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
Yeah the Polo looks good but what about the Fox? For Ford what about the Ka? Or the Getz from Hyundai.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
For VW, I think it would be a good idea to really go back to their roots. They could have some fun with the Polo and make it the new Beetle, where the ACTUAL New Beetle is an $18-20K car that is out of reach for a lot of entry-level buyers. I think they are good-looking, it would give us more choice in hatchbacks, and I bet they COULD sell 30K a year at least, which for VWoA would be a pretty big deal right now.
I could see two versions, the base model at $11K with bare-bones equipment but a full complement of safety features (remember, they are already selling this car pretty cheaply just across the border), and a $13K version equipped roughly as the base model Rabbit 2-door is. With large alloys and moonroofs optional as they are on the Rabbit, for those that want a subcompact but want to spruce it up.
As for all the rest mentioned recently: Getz? Ick. Fox? Ick. Ford Ka? Interesting, might work, but I like the idea of the Festiva better. Corsa? That one I like a lot. Let's do that. And Swift? Oh YEAH! PLEASE bring that to the States ASAP. :-)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Reet! Reet! Reet! Reet! Don't talk about Suzuki's in here. Until I got excited about them and mentioned that I might want to buy one of them in this forum I thought they were a legitimate brand of car. Apparently not.
Can the Swift. It's bad for America because shifty and snake and Mr.Boaz Constrictor all collectively feel that Suzuki is crap. Ban Suzuki! I don't want any of you ever to mention Suzuki again in here.
Now go to your rooms. No soup or cookies!
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Polo? Good idea.
Or is it Yamaha that you're thinking of?
Oh, it's all Asian, isn't it?
Except for this particular carmaker from Brazil working feverishly on this little mini-car called the Obvio! 828/2 and another Obvio! called the 012
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)
None of the aforementioned people said Suzuki made bad cars. It was only pointed out that they weren't willing to sound like the music man trying to sell band equipment in River City when they talked about the value of a SX4. And I knew I would live to regret mentioning that POS car from Brazil.
When did I say its crap?
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
The truly sporty hot hatches in our market are a tiny thin niche, in which sales are highly unpredictable except for the safe prediction that they will never be very numerous. More people prefer a comfy ride and maximum cupholders to a truly sporty ride and exhaust note (which many people will call punishing and loud, respectively).
It is for that reason, and NOT because I think subcompacts are a bad sales proposition, that I think they would never be brave enough to bring the Swift GT here. Now the base Swift is all-around decent transportation and I wouldn't mind seeing them bring that here either, but it wouldn't excite me anywhere near as much.
I have high hopes for the Accent SE, whose suspension and tires actually have the guts to give it handling to justify the "Sport Edition" name. And of course the Fit Sport is the more popular of the two trims of that car, and has great handling too. So we will see...
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I doubt that the thing would pass smog at all - way to high compression. Sad, really. Nice little car.
Philistines. I spit on their adaptive cruise controls.
This, my beloved brethren, I believe is because a higher percentage of "motorists" in this country view their conveyances as appliances than any other 1st world nation on the planet.
They know not what they miss, day in and day out...
The sedan was several seconds faster then the SUV.
The test I would like to see is FWD vs AWD and BOTH with top notch snow tires. I still say that all else being equal, if you add awd to the equation you'll have a safer drive and better overall traction.
So you put the same careful driver who has driven RWD cars in the snow all their life, they'll be able to drive safer, especially if they keep their safe driving habits. I'm just trying to compare machine to machine, and I don't believe that if I had a AWD vehicle I'll all of a sudden start driving crazy.
I do know that when I went from driving RWD to FWD cars, it was a lot easier to drive in Northeast Ohio, but I didn't just driving crazy because I was in FWD. And then when I got a car with antilock brakes, stopping in the snow became easier. And it's impossible to say how often AWD would have helped in a previous driving situation, but it's hard not to say that by adding AWD (aka Subaru) won't help. As far as cost, if it adds $1000 in cost and a few $100/yr in added fuel cost, then you just have to comare that cost to the cost of any other option in a car and see if it makes sense to you. But at least admit that it makes a car safer, even if you don't opt for it. Saying AWD makes cars unsafe because you see a lot of AWD vehicles in ditches makes about as much sense as saying that painting a car red will make it less safe because you see a lot of red cars in ditches. Plus I wonder how many of those SUVs you see in ditches are really AWD and not the FWD version? I consider AWD to be a safety feature as important as airbags, antilock brakes, or traction control for those living in snow country. Now that I live in southwest Ohio versus northeast ohio, I don't consider myself in snow country anymore.
XK VS LR3 on frozen lake
While I don't disagree with you, I believe the point C&D was trying to make was that swapping out tires for the winter season was a better route to improve traction than having the penalty of AWD (weight, mileage) all year long.
One car magazine (C&D I'm pretty sure) did a traction test not too long ago. They had FWD, AWD and RWD cars, and various tires (I think summer/ all season/ snow) for each, and did traction tests on each (handling, acceleration and braking, snow and ice).
Anyway, as you might expect, the tires made a huge difference. A FWD car on snows did better generally than AWD on a/s, and a RWD car with snows outdid AWD on summer tires, etc.
Biggest difference I think was braking, where it is all tires.
I'm pretty sure though tht the best overall was AWD with snows, but outside of the true snow belts (like Vermont), I doubt many people with AWD cars bother to get snow tires.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
Does that make any sense?
In other words, for the inexperienced driver, a false sense of security.
True ... we have had both 4WD (Expedition, Explorer) vehicles and AWD (Saturn VUE) vehicles in our house for years. The VUE is FWD unless the front tires start to slip, then the rear wheels take up some of the slack. Probably helps us 5-10 days a year here in Colorado.
My car (Saturn L300) is FWD with traction control and can handle almost anything Mother Nature dishes out, except for the lack of ground clearance the VUE has.
Hmm, take a big (relatively) engine and put it in a small car...sounds like...hmm a Nova with a 350 or something.
Ouch. I just blew coffee through my nose....
You know, before you post stuff like that, you really need to proceed it with a warning.
FYI - I have a Celica GTS 6sp. When Toyota announced plans to whack the Celica and start pushing the tC as their 'sporty' model, I was willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.
Until I drove a tC. Puke, what a Major Disappointment. If your idea of 'performance' ends at 5k rpm and neither steering nor braking feel are ANYWHERE in your performance vocabularly, then the tC might be tolerable. Might.
Maybe you're trying to compare a tC to a base Celica, but even THEN, the Celica KILLS the tC in handling/braking.
And now you're comparing a tC to a Nova with a SB Chevy? Good thing I already put my coffee down.....
Helloooooooo Mazda.
Hell I even like the mazda 5 I think it is cool looking and if it drives ok it would be a great people carrier runabout.
I do like the Mazda 6, and I love the fact that I can get a V6 with a manual and not spend 30 grand.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Drop in the turbo 2.3 from the Speed3/6/CX7 and it should be a runaway hit.....
***
The beauty of full-time AWD, though, is that it works amazingly well. You can as seen in the Top Gear episode, run on ice just fine. The part-time mode is rubbish as far as I'm concerned, but full-time AWD is a very good option.
Look - I don't want to spend Subaru or Volvo XC prices to get AWD - but I aalso want to be able to turn it off and get 2wd speed and performance. The Suzuki does that at thousands less than the competiton, so it should be some praise in my book.
i would love to a fwd based vehicle on the same course.
i'm kind of sorry this thread has gone so far off.
As far as fuel prices driving us towards sub compacts? This morning I paid $2.44 a gallon. That is $1.10 less than I paid for the same grade fuel in early August. Maybe next summer we will have to face the fuel spikes again but Americans live from one crisis to the next. I bet mid sized cars grow at a faster pace for the rest of the year. Camry already had a better August than they did July. I bet they are up again in October.
I'm guessing that the Celica, being a small but powerful, high-revving car, was somewhat expensive for Toyota to build, and came in at a higher price point to really gain wide acceptance.
They are both nice cars, and bigger people can get into the tC easier. But the inside looks too darn plastic-esque.
Toyota just cheaped-out as the Celica was eating into Tc sales more than they wanted. It's as if Honda took their S2000 and replaced it with a Miata clone. People might say it looks better or has better this or that, but the truth is that it would be a step backwards.
I actually found the Tc very comfortable, if a bit soft.
I think it was the other way around, the Tc was eating into Celica sales. If you really like the Celica motor, you can still find it in the Corolla, Matrix, and Vibe (oh and a Lotus).
I don't have anything against the Celica, just thought it to be overpriced for what it offered. Mitsubishi, Nissan and Toyota all bailed on that market at the same time, with the Eclipse going Neon, Nissan dropping RWD, and the Celica turning more and more into a secretary transport. Of course right at that time Honda introduced the Integra Type R and then the RSX (although they did lose their way with the Civic SI for a bit there).
I test drove a 2005 Scion tC RS 1.0 and found power to be more than adequate.
The 2007 Suzuki SX4 remains an interesting and gainful venture with that FWD(2WD), AWD-Auto and AWD-Lock(4WD)option. It also has an interesting body design with styling farmed out to the Italians. Seems to me that AWD would be safer in inclement weather than anything else. Suzuki installs disc brakes, ABS and Electronic Force Distribution for extra safety.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
The tC is a good deal more sophisticated, IMO, from a styling standpoint; a more timeless approach to the genre. I like it very much. I am utterly convinced it is an excellent platform for a long-term project car of sorts, for fun and daily transport...
Anyway I think these are two rather good coupes, for the four-banger FWDers they are. Hardly worth the "which is better" discussion...
I think it's more interesting as an indication of where Toyota was (is) going. I'm sure the move from the Celica to the tC made more 'sense' from a Corporate standpoint; I just think it's indicative of Toyota's overall conservatism. Which I'm sure makes the stockholders happy - even if it does make their lineup a little too boring for my taste.
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
I find it hard to blame them, much as I hate to be so forgiving. To create the car we're perhaps thinking of, they really have to sell it at a Lexus price point to be in the black. Unfortunately, in getting it to the Lexus price point, they have to bulk it up and dull down the sensory input to the point of "why bother"; GS and new IS being prime examples. The sheer amount of doo-dadderie and cushy-bits on those two make them mostly unpalatable to anyone who actually enjoys the the sensations of driving.
Catch-22. But the tC at least (and to Big T's credit) has an ever-expanding menu of Toyota-made goodies to improve the experience, getting the enthusiast a little bit closer to something worth obsession.
The Altezza was closer to the best expression, IMO. Hatch, sedan and coupe based on that kind of platform updated, with all of the customizing available for the Scions and the backing of a TRD (horrid acronym) parts program would do the trick I think.
The only thing in the sub-$30k category in RWD from Toyota is either used or has an open bed.
What you seem to be saying is that they've gotten too big to be 'daring'. I dunno, maybe that's true; perhaps there IS some 'critical mass' that a company reaches at which point they MUST build cars to the lowest common denominator. The General Driving Public equates Toyota with sensible shoes and (g-forbid) they do anything to dispel that notion.
And I had hopes with the new IS; not any longer. They'll probably figure out some way to dumb-down the new Supra (assuming of course they can fit in the development of a new Supra amidst the need to develop another SUV or two...).