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

1121315171824

Comments

  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    I thought it might be intrusive because its higher up than a normal gauge.

    No, it's actually no higher than the top of a typical dash shroud, it just puts the numbers closer to view (meaning less eyes-off-the-road-time). I found I could monitor the speed in my peripheral (sp? its late and I'm tired :blush: ) vision, so I never had to look down.

    At night, it is also easily brightness-adjustable so as not to be a distraction.

    The car handles marvelously, second in class IMO to the Mazda 3. In that respect, it rides better than the Mazda as well, with MUCH less road noise from the tires to boot.

    The ride is similar to my Accord (my dad has a 2007 Civic btw which is how I can express an educated opinion), but the steering is quicker than my Accord, and with less weight, it handles better, very nimbly.
  • steve333steve333 Member Posts: 201
    welp, I may have to test drive one and the mazda 3 and see how they compare with my cobalt.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    The driving position is quite different in feel to a conventional car like my Accord, or a 3. I can see how some people have trouble adjusting to it, but I can also easily see its benefits and why it would be popular.

    If you don't like it, I'd certainly understand. It is quite polarizing, but I do applaud Honda for not taking the boring route as it did with the 01-05 Civic.
  • steve333steve333 Member Posts: 201
    By driving position do you mean it is low to the ground?
  • eldainoeldaino Member Posts: 1,618
    i dunno if thats what grad meant, but it IS very low to the ground.

    the car handles bumps wonderfully. it has a better steering feel than my rabbit does (more connected to the road) but it does not feel as ...solid. still very solid, just not as much.

    according to the comparo between these cars that c/d did, the civic (and rabbit) were both on the heels of the mazda 3 with regards to handling, but were both more comfortable rides.
  • steve333steve333 Member Posts: 201
    Not fond of the down on the ground feeling. I had an 1989 Accord that when i got out of the car it was so low it was uncomfortable. Seats were awful also.
    Is the Rabbit higher up? I got my Cobalt basically because it was more comfortable than the other compacts I tried and I couldnt find a Mazda 3 to buy.
    The Rabbit is appealing but not sure about VW reliability.
    I am very intrigued by the Saturn Astra thats going to be coming very soon.
  • eldainoeldaino Member Posts: 1,618
    Is the Rabbit higher up? I got my Cobalt basically because it was more comfortable than the other compacts I tried and I couldnt find a Mazda 3 to buy.
    The Rabbit is appealing but not sure about VW reliability.


    yeah it is actually. I cant wait to lower it, kinda like a mini suv almost.Bigger wheels fills out the wells better, but i wouldn't mind dropping it so that it has a better stance; vw actually sells eibach lowering springs for this purpose. Don't get me wrong its not colossaly off the ground, but a couple inches and it would be perfect.

    vw reliability has been subpar as of late, but the mkV generation (new jetta, gti, and rabbit) have been much much better. Maybe not this amazing poster child for reliability or anything, but i have no worries about my car. after over 22k i've got no problems.
  • steve333steve333 Member Posts: 201
    Thats good to know, the Rabbit is on my list, after the mazda 3, and saturn astra.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    yeah it is actually. I cant wait to lower it,

    I thought you were Civic shopping again?
  • sandman46sandman46 Member Posts: 1,798
    The view takes almost no time to get used to and it just falls into one's normal sight range. I get into the wife's 3 and find it more difficult to read the speedo now. Prefer the Civic's.
    Great little car with nothing to complain about actually. At a bit over a year of ownership and 8k miles, am quite pleased with this buying decision.

    The Sandman :)
  • eldainoeldaino Member Posts: 1,618
    totally true. when we bought the rabbit, it was harder to re-adjust! the civic dash is way ahead of its time...i don't find it gimicky at all, but the fact that cars like the accord probably wont incorporate it into its design would make some people view it as gimmicky. We'll see if they keep it for gen 9.

    Graduate: my wife and i are trying to save up some more dough, and since we have only had the bunny for not even a year, we know its going to set us back to get a civic, simply because we know that if we were to get one, we want ALL the options we want on it (which isn't all of them but it is a few) and even if we didn't get them, we are still talking about a 20k car, and even though the gas mileage will be great, the car payments will totally counteract it. Its going to be awhile before we trade in the bunny, but thats if we ever do; he's been good to me so hopefully it will be a lasting relationship! ;) (unless ofcourse somethign goes wrong and past vw reliability rears its ugly head. but until then, we'll be fine.)
  • aviator48570aviator48570 Member Posts: 9
    Sorry for getting back to you so late, I've been very busy. The car handles the bumps fairly well; it's a stiffer suspension than the '97 oldsmobile regency that I used to drive, but that's an entirely different class of car. The suspension package is set up to corner extremely well with limited body lean, so what you lose in comfort over bumps (which isn't very much), you make up in good handling. For me and my experience thus far, the comfort of the seats also makes up for the stiffer suspension.
  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Administrator Posts: 11,242
    A reporter would like to speak to owners who purchased a used vehicle recently and if gas prices and fuel economy played an important factor in their buying decision. Please respond to ctalati@edmunds.com no later than July 23, 2007 with your daytime contact information and the year and model of your used car.

    MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
    Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
    2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
    Review your vehicle

  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Some interesting things happening in this segment over the coming year. The 2008 Lancer has already debuted and is by all accounts a huge improvement over the last Lancer. The Focus will get a re-do this fall, but we'll lose the 5-door and the wagon. The all-new Corolla should be out next spring, as a 2009 model; both a sedan and coupe are rumored. The Elantra SE adds standard ESC (and may be the lowest-priced sedan in the U.S. with standard ESC) while the Limited trim goes away. Other compacts are beefing up for safety, too: Sentra adds ABS as standard, Cobalt add standard side curtains, as does the Mazda3s. So lots of "new and improved" economy sedans for new car buyers to check out, along with the others in this class.

    Did I leave anyone out?
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    I have been thinking that 20k is a pretty high limit for something deemed entry level or "economy." Is this primarily looking at compacts or subcompacts or is it purely a $$ amount?
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    I am not really sure anymore. It used to be about sedans in the so-called "compact" class, e.g. Civic, Cobalt, Corolla, Elantra, Focus, Mazda3, Sentra, Spectra. But now I see cars that are generally considered subcompacts here: Fit and Yaris. (And the Fit isn't even available as a sedan!) But a car that is compact-sized and competes directly with Fit and Yaris, and is available as a Sedan--that is, the Versa--isn't here. So I guess I am confused too.

    For me, it's about "compact" sedans--those one notch up from the B-class cars in price and (usually) size, and generally fall into the $16k-20k price range but can start lower and go a little higher. $20k is a lot for a compact car, I agree, but considering that Civics and Mazda3's easily go over $20k and it's possible for an Elantra to list for nearly $20k, I guess $20k doesn't go as far as it used to. :cry:
  • iluvmysephia1iluvmysephia1 Member Posts: 7,709
    this thread's limits in price, going up to $22,125. But I bought the Sun and Sound package with the CVT automatic tranny and those add to the Lancer GTS cost. The base Lancer GTS would nip in under $20,000 so we're OK to keep the title as it is.

    Size-wise the Lancer fits fine in to this thread's parameters.

    2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick

  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Wow, $22k for a compact. That sounds like a Volkswagen or something! ;)
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Keep in mind that Accords and Camrys can list for near $30k, so $22k for a fully-loaded compact with nav, killer sound system, 18" alloys etc. etc. doesn't sound that much in that context.

    And there are good compacts available for around $12k + T&L too, for those who can do without things like nav, killer sound systems, 18" alloys etc. etc. ;)
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Oh, I know. A Mazda 3s GT can be at the price in no-time. I guess it just hit me that that price for the compact is how much my midsize was.

    I remember when my mom's loaded '93 Accord was $20,000, and my dad's Civic coupe ('95) was around $12,000. In my head, I guess, compacts should be under $20,000 (my dad has a Civic EX, and we all know it stickers near $20k). Its a shame that I can't fit in most compacts, at a large 6'4". I'm destined for a midsize or larger life!
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    In my head also, a compact should be under $20k. There's some really nice vehicles outside the compact class available for $20k. I'll be very surprised if I spend more than $15k on my next compact (assuming I get a compact next year). But it won't have factory nav, a killer stereo, 18" alloys, leather, and other toys that can be had on compacts these days. That's why some compacts cost well over $20k.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Yep, the compacts of ten-fifteen years ago often had steel stamped wheels without covers, manual steering, *optional* A/C , and crank-up windows as a common standard.

    Today, we scoff at cars without PW/PL/PS/CD/AC.

    Also, at my size, I need more size for my money! Hence, my Accord without all the goodies (NAV, 18", leather) for the same price as that Mitsu.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Yes, I scoff at cars w/o PW/PL/CD/AC now. :) I got rid of my last car w/cassette last year. I won't own a 4-door car w/o PW and PL now. And since I do sometimes "dress up" for work, in the summer, I won't drive a car w/o AC now. But I can get a compact with all of those features for around $12k. They are standards in the class now, just like safety features like side airbags/curtains and even ABS are becoming ubiquitous in the class now. Still more reasons why economy cars cost as much as they do now.

    Oh well... I also make 20 times more than what I did when I owned my first economy car, a Corolla. And yet I can buy the same model today but much larger, more comfortable, more powerful, safer, and with way more creature comforts for only about 4 times as much. Not too bad.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    I remember when my mom's loaded '93 Accord was $20,000

    Wow was that an SE? My inherited EX was 16.5k in '93.
  • eldainoeldaino Member Posts: 1,618
    now now grad maybe for a gti which is well worth it! :P

    my vw was only 17k ;)
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    D'oh, I remember what car I'm thinking of now (I was 6 years old, cut me some slack! :)). It was my aunt's '94 Ram Club Cab. $20,100.

    Not the Accord.

    Come to think of it, I don't think I was there for my mom and dad's '93 purchase, but I did go with my dad and aunt when she bought her Ram. I remember, because when we got there, I wanted a "new" Neon, in the showroom.

    I knew there was a $20,000 in there somewhere... When its 14 years ago, and I'm only 19 (20 this month), it starts to run together.

    Good catch, engineer...

    And no, it was an EX, not an SE (cloth seats, no Bose stereo).
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Oh, the low-end VWs are where its at! Don't get me wrong...

    But the 2.5 Jetta loaded up is over $26k. A lot of features, yes, but in the end, its still a 150 hp, 22 MPG, heavy as a midsize but small-as-a-compact car (albeit a nice one)...

    For me, its an equation that doesn't wash. That doesn't mean it is a bad decision, for someone who buys that car, but its way too much for way too little in my world.

    $17k, on the other hand, is very different. :)
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    I remember as far back as '95 a Civic EX 4-door ran $16k (because I nearly bought one), so $20k for a loaded Accord back then is not out of the question.

    Which brings up an interesting point... today I can go out and buy a compact that has all the equipment and then some of the '95 Civic EX, which IMO was the top compact of its day, and also today's compact is larger, more comfortable, more powerful, safter (six airbags and even ESC vs. two airbags)... and still pay $16k or maybe even less! And our dollars are worth a lot less now than in '95. So pricewise compact shoppers are in pretty good shape compared to over a decade ago.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Things are definitely better these days for the buyer!

    My own 1996 Accord LX (a step-up from the base model) stickered for ~$19,500k, and the top-line EXV6 was $25k then.

    Seemed like a $20,000 EX was reasonable, but I know for sure that that '94 Ram was $20k-$21k. I just thought that '93 EX Accord was too.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    I disagree. I think my '93 EX handles much better, is more responsive, and gets similar mileage to the '07 EX. With the exception of 27 air bags and a cd-changer, I really don't see a huge improvement.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Well, i can compare my 1996 LX to my 2006 EX. And, in comparison, my 2006 is quieter, safer (better ratings as well as more standard safety features), a lot more weight, faster with better mileage (24/34 vs. 23/31).

    That doesn't include the extra features associated with the EX model over an LX.

    Quieter, safer, faster, cheaper to maintain and keep running, more roomy, more comfortable, all for good money (compare with inflation).

    I'll take the new model, thanks.

    If you are a fan of the Accord of a decade ago or more, I'd suggest the current Civic. Similar size, weight, handling characteristics to the old Accords.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    Well, i can compare my 1996 LX to my 2006 EX. And, in comparison, my 2006 is quieter, safer (better ratings as well as more standard safety features), a lot more weight, faster with better mileage (24/34 vs. 23/31).

    Comparing to my '93, in 15 years and $6000 more expensive they managed to get a whopping 3mpg hwy mileage improvement? And that was partially by using Michelin rocks for tires. The Accord EX listing I saw had the '93 at 9 sec 0-60 and the '07 at 7.7. 15 years, ~1 sec faster.

    Quieter, safer, faster, cheaper to maintain and keep running, more roomy, more comfortable, all for good money (compare with inflation).

    I was looking over the maintenance schedules and with the exception of timing belt intervals they looked very similar. I noticed there is still a suggestion to adjust the valves "as necessary."

    So the Accord gets me from 1 airbag to like 6 or something and thats about it...oh and a 6 cd changer.

    I personally don't care for the Civic styling inside or out, but the Civic SI looks like a great ride.
  • eldainoeldaino Member Posts: 1,618
    grad hit it on the head.

    everywhere from the uber expensive jetta(for a 20k one i'd be ok with the content and mileage like the wolfsburg, but for 26k i'll have a v-6 accord or a decked out gti)

    and the civic being like the accord of old.

    the newer accords are quicker, better mileage, smoother, quiter and all around better.

    they may not be as tossble, but they are still fun rides.

    lilengineer boy; the new accords safety should be enought to make it better, its not just about airbags. (as an engineer don't you know that? :P )

    1 second is one second. the accord is no speed demon, but the facts are facts; the newer version is significantly quicker. (and i'm a fan of both the cb7 and grad older gen accord too.)
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    the newer accords are quicker, better mileage, smoother, quiter and all around better.

    Smoother is relative. Driving the same poor road by my house, the older Accord seems to make more noise but doesn't feel as harsh. I have also found more tire/road noise but less engine noise on the new Accord so far.

    they may not be as tossble, but they are still fun rides.

    Well, compared to the Camry/Solara anyway. In hindsight I think the Mazda6 would have been a better match for me.

    lilengineer boy; the new accords safety should be enought to make it better, its not just about airbags. (as an engineer don't you know that?)

    Yes, I do agree that there is more to life then airbags. My car has 4 wheel disk brakes with ABS and high performance tires to support accident avoidance, and has crumple zones and what not in addition to a driver's side airbag.

    I know its not a bad ride or anything, I just looked back at how revolutionary each iteration of the Accord was from '76 to '94, and how there really haven't been exciting changes since then.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Yes, I do agree that there is more to life then airbags. My car has 4 wheel disk brakes with ABS and high performance tires to support accident avoidance, and has crumple zones and what not in addition to a driver's side airbag.

    And on top of that, the new top-level Accord has ELectronic Brake-Force Distribution, better safety ratings, "smart" depowered airbags that will cut off the passenger side-bag if the seat senses the weight of a small child/person that could be injured by an airbag. Also, Stability Control is a HUGE addition to the features list.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    And on top of that, the new top-level Accord has Electronic Brake-Force Distribution

    EBD is an electronic proportioning valve. Is it an improvement, yes, is it monumental, no. Also, Honda doesn't have a lock on this, other cars in the price range have similar technology.

    better safety ratings

    4 stars vs 5 stars, with a totally different testing methodology, I don't know if they are comparable

    smart" depowered airbags that will cut off the passenger side-bag if the seat senses the weight of a small child/person that could be injured by an airbag

    the '93 didn't have an airbag to potentially injure a child passenger (not that i would have a kid in the front. anyway).

    Also, Stability Control is a HUGE addition to the features list.

    Which is only available on the V6 models.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    smart" depowered airbags that will cut off the passenger side-bag if the seat senses the weight of a small child/person that could be injured by an airbag

    the '93 didn't have an airbag to potentially injure a child passenger (not that i would have a kid in the front. anyway).


    The '93 also didn't have one AT ALL for passengers who DO need it. The current ones are the best of both worlds.

    Of course Honda doesn't have a lock on the similar cars in this price range, but it DOES have the older models beat, which you seem to have trouble with.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    The '93 also didn't have one AT ALL for passengers who DO need it. The current ones are the best of both worlds.

    As were the 96+ by that definition.

    Of course Honda doesn't have a lock on the similar cars in this price range, but it DOES have the older models beat, which you seem to have trouble with.

    Nah, it is better, incrementally (and I would hope it would be 15 years later). Its just not like the jump from the 85 to the 86 or the 89 to the 90. Maybe the 93-94 is in there because it represents the birth of the American market Vtec Accord (of course the JDM cars could get a H22 Prelude engine in the previous version).
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Yes, the cars got safer incrementally with each passing generation.

    1994 Accords brought met new side-impact standards 3 years early, along with Dual Airbags.

    1998 Accords welcomed Side-Airbags and Traction Control.

    And we all know about the current model...

    This has gotten WAY off topic, so I'm gonna drop it and let this discussion float back to the new millennium.
  • irismgirismg Member Posts: 345
    I think it's all that "safety" equipment driving up the cost. Radios and such surely can't be the culprit, not at wholesale level. I like backy's idea. I don't think I'd pay more than $17K for a car even if I could afford it...unless, of course, it was a Lexus! :shades:

    I think I got a decent program car in 1998 for just under $15K. But it's like I'd have to go back two model years to get below that price threshold now. Not that I mind doing that, I've bought second- and even third-hand all my life, never buy retail, never buy new. A recycled car is nothing to be ashamed of.

    And getting the basic radio is a thought, but if you get a car that's got an upgraded one, your upgraded wiring is already in place, and all you need do is change the head unit. The dealer used to scare people, saying that if anybody but them put in a new stereo for you, your airbag could be disabled without you knowing it! I remember a co-worker was petrified because she wanted to change the cassette in her car to a CD...and she paid the dealer! I couldn't believe it...I told her she got hosed.

    And I absolutely agree I'm not going back to crank windows! Although, I remember when I first got my current I learned a painful lesson about making sure my hair was completely inside the car before I pushed the button!

    Sorry about all that rambling. I think $15,000 is a good limit for anyone who can live with cloth seats. Although, it's almost a "fixer-upper" at that price, isn't it? My first car, a '73 Maverick bought in 1981, cost me $1300.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    A "fixer upper" at $15k? I don't consider a car with mid-sized interior room, A/C, power everything, tilt/telescope steering wheel, alloys, 6-speaker stereo with satellite radio and aux input, fog lamps, ABS, six airbags, stability control, 60/40 rear seat with folding armrest, leather steering wheel and shifter, audio controls on the wheel, heated mirrors, lighted vanity mirrors, cruise, remote locking with alarm, etc. to be a "fixer upper." That is an example of what you can get in this class for 2008 for $15k, with a little negotiating.
  • irismgirismg Member Posts: 345
    Not the prices I see you can't, at least not on new cars.On Toyotas especially the extra airbags and leather will push it up to $20K. That's what I'm seeing in my area. Your area may be different.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Not on an Elantra.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Bingo!

    Got to drive a '07 Elantra GLS the past couple of days in Chicago. Reminded what a smooth, tight car it is even in base trim (although this one did have a moonroof).
  • bhmr59bhmr59 Member Posts: 1,602
    Actually the '07 Ellantra has more head room (front & rear), more front leg room and 1.8 inches less rear leg room than the '07 ACCORD.

    Interior total volume is listed at: Accord 103 cu ft, Elantra 98 cu ft. Cargo volume, both listed at 14 cu ft.

    The Elantra is a "compact" but EPA considers it "mid-size" due to the interior volume.

    The next time you're in the market you might be able to consider a compact if that is what you are interested in at that time.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Yeah, at the time, the compacts were still "compact."

    The Corolla was DULL (the girlfriend had one)
    The Civic was too low (but a hoot to drive)
    The 3 would've been a contended but the nearest dealer was many miles away...

    And, my folks had a little more to spend so a midsize was in the budget.

    The next time, I'd probably drive a LOT more cars than just midsizers.
  • jml7jml7 Member Posts: 5
    Ok.. Let me just think...

    Mazda3
    Civic
    Elantra
    Spectra
    Focus
    Cobalt
    Forenza

    In that order, 1st to last, top to bottom. I'm really only sure about the first and last place finishers- all others are fuzzy.
  • ttaittai Member Posts: 114
    Here is the best site so far for the latest motor news where you can see your car in action. Just pick a car and
    watch it slolem, brake, accellerate, order chinsese food, whatever. I think all you Yaris owners will grin from ear to ear. All you Fit and Aveo owners, not so much. Huyndai testing is done in 2006.

    http://www.cars.com/go/video/motorweek/videoPopup.jsp?makeid=47&year=2007&modeli- d=8242&location=MW_L_2007_Toyota_Yaris.flv
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    That's pretty much how I'd rank them except maybe flip the Civic and Elantra, especially now that the Elantra SE comes with standard ESC for 2008. Someone looking for high mpg might rank the Civic higher, and someone looking for a car pool car might put the Elantra at the top (roomiest and one of the smoothest, quietest rides of the group).

    I might have to rank the Cobalt ahead of the Focus for now if only because the Focus is lacking in basic safety equipment, and I hate its interior.
  • sandman46sandman46 Member Posts: 1,798
    Having just driven both of these earlier, we took our 3 in for it's alignment check, new air filter & induction service, I couldn't ask for more. I drove the Civic there and test drove the Mazda when the work was completed and I have to admit, both of these are excellent choices and a hoot to drive. True they are probably at the top of the heap $ wise, excellent choices just the same.
    The 3 just hit 33k and the Civic's at slightly over 9k and both drive like the day we picked them up from the dealer. Hopefully the mpg's will rise on the 3 with the work done today. Had the oil changed on it this past weekend.

    The Sandman :)
This discussion has been closed.

Your Privacy

By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our Visitor Agreement.