What is "wrong" with these new subcompacts?

w9cw

I bought a 2006 Hyundai Elantra last December, and just for grins took it in for an appraisal two weeks ago. The dealer offered me $12,500 ACV for the car, and I originally paid $13,750 including TTL in Dec 2005. Not bad, I thought regardless of marque. The Elantra included a $1K rebate from Hyundai at time of purchase, plus I got an exceptional deal from a dealer in Downers Grove, IL. The private party sale price according to Edmunds.com is $12,750. The car only has 3500 miles on it at the present time. I paid cash for the vehicle, thus required no financing.

tjw1308

In three years, a Toyota will be worth more (even in percentage to what you paid) than a 3 year old Hyundai.

Azera, Accent, Elantra, Santa Fe... Doesn't matter. Take a comparable Toyota, add three years, and it holds it's value better.

It may not be as pronounced in a less expensive car like the Accent, but don't think for a minute it isn't accurate.

I know there are a lot of good Hyundai salespeople out there... but sheesh

As for someone that has a problematic Toyota... hey, it happens. It doesn't happen a lot, or statistically as much as with Hyundai, but they aren't flawless. Even Lexus advertises the relentless "Pursuit" of perfection

T

snakeweasel

plus I got an exception deal from a dealer in Downers Grove, IL.

I know that dealer, I bought my cars from them. Very good dealer whith good prices.

tjw1308

That's not bad at all. Of course, I'd hope that almost any car with only 3500 miles and still in the current model year (even though they have 2007's, they still have 2006's as new) would bring as close to invoice as possible.

That's still pretty impressive.

I would have inked up :P

T

w9cw

Hi "snake" - great dealer Pugi. BTW . . . I got the following quotes on another Hyundai for the family this week from them.

2007 Sonata GLS Automatic with Premium Package and Carpet Floor/Trunk Mats (2.4L DOHC I4 only for 2007 for this trim level), $16,194

2007 Sonata Limited Automatic (3.3L DOHC V6) No Options (none needed really!), but Carpet Floor/Trunk Mats, $18,465

Includes applicable rebates and doc fees, but not TTL of course. Still a good buy on either . . .

I know this is off topic here, but if you want a good deal on a Hyundai, Mazda, or VW this dealer is top-notch in every respect.

And, to reply to the other poster, obviously either a Honda or Toyota will have superior resale in 3 years, but that's a moot point for me. I keep my cars for "at least" a decade. In fact, two of my SAABs are 19 and 21 years old respectively. Still going strong, along with my 12 year old Grand Caravan ES, and 36 year old Volvo 144S . . .

Finally, I'm not a Hyundai salesperson, nor am I associated with Hyundai in any way other than owning one. I'm in the national consumer electronics magazine publishing business.

stickguy

Well, my 15 1/2 YO son (who is already taking driver's ed in school, which is making my sweat just thinking about it) wants a Fit, although I imagine if I offered him my Accord he would take it.

Of course, he isn't getting either one, but at least the boy can dream. Plan A is still talking his grandmother out of her 1995 100K Saturn. But, at least it is a stick!

plekto

The best car the get a new first-time driver is without a doubt a 1993 Volvo 240 Wagon.

Safe, solid, slightly retro looking, can haul stuff, and of course, you can get one for very little money in mint condition. And - they came in stickshift as well.

snakeweasel

When I was a first time driver I was happy to have a car that had four tires and ran.

brightness04

Advertising may change the bottle, but the wine inside is still the same . . . whether "Suburban" is a big station wagon, a minivan, an SUV or a crossover matters very little, so long as it is a two-box design and carry enough seats for 7-8 people in three rows.

brightness04

Is the market shares for organic food (as per centage of all food sold at all grocery stores) and Prius (as per centage of all midsize and comnpact cars) even as great as sportscars and coupes as per centage of all cars?

Sure, there are always the fashionable crowd that is willing to pay more for smaller packages . . . the reality is that if organic food were the dominant type of food that people buy, there wouldn't be an organic food market . . . it would just be called food market, like it was before the "green revolution" of the 1960's. What's really ironic is that, the "green revolution" was about using fertilizer and pesticide (both petroleum products) to increase crop yield dramaticly . . . in the hopes of solving world hunger . . . in other words, is going backwards and using "organic farming" that takes up more land and labor while producing less food really the "socially conscienable" thing to do? There was a time when eating baby corn was considered socially unconscienable because the same crop could have fed a lot more people if only waited a couple more months . . . but nowadays, baby corns are everywhere in the organic food section.

The incentives will not only be economic, but social and perhaps even legal (tax breaks, tax credits perhaps for industry, new regulations, or even penalties).

In other words, compelling individuals into a course of action that that they would not undertake on their free will.

brightness04

All you need is ENOUGH people will a social conscience

How can anyone be sure that the fashionable "social conscience" at any given time and locale is really worthwhile if not counter-productive? In many parts of the world, "social conscience" means following Sharia Law to the letter. Don't laugh, in our own Western Christian tradition, it was once upon a time accepted "social conscience" to stone witches, burn heretics and engage in pogroms whenever natural disasters struck . . . the alternatives had been human/child sacrifices. Humanity has a long track record blaming fellow human beings for natural disasters . . . how do we know we are not doing the same thing yet again? How do we know that burning extra fuel, generating CO2 is not helping to prevent the planet from entering a new ice age? After all, higher temperature and higher CO2 level certainly help crop yield. Isn't helping solving world hunger a very good "social conscience"?

brightness04

Very reasoned points. Valuation is intrinsicly very subjective . . . that's why we have a vibrant market offering products from the smallest subcompacts to the largest SUVs/minivans. Take for example, buying a used midsize car vs. buying a tiny new car . . . people on both sides of the argument often profess inability of how in the world someone else could make the opposite decision . . . quite amusing indeed (not the purchase decision, but the sheer dismissiveness often dished out in private company)

brightness04

If I had more money to spend, I certainly wouldn't buy a bigger version of the xA, but rather another type of car entirely.

Pray tell, what type would that be? Something with a bigger (and "unnecessary") engine perhaps :-)

Mr_Shiftright

Anything but a big car I think. No, it doesn't need a bigger engine, it just can't be boring.

RE: "compelling people against their free will"

And THANK GOD we do. That is called "society".

A world where everyone acted on their free will would be chaos. There is limited "free will" in society and limited "free markets". A necessity of modern life.

brightness04

That is a very naive take on "free will" and "free market." While this is not a forum for in-depth discussion on either subjects, suffice to say that regulations are what usually lead to chaos . . . because people have "free will" (to make the best of a given situation for themselves, individually) regardless how the statist would like to pretend that it is possible to expunge such human nature. When regulations are introduced into a society (heck even before they are introduced, but merely the mentioning of regulations), interest groups inevitably rise to twist the rule making and rule enforcing process in their own favor . . . thereby introducing chaos into the mix depending on who happens to be in power at the time. Do an online search for "Planned Chaos" on this subject. A few recent examples of this phenomenom in the auto industry:

(1) the numerous types of gas manadated for different regions of the society by EPA in the name of protecting the environment. Who do you think really benefit from that? Big oil refining businesses so that they do not have to compete against each other across regions. The resulting chaos (not orderly distribution of optimum types of gas to each region like the regulation idiots envisioned, if they were really that dumb as opposed to nefarious) severely hurt the consumers last year.

(2) The big HOV and other government tax/incentive debate on hybrid vs. diesel. It's all very arbitrary and chaotic.

(3) The EPA regulation on fleet gas mileage a decade ago led to both the mfrs and consumers' penchant for SUV's to skirt the rule.

(4) Tax break on 6000lb+ work trucks became an incentive for mfrs to come up with cars like BMW X5, pegging the GVWR exactly at 6001lbs or thereabouts.

BTW, what's really interesting is that, while a rebuttal to"free will" was proffered on purely astract presumed axioms, no counter-point was made at all to rebutt my main point that "social conscience" is intrinsicly subjective and ambiguous, making legislating on that basis arbitrary and chaotic, in reference to any of the substantive examples that I gave.

iluvmysephia1

just like our choices in new or used cars are very, very subjective. People look at the world differently, yes they do.

What caused the big rush on '65 Mustangs then? A great new car design from Ford? For a reasonable price? Yes! Sometimes a large, huge group of people can get together and make a "collective" decision. They did this when they camped out in front of their favorite Ford dealer in order to get their 1965 Ford Mustang.

Does that type of thing happen anymore? I certainly haven't seen it. That doesn't mean it can't happen.

Let's ask the car nut panel here on Edmunds which car comes the closest to the 1965 Ford Mustang to coming to a "mass chaos I gotta have that car" kind of run. I'm talking post 1965 now.

How about the 2001 PT Cruiser? Eh?

fintail

Deafening pseudo-intellectualism. You call someone else naive. Let's examine your own knowledge and credentials. Do you ever post anywhere without introducting your dogma and propaganda?

Let's just take all regulation out of everything, people will naturally do what's best, and everything will be perfect.

Mr_Shiftright

I wasn't suggesting legislation for a social conscience about cars...by "social incentives" for subcompact buyers or "green car" buyers, I meant the admiration and good will of your fellow man for doing things that are of obvious benefit to everyone. Regulation has its place, as does economic incentives. The answer to which type of incentive to put where is: "it depends". The last thing you want to do is legislate morality.

I thought Lady Bird Johnson's campaign to clean up American highways was fantastic. You just don't see anyone throwing their finished meals out the car very much anymore...sure, it did require a littering fine but I don't think that was the incentive. It was a "social incentive" that got rid of a bad thing in that case...putting your name on the highway as a volunteer, etc.

So I definitely could see social incentives operating in the subcompact marketplace, and in fact I see them already. Even the Simpsons ridiculed certain types of car buyers---you might think that trivial, but the media has tremendous power to influence social incentive.

brightness04

There is no fairyland in free-market. It does not promise prosperity for all; nor does it promise happiness for all. What free-market advocates is that you shall have your freedom in pursuit of happiness . . . whether you attain that goal is your own business.

On the the other hand, it's the advocates for regulations such as yourself who promises us a fairyland of regulated utopia . . . otherwise, why should we give up our freedom and submit ourselves to your regulations at all?

How can you, with a clear conscience, own and drive a car made by union labor?

Two reasons:

(1) GMAC financial subsidy . . . the lease had a near-zero money factor, and it was well known that the final purchase price would be renegotiated at lease end . . . that's on top of $5k cash subsidy at lease inception, making the car $10k under MSRP . . . and $12k under MSRP by the time I paid the final buy-out with cash, not counting the opportunity cost of money over those 3 years (when gold went from $280 to well over $400 during the same time span, thanks to government regulation of money itself)

(2) The wife was still brainwashed by the anti-SUV ideology at the time, so the safest five-door options out there available to us was either Saab 9-5 or Volvo V70 . . . Toyota and Honda no longer made wagons, BMW 5 wagon and MB E wagon were too expensive, A6 was too slow and expensive, A4 and 3 wagon were too small, Taurus and Focus were not serious contenders due to serious recalls back then.

Like I said, I'm not dogmatic at all . . . certainly not to the degree that I would refuse to buy a car just because union labor was involved in the manufacture, unless it has serious defects as a consequence of that.

nippononly

boaz47

Ahh, we seems to have slipped off course here somewhere. The thing is, many of us have owned small cars and big cars and everything in between. For the most part I can't think of small car that was as pleasing to own and a larger one. yes, for commuting a small car would be fine but only because it was less expensive to buy and less expensive to drive. If those two things aren't present then they aren't as impressive as they could be. Sub Compacts are going to have to jump a pretty high hurdle to change peoples perceptions of them being entry level only or starter cars.

crimsona

The problem with subcompacts are that parking spots are too large and plentiful

Stew on that for a while?

snakeweasel

Yeah so how about them?

Yeah the noise to signal ratio right now is rather high.

That being said my next car will be a inexpensive bare bones good economy car that will just be used to scoot back and forth to work and the occasional trip with the dog.

snakeweasel

The problem with subcompacts are that parking spots are too large and plentiful

They are? where do you live?

brightness04

I think he meant if parking spots were made smaller, people would be forced into getting small cars.

Perhaps the solution is charging parking rate by the size of the vehicle foot print ;-) Then again, tall cars and SUV's will definitely beat normal cars for good if that happens.

brightness04

I don't know if your dog sheds as much as mine does. When we had cars with cloth interior, the seats turned into a hairy mess shortly after we clean the car, every time. The wife's solution was getting leather interior (which I do not really like because it gets hot in the summer and cold in the winter) . . . low and behold, the dog tears the interior up; luckily we are not obsessive about our cars' conditions. Dogs and expensive cars are not a good mix. Perhaps there is a logic to plastic interior like the Element, for us dog owners.

snakeweasel

I think he meant if parking spots were made smaller, people would be forced into getting small cars.

In many places the parking spaces are already smaller. I remember when we had the mini van all those years ago in many places I was right up to the line on both sides of the van.

snakeweasel

I don't know if your dog sheds as much as mine does.

yeah my dog sheds, but she is a rat terrier so her hair is rather thin and very short.

Dogs and expensive cars are not a good mix.

Thats why she rides in the Elantra and not the Caddy.

Unfortunately this dog has a great vertical leap and can actually jump right through an open car window.

nippononly

are becoming much smaller, haven't you noticed? Most new parking lots being built have a great many spaces labelled "compact". The reality is that you can fit a fairly large car in a "compact" space if you are a good driver (many people aren't), but you CANNOT fit Explorers and Suburbans in them, and an Impala is pushing it. So what do people do? Why, they take two spaces of course. It's really quite irritating when the parking lot is fairly full. Subcompacts take care of that problem right away! :-)

boaz: "The thing is, many of us have owned small cars and big cars and everything in between."
I haven't actually. I have owned a couple of 4Runners now, which of course is an SUV, albeit a smaller member of that breed (I will never own the plus-sized '03+ soccer-mobile). But otherwise I have always owned small cars. But I have had rented large cars for a week or two at a time, and they have always been less convenient for the things I do. Forget parking on the street in San Francisco in the Impala or Park Avenue (!!), heck, forget negotiating the tight turns in some of the more cramped downtown parking structures or slotting it in their parking spaces. Forget getting it down those side alleys that usually provide me with shortcuts south of Market. Forget fitting it in the curb lane for turning right when the traffic going straight is backed up. Forget any sense of nimbleness or road feel. And forget 35 to the gallon, heck forget 30 to the gallon.

brightness04

I noticed that parking spaces in some urban locations have gotten a lot smaller in recent years . . . probably as an attempt to generate more money for the city. The municipal government is not paying for fender-benders; they just want more revenue in the meters to pay for more ticket patrol persons on the payroll.

bumpy

So, any chance we'll see the Toyota Aygo or other superminis here?



(though I'd rather have what they're having)

brightness04

Explorers actually have a similar foot print to midsize cars like Fusion, Camry and Accord; within an inch or so both length and width. The previous generation Explorer is actually shorter than today's Fusion and Accord.

You have a very good point about harder to drive and park a full size car in congested cities . . . it's also reflected in purchasing patterns: while the midsize Camry is the best selling car nation-wide, Corollas do outsell Camries in the congested cities like San Francisco, Boston and New York. People are indeed quite good at choosing what's best for their living conditions, even without commercials telling them what to do. This is not meant to be an argument . . . just out of curiousity, why did you rent the full size cars? 'cuz presumably it was well know in advance that you'd be driving in San Fran?

brightness04

haha, my dog's specialty is hopping up to the car window, and giving a thrashing to the paint on the door with her front paws. . . just for being friendly and saying hi when we come home :-)

nippononly

Body work - been in some fender benders that required them to keep my car longer than a week, also spent that long in rentals a couple of times when I was paying to have an older car repainted. Whenever the shop or the insurance arranges the rental, I end up in a full-size for some reason. Which is fine, I like to check out other car models, but it was far from the best tool for the job when I left the burbs and went into the city, as I am wont to do pretty frequently. In the burbs, it was OK to drive, albeit minus the road feel and gas mileage I am fond of in nmy own cars. And of course, it reduced my parking choices at the mall.

The problem with the truck-based SUVs like Explorer is that even though they are, as you say, not much or any bigger than current midsize sedans, they are much higher up with a worse view of the corners, and people are much worse at parking them than they are at parking their Accords and Fusions. So if the space in question requries some parking precision, people will get it wrong more often in the Explorer than in the Fusion. IMO, of course.

nippononly

I would LOVE to see some of the Japanese microcars here! But I won't hold my breath, especially in Toyota's case - they always need a really good business case to go ahead, and a microcar won't make for one for many years yet, I think.

As for the other manufacturers, I think they will all wait to see how Smart cars fare in sales before they make any moves.

bobw3

If you have to shuttle a lot of people around, then you're sometimes forced to rent a full-sized car. Or if I had a long road trip/vacation planned I'd rent a full size minivan. Some people are more practical and drive what they need and then rent the occasional big vehicle if they need it, while others drive a vehicle bigger then they need for a variety of personal reasons. I have a Ford Freestyle that we use on a regular basis (trips to Lowes, Ikea, biking, etc) that will get 26mpg on the highway, and we have a smaller car for my work commutes and weekend trips where we don't need to haul so much.

If I were still single, then the Honda Fit or Nissan Versa would be what I'd drive as my sole vehicle, but since there's an infinite combination of needs and wants you'll never have a single "best" solution.

brightness04

IMHO, vehicle self-parking (a la LS460) will be a popular feature on every car in the years to come . . . of course, assuming it actually works and not costing too much (Lexus is charging less than $1000 for it) . . . just like Vehicle Stability Control etc.

I actually get a better view of the front corners in my Highlander than in the Saab. The problem is the rear factory tinted window making it nearly impossible to see anything out back for parking in low light. Perhaps I should try a rear-mounted camera first in my next car before clamoring for self-parking. I saw that working on a Prius (another car with bad real visibility for parking); it's very cool.

brightness04

Agree. I always thought vehicle size choice as how many deltas out (in terms of probability of future events/needs)is planned for by the owner. If economic conditions are really rotten, people will go to work on their bikes, and rent vans for moving big items (like many city dwellers do when faced with horrendous car insurance and parking cost). On the other hand, if we can afford it, most tend to make a choice a few delta's out, just to reserve some degree of freedome of action . . . without having to line up at the rental places and play chance with rental availability and cost every time.

boaz47

I have only been to San Francisco a few times and I thought everyone just parked there cars on the street and left them there in case of an emergency and then took Bart or something else to get home? That and all the pay for parking spaces you have. If I lived in a place Like San Francisco or even Santa Monica a Sub Compact might be more than practical but of course I don't and most people in the US don't either. The average commute for most people in California is something obscene like 45 miles one way? That means most of their driving isn't in tightly packed cities. When you commute you have two things on your mind, comfort and economy. Cup holders and a good sound system make a big impression to anyone spending that much time in a vehicle. I can't remember the last time I have been in a Corolla that was as Comfortable as a Camry or Avalon. I have never been in a Civic that was as comfortable as a Accord. I had a Civic Si when my son was first learning to drive that was maybe more fun than a Accord but it wasn't as much fun as our Prelude. Not that the SI didn't hold th eroad as well but the Prelude had a lot more HP and held the road every bit as well. Still on those ever so infrequent trips from Arrowhead to San Francisco a Accord should prove more comfortable than a Fit don't you think? And I agree, Micro cars are a long way away from getting into the US. Even if one would be great for running to the store and home once I quit work. But still isn't getting a car for a singular purpose every bit as much a sign of consumerism if I have to have one car for family comfort and another for short errands and commuting? Wouldn't a bit bigger car be a more economical alternative?

brightness04

IMHO, if microcars ever do catch on in the US, it will be the third-car in the family (a place where roadsters currently occupy). Over time, unless it reverts to specialty cars like the roadsters, will grow in size as the kids who drive it the most gradually grow it to mid-size again. The same script that made buyers of the original VW Beetle as the 2nd car into buyers of Passats, Accords, Camrys etc. filling up the 2nd bay nowadays.

daysailer

they were once the subject of this thread, as well as vehicles available circa 1960 that are long absent from these shores ..........

british_rover

I started to work on a Minor in Econ but I couldn't stay awake in those classes so I dropped it. :P

Mr_Shiftright

I'll try to help get this topic cleaned up. In the meantime, everybody has to take a bathroom break and count to 100 or this topic will probably be frozen..that would be too bad.

Shiftright
Visiting Host

british_rover

Ah man I just took a bathroom break...

boaz47

Doesn't it sort of remind you of the old FTP news groups? Some people would follow other people around to debate an issue across several topics like a pit bull on a rope.

I have to wonder how the lowering of fuel prices are going to effect the popularity of Sub Compacts. My local station is 90 cents lower than it was during the summer. Seems as if that might lessen the pain some were feeling with their bigger vehicles.

tsgeisel

Well, nobody's invoked Godwin's Law yet, so we may still be doomed for a while.

I think the high gas prices raised awareness of just how necessary a large vehicle might be, more than it "sold" sub-compacts. Even with prices lower, I expect sub-compacts will still continue to sell.

snakeweasel

OK I went potty and counted to 100.

Doesn't it sort of remind you of the old FTP news groups?

Yes it does. I will admit that some places with some people I have followed them to another news group just to see what they are saying. But I have never posted to them on those other news groups.

I have to wonder how the lowering of fuel prices are going to effect the popularity of Sub Compacts.

We are about 70 cents less now. The lower gas prices will have its impact on economy cars as the savings isn't there. But I have a feeling that every time gas goes up then down more people realize that gas prices are not stable and will act accordingly.

nippononly

Exactly what I am wondering also! The talking heads have been saying for a number of months that peoples' realization that gas could spike again any time (and spike a lot) is what has them changing their buying habits to smaller cars this year.

But I don't know......Americans' attention spans are awful short, and gas has (unexpectedly for me) gone spiralling down in a breathless plunge, rather than just gradually subsiding. The economist quoted in the NY Times today thinks that we will see gas at $2/gallon (for a nationwide average; obviously we here in Cali will continue to pay higher than the average price) by October, instead of Christmas as expected for the winter gas price dip. So, will people brush off their gas price fears and go right back to supersizing their vehicles?

I have to say that as glad as I am of the reduction in my gas bill, if that is the effect of rapidly decreasing prices I would just as soon have them subside more slowly to keep the trend towards smaller cars and crossovers going.

Even then, the article went on to say, the price would be 70% higher than winter "just a few years ago". Is that really true?

Karen_S

...since it is painfully obvious some folks can't behave in a civil manner, this particular boxing ring will be closed for the time being.

eltonron

Following an extensive cleanup of the ideological rants from this past weekend, this thread has now been reopened for discussions that lie within the boundaries of the rules for posting to the forums, as outlined in the Edmunds Terms of Use agreement.

For a brief overview of general forum posting guidelines, feel free to visit the Rules of the Road.

We appreciate your patience as these issues were addressed and we continue to welcome ongoing discussions that are respectful to other members and to the subject at hand.

EltonRon
Host- Automotive News & Views