both agree on that and it is worth putting out as a clear message.

And now I'll get off the soapbox.

backy

By listing Mazda3’s superior fuel economy, reliability and owner satisfaction under the banner of “Mazda3 loses rank” some may question the credibility of CR and what was said after all?

People can draw their own conclusions about CR's credibility.

Actually, as long as we are pulling out the super-sized Nit Picks today, "Mazda3 loses top rank in CR" is true in reference to the automatic transmission car--which I pointed out.

Personally I don't see where providing a short title to a post and then providing details within the post is a problem. If we provided all the details on titles, we would have really long titles, wouldn't we.

npaladin2000

Look can we just stop arguing and say that the Mazda3 is one of the top 2 out of X number of cars that CR has evaluated? Hmm? Number 2 still isn't exactly bad, and while I haven't seen the data, the difference is probably a tenth of a tenth or something.

Number 2 ain't bad, especially when #2 is the base model and #1 is an uplevel version of a very similar chassis.

backy

You can say that, but hopefully someone won't jump on you because you didn't say "one of the top 2 out of X number of small cars that CR has evaluated." ;-)

Actually, I expect the chassis had little to do with the rankings. I'll bet it had more to do with the "small trunk" and road noise on the 3i. CR likes their cars to be quiet and have big trunks--like on the Ford Five Hundred they rated highly. Oh wait... they top-rated the Honda Accord Hybrid too, and that car has a small trunk and they complained about its road noise. Never mind.

alpha01

Backy, I think kyfdx accurately explained the situation of the Mazda 3i. In the objective ratings based on the CR tests, the Focus simply outscored the Mazda 3i. However, all the lists you mention- factor consumer survey reponses along WITH the ratings. Even though the Focus SES tested out with a higher score (by a hair) than the 3i, it did not receive nearly the same profound positive consumer response (in satisfaction or reliability) as did the MZ3. What Im guessing, based on the commentary in the April Auto issue, is that the Focus' greater interior space as well as more refined ride (coupled with similar great handling capabilities) was enough to outweigh the Mazda's better efficiency and interior trim quality, for example.

The 'Top Pick' goes to the highest scoring vehicle, provided a minimum 'Average' Predicted Reliability and decent crash scores.

Also, someone mentioned that the Focus SES is the highest trim Focus- its actually not. Thats the 2.3L ST.

In any case, theres no way I'd buy the Focus over the 3, even with its better ride. Its not as stylish (subjective), or reliable (objective based on CR tests), nor as fuel efficient (objective based on CR tests). Additionally, the 3's top notch interior materials and fit and finish seal the deal, at least for me.

~alpha

backy

In the objective ratings based on the CR tests, the Focus simply outscored the Mazda 3i.

I can't wait to see the May CR issue to see how they actually scored the Focus. Because CR noted that the Mazda3i was one of the few cars it has tested that scored either Very Good or Excellent in all five major ratings categories. The Focus did not. What that tells me is that there must be some non-major categories where the Focus edged ahead of the Mazda3i. I would think interior space and ride quality would be considered major categories, but we'll have to see what the May issue says.

CR could have easily given its "top pick" to the Mazda3i, or maybe both the Focus and Mazda3i, since the Mazda3i was its top pick for manual transmission small cars and scored as well overall (looking at the bar graphs) as did the Focus. Maybe they figure more people will buy cars with automatic transmissions than sticks.

I wouldn't buy the Focus over the Mazda3 either, for the reasons you mentioned plus the superior stick shift and driver's seat on the Mazda3. Also the bumper-to-bumper warranty is longer on the Mazda3.

carguy58

"They still recommend the Mazda3--the only Mazda they recommend-"

I don't know I haven't gotten the current issue of CR yet but I think the reasons why Cr doesn't reccomend Mazda's is for their following reasons-Tribute-CR in their last issue rated it above average in reliability but could not reccomend it due it tipping up in government rollover tests. Miata-CR didn't reccomend but pending CR's current issue but it still was above average in reliability. 6-could understand first year bugs but Mazda still doesn't have the bugs worked out of this car yet? Dang! Is the 6's reliability or just under average? I can't believe it the 626 used to be a reliable car that was made in the same plant in Flat Rock, Michigan. Apparently that reliability didn't carryover to the 6. MPV-tranny problems I believe keep CR from reccomending it. RX-8- I don't know what happened there either. Its made in Japan too. Usually Mazda's that are made in Japan have as good reliability as Honda, Toyota, and Nissan but not this Mazda apparently.

I'm very dissatisfied with Mazda's quality control of late. I can understand but the 6 and the MPV? I don't get it. Mazda has to straighten out quality control problems faster in my opinion.

carguy58

"Then they listed the cars to choose if reliability is important to you. Again, the Mazda3 was there, the Focus was not."

The Focus's reliability CR showed a red market for Model years 03 and 04 which means above average reliability. CR also rated the for model years 01 and 02 model years showed a dash which means average reliability. Finally, for the 00 model year CR gives the Focus an X which indicates under average or poor reliability. I know for 05 Ford did some revisions for the Focus. Did these revisions lead to bad reliability for the 05 Focus because you are saying in your post that the Focus is not there in reliability? Remember I don't have the current issue of CR in front of me. I have the last one though.

backy

CR currently predicts average reliability for the Focus (as a new car, not prior years), and well above average for the Mazda3.

The biggest reason for CR not recommending other Mazdas is lower-than-average predicted reliability (MPV, RX-8, and 6). I suspect the reason they don't recommend the B-series is because they haven't tested it lately. Same with the Miata. They don't recommend the Tribute (or the Escape) because of "a tip-up in the government rollover test."

1313

Does anyone know if Mazda sent a Mazda3 equipped with side airbags/curtains to the IIHS for a second test? It does not show that they did on the IIHS site.

alpha01

This is a very odd tactic (or lack thereof) that both Mazda and Nissan use. When a vehicle is tested that doesnt have side impact protection standard, they don't offer a model to the IIHS with the optional safety equipment. This has happened in the past with the 6 and Altima when they were tested in the IIHS side impact, for example, and has happened again with the 3 and Sentra, respectively. Very odd. The big red squares on the IIHS website are not the best PR, IMO.

~alpha

carguy58

"The a/c problem that some owners have experienced was not reported by the CR survey as a common problem. This is not meant to discount the pain of the owners without proper a/c but rather to accurately show what CR found."

The following CR reliability suvey was conducted between the dates of April 1, 2003, through March 31st 2004 so maybe the A/C problem hasn't shown up on CR's radar rate. I mean March 31st, 2004 the 3 was only out for like 3 or 4 months. I;m just making a statement on the particular dates that CR's reliability data was taken. I;m not trying to cause any beefs with 3 owners on this board just in case somebody thinks I am. For example it took CR 2 or 3 issues to get a hold of the brake problem with the 03 Honda Accord and that car is like 2 years old.

autonomous

Interesting notes, Chris (aka carguy58).

I thought the Mazda3 was out in late 2003 but even if that is true you're right that it is a very short test period and problems may have surfaced since then that will affect it's rating in the future.

On the other hand, the Protege, the predecessor to the Mazda3, has an impeccable record of reliability. Both were produced in Japan. Which makes me wonder about the role of the production source in the reliability of the Protege/Mazda3 in comparison to the Mazda6 which is built in the USA. Is the quality control superior in the parent factory? If so, how to account for the poor reliability of the RX8 also built in Hiroshima? Is the RX8 just too new to be reliable, is that Wankel just too much of a headache for most owners?

My 3 year old Protege5 which continues to hum effortlessly in this cold Canadian clime makes for one happy driver.

carguy58

"I thought the Mazda3 was out in late 2003 but even if that is true you're right that it is a very short test period and problems may have surfaced since then that will affect it's rating in the future."

Exactly.

"On the other hand, the Protege, the predecessor to the Mazda3, has an impeccable record of reliability." Both were produced in Japan."

All three generations of Protege's have great reliability records.

Which makes me wonder about the role of the production source in the reliability of the Protege/Mazda3 in comparison to the Mazda6 which is built in the USA."

Remember I said 04 models in CR were about 6 months old so I don't think an 04 6 its reliability would be up to date currently. I mean we are in 05 now(March) and the last reliability taken for the 04 6 was taken about a year ago. The 6 yes had a bad first year of reliability but like I said in one of my postings before it was a brand spankin new design and Ford Motor Co. is notorious for having bad reliability with first year models(00 Focus, 00 LS, 01 Tribute/Escape, 02 Explorer.)The 6 is we all know is built out of a a Ford plant. In their second year of reliability all these cars were rated average with the exception of the Focus CR has now downgraded the 01 Focus from average reliability to below average in their current issue. However, The current Expedition and Lincoln Navigator are below average in reliability even in their second year of bodystyle. As a matter of fact, the current Navigator was tied for the most problems with the 04 Nissan Quest for most problems(49 problems per 100 cars.)Again, the current issue of CR is not very up to date with 04 models so Ford could have the kinks worked out of the Navigator, and Expedition by now. The 4wd F-150(anothe first year model)also had a worse than averge reliability record. The 2wd F-150 they rated average reliability. CR did change the reliability for the following models: 02 Explorer from below average to average reliability, 02 Nissan Altima: downgraded from average reliability to below average reliability, 03 Nissa Altima: above average reliability to average reliability, and 99 Mazda 626 downgraded from above average reliability to average reliability. CR did however rate 98,00, 01, and 02 626's above average in reliability. They also rated the 97 626 which as part of the 93-97 626 generation average reliability.

"Is the quality control superior in the parent factory?"

Yes I think it could be a little but not that much better but its hard to say. The 98-02 626 generation like I said before has above average reliability with the exception of the 99 model which was average reliability. The 93-97 626 thats a catch 22 since that Ford tranny put a dagger in the reliability record for that generation of 626. The 88-92 626 was made in Flat Rock also and was a pretty reliable car back in its day.

"If so, how to account for the poor reliability of the RX8 also built in Hiroshima? Is the RX8 just too new to be reliable, is that Wankel just too much of a headache for most owners?"

Yes it could be a combonation of both the wankel motor and its a very new model as well. The MPV which is also made in Japan had a good reliability record from the 00-02 model years. CR downgraded the 02 MPV's reliability(above average) to average reliability due to the Fuel recall that Mazda had. For 03 and 04 MPV owners reported to CR about numerous tranny problems and now the MPV's reliability is worse than average.

carguy58

that 16 compact cars went into some kind of government impact side crash testing with an SUV. Only 2 compact cars passed this side impact test: the Corolla and Chevy Cobalt. The Mazda 3 failed but hey 13 other cars failed too. The Honda Civic has yet too be tested in this kinda test yet but will be in the future.

I should note I have been noticing a popularity of the Mazda 3 in Jersey in the past few months particulary. Mazda hit the bullseye on this car. I'm curious how that problem with the A/c on the 04 3 will play out in CR's future reliability ratings.

z71bill

Hold the phone - consumer reports decides to take several cars off the recommended list -

Consumer Reports removes Ford Focus as Top Pick for small cars

Six other vehicles no longer recommended because of crash test results.

Consumer Reports has removed the Ford Focus as its Top Pick for small cars because it performed poorly in insurance industry crash tests that were announced on Sunday.

Two other small cars that received favorable ratings in Consumer Reports' April Auto Issue, the Hyundai Elantra and Mazda3, also are no longer recommended by the magazine because of poor performance in the new side-impact crash tests, conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.

autonomous

Thanks for the update, Bill. Is the source of this update Consumer Reports the May 2005 print issue or the Consumer Reports website or both?

alpha01

Wow, Bill, thanks for posting on that. I'm fairly shocked that CR has done this, given that it didnt really react to the POOR rating to the Altima, and the timing is impressive, given that the April Auto issue has already been fully distributed.

Here's the link, on the CR website, that all can access- http://cdn.consumerreports.org/static/0504pic2_f.html

Also, hopefully, it will kick Mazda in the [non-permissible content removed] to get the 3 tested with Side Impact Airbags- the structure is decent-rated acceptable- so I dont know why they are preventing a re-test. Same goes for Nissan and the Altima.

Backy, you called this first, didnt you?! Wow.

~alpha

everfeb

The Corolla and Cobalt were each tested twice...once with and once without Side Airbags. When tested without the SAB's they also failed. With the SAB they were passed. Can't remember all the details but I thought the report was sort of skewed and remember thinking to myself...put SAB on all the cars tested and they'd probably all pass. No SAB on all cars they all fail. Basically it pointed out how important SAB are if you are hit from the side by an SUV especially as SAB are not all that expensive. Anyway the report was a bit misleading as no car, including the Corolla and Cobalt, without SAB passed. The main problem was the cars, all of them, are so small they get crushed by SUV's. So get SAB or get an SUV.
everfeb

everfeb

"I don't know why they are preventing a re-test>"

Chevy and Toyota PAID to have the Cobalt and Corolla re-tested WITH the SAB. Sorry...from my experiences with Mazda I just can't see them doing this. They just seem to be very "penny wise and pound foolish".
everfeb

alpha01

"Anyway the report was a bit misleading as no car, including the Corolla and Cobalt, without SAB passed."

How is that misleading? This is simply not a test that cars pass without side airbags. The frontal offset is NOT passable without airbags either, though it is not misleading.

Simply putting side airbags and curtains on all cars would not result in passing scores, as the test also highlights the importance of a strong safety cage.

(The Hyundai Elantra, Kia Spectra, Suzuki Aerio, and Saturn ION all received POOR ratings even with side airbags.)

This is the same type of cycle/reaction that occured with the original frontal offsets that nearly all makes pass with flying colors nowadays. Its just that in this case, the airbags arent standard as they were for the frontal offsets in 1995.

~alpha

autonomous

"Consumers Union, the publisher of Consumer Reports, believes that side air bags and head protection should be standard equipment. The poor showing of so many small cars in this latest crash test illustrates an urgent need for better protection against side impacts by larger vehicles."
See: //cdn.consumerreports.org/static/0504pic2_f.html

fowler3

small cars with or without side headcurtain airbags, passengers would still be seriously injured in a T-bone crash with an SUV or other large vehicle. Mainly to the lower torso and legs.

I think we all know that, but buy them anyhow.

You pays your money and you takes your chances.

fowler3

carguy58

"Chevy and Toyota PAID to have the Cobalt and Corolla re-tested WITH the SAB. Sorry...from my experiences with Mazda I just can't see them doing this. They just seem to be very "penny wise and pound foolish".
everfeb

Maybe because GM and Toyota have alot more money than Mazda does. I think Mazda will have to retest though. After all the 3 is the only Mazda product CR reccomends.

carguy58

"Two other small cars that received favorable ratings in Consumer Reports' April Auto Issue, the Hyundai Elantra and Mazda3, also are no longer recommended by the magazine because of poor performance in the new side-impact crash tests, conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety."

The current generation Elantra before this current issue of CR came out could not previously reccomend the Elantra because of poor offset crash test. Now, CR can't reccomend the Elantra because of poor side impact crash tests. This car just don't catch a break as far as crash tests go.

backy

We can all go out a buy a Corolla I guess. Who cares if the driver's seat is uncomfortable for some drivers (by CR's own admission) or if it's not anywhere as fun to drive as the Mazda3.

carguy58

I don't know how this crash tests will affect 3 sales but like I said before the Elantra recieved poor offset crash test at least from model years 2001-2003 and that didn't stop the Elantra from penetrating the market.

I guess with alot of cars faling this crash test we can all draw the conclusion the government is making these crash tests tougher. After all you want a vehicle that can handle a high impact crash but at the same time it damages automakers cars in terms of reputation.

I heard on the news Honda will put alot of optional safety equipment for when the Civic gets its side-impact crash test.

gee35coupe

The same can't be said for the 3. It's a lot easier to sell a CHEAP unsafe car than a "premium" one.

autonomous

"I guess with alot of cars faling this crash test we can all draw the conclusion the government is making these crash tests tougher."

Actually, Chris, that's not a correct deduction since the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety is not part of government but rather an industry sponsored body.

In general, I support this type of involvement by both the industry and government as it promotes safety for everyone and reduces overall costs in the long run.

innapickle

OK,
I am getting the willies. After a flip over crash in Jan 05 ,I bought a Mazda 3 sp. I did test drive (3 times) but after putting only 12 miles on the car, the beauty sits in my driveway. I thought that I just had to get over the feelings. I thought that my research was done, but now I feel like I am looking at a BIG mistake. Comments on the actual FEEL of safety?

kyfdx

While I can't comment on the relative safety of the Mazda3, I can tell you that you will eventually get over your fear of driving..

I totaled a car about three years ago.. While it was certainly less traumatic than flipping over, I did blow the airbags (and a crockpot of chili all over the backseat).

I found that for a few months, I was jumpy, and had a hard time making left turns out of parking lots onto busy streets... there just never seemed to be enough time or room to get out...

I also made my young son stop playing "punch-buggy", as I was jumping out of my skin, every time he spotted a Beetle..

Gradually, I relaxed and everything went back to normal.. There is nothing wrong with being cautious, but I would suggest not obsessing over it while you aren't in the car..

It is true what they say... Time heals all wounds.. Don't let an isolated incident control your life.. learn from it and move on..

regards,
kyfdx

innapickle

That helps. I know that time will help. I should have waited on buying a new car. Sorry about the chili!

Thanks

cti

I believe the Mazda3 received good scores in some recent government tests. (I just searched and couldn't find them).

In any case, all the "safety" options come in one options package. If you, like me, would never buy a car without ABS then you automatically get the other safety features (side air bags, side curtain air bags, and electronic brakeforce distribution) along with it.

Update: Found the crash test scores from the NHTSA. **** frontal driver/passenger
*** side front/rear
**** rollover

Side airbags were not tested, but they typically add one star to side impact ratings.

PLUS, the Mazda 3's good handling and great brakes make it less likely that you will get into an accident in the first place.

Jason

innapickle

Again, Thanks. Took it for another drive this afternoon. Felt the good handling and braking. Felt solid and secure.
Sue

fowler3

You'll get over it. I had the same problem for a long time after driving from Florida to Virginia with a severe ear infection, total loss of eqaulibrium behind the wheel. Pain was terrific! What that's like is -- crossing a bridge I halucinated -- thought the bridge made a U-turn. Freaking scary! I couldn't drive over bridges for years. But you do get over it--eventually--well, most of it. I still get nervous crossing bridges over water.

But following this horror experience I drove from Virginia to California and back solo, but that's another story. Heh

About buy a Mazda3 considering the CR report:

1) Is it anything you didn't already know?

2) Aren't all compact cars on the road eqaully at risk?

3) Do you expect compact owners to just park their cars and never drive them again?

NO!

Buckle your belts! Buckle your alertness!

fowler3

npaladin2000

"3) Do you expect compact owners to just park their cars and never drive them again?"

Car dealers do. Then maybe you'll trade it in on a shiny new Escape or RAV4. See, they make more money on compact SUVs then they do compact cars.

audia8q

It's interesting how one test can cause such hysteria...one test which is essentially new without alot of previous information. I'm not sure how anyone of us survived this long;)

On a serious note...I personally love safety items but some folks don't. We see people who would prefer a lower price than an airbag. Some car makers give the consumer that choice..others don't. The car makers who give consumers choices will get hammered by the media/IIHS for not including those things as standard, notice I didn't say free. Remember, media/IIHS does not think consumers are smart enough to make this decision on their own.

My guess is that a vehicles accident avoidance ability saves more lives and more money than all the other safety items combined...if the IIHS would come up with that test the results would be scary. I would say that most of us test this feature almost everyday...

Life is all about choices.

npaladin2000

"My guess is that a vehicles accident avoidance ability saves more lives and more money than all the other safety items combined...if the IIHS would come up with that test the results would be scary. I would say that most of us test this feature almost everyday..."

Yeah, people, and especially the safety-gadget development industry, seem to forget that the best way to survive an accident is to avoid one. But I guess if they told people that then they wouldn't sell as many airbags or ABS systems, etc. Although personally I like ABS, since it helps me to AVOID accidents.

Looks like even CR is getting more toward surviving being hit then avoiding being hit. You know, it wouldn't be as much of a problem if they actually TESTED drivers skills on a regualr basis instead of giving out licences in vending machines.

mazdafun

I'm with you. I think ALL drivers should be retested on a regular basis, and in the vehicle they intend to use (I think it's a real cheat when someone goes for a road test in a compact when they will really be driving a full-size SUV...you can tell when drivers of these can't handle vehicles of that size and mass).

I think we should go to a system like those used in Europe and Japan where drivers are rated to handle vehicles in more-finely defined vehicle segments. C'mon, a regular license allows the same person to drive a compact car, an extended club wagon, a U-Haul truck or a 3-ton SUV? They handle so differently.

backy

CR does include emergency handling (i.e. accident avoidance) in their reviews and ratings.

carguy58

Yeah the Elantra is a cheap alternative to the Corolla, 3, Civic and Focus but its still a car you want to feel safe in if you own one.

carguy58

I have had 2 accidents in my lifetime. I crashed into an SUV one time. The SUV had more damage than my car did. The other one happened in the snow. Alot of accidents happen in the snow. I have not felt fear to drive after both of them. Accidents happen.

About people questioning the 3 and its safety. This is not exclusively a Mazda problem. I mean the Corolla and Cobalt would have failed without the SAB. So I guess nobody should buy a Corolla without the SAB. The Altima failed. Thats Nissan's pride and gold right there.

Finally, the guy from IIHS(Robert Lund)said he wasn't surprised that most of these compact cars falied the said impact crash test. He said back in 1997 when cars were tested for frontal crash tests most of the cars failed too. Now most cars pass the frontal crash tests(hence car makers making frontal air bags standard equipment.)

backy

Yeah the Elantra is a cheap alternative to the Corolla, 3, Civic and Focus but its still a car you want to feel safe in if you own one.

The Elantra has comparable crash test ratings to these other cars (except the Corolla did better on the IIHS side impact test), plus standard SABs whereas they are optional on all the other cars. So I feel quite safe in it, thank you!

npaladin2000

Yeah, but does the emergency handling test take precedence over the techie, gadgety, weight-robbing, MPG decreasing, car-inflating accident-survival features?

backy

Yes, actually it does. I've seen CR rate cars "Not Acceptable" because of poor emergency handling. I've never seen them rate a car "Not Acceptable" because of a dearth of techie, gadgety, weight-robbing, MPG decreasing, car-inflating accident-survival features.