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.
Options

What is "wrong" with these new subcompacts?

16061636566195

Comments

  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    Supersizing can be tricky; for instance, there are some cars that look attractive next to the subcompact until you realize that a) they really don't have any more room for the DRIVER (and hey, who is #1 in a car purchase, you or your luggage?) and b) I've noticed on a few of these highly touted "compacts" that you get 24 mpg and an 11 gallon gas tank---well, if that ain't a pain in the butt, I don't know what is.
  • daysailerdaysailer Member Posts: 720
    between the size and mass of a vehicle and its room for the driver. In fact, the largest vehicle that I've ever had ('92 Mazdz MPV) has perhaps the WORST driver legroom while one of the smallest ('84 Civic) was among the best in that regard.
  • british_roverbritish_rover Member Posts: 8,502
    Funny that you mention that. I had more leg room in my Cooper S then I do right now in the Forreseter I have been driving. In the Cooper I didn't have the seat all the way back for normal driving. I had it one or two slots from the last slot. For more agressive driving I would bring it a notch or so closer and raise the height of the seat slightly.

    On the forrester even witht he seat all the way back and all the way down I still dont' really have enough leg room.
  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 33,732
    Only, to show you how ill-trained the modern America's eye is for body design, people are buying up Subaru's like old Michael Jordan basketball cards.

    I'm shocked that you have the nerve to criticize anyone's style preferences when you believe the SX4 is some sort of beauty contest winner. Simply amazing!

    I'm not saying the SX4 is ugly, and I'm not saying a Subie Forester is attractive, but let's face it, neither will be taught in design school.

    '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

  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    I think Subaru charges customers only for the drivetrain---the body is free :P
  • rorrrorr Member Posts: 3,630
    "...---the body is free"

    ....and worth every penny. ;)
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    Subarus are kind of BLAH to me. They don't bother me. The only offensive design to my sensitive artistic eyes is the WRX. Does Subaru even HAVE a styling department or do they farm it out to Fujitsu Heavy Industries or something?

    It seems easier to make a small car attractive, because you have that pupply like cuteness working for you.
  • boomchekboomchek Member Posts: 5,516
    I acutally love how the new Legacy looks from every angle. I can't say much about the Impreza's new face though.

    2016 Audi A7 3.0T S Line, 2021 Subaru WRX

  • wave54wave54 Member Posts: 211
    10K on something used will get you a very nice midsize car. Sometihng made twice as well all around.

    Cuts right to the heart of this discussion! There seems to be the natural assumption that everyone would rather have a bigger car -- I don't.

    There's more driver room in today's subcompacts than many large cars in the "long hood, short rear-deck" '70s (i.e. Monte Carlo, Cutlass, etc.).

    I wanted small and frugal (drive 70K miles/year) and will buy a B-class vehicle next time, as well.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    you're right the Legacy is better but it still appears to me a very dated design. This is a 1996 car to my eyes, ten years old already--but not offensive in any way. I don't think anybody is going to stop and point at it.

    To be fair, aside from the MINI none of the subs' designs really knocks anybody out either apparently. I think the xA is kinda different (eccentric) enough to be interesting but not exactly attractive. I don't know why the sbus can't be more bold, like the Figaro was---even a smaller Hyundai Tiburon would be nicer to look at than these little loaves of bread they are selling.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,022
    That was the story I'd heard too, that some kind of GM/Wankel rotary was supposed to go into the Pacer, but it was scrapped at the last minute.

    It's been awhile since I've sat in a Pacer, but I remember them actually being pretty roomy up front. Kinda like a midsized front seat mated to a subcompact back seat.
  • boaz47boaz47 Member Posts: 2,747
    Yes, I agree. believe it or not. It seems to be the lot of Sub Compacts to save every penny they can by not using a design team. I also found and do find the Tiburon interesting to look at. I sort of warmed up to the Matrix after a while only to smirk at the xA for looking like a Matrix that wasn't left in the oven long enough. The Echo looked like they wanted us to look away and still hasn't warmed up for me. The Yaris looks for all the world like a little Camry but nothing to ohh or Ahh about. But if they are designed as simply transportation vehicles what should we expect?
  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    But if they are designed as simply transportation vehicles what should we expect?

    Please oh please anything but like this.

    image

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,022
    There's more driver room in today's subcompacts than many large cars in the "long hood, short rear-deck" '70s (i.e. Monte Carlo, Cutlass, etc.).

    As the owner of one of those long hood, short deck 70's cars, a 1976 LeMans, I'd have to disagree with you there. I'm 6'3", and the thing fits me better than most cars built today, even so-called full-sized cars. I'd say the only thing I don't like about the driving position is that the windshield is a bit close. If I have the wheelt tilted up enough and "palm" the steering wheel instead of gripping it, I can hit my fingers on the windshield.

    Now where it really gives up interior room is the back seat. It's wide, actually has decent headroom for such a low-slung car, but legroom, especially once I get the power front seat to where I like it, is probably worse than many subcompacts.

    Its low profile also forces it to give up some trunk space. I think it has about 15 cubic feet of trunk space, which isn't that generous for something that's 208" long.

    I think the biggest problem I have with most of today's subcompacts is legroom, or lack of it. Headroom in most of them is great, but the lack of legroom, which forces my knees to a higher level, coupled with a steering wheel that won't tilt up high enough, makes for an inhospitable driving position. Cars today also tend to have wheel wells, dashboards, center consoles, etc which intrude into the passenger cabin more than back in the day.

    I can understand the appeal of a smaller car though, for the right person and in the right lifestyle/circumstances.
  • daysailerdaysailer Member Posts: 720
    10K on something used will get you a very nice midsize car. Sometihng made twice as well all around.

    Cuts right to the heart of this discussion! There seems to be the natural assumption that everyone would rather have a bigger car -- I don't.


    I agree! Why the pervasive assumption that everyone considers bigger to be better! I don't buy vehicles by the pound! I would sooner pay a premium for smaller/lighter than for bigger heavier. Everyone would not "really rather have a Buick"!
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,022
    Why the pervasive assumption that everyone considers bigger to be better! I don't buy vehicles by the pound! I would sooner pay a premium for smaller/lighter than for bigger heavier.

    I consider bigger to be better, but only to a point. That point being where it's big enough to be comfortable for me. As a general rule small cars ARE more space-efficient than bigger ones, but all the space efficiency in the world isn't worth a damn to me if I don't fit comfortably!
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    Hear hear! :-)

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • boomchekboomchek Member Posts: 5,516
    Yes the Mini does stand out, just like the New Beetle when it first came out. The problem I see with retro designs like the Mini, the New Beetle, even the PT Crusier is that they date very fast, and it's so difficult to do a redesign on a car like that, and update it.

    If you look at the Beetle, the PT, or even the Mini, they are virtually unchanged since the day they came out.

    It will be curious to see what the next Mustang will look like.

    Aside from that most subcompacts are basically variations of basic boxes on 4 wheels with maximum room inside, that's all they have going for them, unless you look at cars like the Mini, the Smart Car, or the New Beetle for that matter, as they have a little bit of style to them.

    2016 Audi A7 3.0T S Line, 2021 Subaru WRX

  • wave54wave54 Member Posts: 211
    As the owner of one of those long hood, short deck 70's cars, a 1976 LeMans, I'd have to disagree with you there. I'm 6'3", and the thing fits me better than most cars built today, even so-called full-sized cars.

    Can't speak for every model, but I've been in a number of very large 2-ton cars that have my knees crushed against the dash with the steering wheel, dash and windshield too close.

    One of the worst was a former boss's Chrysler Cordoba. Getting inside was excruciating, yet I pop right in and out of my Aveo effortlessly and I'm 6'4" and 250#.

    Wasn't comfortable in the front seat of a last-generation Lincoln Town Car either -- not enough leg room. And don't get me started on the 90's era S-10 Blazers with that sit-on-the-floor with legs-straight-out-cuz-the-floor-is-too-damn-high driving position -- horrible!!!
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,022
    Can't speak for every model, but I've been in a number of very large 2-ton cars that have my knees crushed against the dash with the steering wheel, dash and windshield too close.

    Yeah, to be fair, not all of those mammoth 2-ton (or more) cars were built the same. One of my friends has a 1978 Mark V, and it's not especially roomy inside given its huge external dimensions. I think the legroom's actually okay, but you sit really low to the floor, and headroom's not all that great. And Ford products back then seemed to have a dashboard that cut real low, and while it didn't actually come into contact, just seemed too close to my shins for comfort.

    I've been in both generations of Cordoba, and they're really not that huge inside either. I think the 80-83 is a bit more comfy than the 75-79, partly because the seat feels a bit higher up, feels like it goes back a bit further, and it uses a modified dashboard from the 1979-81 fullsizers which slopes away, but I think My LeMans is better than both.

    And yeah, entry/exit isn't so great on those older cars, and the older I get, the more I notice it! Oddly though, I took my 82 year old Grandma to the doctor once in my '76 LeMans, and she remarked about how easy it was to get into and out of! One thing that my LeMans might have going for it though is the power seat. I put it all the way back and raise it up kinda high, which negates that low seating position that made many of those older cars irritating to get into and out of.

    Funny you'd mention the Town Car...I'm not really all that impressed with them either. It seems like ever since the Ford "Panther" body went aero (~1990 for the Town Car, 1992 for the Crown Vic/Grand Marquis) they just didn't feel as roomy inside to me. And yeah, those S-10 Blazers were pretty cramped inside if you were tall/big-framed. They were narrow inside as well, with small-ish seats, not a lot of footwell room, etc.

    One area that they've definitely improved cars is the ease of entry and exit. A month or so ago I tried to get into the back seat of a 70's Dodge Coronet sedan. Now it was pretty roomy once I was inside, but you had to practically be a contortionist to get into it! I was also recently in a 1974 New Yorker 4-door. This sucker felt HUGE inside to me, but entry/exit wasn't all that easy. In contrast, I don't think my uncle's '03 Corolla is very comfortable to drive, but it's fairly easy to get into and out of. And while the driving position sucks, IMO, the front passenger seat and even the back seat aren't bad.
  • boaz47boaz47 Member Posts: 2,747
    The reason so there is this pervasive assumption is sales figures. Manufacturers live and breath on sales figures and trends. If you can sell 400,000 Camries and make $1000.00 bucks on each, Just an example, or you can sell 50,000 Yaris and make $700.00 each what are you going to try harder to sell? If you make three cars and the slowest selling one is the smallest and least profitable what are you going to push? Now if your biggest vehicle still outsells you smallest one and it makes you $2500.00 a unit, once again simply a number as an example, what are you going to advertise. So if five enthusiast buy a Sub Compact and keep it till its wheels fall off that isn't very impressive sales wise to the bean counters. But if a Soccer mom buys a new kid mover every three years and another 200,000 soccer moms do the same then your market people will almost naturally assume everyone wants more car for the money and they might even be willing to spend a bit more to get more.

    The secondary problem sub compacts have is that same buying public that will buy 400,000 Camries might be willing to get a smaller car. But only if they can have it for a lot less money. There is almost no way to get the image of a small car is less car out of our collective cultural mind. I big house is always worth more than a small house. A big boat is always worth more than a small boat. The idea of super sizing works because it is perceived getting a better deal. 50 percent more for only 10 percent more money sounds pretty good to most people. To the enthusiast that might be frustrating but to the marketers it makes perfect sense.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    I was just window shopping today, thinking "What if I wanted a small-ish car, maybe just a little bigger than the Scion xA, but with really good performance?"

    So I'm thinking, MazdaSpeed3, new VW GTI, new Civic Si.

    All great, fast "little" cars.

    And you know what---they're TWICE the price of the xA.

    Would I pay $12,500 extra dollars for 9 inches more room and 2 or 3 seconds off 0-60?

    Not sure...makes me what to just stop screwing around and buy a Mustang GT and be done with it.
  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    Oh I agree if you are going to spend 22-23K for a supped up compact just spend a few grand more and get something like the Mustang.

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • johnniconjohnnicon Member Posts: 10
    My Chrysler cars were a 1949 Dodge Coronet a 1964 Plymouth Valiant Signet, a 1966 Plymouth Baracuda, a 1972 Plymouth Duster, and then another 1963 Plymouth Valiant. The engines were indestructable. I would have loved to have had a Chrysler small product when I switched to Hondas in the mid 70's but there were none. I now have a Scion XA. I would love to have a MB Smart Car or the Class A. But, the latter isn't here yet and the former is still very overpriced. YES! Make a quality sub-compact, if you can afford it, and I will be your customer.
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 20,707
    i've been window shopping too. mazda3 2.3 has good power. still about 20k or so. focus 2.3 lists a bit cheaper, but real world, major good deal.
    i'll bet i could do a smoke show with my zts that could show up on the weather channel. oops, sorry, flashback to my younger days in the mustang. ;)
    the 'st' models have the old svt suspension. my '04 zts only has the rear anti roll bar.
    2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    I responded to the person's yammering on and on about an Aveo. Honestly - spending $10K on a used Civic/Mazda 3/Hyundai/etc , or something "larger" that gets the same gas mileage - you'd have to be nuts to get the Aveo.

    You all assumed that I meant a Buick. Compared to an Aveo, a Civic is a huge monster. 40mpg highway, tons better built, and I can guarantee less problems even at 3-4 years old than the Aveo will have new.
  • iluvmysephia1iluvmysephia1 Member Posts: 7,709
    of looking at.

    image

    Timeless design. For less.

    2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick

  • boomchekboomchek Member Posts: 5,516
    Dude, timesless design is 93-97 RX-7, MB SL 89-99, Lambo Miura.

    I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

    2016 Audi A7 3.0T S Line, 2021 Subaru WRX

  • daysailerdaysailer Member Posts: 720
    No argument - the Civic IS a much better vehicle and better value than the Aveo, and many other cars for that matter. But, as you said, it IS a huge monster and not just in comparison to the Aveo. By no stretch of the imagination can I accept a 3000lbm vehicle as a "subcompact"!
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,022
    I wouldn't call it timeless, but I do find the SX4 to be a handsome little car. The only thing I really think is "incorrect" from a styling standpoint is the A-pillar area. It just doesn't look right for the A-pillar to come down to the cowl ahead of the door like that. It forces them to put that little spacer window in, and just makes the design look a bit fussier and not well thought-out.

    Other than that though I like it. One area I give it bonus points for is the front, where it looks like they got the proportioning down right for the grille and the headlights. Often, cars end up with headlights that are too big and a grille that's too small and it gives them kind of a :surprise: type of look.
  • nortsr1nortsr1 Member Posts: 1,060
    We are still waiting!!!!!
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    Dude, timesless design is 93-97 RX-7, MB SL 89-99, Lambo Miura.
    1990-1996 300ZX, 196x-1998 911
  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    You call that timeless? It pretty much looks like just about any generic small hatch/wagon. there is nothing about that cars looks that endears me to it.

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    Dude, timesless design is 93-97 RX-7, MB SL 89-99, Lambo Miura.

    Agreed, how about this one?

    image

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • w9cww9cw Member Posts: 888
    iluvmysephia1 should be in the Marketing Dept. for Suzuki, and Kia for that matter!
  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    I thought he was.

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 33,732
    so did i, but if not, they at least owe him a free car.

    '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

  • mwqamwqa Member Posts: 106
    Don't you know - he just changed jobs! :)

    I don't mind seeing all his posts - they are entertaining - but they really should be transferred to the Suzuki SX4 forum.
  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    If thats all you need to do to get a new car i would be talking up some mighty nice cars. ;)

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 33,732
    well, that's the differene ... if it was a nice car, I couldn't see him getting a free one. The way I figure it, they'll practically be giving SX4s away in cereal boxes by the end of the production year, anyway. ;)

    '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

  • bumpybumpy Member Posts: 4,425
    If we're going to get into a styling war, let's at least keep it on topic.

    image

    image

    image

    image
  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    The way I figure it, they'll practically be giving SX4s away in cereal boxes by the end of the production year, anyway.

    I don't see it that way, the car does offer some value at its price. Is it a great value? That depends on what you are looking for. Will Suzuki sell heaps, loads and globs of them? No, but I don't think they will be sold at basement bargain prices either.

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    Nice dog.

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 33,732
    we'll see.

    they are, after all, still related to GM.

    There are loads of decent cars out there that get firesaled year after year. Will it be the bargain bin for the SX4? Well, that's going to depend alot on how you define big incentives. you probably won't see $10k off on a cheap little car like you do on the big SUVs, but that's not exactly a fair comparison. If I had to make a wager, I'd say we'll see $11,500, if not less, by the end of next summer. That's about 25% off.

    '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

  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    If I had to make a wager, I'd say we'll see $11,500, if not less, by the end of next summer. That's about 25% off.

    I would take that wager, they will not go that low. They may (mind you may) hit the $12,500 mark with incentives. Even then it would be $1900 under invoice. Realistically I would say they would be in the $13's at their lowest.

    However if they do hit $11,500 or less I might snap one up. But I would suspect that if prices drop that low (or even drop to $12,500) the car will be discontinued.

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 33,732
    Why would they discontinue a car with 25% discount when there are cars still being produced by other manufacturers with larger discounts than that?

    Besides, I'm talking about the end of the summer, when several manufacturers are throwing around the big incentives money. Just because a car sells cheap at that time of the year, doesn't mean it was a failure all year round.

    '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

  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    Why would they discontinue a car with 25% discount when there are cars still being produced by other manufacturers with larger discounts than that?

    Because those cars with larger discounts have a larger profit margin than the SX4 has. The profit margin on the SX4 is razor thin.

    Besides, I'm talking about the end of the summer, when several manufacturers are throwing around the big incentives money.

    Again the margins are not there.

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • iluvmysephia1iluvmysephia1 Member Posts: 7,709
    the A-pillar area is one of my favorite spots on the 2007 Suzuki SX4! I like the "different-ness" of that area. Notice the crinkle-line coming down the side of the car comes right down to that area and stops right there. It is a coming together area at the front and one that always causes my eyes to roll over the front fender to check the accuracy of the fender roll. Looks good, looks solid to me.

    As for SX4 pricing taking any drops any time, I wouldn't expect SX4 pricing to drop much at all for months. Some manufacturer rebates might come by the spring of '07 in the $500-$1,000 range. I think the car is a great deal at invoice.

    2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick

  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 33,732
    I think its relatively the same percetage-wise, which is why I've been giving it in those terms.

    '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

  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    I think its relatively the same percetage-wise, which is why I've been giving it in those terms.

    No its not, the profit margin on many SUV's and pickups are much greater than for small cars like the SX4. Compare invoice verses sticker on a dodge Ram verses the SX4. The Dodge Roms invoice is about 88% of the sticker price while for the SX4 the invoice is 96% of the sticker price.

    That means that if you sell a Dodge Ram at invoice you sold it at a 12% discount, but a SX4 at invoice is only a 4% discount.

    Or look at it this way in order to sell the Ram at 75% of sticker I would have to make the price 85% of the invoice. To do the same with the SX4 I would have to sell at 78% of invoice. Which is more likely to happen?

    On these small cars there just isn't a whole lot of fat to cut, even if you look at it percentage wise.

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

Sign In or Register to comment.