Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
Actually, I'd say the S2000 is about the worst of those little 2-seater toys when it comes to interior room. At least, for my 6'3" frame. It was hard to get into and out of, and I recall the footwells were really poorly shaped. So not only was legroom bad, but so was footroom. I thought the Solstice/Sky were much more comfy and roomy, and the Miata comfier still.
Overall, I was disapointed, because I think the S2000 is the best looking of that bunch, then the Solstice/Sky, and finally the Miata.
I remember some little Hyundai I sat in at the DC auto show, probably an Accent. It was a little 2-door hatchback. Kind of a grubby little thing, but I was downright shocked at how roomy it was. The way that front seat went back, it was in the same league as some of the biggest dreadnaughts of the 70's. Now granted, the car was narrow inside, and putting the seat all the way back turned it into essentially a 2-seater, but I was still impressed with that legroom.
I have noticed though that newer Nissans, like the Sentra and Versa, seem to have the dash moved a bit further away, which gives the illusion of an airier interior, but there's just not much legroom up under the dash. So for me, they look more comfy than they really are. Although they are improving. A few years back, one of my friends had a Sentra as a rental car, maybe an '02 or '03. Miserable, uncomfortable little thing that really bucked the theory that these things have ADVANCED over the years. I mean, it wasn't Gremlin-bad. Maybe Omni/Rizon bad? :P
So it is what it is and many people WILL voluntarily "downgrade" in their minds, and in fact.
james
Downgrade from what to what though? Going from an Expedition to an Accord, for instance, I could see. That would double your effective MPGs and be easier to maneuver around town. Going from a comfortable midsize car that gets 28mpg to a tinny box with no sound proofing to get 31 is unlikely.
The tinny econobox will get 32 at least.
Just kiddin', I actually prefer small cars.
Fair 'nuff.
(15,000 mi/yr)/28 mpg = 536 gallons/year
(15,000 mi/yr)/31 mpg = 484 gallons/year
536-484=52 gallons/year
52 gallons/year * $3/gallon = $155/year
For reference:
Starbucks Cafe Mocha = ~$3.75
SCM * 3/week *50 weeks = ~$560
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
At 40 mpg and $3 gas, I save more than $20 for every 20 gallons I put in vs that hypothetical 25 mpg car. That's enough to be significant for me.
But also, my car fits in parking spots marked "compact", and lately I come across more and more of those. Big cars turn so wide and handle so poorly...
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Mine doesn't follow rain grooves, but when I go across bridges with metal decks it does wiggle around some....
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I don't agree. I think that there are a lot of people who make judgments of people on what car they drive. Personally, I don't care what I drive and I hang with a lot of non-car (and some anti-car) people.
Most salesmen are expected to maintain newer vehicles when visiting clients. The industry that you work in will usually dictate the model that you purchase.
I even had a kid in my Junior Achievement class ask me if I was successful in my career ... because I had a Ford Tempo (and he had a new Mustang).
There might be that first shallow impression but either the person has charisma and persuasive qualities or not---and once they engage another individual, their car image melts away...or...perhaps their horrible personality re-inforces the prejudice of a Geo Metro. :P
I think the man makes the car, not the car makes the man.
At 40 mpg and $3 gas, I save more than $20 for every 20 gallons I put in vs that hypothetical 25 mpg car. That's enough to be significant for me.
But also, my car fits in parking spots marked "compact", and lately I come across more and more of those. Big cars turn so wide and handle so poorly...
Yeah I was kind of more aiming my argument at a subcompact vs a midsize than a subcompact vs a large. I think if you drive a Crown Vic or something, that is a different scenario, but my Accord will fit in a space marked compact (and not overhang the rear line) and so far has been in the mid-30s for mpg. I drive about 10k/yr so the 5-6 mpg doesn't affect me much.
I also didn't care for the handling of the Echo or Corolla. I tested low trim levels of each and the wallowing on the highway and the tippy feeling on corners was unsettling to me. And then there was the pesky baby seat issue.
You must have a very good Echo my friend. I had to ride with one of my old assistants to Palmdale from San Bernardino. Out on the highway heading to Four corners the road is two lanes and the speed limit it 65. Big trucks passing the other way almost blasted us off the road. It was a bit windy I agree but you knew the echo was, shall we say, more spirited, than our Focus in the same conditions. I was up in the same area a week before in a new Equinox and we hardly noticed the passing trucks. We even had room for a cooler between us still had a place for each to place a hot or cold drink. But we did not get 40 MPG in the Chevy.
If I drop the speed down to around 55, it's pretty stable...but if say I'm duking it out with a semi going over a bridge or in a tunnel, it feels like I'm in propwash.
Best thing is to slow down and keep the wheel real loose in your hands...this puts more weight on the front wheels and I let them do the work.
Yes, they are close enough to the front seats for the kids to kick them if they want. I ask them not to and they don't. No prob.
Yeah, boaz, the Echo does get buffeted quite a bit by passing trucks on the highway. I rarely get passed by trucks, usually I am the one passing. Even at 75 mph, this car has plenty of get-up-and-go to go faster.
Hey lilengineer, do you really pull low 30s mpg regularly in your Accord? Like, in town, commuting and running errands? That's pretty good, even for a 4-cyl Accord.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Yeah, its funny, the old one (93) was a little better, but this one seems to be above 30 at all times. My commute is mostly highway or superslab, so its not stop and go. I typically accelerate very gently but continue accelerating until I reach my cruising speed, which can be above posted limits from time to time.
What is incredible is I can usually get in the low 30s with the Legacy wagon, and that is rated at like 30 highway. Of course I have to train myself not to look at the slightly optimistic MPG read out display thing while I am trying to drive...
The '93 Civic was our mileage champ as it would stay in the low 40s on my wife's commute. It had great ride quality, handled really well, and was fun, zippy and light. It was also very durable and at 180k it was still on its original clutch. While I don't miss that car, I miss that style, but still, that would be a compact not a sub-compact.
Go to Brazil and rent a car for a week. You'll probably get a Fiat Palio, a car the size of an Aveo, basically.
It works there because all the other cars are that size. Here an Aveo seems tinny next to that Suburban you're sharing the road with.
In Brazil, the same car would be fine, you fit right in. Gas costs a fortune (especially to someone with a Brazilian income). Parking spaces are ALL compact.
My mom drives a Fit, also considered a "carro popular", i.e. standard size car.
One brother drives a Focus sedan, which seems big there, and the other a Civic, with leather and all, considered a mid/premium car.
They all get by just fine with that transportation. My brothers have 2-3 kids, and probably travel more miles than I do. They buy more groceries because they have maids and nannies.
It can be done, but it's not easy to make Americans feel safe in the land of giant tractor trailers.
Europe has smaller, narrower roads, so like Brazil there are more incentives for driving a smaller car.
It seems that incentives of some sort or another always have to operate in any "downsizing"...that's why wrist watches don't weigh 6 pounds and why NY city apartments are so small.
But "upsizing" isn't rational in most cases.
There are built-in "incentives" to drive small cars in other countries:
* expensive gas (compared to income)
* narrow roads
* small parking spaces
* everyone else drives small cars
* trucks aren't double-SEMI in size
* taxes on car/engine size
* issues with "image" - i.e. cheap hatchback
* driving distances are often shorter
What I mean by that last one is that Texas alone is probably close to the size of all of Europe.
So with all those lacking here in the US, small cars have an uphill battle. They need some sort of perks or incentives to get more people interested in them.
Here in DC/MD, they talked about closing Rock Creek Park, which is used by a lot of commuters. My idea was to allow only PZEVs, hybrids, Smart cars, etc. Maybe HOV as well, so at least the big cars were being well utilized.
How about lower cost compact parking spots, too? Parking costs $233 in my garage. What about a $150 spot for subcompacts? Every little bit helps.
How are you breaking 40 mpg AND driving the car hard at the same time? :confuse: Unless the EPA under-rated those cars? The one time I checked fuel economy on my uncle's '03 Corolla, I got 37.4, just about pure highway, going up to PA and back. Its EPA highway rating is 38. And I wasn't exactly pushing it hard. I'd say I averaged 65-70, with an occasional jaunt to 80 where it was warranted. I actually made it a point to drive it a bit more gently, since it wasn't my car.
Or is it just possible somehow that you can flog a manual-shift car harder without a drop in fuel economy, whereas an automatic-tranny car would guzzle more?
I definitely think that is true. Both of our cars are sticks, and both regularly beat the EPA estimates.
First NYC used the passive system of merely punishing all cars unilaterally, making car ownership in New York City a living hell.
But apparently, human beings, being so adaptable, were able to adjust to Hell by either bribing the devil for a parking spot or being content to play the parking game for hours each day.
Now New York is planning more active forms of punishment, such as levies to enter the inner city area (like London does).
So in America it seems that financial incentives are the only recourse at the moment.
Of course in the Wide Open Spaces, this is not necessary, since traffic, etc are not issues. In the wild west, the only dis-incentive to big cars is fuel prices.
That would be a drag except for the fact that it is so light that it's zippy anyway.
Magazine editors always get crappy gas mileage. I'm sure part of the reason is that they do instrumented track testing on every car they drive and include those drives in the cumulative fuel economy rating. Not to mention, they get paid to explore the outer bounds of a car's power and handling, so that's how the cars are driven all the time.
Hey juice, I thought Brazilians drove almost exclusively on homegrown ethanol so gas was really cheap there?
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
We've just come back from a week in Ireland. We rented a Focus and fit right in, just as we would have done anywhere else in Europe. When we come to the USA we rent something appropriate. February in Arizona we had a Durango - and fit right in. Gas price didn't even enter the equation; it's so - comparatively - cheap.
Not sure about USA trucks vs European trucks. Your tractor units are certainly longer but Europe has strict overall-length regulations for trucks which is why most are relatively compact cabovers. Our MGW is 44 tonnes but I don't know how that compares to USA. Would be interested to know, though.
Yes, USA could convert to compacts and subcompacts but the reverse is not viable in Europe. Will USA go this route ? Some folks have and others will, no doubt, but I can't see any mass swing anytime soon.
Horses for courses is the phrase that comes to mind.
I told him Yosemite was a half-day trip and he'd better fill up that tank he was driving...he looked at the gas pump and squinted at the price per gallon. Little wheels went off in his head and he turned to me and said: "This is no money at all".
I guess "bargains" are just as much mental constructs as anything else in the universe :P
If you look at things realistically just look at how many people move to the US and adopt our lifestyle, including the cars and trucks we drive and compare it to the number of Americans moving to South America or Europe and adopting their lifestyle. Some say it isn't rational yet how many desire what we already have?
I was in Europe about two years ago and maybe it is because I am from California I believe we have a much nicer selection of vehicles to choose from that they do. I know we have a better selection than England and I don't know how anyone drives in London. With their public transportation I don't know why anyone needs to drive in London. But they did have some exotics I don't see that often unless I am in New Port Beach of Santa Monica.
The biggest question is why should we restrict ourselves to Sub Compacts if we as a nation are successful enough to not have to? If part of our success as a nation allows us leverage to force fuel prices into a place where we can drive bigger cars and if our road system is designed to accomodate larger vehicles why shouldn't we take advantage of it?
It isn't as if we need to suffer with other nations because their government can't provide fuel to them at the prices we pay. It isn't as if we aren't generous to a fault when a disaster hits those same countries and Americans have to share some of their excess with them. We have designed our roads to make us more mobile than Europe and Asia. We have a better standard of living that allows us more freedom in our vehicle choices than Europe and Asia. When we buy a vehicle it is often based on what we earn and can afford. It is part of the American work ethnic. If we work hard we do so to afford more. Even if in reality we often work hard just to survive.
The mindset is different here. In Europe it is easy to understand that if a vehicle is used 90 percent of the time to make a living then there is no reason to use any more of those living expenses to finance the extra 10 percent of you vehicle use on pleasure. So you make do with with what you need the most. We don't live to work as much as they do. We work to live and living includes our free time. 28 percent of our week is free time and we buy vehicles to reflect what we hope to do in that free time. It simply doesn't matter if we in fact do use that vehicle for the things we planned or not. That may be why the after market for cars and trucks is so much more profitable here than in Europe.
So I totally understand why some people would prefer a vehicle like Nippon. I was once very impressed with the Metro as a commuter car. 50 MPG was hard to laugh at. 20 years ago the VW Rabbit diesel got close to 50 MPG. It was slow but got great fuel mileage. But given the choice it is easier and seems more rational to spend any discretionary income on making your life more comfortable than it is to be more frugal so that others can be more comfortable.
Nowadays all they are is "small"...they don't give anything else up to bigger cars. You can have leather, NAV, power seats, whatever you want.
Did I miss the memo about 2 hour lunches and taking August off? (link)
Now almost the opposite is happening - over-optioned cars are the rule at higher prices. I wish I could get a 528 today with the basics, strip out all the things that I don't need, and that are causing repair headaches for many brands.
Nowadays all they are is "small"...they don't give anything else up to bigger cars. You can have leather, NAV, power seats, whatever you want.
This isn't 10 years ago, but more like 15...but I had a '91 Civic 4-door for a rental. I have to admit, for a such a small car it was really nice. Yeah, it was teeny compared to the types of cars I was used to, but it was good enough to give me a new respect for small cars. And I put about 1500 miles on that thing in the space of a week. So if it had been an uncomfortable rattletrap trust me, I would have noticed!
I think small cars have come a long way in some respects since those days. For example, that Civic had trouble going over 75-80 mph, unless you either held 3rd gear manually to get it past that sticking spot and then shifted back into overdrive around 85-90, or found a long enough downhill grade. I'd imagine that ANY car sold in the States these days could easily hit 100, unless it's got some kind of limiter. And fuel economy...I only got about 29 mpg out of that car, in mostly highway driving. Okay, so there was one jaunt up to 100, and another up to 115, and some downtown LA driving and such. But nowadays, my Intrepid would probably get close to that economy, and my uncle's Corolla might get 37 or so.
But in some ways they have cheapened. My uncle's Corolla, despite being larger, is not as comfortable as I found that Civic to be. Now okay, I'm also 15 years older now, but the Corolla just has that awful driving position. The Corolla has a much more comfortable back seat though. As I recall, putting the front seat all the way back in that Civic turned the back seat into an upholstered package shelf. They also use a lot more hard plastic these days, and cheaper cuts of fabric and carpet. I guess the stuff might actually be more durable, in a PlaySkool sort of way, but it's just not as attractive, comfortable to the touch, etc.
Also, isn't leather still somewhat of a rarity with small cars? I don't think the Civic or Corolla offer it, and I think the only way to get a Cobalt with it is to get the SS model.
I also wonder if the leather they'd use in these small cars would be low-rent stuff, like when they started putting leather in Ford and Chevies and stuff. I remember the first time I saw a Caprice with leather, maybe around 1987, it had this cheap, thin, greasy-looking, Hefty-bag quality to it.
With some of these cheap grades of leather, they'd almost be better off going with a high quality "leatherette", like what you can get in the Aveo. I saw one of those at the auto show, and I didn't even know it was fake until I read the window sticker!
Oh, ages ago, a buddy of mine had a 1980 Accord hatchback. Quality-wise, the car was a piece of junk. But I found it to be very comfy. Now the back seat was unuseable, but it was great for just two people up front. And the driver's comfort is the most important. It almost seemed like in those older examples, like the 1980 Accord and 1991 Civic, they were focusing on the driver's comfort, where with today's cars they're forcing you to compromise. You usually get a more useable back seat, but at the expense of some front seat travel.
How hard it is, anyway, to adjust a seat track? You'd think that it wouldn't be that expensive to just give the tracks another inch or two of travel. With some cars though, I guess that could put the steering wheel out of reach. And a telescope feature would add to the cost.
What about the opposite, i.e. an incentive for small cars? Rather than disincentives for all cars, period. How 'bout a pass for tiny 2 seaters, PZEVs, hybrids, HOV cars, etc.? That's my idea. Make them exempt from this levy.
alltorque: "Gas price didn't even enter the equation; it's so - comparatively - cheap"
Bingo. I thought someone was going to complain about $3 gas, but let's not forget inflation has the dollar very weak right now. $3 ain't what it used to be.
Gas is cheap. You know what's expensive? Milk! We use 6 gallons a week, at about $4 per gallon. Ouch. I used to get a half gallon when I lived alone, for under a buck, and it would usually spoil before I ran out.
shifty: "modern subcompacts are a galaxy away from the miserable little tin cans from the past"
So true. I went to test drive a Kia Sedona a while ago, and sat in a Spectra in the showroom while I waited.
Wow. This is an econobox? College kids have it easy, I tell ya. It's actually pretty nice. Far from the penalty boxes I remember from 1986, the year I started college.
The catch? Manufacturers have no real incentive to push these models as they're just not as profitable as the big cars.
I doubt my levy-exempt status for little cars would be about as unpopular, politically. It's taboo to do anything pro-car.
* A/C was an option
* if you were lucky, AM/FM was standard, cassette optional
* power what? power nothing, not even steering
* right passenger side mirror - optional, pay up sucker
* pardon those plastic (vinyl) seats
* 4 speed manual transmission
I still think that way when I hear "econobox".
This is popular with the cyclists and greenies etc but the motorists are not happy bunnies.
Coming soon to a city near you.
My '82 Accord had power brakes...
and.. a 5-speed, with cloth interior...
Everything else is right on the money... The right-hand mirror... that was the one that really got me...
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
Brazilians drive almost exclusively on homegrown ethanol because regular gas is really expensive there.
Visibility - optional?
alltorque: I would not be opposed to such a tax in DC, and to be honest, that might just be the kick in the pants I would need to get a PZEV, Smart ForTwo, hybrid, or whatever.
Well, I'd replace the Miata, so maybe a Smart Roadster. What's that one tuned by Brabus? :shades:
* A/C was an option
* if you were lucky, AM/FM was standard, cassette optional
* power what? power nothing, not even steering
* right passenger side mirror - optional, pay up sucker
* pardon those plastic (vinyl) seats
* 4 speed manual transmission
I still think that way when I hear "econobox".
Honestly though, most cars were like that back in those days. Even on my grandparents' 1985 Buick LeSabre, you had to pay extra for a/c. IIRC, it was something like $650 for manual and $795 for automatic climate control. I think an AM radio was standard, but it may have had FM, too. If you wanted stereo, or a tape deck, or an equalizer, you had to pay extra...ridiculously extra.
Power steering and brakes were standard, but they'd be mandatory on a car that size. You DON'T want a disc-brake car that size without a power assist! Still, power windows, seats, door locks, antenna, trunk release, mirrors, that was all optional. A right side mirror may have been standard by that time, but good luck adjusting it without power. At least with a small car you could reach over there, adjust, then sit back and if it wasn't where you needed it, try again.
Now it did have pretty nice seats. In base form they were cloth, and in Limited trim they were this really nice, plush velour. Hell, they don't make cloth that nice NOWADAYS!. These days, you automatically jump to leather for an upgraded interior.
The transmission was automatic, but was just a 3-speed. If you bought the V-8 (which was a really good idea in a car this size) then they forced you to get the 4-speed, which was around $150.
In 1985, I think the only cars that would've had a/c standard were Lincolns, Caddies, the 5th Ave, and pricier Buick/Olds cars like the Electra/98 and Riviera/Toronado. I think when they shrunk the LeSabre/88 for 1986 though, a/c was standard, and as the 80's wore on it became standard on more and more cars.
2008 Brabus fortwo
As you say; you can afford to enjoy the cars/lifestyle that you do and we can only envy you that. Enjoy it whilst you can..............which I hope will be a long time.
Would people give up their cars or just pay it and move on? I don't know London well enough to know what kind of income levels there are in that area.
Isn't this all part of King Livingston's plan to ban the car from the greater London area?
My '89 Galant lacked AC but had a nice 6 speaker AM/FM Cassette, power steering, power brakes, defrost, and mirrors on both sides (I think that was a requirement when I was shopping). Oh and 185/70R14s with cheesy but durable wheel covers.
The '92 Impulse had power mirrors and an AM/FM radio but no AC. I liked that it had a wiper for the rear hatch, and intermittent on all of them. It had 185/60R14 tires and was pretty fun to drive - at least until SB Honda killed it. It was a wagon-back and we called it the Flying Snail.
All of those cars got phenomenal mileage even at extra-legal speeds.
I think my Chevy Sprint had 12" wheels.
It was the upscale model, so it actually had luxury options like cloth, power steering, and even a right-side mirror! I was livin' in luxury, baby.