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, it had already occurred to me that when I go back to test drive a manual-shift Yaris hatch, I will also ask to test drive an xA so as to get the true back-to-back perspective, not only for the relative driving experience but also interior space and versatility.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I think that I could get used to them pretty quick. I already was during the test drive. The Yaris also has center-mounted guages.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Drive an xA too, they're a great little car (my wife hated the looks of 'em though, so I had to scratch it off the list.)
Todd in Beerbratistan
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
Todd in Beerbratistan
My dealer finally has '06 Accents, however, and I can't believe how similar it looks to the Yaris sedan - it's like the two copied each other. Even the plastic wheel covers look similar!
He also still has four '05 Accents, all sticks without A/C, all stickered at $10,544. I figure with a bit of arm-twisting he might sell them for $9000, as the '05 model year falls further and further behind us and he stocks more and more '06s on the lot. I wonder........of course, you take one look at the '06, and you don't want to settle for the old model any more at any price.
kyfdx: yes, the Yaris is either a 3-door hatch or a 4-door sedan. There is no 5-door, because of the xA. But if you don't care about the power package or ABS, you can save $1000 plus whatever discount you can negotiate by going with the Yaris.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Todd in Beerbratistan
The only thing of any value is the tachometer anyway...idiot lights and a speedometer aren't much fun to look at.....maybe I'll just get an aftermarket tach and mount it like on the old Corvette (left side of steering wheel) and just remove the other instruments completely and turn it into luggage space :P YOu can tell speed from the tach and by the time the red "temp light" goes on the engine is probably toast anyway....
Okay, maybe a side pillar mounted temp gauge...
I liked the dash layout and all the other controls in the xA but, for some reason, I kept pressing the wrong button on the steering wheel while trying to change the radio station or turn the volume up! I'd get used to that, too. It would drive me nuts until I did so I most certainly would!
The little xA's motor revs kind of loud when pushed but since I drive Kia's that didn't bother me a bit. It picks up and moves pretty well once you give it ample gas. A fun little car to drive. Like I've said, it inspires me to want to drive it more. Sort of like micweb's comments regarding the Scion xA he used to have, the little cube pulls you to want to drive it some more.
Funny thing about that, the first stick I drove was my Dad's 1966 VW Fastback and that little car was great fun to drive, too. It had the same effect on me, I would look forward to driving it. Even more so than my first car, a 1965 Ford Mustang. I just like small cars and driving them.
Hence, my disfavor regarding American cars of late.
Who likes the partly-American Dodge Caliber? Seems to be the real thing from reviews so far.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
But then, the Caliber is not a subcompact - it's at least as big as the HHR, isn't it?
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Todd in Beerbratistan
The '06 Hyundai Accent took a long time to arrive, too. It's a silver one, but an automatic tranny, so it immediately had to be dismissed from my further consideration, though.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Todd in Beerbratistan
As for the HHR, I like the looks of it except for one thing...the location of the front axle, which is a symptom of its FWD layout. Instead of being better proportioned like the 1953 or so Suburban it's trying to evoke memories of, it kinda reminds me of some of those cement mixers or dumptrucks that look like conventional cab models, but are what's called a "set back front axle" design.
If it were a tossup between the PT Cruiser and the HHR, I think I'd still go with the PT. The HHR might actually be a bit bigger inside, but something about it just feels more claustrophic to me. And while they've both got tons of hard plastic on the inside, I just prefer the grain of the Chrysler's hard plastic to that of GM's.
We had a PT until last summer and enjoyed it. Never gave us a problem and the transformable interior was very useful. However, ours was a 01 before the turbo, and was horribly underpowered. MPG suffered as well.
2024 Jeep Grand Cherokee L Limited Velvet Red over Wicker Beige
2024 Audi Q5 Premium Plus Daytona Gray over Beige
2017 BMW X1 Jet Black over Mocha
If it is as good in reliablilty as in style and design, it should be nice.
Turboshadow
I think the GEMA "World Engine" will be a solid powerplant, depending on how well the makers that use it implement it (it gets DCX's own heads for the Caliber).
Todd in Beerbratistan
But even here we are talking about cars larger than what I think a sub compact is. And what is the comment most often made by responding posters. Lots of room and a better interior than we expected for a low priced car. That in a nut shell may be the biggest problem a sub compact has to overcome. The public's perception of what to expect in a sub compact and the manufacturers tendency to offer very little in comfort features. In the Caliber it looks like they took a shot but it isn't what most consider a Sub Compact. Interesting that they are offering as CVT in it however.
My MAJOR objection with the Neon was that I have had o return two out of the last three to rental agencies due to the failure of the hose between the radiator and the engine (on vehicles with UNDER 2K miles). That is a problem that SHOULD HAVE BEEN caught at the end of the assembly line.
And the 1.8 and 2.0 in the lower trims of the Caliber are both the direct result of the Hyundai/Mitsu/DCX team-up for a world engine. At least that's what I read.
Yarii are already selling well! :-)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Todd in Beerbratistan
<175": subcompact
175-185": compact
185-205": midsize
205+": full-size
However, those sizes are more a result of the ranges that most cars tended to fall at the time, moreso than any set-in-stone thresholds. Once cars started getting taller and wider, with longer wheelbases, and less bumper overhang, distinctions really got blurred.
Another rough rule-of-thumb I used to use was shoulder room, and went something like...
<52": subcompact
52-56": compact
56-60": midsize
60+": fullsize
Naturally, there would be some overlap here and there.
Nowadays though, most cars have bucket seats, and very few cars, IMO, can comfortably seat 3 across, so shoulder room probably isn't as critical of a measurement as it used to be.
Mini Compact: Under 85
Sub Compact 85 – 99
Compact: 100 – 109
Midsize: 110 – 119
Large: 120 or more
I’m not sure if the same measurements apply to hatchbacks, but if they did, cars like Honda Fit (90.1 cu ft + 21.3 cu ft = 111.4 cu ft) would actually qualify to be a midsize vehicle!
Of course, EPA classifies "station wagons" differently:
Small: Less than 130 cu ft
Midsize: 130 - 159 cu ft
Large: 160 cu ft or more
Some of those interior volumes can also be a bit misleading, because a car that's narrow, but tall, can feel more cramped inside than a car that's wide but low. For example, my buddy's 1978 Mark V was actually classified as a midsized car! I forget the exact measurements, but I think its interior volume is something like 99 cubic feet, while trunk space is around 18 cubic feet. However, it's wide enough inside that the back seat could probably hold three across better than most modern-day cars could. I've sat back there, and while it's not expansive, I could fit back there much better than in some supposedly full-sized modern cars such as the Impala. Plus, have more stretch out room in the front seats!
Nowadays there's a very fine line between most midsized and full-sized cars. Back in, say, 1980, your typical full-sizer had around 110-112 cubic feet of interior volume, while you're typical intermediate was around 100-102 cubic feet. Trunks on the midsizers back then were around 15-17 cubic feet, compared to a good 20+ for the full-sized cars.
These days though, many midsized cars are pushing 102-103 cubic feet (Accord, Altima, '06 and earlier Camry) with trunks still around 15-17 cubic feet. But many full-sized cars these days are around 104-106 cubic feet, with trunks maybe 16-18 cubic feet, so the distinction has been blurred.
It's just that, back in the day, what constituted a big car was well over the threshold, while what was considered a midsize was often borderline full-sized.
Personally I think that 120 cubic foot threshold is a bit low. For example, a 2000 Taurus is considered a full-sized car! IIRC, the interior volume is 104 cubic feet and the trunk is 17. However, the 1996-1999 was a midsized car, with someting like 101 cubic feet of interior, and 16 cubic feet of trunk. For 2000, they raised the roof, giving it more headroom in the back, at least at the point they measure it. And the reskinning gave it a higher decklid.
However, I still can't sit in the back seat of a Taurus without my head coming into contact with the side curvature of the C-pillar, so that extra supposed headroom is as useless as it ever was. Unless I want to lean inward at an uncomfortable angle. In many cases, these seemingly generous interior volumes are just an example of an inflated number that translates into very little useable space.
I'd be kinda curious to see what kind of interior volume my '76 LeMans is rated at. But I don't think the EPA started measuring interior volume until 1978, and by then the LeMans and its siblings had been downsized. Just going by feel, to me it fits a bit better than a modern Impala up in front, and about as bad in the back seat (I can't fit in either), but the sloping decklid and full-sized spare cut down trunk space alot. The sedans were bigger in the back seat, but I wonder if the coupe would have been small enough to be classed as a compact?
21.3 cu ft: With rear seats up
41.9 cu ft: With rear seats down
Legroom (F/R, in.) 41.9/33.7
Shoulder room (F/R, in.) 52.8/50.6
Hip room (F/R, in.) 51.2/51.0
Passenger volume (cu. ft.) 90.1
Cargo volume (Std./Max, cu. ft.) 21.3/41.9
For example, if you take the following formula...
(front headroom X front shoulder room X front legroom)/1728 + (rear headroom X rear shoulder room X rear legroom)/1728,
you end up with 90.1 (1728 is the number of cubic inches in a cubic foot)
I've done this formula with a variety of other cars, and have always come close, like within a foot or two, of the dimensions the EPA and other sources publish.
It's an inexact science at best, because it doesn't take into account intrusions by the wheel wells, tranny/driveshaft/exhaust hump, (or that right-side catalytic converter hump so many RWD 70's and 80's cars had) or the curvature of the sides of the car, or the curvature of the roof, how far in the dash protrudes, etc.
Still, on the subject of the Fit, I remember sitting in one at the Philly auto show, and it did seem pretty well laid-out and space efficient. And I could fit in the back of it better than I could an '06 Impala. Or '76 LeMans coupe!
When we talk about subcompacts here, I think we are referring as much to an intuitive notion of passenger room as we are to EPA definitions. The Fit will definitely be a subcompact. The cargo area is cute and small when the back seats are up - you won't be putting much back there, and the rear seat passengers have their heads not far from the rear hatch glass.
But if you are willing to stack your stuff all the way to the roof, and it is squishable, I guess technically you will have more cargo space than the trunks of even the very largest cars! :-)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
And in most cases, anything that you stacked up above the level of the seatback is going to be unstable, and just waiting to bean your backseat passengers. Or YOU, if you nail the brakes hard enough!
That being said though, I'll admit that I have loaded up the back seat of notchback-style cars to the point that I couldn't see out the back, and if I had to stop suddenly...well, I just made sure I didn't have any silverware aimed at the back of my head! :P
my wife still wishes that she had a Chevette to haul junk in ...
Hard to argue with 40 to the gallon in a car as refined and well-built as any other Toyota off the line.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Todd in Beerbratistan
I don't agree. I thinkl that you are going to see more cars vs. SUVs but I don't see people rushing out to buy vehicles that are cramped and very uncomfortable. The Fit and the Yari make the Echo look spacious in comparison.
Besides, unless you do an awful lot of driving and fuel prices shoot through the roof, the difference between a car that gets 30 mpg on the highway versus one that gets 40 really isn't that vast. If gas shoots to $3.00 per gallon, then for every 10,000 miles you drive, a car that gets 30 mpg would cost you about $250 more than one that gets 40 mpg. And depending on the driver, the sacrifice in comfort might not be worth it.
I think your comment is very typical of the knee-jerk reaction some people that are used to large cars, have to small cars. For one, the Fit has not yet been available to drive, which is the best way to get a feel for how much space you have, and how much comfort is present or lacking. The Echo is quite spacious inside, as is the Yaris. Will you take a family of six to Disneyland in one? Definitely not. Can you commute in it in comfort, as well as carry 2 or 3 passengers from time to time in the same? Oh yes, quite definitely.
There are small-car people and large-car people, and from reading Edmunds for years now, it appears to me that "never the twain shall meet". Which is fine. But don't ASSUME that small-car people are settling for uncomfortable, cramped rides just because small cars are not your thing. I certainly would not willingly drive a cramped uncomfortable car.
andre: Yes, but "highway" mileage is not what most people are achieving week in and week out in their cars. They are usually pulling somewhere close to the city EPA number. In an Avalon, I think most folks would be lucky to average 25, unless they were concentrating on getting good mileage. 25 vs 37 is a 1/3 gas savings driving the more frugal car. 1/3 can add up quickly if you drive a normal amount and gas gets to $3/gallon again.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I like a driving position where I can really stretch out, which is usually your typical big car driving position. But to me, the Focus feels like driving an old pickup truck. Seat's kinda high up, but you're close to the cowl with not much stretch-out room for your legs.
As it is, even in my Intrepid I'll start feeling cramped and fidgety after driving for about a half-hour. In something like my uncle's Corolla, I'm just glad I never had to drive it more than maybe 5-6 miles because I'm uncomfortable the moment I get behind the wheel. I know we've had that discussion before though, about how the Corolla's seating position isn't the most optimal for the driver.
I'll admit I kinda liked the new Civic, though; it felt pretty comfy up front for me. And the Mazda3 and Cobalt fit me well up front, although you wouldn't be able to put anybody in the back seat behind me in either of those two.
Funny thing, I drive a lot of old 60s cars and you'd be amazed how cramped soe of them are for their gigantic size.
How'd that happen. Well it's a classic case of good design....a good design starts with the inside of the car and works out, and a bad design does it the other way.
Rocky
For the time though, the Dart was a model of space efficiency. The '68 sedan had more front and rear legroom than the '68 Impala, a full-size. And they were better laid out inside, IMO, at least, than any 70's compact to follow. They'd probably be classified as midsized today though, so the "compact" moniker is a bit of a misnomer.
Now yeah, a '68 Dart is a lot bigger than a Scion or any small car today. It's less space efficient in the sense that, say you get a car that's 50% bigger on the outside yet only 25% bigger on the inside. However, space efficiency, "good design", etc are just marketing buzzwords when the reality hits you that for all the hoopla, the car that's "good design" just doesn't fit you!
I distinctly remember hitting my head on the roof of a '71 Dodge Dart, and of course we won't talk ergonomics or the "three on the tree" shifter. On the other hand, if you need to stuff a few bodies in your trunk, an xA isn't going to handle that but a Dart sure :P would.
My vote for the most intelligently designed 60s American car? You'll laugh... a 1965 Corvair 4-door hardtop!
And I'd like the big, squashy seats. There are few things I hate more than a car with narrow seats where it feels like my [non-permissible content removed] and shoulders are spilling over the sides. Now if I were built like Rosie O'Donnell or Oprah on one of her upswings, I wouldn't have room to complain because I'd probably be spilling out over any type of seat, but I'm actually on the skinny side!
That's one reason why I don't like the Toyota Tundra...its tiny seats. It's like they took the seats out of something tiny like a Corolla and put them in a 5/6 full sized truck!