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
Great, where the heck were they when I was looking all over for a Swift GT 16v??
:-)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
If one is regularly piling stuff on the roof of a Fit you really should have bought a Navigator in the first place.
of course, the mileage is not too good unloaded.
yeah, it is a compromise.
Going to a trailer hitch rack, I don't notice any hit at all to the MPG for the rack. I actually did it so someone 5'2" could load and unload bikes, the mpg was a bonus.
With 4 bikes on the back you are getting close to the tongue weight limit for the hitch (class 1, 200 lbs tongue- 4 bikes * 30 lbs/bike + weight of bike rack) and the handling of the car changes.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
You just have to make sure not to exceed the vehicle's roof rating or the rack's cargo rating (the deck boards were pushing my luck!!).
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
The first time you install it, it takes about 30-40 minutes, and then after that it takes about 10 minutes. The rack and attachments aren't cheap, replacing my system would be about $500 (4 towers, 4 fit clips, 2 load bars, 4 fork mount racks with full trays, a fairing and locks [rack to car, fork mounts to rack]). To move to another vehicle, I am out about $40 for new fit clips (less on ebay).
I have had really good luck with mine, its been used on 4 cars, it holds up really, and helps me schlep all this cr*p without a bigger vehicle.
Today's cars have everything you mentioned plus more insulation, side-impact door beams, and bigger wheels and tires. The 600 lbs makes a huge difference in crash protection, I can't imagine how poorly an '84 Civic hatch would do in today's IIHS offset crash tests.
-juice
Just check the capacity (mine's 150 lbs) and don't exceed the overall payload. For light duty jobs they work like a charm.
Who needs a pickup to haul 4'x8' sheets of plywood? I average over 25 mpg and never had to rent from U-Haul or even those trucks Home Depot rents by the hour.
-juice
Actually something like a 1984 Civic might not do too poorly in one of those offset crash tests. In that type of crash, running something into a fixed barrier, additional weight will often work against you. Basically, those tests are designed to simulate you running head-on (either dead-on or offset, depending on the test) into another car of similar mass and speed.
However, out in the real world, we can't predict what we're going to hit or what's going to hit us. And there isn't exactly a surplus of 1984-Civic-mass cars running about!
I have an old Consumer Reports auto issue from April 1984, stashed away somewhere, and it had a safety article. I remember it started off with something like "No car built today can withstand a 35 mph impact into a fixed barrier. Yet the driver has a surprisingly good chance of emerging with either minor injuries or no injuries at all..."
But then I wonder what started happening, because I remember by the late 1990's, many cars, regardless of size, were getting poor crash test ratings. Maybe the tests are more accurate now? Also, I'd imagine that the offset test would actually penetrate further into the car than a flat-frontal test, since a smaller area of the car is taking the full force, instead of the whole front-end.
And yes, the biggest issue would be the mis-match against today's heavier cars in a multi-vehicle collision. A tiny car like that would have to absorb the brunt of the impact.
-juice
No, mine were held together with that plastic and some rope, and then tied down with rope and several bungees.
-juice
How easy is it to load a bike on one of those racks?
Shoot, if I could invest $500 in a rack system I'd rather do that than consider buying a slightly larger vehicle to accomodate my bikes (the xA interior just....just...allows one mountain bike with the front wheel off---it's a tight fit).
Also you can add a trailer hitch and buy one of those types of bike racks...just plug 'em in and out.
Both current vehicles have a 1 1/4 trailer hitch, the rack slides in and bolts on. Ours will hold up to 4 bikes, but as I said, that much weight that far back you can feel when you are driving. Both of us can load and unload. Our hitch rack doesn't do anything fancy at all (got it on sale for $70 from REI). Nicer ones hold the bikes much better, fold away from the car more effectively and easily, and, most importantly the arms that hold the bikes fold down so you don't need an extra 2' to parallel park.
[EDIT] One downside-the hitch rack will fit any 1 1/4 receiver and ours had an adapter to fit any 2" receiver...all of my friends want to barrow it all the time and its never at my house when I want to use it (the upside to this being I can usually make them go riding with me and they then have to drive since they have the rack, so I save gas...
I've never yet been frustrated loading cargo into the interior of the xA but bikes and other "long" items are a hassle.
Personally I'd rather own a vehicle that works 95% of the time for my uses and fails 5%, then one that is in maximum use 5% and empty for 95%. Driving, insuring, buying and feeding a large vehicle that carries one person and a container of milk around 95% of the time seems irrational to me just because you might "need it" for the occasional event. I always used to laugh at the "plywood" comment when judging the interior size of a vehicle, as if the person did this regularly when in fact it was 2X a year. I just have the yard pre-cut it to pieces close to what I want and then I do the trimming at home.
Just how many times do people who own a large SUV, or even a minivan, actually use the extra space?
When we leased our Expedition back in 1998, my wife was working at a job where she had to go to Sam's Club every other week to buy $500 worth of groceries. No way was that amount of food was going to fit in something smaller!
We took the Expedition (and the Explorer that followed it) on a couple of road trips to Los Angeles and Las Vegas.
At the time, our kids were pre-teen and teenagers, so we were constantly hauling their friends around. Wife refused to buy a minivan, so we stayed with the SUV's.
However, like you, the first time we did the trip to the west coast, we rented a Taurus that cost us nothing - used my Amex reward points.
Now, we drive what we feel are "right sized" vehicles - Saturn VUE for the wife, and a Saturn L300 for me.
Can you tow that with an xA? Probably not (the trailer and contents are less than 1000lbs though so maybe). Can you tow it with an Accord? Definitely. (nothing against the xA, I was just making the point that you can still have a relatively small vehicle like a 10 year old Accord function as an SUV on occasion).
Unloaded the car gets ~30mpg, loaded pulling the trailer it gets like 12, but thats not important. It only tows maybe 2 or 3x a year so I am not paying for capacity I am not using.
However, that $200-300 worth of groceries would usually include bulky items like toilet paper, paper towels, a 50 pound bag of kibble, a 30 pound tub of cat litter, a 24/30 pack of bottled water, etc.
And the roof rack cross bars came standard. So all I'd need to buy are clamps, and then Subaru re-sells all the Yakima stuff. You can even use Chase credit card's Subaru Bucks rewards to pay for them.
Any how, I have what you mentioned later - a hitch-mounted bike rack. It only fits 2 bikes, I wish it could hold 3, but at least it does tilt out of the way so I can open the hatch.
-juice
Full article:
http://www.scionevolution.org/home/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=127- &Itemid=1
Swing-Away Thule 998XT Trailblazer hitch bike racks
It swings away from the car altogether to give access to the hatch, and the arms fold down so it doesn't stick out as far behind the vehicle.
I think there is a 1 1/4 version of this rack as well.
Scion xA cargo area -- oh, way more than a Tracker.
Here's what you can stuff into an xA:
xA Cargo
So that stuff is way more than 10-15 grocery bags.
That really doesn't look like a whole lot to me. Throw that 2-drawer cabinet in the back of my Intrepid and the rest of that stuff would probably fit in the trunk. My buddy's Tracker could probably swallow most of that with no trouble. Maybe if you had a pic of all the stuff packed in the car, or with a person standing by it, I'd get a better visual of just how much stuff that is.
When I moved a few years ago, we used the Tracker to transport the tv sets...a 25" console tv that dates back to the Iran hostage crisis and a newer 32" tube tv. NOT at the same time though!
I do remember there was something funny about the way the back seats folded on that Tracker, though. Seemed like they still took up an awful lot of room. I think the seatbacks folded forward, mostly flat, and then the whole thing tumbled forward. It's a shame they didn't make them where you could easily remove them.
xA usable cargo space with back seats flipped down is:
54" front to back
31" of height
50" of width
So it's a far amount of room. I don't think your Intrepid could take an object as bulky as what might fit in an xA even though you might have similar cargo area in inches.
What sold us were its good value (accessories, interior quality, and amenities relative to its MSRP), driving feel (very quick and sporty), maneuverability (tight turning radius and responsive steering), trim size (about 80% overall size of a typical minivan, e.g. the Sienna) and overall build quality. After some aggressive negotiating, our out-the-door price was just over $21,000.
We concur with Consumer Reports that the Mazda 5's 4-cylinder engine could use more power (especially when fully loaded), but then its mileage would be lower and its price would be higher. In the end, we chose the better MPG (all the time) over the greater horsepower (needed infrequently). With regard to its size, the Mazda 5 is about 4 inches shorter in length than our BMW 528i. What a surprise!
Hope this helps.
One reason I got the xA is that the design reminded me (in concept, not look) of the Saab 5-door hatch.
The new Matrix has a neat feature...it's a 5-door hatch with a front seat that folds completely flat...so you can stuff in an object long enough to reach from tailgate to dashboard!
I guess that's one thing that makes the newer hatchbacks so versatile, is that many of them have a big station wagon style rear door, instead of the older styles where you still had to lift stuff up over a high sill in back.
About 8 or 9 years ago, I put a newer seats in my '68 Dart. I forget what they were out of...something like an early 70's Demon/Duster most likely. With the seat all the way back, I could fold the passenger side seatback all the way down to where it was flat. The driver's side would have been able to do it too, except for the steering wheel.
When I delivered pizzas, for awhile Little Caesar's was selling this mess called "Pizza By the Foot", which came in a long, skinny box about 4 feet long. That folding seatback came in really handy for transporting those things, and getting them into and out of the car easily. I remember we had this other driver, a chunky dude who filled up about half of the cab of his little 80's Nissan pickup truck. He ended up quitting, because he couldn't fit them beside them in the cab! Guess he could've put them back in the bed, but they most likely would have slid around. And they never did think this promotion through...we had no hot-bags that would fit the things! I would usually just take one hot-bag and put it on either end, and that covered most of it.
That fold-flat front seat is a neat feature. I think my buddy's Xterra does it, too.
Situation
Insurance Institute for Highway Safety says small cars not intrinsically dangerous on own
But technology can't overcome inherent weight disadvantage in collision w/ larger vehicle
In all crash types, 117 driver deaths per million subcompacts in 2004 vs 68 for midsize cars
Driver fatality rate in multiple-vehicle crashes highest for smallest category of cars
Safety advocates say cautious driving can mitigate risk of being injured in crash
Carmakers increasing crash compatibility of different sized vehicles to reduce injury risk
Significant Points
Automakers adding more safety features to small cars: ABS, ESC, side-curtain air bags
Today's small vehicle shopper less interested in lowest price, more willing to pay for features
Many new subcompacts earn good ratings in crash tests
But IIHS says even w/ good performance, size counts against them
Says 5-star subcompact less safe than 5-star larger, heavier vehicle
IIHS expects fatalities/injuries to rise w/ shift to smaller vehicles
Counter point
In all crash types, 117 driver deaths per million subcompacts in 2004 vs 68 for midsize cars
More young people by smaller cars because they are less $$$, make riskier driving decisions, have more accidents, etc
Anyone can "afford" a couple of year used larger GM or Ford or simmilar for less than the price of the cheapest new car.
People drive small cars by choice. Not based upon economics.
Younger drivers tend to drive the smaller cars.
Younger drivers tend to drive more aggressively
Hence smaller cars are more likely to be driven more aggressively.
Now since more aggressive driving results in a higher accident rate and a higher accident rate would result in a higher fatality rate. Hence cars being driven more aggressively (more small cars than large ones) would result in a higher fatality rate.
People drive small cars by choice. Not based upon economics.
Not true many people drive a small car because of economics. many people who cannot afford larger car will buy the less expensive smaller cars.
So while some may drive a small car by choice, others buy them out of economics.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Remember when the Camaro was billed as the deadliest car in the world? Well, duh, look who drove them.
Also, we should look at the "relative" safety of the modern subcompact...it's far safer than a 1985 Civic...how could it not be with ABS, side, front, head airbags and traction controls?
But yes, if a Southern Pacific locomotive hits your Echo, it's going to hurt.
No it won't. That Southern Pacific locomotive wont feel a thing and will shrug it off.
The Echo and its occupants will not hurt either they will simply cease to exists.
Remember folks ties go to the train.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
I prefer to drive a small car that pollutes less. Yes, I risk not surviving a crash, but at least I know I'm not killing the planet - or my grandkids.
Gets 22/27 mpg highway in normal driving. That's not a whole lot worse than some of the smaller cars like a Mini(23/32) or Mazda 6. 24/31 with the tiny 4 cyl engine - the 6(20/27) is worse than the Buick, despite being 500 pounds lighter(3378lbs vs 3879lbs).
And it looked like just about any of the modern 5-door compact/sub-compacts out there. It could easily have been mistaken in passing (so to speak) for an xA, and not so easily for a Matrix. It has that getting taller towards the passenger seat effect that you the Mazda3 or Fit don't have (that I remember).
So...what's wrong with sub-compacts these days? Smaller cars have less room for design innovation. Or maybe I'm the only one who doesn't consider a taillight redesign to be "innovation" (it *is* definitely design, though).
However, the Mini does have the lowest Green House gas emissions at 6.3 tons, a ton and a half less than that of the Buick (at 7.9 tons). Not as safe, but still better for the environment.
Me? I’d choose the 2005 manual Echo – mileage is 35/42, the pollution score is 2 but the GHG are only 4.8!
As far as NHTSA crash ratings go, the Buick is pretty impressive. It received a front seat, side impact rating of 4 stars, whereas the Mazda6 and the Echo only receive 3. (I couldn’t find the stats for the MINI.) However, at least as far as the Mazda6 goes, it is worse in frontal collisions (3 stars vs. 4 for the Mazda). What’s this? A lighter car safer in frontal collisions than a heavier car? Say it ain’t so!
In all crash types, 117 driver deaths per million subcompacts in 2004 vs 68 for midsize cars
More young people by smaller cars because they are less $$$, make riskier driving decisions, have more accidents, etc
Anyone know what the average age of subcompact buyers is? I bet it's 30 or better. The current crop of small cars is just too stodgy for most 18 year-olds, with the possible exception of the xA.
I don't believe that subcompacts, as a class, are being driven by the group of drivers who are most aggressive and prone to higher accident rates.