Actually, it looks like the 2CV and the litte green thing got pulverized, while the other cars seemed to hold up pretty well as the forces dissipated.
Something about the 2CV doesn't look right, though. I wonder if they did something to try keeping it stationary? The truck practically goes through it, but the 2CV doesn't start to move forward until the truck is about halfway through it. However, when the little green car gets hit, it pitches forward immediately, being crushed between the truck and the little red car. I'd imagine that in a situation like that, just about any car would be reduced to jelly if it was in the back of that row.
As I mentioned not that long ago I have started looking for a new or newer car now that I don’t have to commute at all. I started thinking that some of the sub compacts have some useable space inside so maybe I should look for one because they get such great fuel mileage. Well some of them do anyway. But once negotiations started with my wife it was decided that maybe we could use an AWD or 4WD before this winter. First Snow doesn’t often come before January. I didn’t need AWD because we don’t get that much snow but she doesn’t want to chain up even with Spyder Spikes so AWD it was. As soon as maximum fuel mileage fell to something less than number one on my needs list then sub compacts started to slide back in my lists of cars to look at. They were already on the edge because my wife and I like to travel a bit by car and a long road trip in a sub compact doesn’t seem like an inviting image.
Once the AWD cars entered the picture the price range increased and the size issue became less critical. A CR-V and even a Rav4 have more room than I thought. However I have already given up 3 or 4 mpg looking at AWD so if you give up 3 or 4 more MPG a Liberty starts looking better and you get even more room and twice the towing capacity of a Forester. Suddenly I am looking at V-6s and small travel trailers.
Sub compacts may be nice for people that have two cars or don’t get out much but they just limit some of us more than we are willing to be limited. The smart sized cars might even be cute but once you get into the 12k bracket you have so many choices that they simply don’t seem worth it. And just to let you know, I realize I will only use AWD maybe 10 percent of the time. And I will only take road trips 20 percent of the time but it is nice to know I can just pick up and use either whenever I want to. Once the real shopping starts the real world value of a sub compact just spirals away. It takes a desire for something small simply for the size itself to make them worthwhile
Don't you think 99% of Americans could actually survive without taking their own lives from depression if they were "forced" to drive say a new Scion xD? It's small but now has a bigger engine to address freeway driving complaints in the xA, it still gets great mileage, you can stuff it with way more materials goods than your whole family could carry all at once, it seats 4 in a pinch (yeah, you can't stretch out in luxury, but you won't DIE sitting back there for 1/2 hour), easy to park, cheap to run, GREAT resale value.
I mean, in a pinch, couldn't the vast majority of the world be happy in a car like this? (discounting the need for enthusiast's cars I mean).
I believe that advertising has created this false impression that other people REALLY CARE about what you drive, but really, unless what you drive is a bashed-in pile of crap, most people do not make vast solid and meaningful impressions of others based on their cars.
And anyone who will judge you totally on your automobile is not someone you want to know anyway, because this kind of one-upsmanship never ends. It goes from Corvette to Porsche to Ferrari to helicopter to King Air to Lear jet to buying trips into outer space. It never ends. It's exhausting.
Of course, some cars are more FUN than others, but fun is not the same as seeking prestige. It is, to me at any rate, more fulfilling to have fun DRIVING than to have "fun" rubbing it in to the neighbors.
Sure I may spring for a sportier image in a MINI than in an xA...but that's about fun. I don't care what people thing of me in that little crate, because I'm having a ball in there.
The vehicle needs to have seating capacity for 2 children under 5. Not such a big deal, you think...they are pretty small...but then you look at the apparatus they are required to sit in and suddenly you can see where some of the up-sizing comes from. The '05 Legacy wagon (a midsize wagon...) cannot hold 1 infant seat and 2 passengers with any degree of comfort. The seat belt does a lousy job of restraining the infant carrier, and latch is only in the outboard positions next to the side curtain air bags. Also if you have the infant seat in one of the outboard positions, the front seat has to be up pretty far forward. This is a midsized wagon with PLENTY of leg-room. Also, in the wagon, if you load in the stroller and the pack-n-play (think play-pen/crib thing), the cargo area is full. The '07 Accord has less of an issue in the back seat (it can use latch from the center as the latch components are outside of the outboard seatbelts) but has the same trunk space limitations. Someday when the next kid comes, and we go to infant seat and toddler seat, the issues will get compounded. You would think that the automakers could work something out with the child/infant seat manufacturers to have them fit in their cars....
Shifty, I agree we could survive with smaller vehicles if we had to. But why? We could survive with smaller houses as well. But will we? We have been blessed with more space than the Average European and so we don't see things the same way. And as far as Asians? We have a cultural space requirement vastly different from most Asians. Americans if given a choice between a 20 inch TV for $200.00 and a 32 inch TV for $225.00 will see the 32 inch as more value because we have rooms that will accept 32 inch TVs and the space we need to sit back from them.
You have said the key words yourself even in your quest to make me smile. The bigger engine in the xD is only one example of how we differ from the makers of the xA. It is much like your complaint of the Smart. The same 99 percent of the people could drive one most of the time but it doesn't offer much for that in the pinch time when you want more. Notice I didn't say need. Need is a 4 letter word to us in this country. Want is a word of hope and need is not. Sure there is a desire by some for the simple life. daysailer and Nippon are examples of that and I say more power to them. But in our culture we look passed the idea of need to the idea of future possibilities. How did SUVs ever get to be so popular with a people that have so few unpaved roads? It was the idea of what you could do even if you never did it. Like I said once fuel mileage falls into someplace below the top three reasons you are looking for a vehicle we are simply offered more for our money that our fellow consumers in Europe. Their idea of a family vehicle would make the average family in this country cry and we have smaller families.
I was only indicating how easy it was from my personal experience over the last few weeks to start looking at sub compacts and end up in mid sized vehicles. For me it was much like the TV example I gave earlier. Is the 32 inch TV better than a 20? I don’t think so but you get a lot more TV for not a lot more money. Is a Rav4 better than a xD? Maybe not but it has more room and can pull 2000 pounds. But you say the xD gets better mileage? Yes but it isn’t 4WD and doesn’t have as much room I might say. But how often do I need 4WD? Not often but if I ever wanted it the xD couldn’t deliver, ever.
Looking at my own life as an example it is now just my wife and I. Why do I need a 4 door? Why do we have a guest room in our house? Do you know how many guests we have in a year that spends the night? It is less than 1 percent of the time I can assure you. But we were more than willing to spend more than we would have for a smaller one bedroom house. And that would have been all we “needed.”
yeah but you are arguing extremes vs. non-extremes here.
Moving into say a 1500 square foot house from a 2500 square foot house does not involve actual SUFFERING. It's an inconvenience which is mostly "mental".
But moving from an Accord to a Smart is impossible for you. Your family would suffer. A Smart is ridiculous for more than one person. But moving to an xD is inconvenient. Big difference. You and wivey and two small kids can survive very nicely in an xD. You just can't haul as much stuff around as in a Suburban...but do you need to, I mean REALLY? Put it on a roof rack pod. Leave it at home. Or rent a van for those 4 times a year, just like the Europeans do.How are all these Parisians, with their big families structures (much more so than Americans) surviving? We have all these laboratory mice in Europe who are challenging the "inconvenience" argument :P
Sure, the question "why" is a good one. Why be inconvenienced if you don't have to? But as fuel prices rise, traffic gets worse, repairs get more expensive, this sense of "convenience" is rapidly being nibbled away at, don't you think?
I sometimes think I bought my minivan a bit late, my younger kid is already 5. We used to carry more stuff when they were babies.
Here's a thought, though, what if instead of just MPG, we measure MPG per person?
An Hummer getting 15mpg with 3 people in it is actually more efficient than a Smart with only the driver getting 44mpg.
I thought of this because we took 7 people in the van this weekend on a road trip. Every one of them was comfy. Oh, and a dog, so 8 live beings, technically. :shades:
I got 26.0mpg.
2 Priuses averaging 44mpg (real world) would actually have used more fuel.
That's a smart way to think. That's how economists think (most of the time).
Of course, this MPG per person looks great on paper but in real life it doesn't fit the situation.
Nothing is more efficient in MPG per person than a rail car (filled to capacity), but are we building trains? No...there's little right of way left, little support for such massive funding, and all kinds of lobbying against it.
As for Hummers, sure...IF they were used to capacity all the time,your argument is undefeatable....a Hummer can outperform a Prius. But I'll be damned, whenever I see a Hummer, it has that same one person in it as the Prius usually does.
But yes, 7 people in a Suburban defeats my Scion handily in an MPGPP contest.
You have some good points but the other question is do Americans see Europeans as an example of how to live or what to avoid? Even your concept of Fun comes into question if it has to go toe to toe with the pleasure of comfort. For the average person is it more fun to be shoulder to shoulder with other people or to kick back and spread out and be comfortable? I know full well that if I had to an xD would work for us. Well I am not interested in any Scion but a xD sized vehicle would work if we could only afford one. But if I have the choice and I wanted to drive to see my son at Fort Carson and ny two choices were a xD or a Ford 500? Sorry the xD simply isn’t in the picture. If I were still commuting the xD might be fine but that still isn’t for fun it is for work. So the sub compacts do there job I agree. But they offer nothing more than what I need and never the dream filling what I hope or want.
its certainly valid on a case by case basis. But since you don't carry 7 people ALL the time, the lifetime use is a whole different ballgame. Sure, we carry 4 beings in our Pacifica fairly often, but it more often carries 2, and even more often than that carries 1. So it averages down quite a ways.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Oh I drove an xD and it's really quite good for commutes and you can have a certain amount of fun with it. It's really a highly competent little vehicle. Toyota keeps on refining and refining.
I just can't equate "spread out and comfortable" with FUN in my own head. To me, fun is being very taut and alert.
A similar analogy could be made with motorcycles, which I used to ride A LOT, and all kinds of them. I had the most fun on a cafe-racer...a light fast bike-- and I absolutely hated the lack of control in a "chair-seat" Harley hog. One was fun, the other merely oblivion to the road. But of course you got the wind in your hair with either, I'll admit that much.
A Smart is ridiculous for more than one person. But moving to an xD is inconvenient. Big difference. You and wivey and two small kids can survive very nicely in an xD.
No, I don't think they could. Both infant seats would be hitting the front seats, and if they had moved on to forward facing seats, the kids would be kicking them the whole time. The car also has stadium seating so once the car seat is factored in, the kids would have access to throwing things at you over the seat. There is not room for strollers + diaper bag. This is not a vacation load, this is going to the store (oh, and certainly no place for groceries with the stroller back there...maybe the back seat floor under the car seats?). Once they can use an umbrella stroller and or a booster (somewhere between 8-9 y/o)seat, it becomes a possibility, albut an inconvenient one. Of course, that is only from 8 -11 or so when the kids hit their growth spurt and need leg room...
I just can't equate "spread out and comfortable" with FUN in my own head. To me, fun is being very taut and alert.
Yeah, but if the opposite is to be horribly cramped, then how is that fun? Spread out and comfortable is going to equate to "Love Boat" for some people, while "taut and alert" is going to equate to knees up in your nostrils for others!
I haven't been in an xA for more than a few minutes at the auto show, but I could tell I wouldn't be comforable in it. And from the specs I've seen, the xD is actually worse in the legroom department. I haven't sat in one yet though, so I can't say from personal experience. Sometimes those published dimensions can be deceiving. The xD, from pics I've seen, looks like it would have worse visibility than an xA. At least, it looks bulkier, with smaller windows, thicker pillars, etc.
I have driven my uncle's '03 Corolla a few times, on trips up to around 115 miles. I did it in a tree-huggy moment back when fuel was more expensive. I didn't find it to be fun in the least. It wasn't particularly fast or agile. It could keep up with traffic, no trouble at all, but I didn't feel that lopping off 2+ feet and 800-900 pounds made for any significant improvements over, say, my Intrepid. Fuel economy was better, something like 37.5 mpg whereas the Intrepid on that one trip might've only gotten around 28-29. Handling was actually worse. Whereas the Intrepid feels stable and well-planted, and fairly responsive, this Corolla just felt nervous and jittery. It wanted to wander in its lane too much. And whatever advantage might have been gained by the small size was more than offset by the blind spots. To the car's credit though, the blind spots were more a result of me not being used to it. If I drove it all the time, I'd be used to them.
Now I know a Corolla is hardly a performance car. And neither is an Intrepid. But it takes more than lopping off a few feet and a few hundred pounds to make a car handle better.
Heck, my uncle even says he prefers his '97 Silverado to his Corolla! So in his eye, the truck is more "fun".
The car also has stadium seating so once the car seat is factored in, the kids would have access to throwing things at you over the seat.
That stadium seating can also work against you if you have tall passengers in the back. While it might make for generous looking published specs, all it really does is raise your butt higher so that if you're tall, your legs stick out straighter, which means you'll require MORE fore-aft room, or whatever they call that measurement back there. And stadium seating is also marketing speak for "if you're tall your head will hit the ceiling."
I don't think you guys are looking at the same car I'm looking at here. No way kid seats are going to hit the front seats, and unless you are Gigantor, you can't possibly be cramped in the driver's seat. I'm 6-2, 210 lbs, and I'm just fine.
The seats are NOT so comfortable, so that's a legitimate gripe.
BUT....two strollers plus two kids plus two car seats....yep, that is really pushing it in an xD, so you win that argument....but an xB would work fine for a family of 4 if you can stand to be seen in one. :P Plenty of room in those.
I don't think you guys are looking at the same car I'm looking at here. No way kid seats are going to hit the front seats, and unless you are Gigantor, you can't possibly be cramped in the driver's seat. I'm 6-2, 210 lbs, and I'm just fine.
Shifty, how do you find the front seat comfort of the xD, compared to the xA? Personally, I find the xA to be horribly cramped, but I'm 6'3", and maybe that extra inch makes a difference, especially if its in the inseam. I rarely have a problem with headroom in cars, but legroom is often a concern for me.
Now I *could* drive an xA if I had to. I'd probably be okay going back and forth to work, as that trip is only 3.5 miles. Although I know the security guards would laugh at me after seeing me drive through the gave in those mammoth Chryslers, Pontiacs, pickup truck, etc. But for my purposes, it's a "ten minute car". As in, that's about how long I'd really want to be in it. To be fair though, in my experience, there is no such thing as a car that is so comfortable that you can just hop in it and drive pleasurably for hours on end and only have to stop when it's time to fill up the tank. If I can go an hour behind the wheel before some body part gets irritated, it's a miracle!
At first, I was thinking that my '76 LeMans came close. When I drove that thing the 500 miles back from where I bought it, we only stopped four times. Twice to pee, and twice for gasoline. Too bad we couldn't coordinate the two! ;-) But then, when I drove the thing up to Carlisle in June for the GM show, my butt was starting to ache after about an hour. That's when I remembered that I put a pillow down for the trip back from Ohio. The guy warned me that the seat had a tear in it, so I put the pillow down over it. For the Carlisle trip, I just had a red towel on it that kinda matched the seat.
As for the xB? Back seat's pretty roomy, but those little cushions aren't that comfortable. It may have the legroom of an '83 Electra, but it has the seat comfort of a cinder block. And the tight seating position up front still makes it a "ten minute car" for my needs.
Now that's not to say that there's no such thing as a small car that I'm comfy in. I was actually comfy in the Neon. But I know better than to buy one of those! :sick: And the new Civic is pretty comfy, too. The back seat seems a bit tight at first, but because the way the seatback is contoured, I found I could actually fit back there.
I think for the xA to be comfortable for me, its seat would either have to be about 2 inches higher, or be able to slide back about 3 inches further. And the steering wheel would have to be adjusted accordingly.
You gotta post a picture of yourself in your carspace page. You need more legroom AND more height? You have to be 7 foot tall and you just don't know it--lol! I can wear an Indian war bonnet in my xA (but I don't usually).
As for legroom, yeah, maybe I'm at the limit. I have a 34 inseam and that's about all I can handle in the xA
I'm good for about 200 miles at a stretch in the car, otherwise it starts to annoy me.
You gotta post a picture of yourself in your carspace page. You need more legroom AND more height? You have to be 7 foot tall and you just don't know it--lol! I can wear an Indian war bonnet in my xA (but I don't usually).
No no no, I meant either move the seat up about 2 inches, which would put it about the same level as my '85 Silverado, OR make it so it could go back about 3 inches, which would probably equate it to something like my Intrepid. If it did both, I wouldn't be able to reach the pedals!
And to the Corolla's credit, I have sat in nicer models at the auto shows, which have a lever on the seat that ratchets and angles the back of the seat cushion downward. That puts me at a better angle, comfort-wise, than my uncle's Cheap Edition trim level.
So how does the xD compare to the xA, front-seat-wise, in your opinion?
It seems about the same, maybe a teensy bit better. When I sat in one last time I didn't drive it and I've found that you can't really tell if you're a good fit until you are in a dynamic situation, shifting, turning, etc. Just sitting there you can fool yourself by making body adjustments that wouldn't work while driving.
The MINI however, when I drove it, was WAYYYYY better on legroom. I could push the seat back so far that I couldn't drive the car!!
I could accept the Mini as fun. But because we keep coming back to things like, "all you need" and the word need is often the optimum when we talk about a small car verses a larger one, we also have to mention that 90 percent of the time a person is commuting fun doesn't factor in at all. There is no fun in commuting but there can be comfort. A road trip in a small tight car is not as pleasurable as a larger more comfortable car as far as fatigue goes. A canyon trip might be or a mountain road trip but not a commute and not a road trip. A good example of that is how we travel. First class equates to comfort and room to stretch out tight compact equates to economy class.
I have listened to many of you like nippon and daysaler for some time. I see the point of sub compacts but as a one car family I would find them restricting. This is not to say others might not find some pleasure in the very restrictions they offer and being able to accomplish many of the same things a larger more comfortable vehicle can. There are people that take pride in crossing the ocean in a 30 foot boat, some even smaller, and there are those that find the trip much more enjoyable in a ship. If I had to I could venture into a ocean crossing in a 40 footer but would I do so if I didn't "have" to?
There must be a reason the most popular vehicle in the US is a mid sized car. There has to be a reason the most popular truck is a full sized truck.
Like you I was a motorcycle rider. But I will tell you I liked a big Cafe racer a lot more than I liked a small cafe racer. I would put my 750 Kawasaki up against a RD350 Yamaha any day. I would rather ride my 850 shaft drive from Orange county to the Red Woods over the Cafe racer any day. Tight has it place but not as much as some would indicate. IMHO
I'm about good for a car up to BMW 3-series size. After that it all feels excessive and unnecessary to me.
As for bikes, my favorite is BIG + LIGHT....ala BMW or Ducati...best of both worlds I think. Big but not porky. My idea of a failure on two wheels is a scooter.
BUT....two strollers plus two kids plus two car seats....yep, that is really pushing it in an xD, so you win that argument....but an xB would work fine for a family of 4 if you can stand to be seen in one. Plenty of room in those.
Yeah but then I am driving an ugly underpowered box that gets worse mileage than the Accord I have now :P Actually I thought the reason the mileage went down was they put in the Camry motor or something...
I think my issue is with the size of the baby stuff. I think they could effectively design an infant or baby seat that was much smaller and still offered protection, and there is no reason each stroller needs to be Hummer H1 sized.
I think my issue is with the size of the baby stuff. I think they could effectively design an infant or baby seat that was much smaller and still offered protection, and there is no reason each stroller needs to be Hummer H1 sized.
Isn't that the truth. The explosion in size and amount of stuff one can cart arount with a baby is amazing. Our out of town trips were a laugh, Grapes of Wrath/Beverly Hillbillies kind of loads. Necessary? Not all of it, but the seats are huge.
It kills me because its really not all that much stuff, its just that the stuff is so big. The stroller is huge (and we got the smallest, lightest full featured model - the next step is the umbrella ones and he's not big enough for that yet), the pack-n-play is normal sized, not some super XL model or something, and those two things are the end of my truck or hatch. The infant seat itself is huge. There has to be a more efficient way to package the kid in the car. I like the idea of the swivel captains chairs in the minivans. I haven't tried them out yet (and I am not willing to go to a minivan w/1 kid) but it does sound like it would ease loading.
we use words that highlight why mid sized cars are so popular. If we didn't require so much room? If we didn't have to take the kids with us. If we didn't demand leg room for half hour trips. If we didn't feel we needed more power. If we understood the sacrifices europeans are willing to make. I will add my own. If they didn't cost so close to what a bigger car cost. If they could tow something. If they got considerably better fuel mileage than the next size bigger cars. If they worked for a expanding family.
I will admit some of the sub compacts answer one or two of these questions. Look at the Versa. Until you see it sitting next to the other sub compacts and realize it solves the room problem by being the size of a compact. Sometimes they solve the power problem by giving you the fuel mileage of a bigger car. They are not sports cars and to be any kind of comfortable for even commuting they aren't designed to drive like sports cars. The Mini might be an exception. So like I said earlier unless fuel mileage is number one on your list or because you simply like small cars because they are small what do they do that a mid sized car can't? At least you can get a mid sized car in a sporty configuration and still fly over expansion joints with little notice.
I can see the charm and with at least two cars a sub compact wouldn't not be scratched off of my list. But as an only car they simply seem too restricting. Not that you can't go on a long road trip with one but can you do it and enjoy the ride getting there?
A Miata, while certainly a subcompact, is also atypical of the breed. Sit in my Echo, the new Yaris, Fit, or Aveo, and most will discover lots of stretch out room - these are cars that feel spacious when you sit in the driver's seat. There is no cozy or tight feeling as far as I am concerned. But then, I am a weirdo! :-P
I would say that applies to the Mini too, although less so because of design elements like the high window sills that make it feel more restrictive.
I "enjoyed" getting 49 mpg on a couple of trips to San Diego in my Echo. Did I "enjoy" the trip? Yes, as much as I would have enjoyed it in any car. It is more relaxing/coma-inducing to make that drive in a Lincoln Continental (something I have done, don't worry, it was rented) but the gas mileage sucks, the handling sucks once I have to drive around town at my destination, and parking the stupid thing was a major PITA.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I understand what you are saying and in this case I totally agree. When I bought my Wife the Focus we had an F-250 and a PT cruiser. At first we thought about getting a Miata but when my son and I sat in one we realized it would simply be Moms car because the two of us sat shoulder to shoulder and his head would touch when the top was up. He is a long wasted kid at 220 and 6 foot 2. But then a Miata is a whole different class of car than a Sub Compact and heaven knows it has nothing in common with a smart car. We sold the PT and the F-250 because we felt we could manage with just the Focus. Now we want to travel a bit more so we thought about looking for another car and sub compacts require us to compromise on comfort only to get better mileage. You can budget in more to offset mileage but if you go with a sub compact you can’t buy comfort. If you understand where I am coming from?
I know sub compacts can serve a purpose. I also know there are people that enjoy using the smallest lightest vehicle they can to accomplish the same things larger vehicles do. You see it all the time in camping clubs with travel trailers and RVs. Groups of people will meet somewhere and you will walk by row after row of large comfortable camping vehicles only to come to a family pulling a small teardrop trailer behind a CR-V or even an Accord just because they can. There are always minimalists in the world to a greater of lesser degree than most of the rest of us. All I am pointing out is how easy it is to move beyond the sub compact in today’s world. Yes I agree they can do everything a larger vehicle can do maybe 80 percent of the time. If you are a city dweller and don’t go camping, fishing, hiking, hunting, skiing, or anything that requires taking the whole family and the dog they may be fine for 90 percent of your driving needs. It is just for most of us it is frustrating for the 10 percent of the time when they just won’t fit the bill.
That is why I believe they will always be viewed as entry level vehicles or niche vehicles. They are like starter homes or retirement homes. Necessary but not practical for most of our lives.
Sit in my Echo, the new Yaris, Fit, or Aveo, and most will discover lots of stretch out room - these are cars that feel spacious when you sit in the driver's seat.
That depends very much on the car. To give three different examples, the S2000 has plenty of stretch-out room, but the seats and dash design give it a very closed-in feel and it is a bit of an adventure climbing in and out. The SE-R has about the same stretch room, but the seats go back far enough and dash is small enough to give it an airy feel with piles of open space (it's the only car I've ever had that I didn't put the seat back all the way). The Accent is the same size car as the SE-R inside and out, but the dash is somewhat larger and the seat doesn't go back as far so it ends up about halfway to the S2k on the roominess scale.
Don't you think 99% of Americans could actually survive without taking their own lives from depression if they were "forced" to drive say a new Scion xD? It's small but now has a bigger engine to address freeway driving complaints in the xA, it still gets great mileage, you can stuff it with way more materials goods than your whole family could carry all at once, it seats 4 in a pinch (yeah, you can't stretch out in luxury, but you won't DIE sitting back there for 1/2 hour), easy to park, cheap to run, GREAT resale value.
I had a chance to sit in an xD a couple of day ago and anyone who says the back seat is small hasn't sat in one or is one very tall person. There is so much legroom with the rear seats moved all the way back I don't see how it could be considered to have small back seats. Granted I didn't drive it but plenty of room in the back seat. My wife likes it but we didn't have time for all the dealer hassle so we just looked at it on the showroom floor. While it doesn't offer as much room as the Fit it's got more comfortable seats. My neighbor has a Fit and i've driven it a few times and it's ok but needs more power on the highway and the seats are just ok, not great for highway driving but it is a City car. The xD has a high beltline and my wife found she needed a cushion to see out the back, so we are still thinking about it but it was easier to see out of than a civic sedan which even i can't see the nose or the tail from inside. We will drive one when we are closer to buying probably early 2008 when prices have calmed down. Once I drive it that will tell me a lot. So far my wife likes it. I can't see why it shouldn't be cross shopped with similar cars like the Fit and the Versa. The fit drives nice in the city so we will see how well the xD drive with the 1.8L corolla engine in it.
I had an '86 Chevy Sprint sub-compact, though, while in college, and that thing had TONS of front leg room. Not much of a back seat behind it, but yeah, small cars can still be roomy, at least for the front passengers.
To me the Outback is about as small as an active family can use. It is a bit light in the towing capacity but would work well with a Kayak or canoe on top and maybe a small tent trailer. Going as small as a WRX is an option as long as someone has another vehicle like you do.
I guess what I was really trying to say is that if aliens invaded earth and made us all drive Scion xDs, in about 3 months we'd all have adapted as necessary and we'd be fine with it.
Since there are no aliens invading us (excluding L.A. I mean) we expand our horizons and our needs. By that I mean, rather than choosing what works 95% of the time and fails 5%, we choose cars that are fully utilized only 5% of the time and wasted 95% of the time----e.g., AWD for most Americans, or 3-row seats for most Americans.
So it is what it is and most people are not voluntarily going to "downgrade" in their minds, or in fact.
I guess what I was really trying to say is that if aliens invaded earth and made us all drive Scion xDs, in about 3 months we'd all have adapted as necessary and we'd be fine with it.
Since there are no aliens invading us (excluding L.A. I mean) we expand our horizons and our needs. By that I mean, rather than choosing what works 95% of the time and fails 5%, we choose cars that are fully utilized only 5% of the time and wasted 95% of the time----e.g., AWD for most Americans, or 3-row seats for most Americans.
So it is what it is and most people are not voluntarily going to "downgrade" in their minds, or in fact.
I don't think the xD is going to motivate people to do so. My AWD Legacy gets better rated mileage, as does my Accord. There is no real price for the added utility. I would like something like a CRX personally. 40-50 mpg in a really fun, lightweight and sporty package that doesn't pretend to hold more than a couple people.
Well, ummm, maybe no one else has noticed, but the price of crude oil hit an all-time high of $82 yesterday. I don't know why the price of gas hasn't jumped yet, but I would be surprised if it doesn't.
So it is what it is and many people WILL voluntarily "downgrade" in their minds, and in fact. :sick:
Comments
It wasn't a collision, it was like an explosion.
Actually, it looks like the 2CV and the litte green thing got pulverized, while the other cars seemed to hold up pretty well as the forces dissipated.
Something about the 2CV doesn't look right, though. I wonder if they did something to try keeping it stationary? The truck practically goes through it, but the 2CV doesn't start to move forward until the truck is about halfway through it. However, when the little green car gets hit, it pitches forward immediately, being crushed between the truck and the little red car. I'd imagine that in a situation like that, just about any car would be reduced to jelly if it was in the back of that row.
Once the AWD cars entered the picture the price range increased and the size issue became less critical. A CR-V and even a Rav4 have more room than I thought. However I have already given up 3 or 4 mpg looking at AWD so if you give up 3 or 4 more MPG a Liberty starts looking better and you get even more room and twice the towing capacity of a Forester. Suddenly I am looking at V-6s and small travel trailers.
Sub compacts may be nice for people that have two cars or don’t get out much but they just limit some of us more than we are willing to be limited. The smart sized cars might even be cute but once you get into the 12k bracket you have so many choices that they simply don’t seem worth it. And just to let you know, I realize I will only use AWD maybe 10 percent of the time. And I will only take road trips 20 percent of the time but it is nice to know I can just pick up and use either whenever I want to. Once the real shopping starts the real world value of a sub compact just spirals away. It takes a desire for something small simply for the size itself to make them worthwhile
I mean, in a pinch, couldn't the vast majority of the world be happy in a car like this? (discounting the need for enthusiast's cars I mean).
And anyone who will judge you totally on your automobile is not someone you want to know anyway, because this kind of one-upsmanship never ends. It goes from Corvette to Porsche to Ferrari to helicopter to King Air to Lear jet to buying trips into outer space. It never ends. It's exhausting.
Of course, some cars are more FUN than others, but fun is not the same as seeking prestige. It is, to me at any rate, more fulfilling to have fun DRIVING than to have "fun" rubbing it in to the neighbors.
Sure I may spring for a sportier image in a MINI than in an xA...but that's about fun. I don't care what people thing of me in that little crate, because I'm having a ball in there.
The '05 Legacy wagon (a midsize wagon...) cannot hold 1 infant seat and 2 passengers with any degree of comfort. The seat belt does a lousy job of restraining the infant carrier, and latch is only in the outboard positions next to the side curtain air bags. Also if you have the infant seat in one of the outboard positions, the front seat has to be up pretty far forward. This is a midsized wagon with PLENTY of leg-room.
Also, in the wagon, if you load in the stroller and the pack-n-play (think play-pen/crib thing), the cargo area is full.
The '07 Accord has less of an issue in the back seat (it can use latch from the center as the latch components are outside of the outboard seatbelts) but has the same trunk space limitations.
Someday when the next kid comes, and we go to infant seat and toddler seat, the issues will get compounded.
You would think that the automakers could work something out with the child/infant seat manufacturers to have them fit in their cars....
You have said the key words yourself even in your quest to make me smile. The bigger engine in the xD is only one example of how we differ from the makers of the xA. It is much like your complaint of the Smart. The same 99 percent of the people could drive one most of the time but it doesn't offer much for that in the pinch time when you want more. Notice I didn't say need. Need is a 4 letter word to us in this country. Want is a word of hope and need is not. Sure there is a desire by some for the simple life. daysailer and Nippon are examples of that and I say more power to them. But in our culture we look passed the idea of need to the idea of future possibilities. How did SUVs ever get to be so popular with a people that have so few unpaved roads? It was the idea of what you could do even if you never did it. Like I said once fuel mileage falls into someplace below the top three reasons you are looking for a vehicle we are simply offered more for our money that our fellow consumers in Europe. Their idea of a family vehicle would make the average family in this country cry and we have smaller families.
I was only indicating how easy it was from my personal experience over the last few weeks to start looking at sub compacts and end up in mid sized vehicles. For me it was much like the TV example I gave earlier. Is the 32 inch TV better than a 20? I don’t think so but you get a lot more TV for not a lot more money. Is a Rav4 better than a xD? Maybe not but it has more room and can pull 2000 pounds. But you say the xD gets better mileage? Yes but it isn’t 4WD and doesn’t have as much room I might say. But how often do I need 4WD? Not often but if I ever wanted it the xD couldn’t deliver, ever.
Looking at my own life as an example it is now just my wife and I. Why do I need a 4 door? Why do we have a guest room in our house? Do you know how many guests we have in a year that spends the night? It is less than 1 percent of the time I can assure you. But we were more than willing to spend more than we would have for a smaller one bedroom house. And that would have been all we “needed.”
Moving into say a 1500 square foot house from a 2500 square foot house does not involve actual SUFFERING. It's an inconvenience which is mostly "mental".
But moving from an Accord to a Smart is impossible for you. Your family would suffer. A Smart is ridiculous for more than one person. But moving to an xD is inconvenient. Big difference. You and wivey and two small kids can survive very nicely in an xD. You just can't haul as much stuff around as in a Suburban...but do you need to, I mean REALLY? Put it on a roof rack pod. Leave it at home. Or rent a van for those 4 times a year, just like the Europeans do.How are all these Parisians, with their big families structures (much more so than Americans) surviving? We have all these laboratory mice in Europe who are challenging the "inconvenience" argument :P
Sure, the question "why" is a good one. Why be inconvenienced if you don't have to? But as fuel prices rise, traffic gets worse, repairs get more expensive, this sense of "convenience" is rapidly being nibbled away at, don't you think?
Here's a thought, though, what if instead of just MPG, we measure MPG per person?
An Hummer getting 15mpg with 3 people in it is actually more efficient than a Smart with only the driver getting 44mpg.
I thought of this because we took 7 people in the van this weekend on a road trip. Every one of them was comfy. Oh, and a dog, so 8 live beings, technically. :shades:
I got 26.0mpg.
2 Priuses averaging 44mpg (real world) would actually have used more fuel.
Of course, this MPG per person looks great on paper but in real life it doesn't fit the situation.
Nothing is more efficient in MPG per person than a rail car (filled to capacity), but are we building trains? No...there's little right of way left, little support for such massive funding, and all kinds of lobbying against it.
As for Hummers, sure...IF they were used to capacity all the time,your argument is undefeatable....a Hummer can outperform a Prius. But I'll be damned, whenever I see a Hummer, it has that same one person in it as the Prius usually does.
But yes, 7 people in a Suburban defeats my Scion handily in an MPGPP contest.
An 8 seat minivan makes a whole lot more sense economically.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Basically the Miata is my city car, for commuting and errands, and even dates with my wife.
For evenings and weekends the van is my family car.
This strategy is very efficient because if you think about it my "utilization" is at least 50% for both cars all the time.
Miata 1 or 2/2 = 50-100%.
Van 4+/8 = 50% or more.
I wouldn't want to have a city commute in the van.
I just can't equate "spread out and comfortable" with FUN in my own head. To me, fun is being very taut and alert.
A similar analogy could be made with motorcycles, which I used to ride A LOT, and all kinds of them. I had the most fun on a cafe-racer...a light fast bike-- and I absolutely hated the lack of control in a "chair-seat" Harley hog. One was fun, the other merely oblivion to the road. But of course you got the wind in your hair with either, I'll admit that much.
To me "fun" requires excitement as a component.
No, I don't think they could. Both infant seats would be hitting the front seats, and if they had moved on to forward facing seats, the kids would be kicking them the whole time. The car also has stadium seating so once the car seat is factored in, the kids would have access to throwing things at you over the seat.
There is not room for strollers + diaper bag. This is not a vacation load, this is going to the store (oh, and certainly no place for groceries with the stroller back there...maybe the back seat floor under the car seats?).
Once they can use an umbrella stroller and or a booster (somewhere between 8-9 y/o)seat, it becomes a possibility, albut an inconvenient one. Of course, that is only from 8 -11 or so when the kids hit their growth spurt and need leg room...
Yeah, but if the opposite is to be horribly cramped, then how is that fun? Spread out and comfortable is going to equate to "Love Boat" for some people, while "taut and alert" is going to equate to knees up in your nostrils for others!
I haven't been in an xA for more than a few minutes at the auto show, but I could tell I wouldn't be comforable in it. And from the specs I've seen, the xD is actually worse in the legroom department. I haven't sat in one yet though, so I can't say from personal experience. Sometimes those published dimensions can be deceiving. The xD, from pics I've seen, looks like it would have worse visibility than an xA. At least, it looks bulkier, with smaller windows, thicker pillars, etc.
I have driven my uncle's '03 Corolla a few times, on trips up to around 115 miles. I did it in a tree-huggy moment back when fuel was more expensive. I didn't find it to be fun in the least. It wasn't particularly fast or agile. It could keep up with traffic, no trouble at all, but I didn't feel that lopping off 2+ feet and 800-900 pounds made for any significant improvements over, say, my Intrepid. Fuel economy was better, something like 37.5 mpg whereas the Intrepid on that one trip might've only gotten around 28-29. Handling was actually worse. Whereas the Intrepid feels stable and well-planted, and fairly responsive, this Corolla just felt nervous and jittery. It wanted to wander in its lane too much. And whatever advantage might have been gained by the small size was more than offset by the blind spots. To the car's credit though, the blind spots were more a result of me not being used to it. If I drove it all the time, I'd be used to them.
Now I know a Corolla is hardly a performance car. And neither is an Intrepid. But it takes more than lopping off a few feet and a few hundred pounds to make a car handle better.
Heck, my uncle even says he prefers his '97 Silverado to his Corolla! So in his eye, the truck is more "fun".
That stadium seating can also work against you if you have tall passengers in the back. While it might make for generous looking published specs, all it really does is raise your butt higher so that if you're tall, your legs stick out straighter, which means you'll require MORE fore-aft room, or whatever they call that measurement back there. And stadium seating is also marketing speak for "if you're tall your head will hit the ceiling."
The seats are NOT so comfortable, so that's a legitimate gripe.
BUT....two strollers plus two kids plus two car seats....yep, that is really pushing it in an xD, so you win that argument....but an xB would work fine for a family of 4 if you can stand to be seen in one. :P Plenty of room in those.
Shifty, how do you find the front seat comfort of the xD, compared to the xA? Personally, I find the xA to be horribly cramped, but I'm 6'3", and maybe that extra inch makes a difference, especially if its in the inseam. I rarely have a problem with headroom in cars, but legroom is often a concern for me.
Now I *could* drive an xA if I had to. I'd probably be okay going back and forth to work, as that trip is only 3.5 miles. Although I know the security guards would laugh at me after seeing me drive through the gave in those mammoth Chryslers, Pontiacs, pickup truck, etc. But for my purposes, it's a "ten minute car". As in, that's about how long I'd really want to be in it. To be fair though, in my experience, there is no such thing as a car that is so comfortable that you can just hop in it and drive pleasurably for hours on end and only have to stop when it's time to fill up the tank. If I can go an hour behind the wheel before some body part gets irritated, it's a miracle!
At first, I was thinking that my '76 LeMans came close. When I drove that thing the 500 miles back from where I bought it, we only stopped four times. Twice to pee, and twice for gasoline. Too bad we couldn't coordinate the two! ;-) But then, when I drove the thing up to Carlisle in June for the GM show, my butt was starting to ache after about an hour. That's when I remembered that I put a pillow down for the trip back from Ohio. The guy warned me that the seat had a tear in it, so I put the pillow down over it. For the Carlisle trip, I just had a red towel on it that kinda matched the seat.
As for the xB? Back seat's pretty roomy, but those little cushions aren't that comfortable. It may have the legroom of an '83 Electra, but it has the seat comfort of a cinder block. And the tight seating position up front still makes it a "ten minute car" for my needs.
Now that's not to say that there's no such thing as a small car that I'm comfy in. I was actually comfy in the Neon. But I know better than to buy one of those! :sick: And the new Civic is pretty comfy, too. The back seat seems a bit tight at first, but because the way the seatback is contoured, I found I could actually fit back there.
I think for the xA to be comfortable for me, its seat would either have to be about 2 inches higher, or be able to slide back about 3 inches further. And the steering wheel would have to be adjusted accordingly.
As for legroom, yeah, maybe I'm at the limit. I have a 34 inseam and that's about all I can handle in the xA
I'm good for about 200 miles at a stretch in the car, otherwise it starts to annoy me.
No no no, I meant either move the seat up about 2 inches, which would put it about the same level as my '85 Silverado, OR make it so it could go back about 3 inches, which would probably equate it to something like my Intrepid. If it did both, I wouldn't be able to reach the pedals!
And to the Corolla's credit, I have sat in nicer models at the auto shows, which have a lever on the seat that ratchets and angles the back of the seat cushion downward. That puts me at a better angle, comfort-wise, than my uncle's Cheap Edition trim level.
So how does the xD compare to the xA, front-seat-wise, in your opinion?
The MINI however, when I drove it, was WAYYYYY better on legroom. I could push the seat back so far that I couldn't drive the car!!
I have listened to many of you like nippon and daysaler for some time. I see the point of sub compacts but as a one car family I would find them restricting. This is not to say others might not find some pleasure in the very restrictions they offer and being able to accomplish many of the same things a larger more comfortable vehicle can. There are people that take pride in crossing the ocean in a 30 foot boat, some even smaller, and there are those that find the trip much more enjoyable in a ship. If I had to I could venture into a ocean crossing in a 40 footer but would I do so if I didn't "have" to?
There must be a reason the most popular vehicle in the US is a mid sized car. There has to be a reason the most popular truck is a full sized truck.
Like you I was a motorcycle rider. But I will tell you I liked a big Cafe racer a lot more than I liked a small cafe racer. I would put my 750 Kawasaki up against a RD350 Yamaha any day. I would rather ride my 850 shaft drive from Orange county to the Red Woods over the Cafe racer any day. Tight has it place but not as much as some would indicate. IMHO
As for bikes, my favorite is BIG + LIGHT....ala BMW or Ducati...best of both worlds I think. Big but not porky. My idea of a failure on two wheels is a scooter.
Yeah but then I am driving an ugly underpowered box that gets worse mileage than the Accord I have now :P Actually I thought the reason the mileage went down was they put in the Camry motor or something...
I think my issue is with the size of the baby stuff. I think they could effectively design an infant or baby seat that was much smaller and still offered protection, and there is no reason each stroller needs to be Hummer H1 sized.
Isn't that the truth. The explosion in size and amount of stuff one can cart arount with a baby is amazing. Our out of town trips were a laugh, Grapes of Wrath/Beverly Hillbillies kind of loads. Necessary? Not all of it, but the seats are huge.
I like the idea of the swivel captains chairs in the minivans. I haven't tried them out yet (and I am not willing to go to a minivan w/1 kid) but it does sound like it would ease loading.
I will admit some of the sub compacts answer one or two of these questions. Look at the Versa. Until you see it sitting next to the other sub compacts and realize it solves the room problem by being the size of a compact. Sometimes they solve the power problem by giving you the fuel mileage of a bigger car. They are not sports cars and to be any kind of comfortable for even commuting they aren't designed to drive like sports cars. The Mini might be an exception. So like I said earlier unless fuel mileage is number one on your list or because you simply like small cars because they are small what do they do that a mid sized car can't? At least you can get a mid sized car in a sporty configuration and still fly over expansion joints with little notice.
I can see the charm and with at least two cars a sub compact wouldn't not be scratched off of my list. But as an only car they simply seem too restricting. Not that you can't go on a long road trip with one but can you do it and enjoy the ride getting there?
Most families have at least 2 cars, and in those cases the space is a lot less critical.
My Miata is definitely tight for me, after an hour or two I'm cramped and want to stretch.
I would say that applies to the Mini too, although less so because of design elements like the high window sills that make it feel more restrictive.
I "enjoyed" getting 49 mpg on a couple of trips to San Diego in my Echo. Did I "enjoy" the trip? Yes, as much as I would have enjoyed it in any car. It is more relaxing/coma-inducing to make that drive in a Lincoln Continental (something I have done, don't worry, it was rented) but the gas mileage sucks, the handling sucks once I have to drive around town at my destination, and parking the stupid thing was a major PITA.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I know sub compacts can serve a purpose. I also know there are people that enjoy using the smallest lightest vehicle they can to accomplish the same things larger vehicles do. You see it all the time in camping clubs with travel trailers and RVs. Groups of people will meet somewhere and you will walk by row after row of large comfortable camping vehicles only to come to a family pulling a small teardrop trailer behind a CR-V or even an Accord just because they can. There are always minimalists in the world to a greater of lesser degree than most of the rest of us. All I am pointing out is how easy it is to move beyond the sub compact in today’s world. Yes I agree they can do everything a larger vehicle can do maybe 80 percent of the time. If you are a city dweller and don’t go camping, fishing, hiking, hunting, skiing, or anything that requires taking the whole family and the dog they may be fine for 90 percent of your driving needs. It is just for most of us it is frustrating for the 10 percent of the time when they just won’t fit the bill.
That is why I believe they will always be viewed as entry level vehicles or niche vehicles. They are like starter homes or retirement homes. Necessary but not practical for most of our lives.
That depends very much on the car. To give three different examples, the S2000 has plenty of stretch-out room, but the seats and dash design give it a very closed-in feel and it is a bit of an adventure climbing in and out. The SE-R has about the same stretch room, but the seats go back far enough and dash is small enough to give it an airy feel with piles of open space (it's the only car I've ever had that I didn't put the seat back all the way). The Accent is the same size car as the SE-R inside and out, but the dash is somewhat larger and the seat doesn't go back as far so it ends up about halfway to the S2k on the roominess scale.
I had a chance to sit in an xD a couple of day ago and anyone who says the back seat is small hasn't sat in one or is one very tall person. There is so much legroom with the rear seats moved all the way back I don't see how it could be considered to have small back seats. Granted I didn't drive it but plenty of room in the back seat. My wife likes it but we didn't have time for all the dealer hassle so we just looked at it on the showroom floor. While it doesn't offer as much room as the Fit it's got more comfortable seats. My neighbor has a Fit and i've driven it a few times and it's ok but needs more power on the highway and the seats are just ok, not great for highway driving but it is a City car.
The xD has a high beltline and my wife found she needed a cushion to see out the back, so we are still thinking about it but it was easier to see out of than a civic sedan which even i can't see the nose or the tail from inside. We will drive one when we are closer to buying probably early 2008 when prices have calmed down.
Once I drive it that will tell me a lot. So far my wife likes it. I can't see why it shouldn't be cross shopped with similar cars like the Fit and the Versa. The fit drives nice in the city so we will see how well the xD drive with the 1.8L corolla engine in it.
I had an '86 Chevy Sprint sub-compact, though, while in college, and that thing had TONS of front leg room. Not much of a back seat behind it, but yeah, small cars can still be roomy, at least for the front passengers.
Since there are no aliens invading us (excluding L.A. I mean) we expand our horizons and our needs. By that I mean, rather than choosing what works 95% of the time and fails 5%, we choose cars that are fully utilized only 5% of the time and wasted 95% of the time----e.g., AWD for most Americans, or 3-row seats for most Americans.
So it is what it is and most people are not voluntarily going to "downgrade" in their minds, or in fact.
Since there are no aliens invading us (excluding L.A. I mean) we expand our horizons and our needs. By that I mean, rather than choosing what works 95% of the time and fails 5%, we choose cars that are fully utilized only 5% of the time and wasted 95% of the time----e.g., AWD for most Americans, or 3-row seats for most Americans.
So it is what it is and most people are not voluntarily going to "downgrade" in their minds, or in fact.
I don't think the xD is going to motivate people to do so. My AWD Legacy gets better rated mileage, as does my Accord. There is no real price for the added utility. I would like something like a CRX personally. 40-50 mpg in a really fun, lightweight and sporty package that doesn't pretend to hold more than a couple people.
So it is what it is and many people WILL voluntarily "downgrade" in their minds, and in fact. :sick:
james
$82/barrel seems like a lot, but the dollar itself is very, very weak right now, so a lot of that is plain ol' inflation.
Traffic was extremely heavy this morning so I'd be delighted to see more people finding gas prices revoltingly high and using other alternatives.
The Insight could have been that but with 60-70 mpg. I heard Honda might redo the Insight as a slightly more practical vehicle.
A normal looking one could have been a practical hatch with lots of cargo space.