Ok but also remember that there are no seat belts except for the driver and only one door. Plus they don't handle that well and can't really go that fast.
Me: But officer I couldn't have been doing 65 MPH This thing barely does 55 MPH.
Not to mention parking is a big headache, plus the expense of making your garage bigger.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
>Look at the Accord, Camry, Corolla, Civic, Odyssey, etc... How many different versions of these cars have been at GM or Ford under different names.
I don't think GM or Ford has sold any of those models you have listed. :confuse:
>as folks over the age of 60 get older and older and stop driving, the need for a lot of GM cars (especially Buicks) will disappear. It seems like the internet-aged folks are more likely to do more research on their car purchases compared to older folks who go back to their GM or Ford dealer every three years to have the dealer "guide" them to their next car that they'll drive for another 3 years.
I find your sterotyping of people offensive. I have driven HoToy for the past 5 purchases since 1986. I keep cars longer than 3 years. I have few problems for repair. JD Powers indicates maintenance problems statistically about the same for models.
> I still don't trust their reliability.
How're the transmissions of the Camry, Aurora, Lexus doing with the shift flares and hesitations these days? Are your Honda trannies still failing at same rates in Pilots, Accords, and Odysseys? Yeah, I know, they replace them up to 100K. Then you can wait for the next failure. Any sludging in your Toyota motor or did they get that perfect design fixed. The point is all cars have some problems; it's all in the owner's perception of those problems (with some help from media and magazines).
Why would someone who buys vehicles by the pound even read a subcompact thread, let alone participate.
I know this wasn't directed at me, but check out the title of this thread. It's called What is "wrong" with these new subcompacts Let's face it, with a title like that, it just begs people to come on in and say what exactly IS wrong with them! It's not just a thread for people who would make love to and marry their subcompact if it were legal in all 50 states! :P
You seem unable to understand that some of us PREFER smaller/lighter/nimble/responsive. I would choose a Mini over a Buick even if it cost MORE and consumed more fuel!
Yeah, and on the flip side, there are people who wouldn't be caught dead in a subcompact, whether the reasons are rational or not. In the end, it's all about what your preferences are. If small size is your primary concern, more power to you. But not everyone has the same priorities, thankfully. Otherwise the world would be a pretty boring place.
>Look at the Accord, Camry, Corolla, Civic, Odyssey, etc... How many different versions of these cars have been at GM or Ford under different names.
I don't think GM or Ford has sold any of those models you have listed.
What I meant was that the Ford/GM equivilants (Taurus, Fusion, etc...) to the Accord/Camry keep changing, while Honda and Toyota keep the same models and just upgrade them.
I find your sterotyping of people offensive. I have driven HoToy for the past 5 purchases since 1986. I keep cars longer than 3 years. I have few problems for repair. JD Powers indicates maintenance problems statistically about the same for models.
I say what I see, and what I see when I'm passing a Buick going 55mph in the left lane is some couple who look over the age of 60. What I observe is not a sterotype, so if I observe older people driving around the bigger GMs and Fords, then there's no reason to take offense for me stating my observations.
And are you saying that GM/Ford have equal quality/reliability to Honda/Toyota? If so, then I think that CR and all their black circles for GM and all the red ones for Honda must be wrong, as well as just about every review I've read. The Initial 90 day quality ratings from JD Powers are pretty meaningless. Who cares about the first 90 days?
It may sound strange, but there is a value to me in parking my 157" Fit in my garage versus a 4dr sedan that's 2 to 3 feet longer.
I know there's been an ongoing trend towards smaller garages, but are they getting THAT small? 2 feet longer than a 157" Fit is still something small like a Cobalt. And another 12 inches on top of that puts it to about 193", or about what my old 1980 Malibu was. Or a 2006 Altima.
Aren't most garages still about 19-20 feet deep? I guess there is still some advantage though, in that if you have a smaller car to park, you have more space in your garage to store junk! :P
One of my friends has a townhouse with a garage, and it barely holds his 2001.5 Passat. However, he has shelves on the far wall. His garage is definitely undersized. Even if you took out the shelves, you'd still only have about 18 feet. Suffice to it to say he's not getting his 1978 Mark V in there! :surprise:
Hey man, you gotta read what I wrote. The BASE Mini Cooper makes like 28/36, and that's about to go up in early 2007 with the new model.
But listen to what everybody else is saying - it's really more about getting the appropriate-size vehicle for the job, and finding one you can actually have some fun in also. Fun in a Grand Prix or Malibu? Not on your life. And I know some, perhaps including you, really don't understand this, but for many of us, those extra thousands of pounds of steel you laud are the PROBLEM, not a bonus.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Exactly! My other car in our garage is a Ford Freestyle at 199" but I'm one of those strange people in our neighborhood that actually puts two cars in a two car garage!
the 60 year old buyer isn't their problem. 60 really isn't that "old" anymore. The first baby boomers just started turning 60 this year, and most of them still have many future car purchases to look forward too.
However, I remember fairly recently that the average buyer age of the LeSabre was around 67. The average Century and LeSabre buyer was 70. The Regal was their most youthful car, with an average buyer age of around 55. I think the Rendezvous broke the 50 barrier though.
Also, the average 60 year old buyer today is different from the average 60 year old buyer of, say, 20-25 years ago. My grandparents on my Mom's side of the family bought their last new car, a 1985 LeSabre, when Grandmom was 60 and Granddad was 68. They grew up on purely American cars, and remember a time when American cars reigned supreme and Japanese cars were these tinny little things that could barely get out of their own way no matter how much noise their little engines made, and which had all the rust resistance of a 1971 Vega or, at best, a '76 Volare that missed the recall. They tended to be much more brand loyal, and images of things like World War Two were still fresh on their minds.
But today, the typical 60 year old has probably experienced several generations of ever-improving import cars. There's also a much wider choice of cars to pick from today, as well. In 1985, when my grandparents bought their Buick, the Japanese didn't make full-sized cars. They barely made midsized cars. The Accord was still a subcompact. The Maxima and Camry were compacts. The biggest car the Japanese could muster up at the time, the Cressida, barely qualified as midsized at around 186 inches, was compact inside, and was priced about the same as something like a Buick Electra or Olds 98. Today the Japanese dominate the midsized market. If the fullsized market was as big as it was in 1985, I have a feeling the Japanese would be dominating it as well by now. But even so, the Avalon has a definite presence in that shrunken market.
What Buick needs to do is find a way to keep the current crop of 50-60 year olds, which for the most part are going to have different tastes from the 50-60 year olds of days gone by.
To an extent, Buick has been successful with cars like the Lucerne and LaCrosse. I don't know what their average buyer age is, but I'm sure it's less than the 67-70 that the bulk of their products had been. Still, look at how much Buick's market share and sales have shrunk. Back in their heyday in the 70's, Buick could easily toss out 800,000+ cars, even in a so-so year. They were a much more broadly appealing car back then, though. If you combine everything that Buick sells today...LaCrosse, Lucerne, Rainier, Rendezvous, and that minivan whose name eludes me right now, would they even break 300,000 units this year?
I'm one of those strange people in our neighborhood that actually puts two cars in a two car garage!
So am I, add in the lawn mower, tool chest, gardening supplies, the second fridge (gotta have space for the beer) and the like and it starts getting crowded in there with two full size cars.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
I think he means (maybe?) radical mileage-stretching techniques or driving very slowly and precisely.
Another factor in changing car purchases these days are the punitive speeding laws in the United States. I found driving in a 300HP Porsche immensely frustrating in California. Basically I came to the subjective conclusion that that much horsepower is 99% useless in the year 2006....at least in a passenger car....perhaps not in a truck.
The old cliche seems more reasonable than ever: "It's more fun to drive a slow car fast than a fast car slow" (ly).
That's another reason to buy a subcompact...you're not as isolated from the road as you are in a bigger, heavier car, so when you're driving about 70mph in a subcompact, it's more fun than driving 70mph in an isolated cocoon of a big car.
But I'll stop my comments, as this is a forum for what's wrong with subcompacts, not what's right.
I think he means (maybe?) radical mileage-stretching techniques or driving very slowly and precisely.
Its still 25% over EPA estiments which is a lot.
I found driving in a 300HP Porsche immensely frustrating in California. Basically I came to the subjective conclusion that that much horsepower is 99% useless in the year 2006.
I agree with that, when I drive my 400 HP Caddy I rarely use all that power. FWIW I only use it to put 300HP Porsche's in their place. :P
But really how useful is all that HP when I can get to the SL in under 5 seconds?
Another thing that makes driving high HP cars frustrating is the heavy traffic that I find myself in daily. You can only accelerate as fast as the guy in front of you. And when your snaking along a street in bumper to bumper traffic thats doing 30MPH you might as well be driving a economy car as a 300-400 HP car won't outperform a Yugo under those conditions.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
That's another reason to buy a subcompact...you're not as isolated from the road as you are in a bigger, heavier car, so when you're driving about 70mph in a subcompact, it's more fun than driving 70mph in an isolated cocoon of a big car.
I think that isolation is going to depend more with how the steering and suspension are set up, how much insulation the car has, tires, etc, than simply size. My 2000 Intrepid feels pretty well-connected to the road, and I'm sure it would be considered big among you subcompact lovers.
My grandmother's cousin has a 1989 Coupe DeVille, which is a bit smaller than my Intrepid, and positively tiny compared to some of the battlecruisers I've owned. And with FWD and rack-and-pinion steering, you'd think it would have a somewhat nimble, well-connected feel to it. However, it doesn't. I drove it a few times, and I swear it can float and sway and make you seasick with some of the grandest yachts of the 1970's. It feels like a much bigger car than it is. The biggest car I ever had was a 1969 Bonneville. 125" wheelbase, 225" long, and probably about 4500 pounds, but I swear it was a sportscar compared to my Grandma's cousin's Coupe DeVille.
I think sometimes they just try to "engineer", if you can call it that, a big car feel, because that's what they think the buying public wants. This trend probably started back in the 70's when people were forced, grudgingly, into ever smaller cars, but they didn't want to give up that "big car" ride and feel. That's why we ended up with things like the Granada, which while they were about the smallest of the domestic compacts of the time (GM's Nova and Chrysler's Dart/Valiant were notably larger), their handling was sloppy enough that it would have probably been embarrassing in your typical late 50's car!
I haven't driven a Cobalt, but I wonder if one reason that it's so heavy is to impart more of a quality, sturdy feel. But then, the Cavalier was pretty heavy too! A BMW 3-series is about the size of a Toyota Corolla, but weighs about 700-800 pounds more, and feels like a much sturdier, beefy, quality automobile. Makes a Corolla feel like a tin can. And a 3-series would easily outhandle a Corolla. So it's not necessarily a given that the heavier car will be the poorer handling.
oh, that's nothing. There is some kind of weird hyper-mileage club discussion board out there on the internet I ran into once. There are many claims of 50%+ over epa. I'll certainly never understand it (and have a tough time believing it), but there it is.
'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
I had an '88 LeBaron turbo coupe for a short time. It was the 146 hp 2.2 Turbo I with a 3-speed automatic. It was only EPA-rated at 20/25. No doubt the lack of an overdrive gear hurt its highway rating.
Still, I found that if I drove really slow and annoying, I could get it to break 30 mpg in local driving. Now normally 20 mpg WAS about what it got around town, but it was possible (but not that feasible, as it wasted a lot of time) to get it up to 30.
As for highway economy, I took it cross-country on my honeymoon, and for the most part got about 27-28 mpg. I was pretty impressed, considering that I was going a lot faster than the EPA would do in their controlled tests. On the stretches that the wife drove though, she was able to break 30.
My buddy with the 2001.5 Passat likes to do that hypermiling stuff, and I think he's been able to get it to break 40 mpg on the highway. I think it's EPA rating is around 28-29? He had a 1990 or so Dodge Dynasty with the 3.3 V-6 and 4-speed Ultradrive (the one that started Chrysler's reputation for bad transmissions) and he could get mid to upper 30's on the highway. I'm sure its EPA rating was only about 26-28 on the highway.
Yeah and I know websites that say that Elvis is alive, the world is flat and many other things too. I'll certainly never understand it (and have a tough time believing it), but there it is.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
And a 3-series would easily outhandle a Corolla. So it's not necessarily a given that the heavier car will be the poorer handling.
But because of the speed limits in this country, most of the added capability of BMWs, Mercedes, etc., are wasted in this country. I do agree that going 140mph, I'd rather be in a BMW 3 series then in a Corolla, but for 99% of the driving that most Americans do, driving around in a Corolla S version might feel more fun.
This presupposes that the capabilities don't come into play until the platform is pushed.
That supposition would be false. Most especially, cars with excellent or superior handling capabilities exhibit their advantages throughout their range of operation, and really begin to shine well before limits are even approached. There is more than enough joy to be derived from the difference, IMO, from 25-65 mph to make the added entertainment investment ever so well worth it...
I guess it depends on the definition of what feels "fun" when you're driving. I was just agreeing with the person who posted that it's more fun to drive a slow car fast (eg Corolla) then a fast car slow (eg BMW). Just like you can have "fun" driving a Corvette 65mph on the interstate, but I doubt if it's much more "fun" than driving a Corolla 65mph on the interstate.
Nothing fun about driving an interstate in the first place, IMO.
I can't even tell you my estimation of the personality who looks to freeway driving as fun driving, save maybe in sightseeing mode, I guess.
No, I'm talking about in town and around the periphery. Suburban and inter-rural; curvy roads or at least taking turns of some kind is where the joy is to be found - in the most banal of locales.
A smaller car with great handling makes everyday tasking much more palatable, IMO, than any isolation booth on wheels, regardless if it's fast or not... :shades:
A smaller car with great handling makes everyday tasking much more palatable, IMO, than any isolation booth on wheels, regardless if it's fast or not...
Exactly!! And there are lots of small cars out there for less than $20 that will give you this sort of fun.
Here's the chain, so I responded (#3845) to wale_batel's post #3844. You're not even in this chain of replies, so that's 5 min in the penalty box for you!
#3844 of 3847 Re: Well [bobw3] by wale_bate1 Nov 15, 2006 (10:18 am) Bookmark | Reply | E-mail Msg Replying to: bobw3 (Nov 15, 2006 10:10 am)
Nothing fun about driving an interstate in the first place, IMO.
I can't even tell you my estimation of the personality who looks to freeway driving as fun driving, save maybe in sightseeing mode, I guess.
No, I'm talking about in town and around the periphery. Suburban and inter-rural; curvy roads or at least taking turns of some kind is where the joy is to be found - in the most banal of locales.
A smaller car with great handling makes everyday tasking much more palatable, IMO, than any isolation booth on wheels, regardless if it's fast or not... Replies to this message: • bobw3 (Nov 15, 2006 10:22 am)
#3845 of 3847 Re: Well [wale_bate1] by bobw3 Nov 15, 2006 (10:22 am) Bookmark | Reply | Edit | Delete | E-mail Msg Replying to: wale_bate1 (Nov 15, 2006 10:18 am)
A smaller car with great handling makes everyday tasking much more palatable, IMO, than any isolation booth on wheels, regardless if it's fast or not...
Exactly!! And there are lots of small cars out there for less than $20 that will give you this sort of fun. #3846 of 3847 Re: Well [bobw3] by qbrozen Nov 15, 2006 (10:26 am) Bookmark | Reply | E-mail Msg Replying to: bobw3 (Nov 15, 2006 9:38 am)
why did you reply to my post with that quote?
The reply button is not to be abused, mister. That's 3 minutes in the penalty box for you!
check the little links at the top of each post. If you ever want to see what someone is replying to, you just click the link.
In your 9:38 post (#3841), you replied to my 9:08 post, which had nothing to do with a corolla or bmw. I saw my name in the title of your reply, which is why i caught my attention.
And my 10:26 post is in reply to your 9:38 post, not your 10:18 post. Again, you just need to click the link where it says "reply to: ...." if there is ever any confusion.
Properly used tools are happy tools.
'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
I agree with bobw3's comment in post 3841. I've "slummed" down my car to a 2006 Toyota Corolla with aftermarket tires. BMW's, Porsche's and Corvettes only tempted me to drive fast, and I did, resulting in tickets and insurance grief. There are simply too many people in the US to truly "enjoy" a car. Ninety-five percent of the enjoyment of a BMW can be had with a Honda Civic SI or Toyota Celica GTS, at 1/2 the cost. I think my current Corolla with aftermarket tires has about 90 % of the handling capability of a BMW. If I want to ride hard again, I'll consider building a personal race track or rent one for a few hours and keep my sports car off public streets.
if you were talking about #3842 you should have said so in the first place
i did ... when i hit the "reply" button on that message. ;b
As long as the discussion stays on the topic, I think most people can figure it out.
but wouldn't "all" be a much better number than "most"?
personally, i rely heavily on the "replying to:" i follow too many threads (in between stopping to do actual work) to remember what was on the page before.
PLUS, you have to remember what we're talking about here. Its a very broad topic with many different threads going on at the same time.
Its not a big deal. I mean, i was obviously joking a bit. But it can get confusing to see someone's name in the title of a post and it has nothing to do with what they were talking about (or contains a quote that was not from that person).
'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
There are simply too many people in the US to truly "enjoy" a car.
Heck, it gets to the point around here that I don't even get to push my '85 Silverado to its fullest capability, let alone a performance car!
Well, okay, there's one moment on my way into work, where I have to make a right turn from my side street onto a 4-lane divided road with a 45 mph speed limit. That's about the only time I get to take advantage of its ~12 second 0-60 time, and even there, chances are I won't make it to 60, unless I want to rear end somebody. Or if I'm lucky enough to turn on that road between packs of traffic, I might be able to get up to 60-65 for a brief moment, until I catch up to the pack in front of me.
Maybe a sporty car would allow me to take the turns quicker, but that's a moot point too. The vast majority of the time, the biggest factor slowing my down in corners is the traffic in front of me, and not any inherent failing in the truck itself.
And I guess you could argue that something that big would have marginal brakes, but that's not necessarily true. At least, about a month ago, I got to experience first-hand that I can stop my '85 Silverado quicker than the girl behind me could stop her 2000 Infiniti! Witness Exhibit A. I wish I had a picture of Exhibit B, but trust me, Exhibit B was in the body shop for a much longer amount of time than Exhibit A was! :P
Ninety-five percent of the enjoyment of a BMW can be had with a Honda Civic SI or Toyota Celica GTS, at 1/2 the cost.
Nah. For most of the masses, the enjoyment of the BMW is in the name, and that pretty little propeller badge on the hood. Snob appeal, all the way. No Honda or Toyota is going to deliver that, no matter how good the actual car wearing the badge is. :shades:
"For most of the masses, the enjoyment of the BMW is in the name, and that pretty little propeller badge on the hood. Snob appeal, all the way."
People always say that, but I have to disagree. The BMW is a better drive in some ways, it's not JUST about snob appeal for many owners.
Having said that, are all the BMWs ridiculously overpriced for what you get in the context of how you can use it on the American roads? Yes, absolutely.
Still, I would like to see BMW finally bring the 1-series here, maybe at around $23-25K (gasp! Sacrilege! I know. :-)). Then maybe you would see some of these subcompact-dislikers (didn't want to say haters! :-P) change their tone all of a sudden. The fact is, superlative subcompacts are being sold right now all over the world. But the general American opinion of these little cars is at least half based on the fact that we get a VERY watered-down selection of subs here in the States. :-(
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Actually I would say that it's not necessarily snob appeal but just people in a higher income bracket. For the average family bringing in $50K/year, spending $40K on a car isn't happening. But if you're making $500K/year then you might only even consider buying BMW, Lexus, Mercedes, etc... because as a percentage of your income, it's less than buying a new Kia for someone making $50K/year. It doesn't mean that everyone making $500K/year are snobs. At that income level, issues like MPG, repair costs, etc don't mean a whole lot. That's why I don't think there's a lot of value comparing the luxury car market to the regular car market. Again, the average American family pulls in about $50K/year, or a little over $3K/month after taxes. This is the real American market.
So a 2003 BMW 325i with 35k is about $23k, about the same as a similarly equipped new Accord. The car has free maintainance for another 15k then a 2 year 100k mile powertrain warranty. The interest rate for a CPO BMW 3series is about 5.8%.
Actually I would say that it's not necessarily snob appeal but just people in a higher income bracket.
Not necessarily true.
My wife and I make a comparable income to my sister and brother in law. We drive two (purchased, making payments) Saturns, while they drive a (leased) Honda Pilot and a (leased) BMW 530i.
Could we afford a BMW? Not at the current moment, what with child support and another kid in college, but in a year from now, I probably could.
Of course, they live in a house valued north of $900K (San Diego), while ours recently appraised at just over $200K (Denver suburbs).
Having said that, it's entirely possible that my next car may be smaller than my current one (Saturn L300). Why? The potential of better mileage, a more 'sporty' drive and more creature comforts for the same cost than a 'stripped' BMW or Audi (or Ford or Chevrolet or Dodge, for that matter).
Again, the average American family pulls in about $50K/year, or a little over $3K/month after taxes. This is the real American market.
Agreed, to a point. Before gas bumped up to the $3/gallon range in the late 90's, I suspect lots of "real" American families were leasing gigantic SUV's and pickups that got 12/14/16 MPG. I know because we did it - first an Expedition, then an Explorer. Lots of folks do it for 'status'; I'm not ashamed to admit that we probably fell into that trap.
The Explorer got traded in for a Focus .. almost double the mileage (30MPG vs. 16) for 50-60% of the payment .. and, being a stick, the Focus was a heck of a lot more fun to drive!
Still, I would like to see BMW finally bring the 1-series here, maybe at around $23-25K
Surprisingly, I agree with that statement! Same with the MB B-class that is available in Canada. Would love to see more 'premium' compacts and sub-compacts here in the states, to compete with the Mini.
Who needs yet one more small FWDer to choose from?
The one-series intrigues, but given my current car and what I like as well as what one takes in a package to get what one likes, I'd be looking at it more in the $32K-$37K range, or about what I'd gladly/ecstatically spend on an A3 3.2Q, were it RWD.
I don't agree with post 3856. I could buy 5 BMW's with my cash reserves tomorrow and I wouldn't need a loan or have to sell funds or stock. Would I? Absolutely not. Why? Quality does not scale with price. For a car priced 3 X that of a Corolla, I would want a 9 year / 108 K warranty with lifetime maintenance costs covered. Is a BMW a more fun to drive than a Corolla? Yes, but that doesn't trump practicality or common sense. Consumer Reports ranks BMW as one of the worst cars on the road. If a company is going to try to charge 3X that of a comparable car, then it better be worth 3 X that car.
otoh, although one car costs more than another, it can be more comfortable, handle and ride better, have more features, have better styling, etc... i guess it depends from your post, on how you interpret 'worth'.
2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
Why should cars be all about practicality and common sense? What a sad world that would be. "Worth" is a subjective idea.
About a year and a half ago I bought a used AMG Mercedes for about the price of a new Corolla. I smile almost every time I drive, and about half the time I don't even turn on the radio, just to listen to the car. It's worth it to me...
What is "wrong" with these subcompacts? They're overpriced, for one. The Versa can approach $16k, and its fuel economy isn't that great.......but here's the real problem--compact cars like the Civic, Sentra, and upcoming new Corolla have become incredibly sophisticated, safe, and fuel efficient. And they only cost $3k more or so, if that. Saving a few bucks/wk on gas in a subcompact just isn't worth the tradeoffs and compromises.
How is the Civic, Sentra or Corolla any better than a Fit or Versa?
And to all those previous posts, I'm only comparing NEW cars. If you're going down the road of comparing a new Corolla to a used BMW at the same price that's a whole different topic, but in general, I wouldn't want to have the repair costs of a used BMW.
No headlights, no AC, no heater, no stereo, no defroster, accelerate like an egg is under your foot, barely going over idle speed. And of course, drafting anything that moves and keeping your speed to exactly 50mph at all times.
Yeah.. possible.. Heh.
I got 40 mpg out of a 1987 LeSabre once. Ended up going to my friends house and suddenly I realized that it was 20 miles to his house and then twenty back to the gas station(DUH). 1400rpm, drafting every semi I could, letting it roll down hills, and so on.. made it.
What is "wrong" with these subcompacts? They're overpriced, for one. The Versa can approach $16k, and its fuel economy isn't that great.......but here's the real problem--compact cars like the Civic, Sentra, and upcoming new Corolla have become incredibly sophisticated, safe, and fuel efficient. And they only cost $3k more or so, if that. Saving a few bucks/wk on gas in a subcompact just isn't worth the tradeoffs and compromises.
Actually, I'd imagine a Versa can easily top $16K. About two months ago I was at the local Nissan dealer and they had one Versa on the lot. It was a bit over $16K, and while it was decently equipped, it didn't have a sunroof, and I'm sure there were a few other things it was missing.
Still, not a bad car. Personally I'd go ahead and spend the extra $2-3K to get into a basic Altima (although with the '07 Altima out they might be more than that now), but then I prefer a bigger car.
I haven't checked out the '07 Sentra yet, but I'd definitely take a Versa over the '06 Sentra, and probably a Corolla as well. The Versa's seating position was still a bit sub-standard for my tastes, but I'd rank it above the Corolla and way above the '06 Sentra. I like the Civic though, although it gets a bit more pricey.
With inflation being what it is, $3K might not seem like much money these days, but it's still enough to be a make-or-break decision with many people buying a car. An extra $3K might be more than what they're willing to pay. Or more than they can qualify for on a loan.
The Versa also isn't the best example to use as a subcompact, either. It's considerably larger than the xA, Yaris, and FIT. I'd consider it more of a borderline compact.
Comments
Me: But officer I couldn't have been doing 65 MPH This thing barely does 55 MPH.
Not to mention parking is a big headache, plus the expense of making your garage bigger.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
I don't think GM or Ford has sold any of those models you have listed. :confuse:
>as folks over the age of 60 get older and older and stop driving, the need for a lot of GM cars (especially Buicks) will disappear. It seems like the internet-aged folks are more likely to do more research on their car purchases compared to older folks who go back to their GM or Ford dealer every three years to have the dealer "guide" them to their next car that they'll drive for another 3 years.
I find your sterotyping of people offensive. I have driven HoToy for the past 5 purchases since 1986. I keep cars longer than 3 years. I have few problems for repair. JD Powers indicates maintenance problems statistically about the same for models.
> I still don't trust their reliability.
How're the transmissions of the Camry, Aurora, Lexus doing with the shift flares and hesitations these days? Are your Honda trannies still failing at same rates in Pilots, Accords, and Odysseys? Yeah, I know, they replace them up to 100K. Then you can wait for the next failure. Any sludging in your Toyota motor or did they get that perfect design fixed. The point is all cars have some problems; it's all in the owner's perception of those problems (with some help from media and magazines).
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I know this wasn't directed at me, but check out the title of this thread. It's called What is "wrong" with these new subcompacts Let's face it, with a title like that, it just begs people to come on in and say what exactly IS wrong with them! It's not just a thread for people who would make love to and marry their subcompact if it were legal in all 50 states! :P
You seem unable to understand that some of us PREFER smaller/lighter/nimble/responsive. I would choose a Mini over a Buick even if it cost MORE and consumed more fuel!
Yeah, and on the flip side, there are people who wouldn't be caught dead in a subcompact, whether the reasons are rational or not. In the end, it's all about what your preferences are. If small size is your primary concern, more power to you. But not everyone has the same priorities, thankfully. Otherwise the world would be a pretty boring place.
I don't think GM or Ford has sold any of those models you have listed.
What I meant was that the Ford/GM equivilants (Taurus, Fusion, etc...) to the Accord/Camry keep changing, while Honda and Toyota keep the same models and just upgrade them.
I find your sterotyping of people offensive. I have driven HoToy for the past 5 purchases since 1986. I keep cars longer than 3 years. I have few problems for repair. JD Powers indicates maintenance problems statistically about the same for models.
I say what I see, and what I see when I'm passing a Buick going 55mph in the left lane is some couple who look over the age of 60. What I observe is not a sterotype, so if I observe older people driving around the bigger GMs and Fords, then there's no reason to take offense for me stating my observations.
And are you saying that GM/Ford have equal quality/reliability to Honda/Toyota? If so, then I think that CR and all their black circles for GM and all the red ones for Honda must be wrong, as well as just about every review I've read. The Initial 90 day quality ratings from JD Powers are pretty meaningless. Who cares about the first 90 days?
I know there's been an ongoing trend towards smaller garages, but are they getting THAT small? 2 feet longer than a 157" Fit is still something small like a Cobalt. And another 12 inches on top of that puts it to about 193", or about what my old 1980 Malibu was. Or a 2006 Altima.
Aren't most garages still about 19-20 feet deep? I guess there is still some advantage though, in that if you have a smaller car to park, you have more space in your garage to store junk! :P
One of my friends has a townhouse with a garage, and it barely holds his 2001.5 Passat. However, he has shelves on the far wall. His garage is definitely undersized. Even if you took out the shelves, you'd still only have about 18 feet. Suffice to it to say he's not getting his 1978 Mark V in there! :surprise:
But listen to what everybody else is saying - it's really more about getting the appropriate-size vehicle for the job, and finding one you can actually have some fun in also. Fun in a Grand Prix or Malibu? Not on your life. And I know some, perhaps including you, really don't understand this, but for many of us, those extra thousands of pounds of steel you laud are the PROBLEM, not a bonus.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I probably could do 45 mpg in a base MINI Cooper.
Down which hill and how strong a tail wind?
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
However, I remember fairly recently that the average buyer age of the LeSabre was around 67. The average Century and LeSabre buyer was 70. The Regal was their most youthful car, with an average buyer age of around 55. I think the Rendezvous broke the 50 barrier though.
Also, the average 60 year old buyer today is different from the average 60 year old buyer of, say, 20-25 years ago. My grandparents on my Mom's side of the family bought their last new car, a 1985 LeSabre, when Grandmom was 60 and Granddad was 68. They grew up on purely American cars, and remember a time when American cars reigned supreme and Japanese cars were these tinny little things that could barely get out of their own way no matter how much noise their little engines made, and which had all the rust resistance of a 1971 Vega or, at best, a '76 Volare that missed the recall. They tended to be much more brand loyal, and images of things like World War Two were still fresh on their minds.
But today, the typical 60 year old has probably experienced several generations of ever-improving import cars. There's also a much wider choice of cars to pick from today, as well. In 1985, when my grandparents bought their Buick, the Japanese didn't make full-sized cars. They barely made midsized cars. The Accord was still a subcompact. The Maxima and Camry were compacts. The biggest car the Japanese could muster up at the time, the Cressida, barely qualified as midsized at around 186 inches, was compact inside, and was priced about the same as something like a Buick Electra or Olds 98. Today the Japanese dominate the midsized market. If the fullsized market was as big as it was in 1985, I have a feeling the Japanese would be dominating it as well by now. But even so, the Avalon has a definite presence in that shrunken market.
What Buick needs to do is find a way to keep the current crop of 50-60 year olds, which for the most part are going to have different tastes from the 50-60 year olds of days gone by.
To an extent, Buick has been successful with cars like the Lucerne and LaCrosse. I don't know what their average buyer age is, but I'm sure it's less than the 67-70 that the bulk of their products had been. Still, look at how much Buick's market share and sales have shrunk. Back in their heyday in the 70's, Buick could easily toss out 800,000+ cars, even in a so-so year. They were a much more broadly appealing car back then, though. If you combine everything that Buick sells today...LaCrosse, Lucerne, Rainier, Rendezvous, and that minivan whose name eludes me right now, would they even break 300,000 units this year?
So am I, add in the lawn mower, tool chest, gardening supplies, the second fridge (gotta have space for the beer) and the like and it starts getting crowded in there with two full size cars.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Another factor in changing car purchases these days are the punitive speeding laws in the United States. I found driving in a 300HP Porsche immensely frustrating in California. Basically I came to the subjective conclusion that that much horsepower is 99% useless in the year 2006....at least in a passenger car....perhaps not in a truck.
The old cliche seems more reasonable than ever: "It's more fun to drive a slow car fast than a fast car slow" (ly).
You would have to drive with intention of getting that kind of mileage though and really have to concentrate one what you were doing.
But I'll stop my comments, as this is a forum for what's wrong with subcompacts, not what's right.
Its still 25% over EPA estiments which is a lot.
I found driving in a 300HP Porsche immensely frustrating in California. Basically I came to the subjective conclusion that that much horsepower is 99% useless in the year 2006.
I agree with that, when I drive my 400 HP Caddy I rarely use all that power. FWIW I only use it to put 300HP Porsche's in their place. :P
But really how useful is all that HP when I can get to the SL in under 5 seconds?
Another thing that makes driving high HP cars frustrating is the heavy traffic that I find myself in daily. You can only accelerate as fast as the guy in front of you. And when your snaking along a street in bumper to bumper traffic thats doing 30MPH you might as well be driving a economy car as a 300-400 HP car won't outperform a Yugo under those conditions.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
I think that isolation is going to depend more with how the steering and suspension are set up, how much insulation the car has, tires, etc, than simply size. My 2000 Intrepid feels pretty well-connected to the road, and I'm sure it would be considered big among you subcompact lovers.
My grandmother's cousin has a 1989 Coupe DeVille, which is a bit smaller than my Intrepid, and positively tiny compared to some of the battlecruisers I've owned. And with FWD and rack-and-pinion steering, you'd think it would have a somewhat nimble, well-connected feel to it. However, it doesn't. I drove it a few times, and I swear it can float and sway and make you seasick with some of the grandest yachts of the 1970's. It feels like a much bigger car than it is. The biggest car I ever had was a 1969 Bonneville. 125" wheelbase, 225" long, and probably about 4500 pounds, but I swear it was a sportscar compared to my Grandma's cousin's Coupe DeVille.
I think sometimes they just try to "engineer", if you can call it that, a big car feel, because that's what they think the buying public wants. This trend probably started back in the 70's when people were forced, grudgingly, into ever smaller cars, but they didn't want to give up that "big car" ride and feel. That's why we ended up with things like the Granada, which while they were about the smallest of the domestic compacts of the time (GM's Nova and Chrysler's Dart/Valiant were notably larger), their handling was sloppy enough that it would have probably been embarrassing in your typical late 50's car!
I haven't driven a Cobalt, but I wonder if one reason that it's so heavy is to impart more of a quality, sturdy feel. But then, the Cavalier was pretty heavy too! A BMW 3-series is about the size of a Toyota Corolla, but weighs about 700-800 pounds more, and feels like a much sturdier, beefy, quality automobile. Makes a Corolla feel like a tin can. And a 3-series would easily outhandle a Corolla. So it's not necessarily a given that the heavier car will be the poorer handling.
oh, that's nothing. There is some kind of weird hyper-mileage club discussion board out there on the internet I ran into once. There are many claims of 50%+ over epa. I'll certainly never understand it (and have a tough time believing it), but there it is.
'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
Audi said it was impossible but Top Gear did it.
Impossible Audi Part one
800 miles on one tank of diesel
Still, I found that if I drove really slow and annoying, I could get it to break 30 mpg in local driving. Now normally 20 mpg WAS about what it got around town, but it was possible (but not that feasible, as it wasted a lot of time) to get it up to 30.
As for highway economy, I took it cross-country on my honeymoon, and for the most part got about 27-28 mpg. I was pretty impressed, considering that I was going a lot faster than the EPA would do in their controlled tests. On the stretches that the wife drove though, she was able to break 30.
My buddy with the 2001.5 Passat likes to do that hypermiling stuff, and I think he's been able to get it to break 40 mpg on the highway. I think it's EPA rating is around 28-29? He had a 1990 or so Dodge Dynasty with the 3.3 V-6 and 4-speed Ultradrive (the one that started Chrysler's reputation for bad transmissions) and he could get mid to upper 30's on the highway. I'm sure its EPA rating was only about 26-28 on the highway.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
But because of the speed limits in this country, most of the added capability of BMWs, Mercedes, etc., are wasted in this country. I do agree that going 140mph, I'd rather be in a BMW 3 series then in a Corolla, but for 99% of the driving that most Americans do, driving around in a Corolla S version might feel more fun.
That supposition would be false. Most especially, cars with excellent or superior handling capabilities exhibit their advantages throughout their range of operation, and really begin to shine well before limits are even approached. There is more than enough joy to be derived from the difference, IMO, from 25-65 mph to make the added entertainment investment ever so well worth it...
I can't even tell you my estimation of the personality who looks to freeway driving as fun driving, save maybe in sightseeing mode, I guess.
No, I'm talking about in town and around the periphery. Suburban and inter-rural; curvy roads or at least taking turns of some kind is where the joy is to be found - in the most banal of locales.
A smaller car with great handling makes everyday tasking much more palatable, IMO, than any isolation booth on wheels, regardless if it's fast or not... :shades:
Exactly!! And there are lots of small cars out there for less than $20 that will give you this sort of fun.
The reply button is not to be abused, mister. That's 3 minutes in the penalty box for you!
'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
quite an impressive 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
#3844 of 3847 Re: Well [bobw3] by wale_bate1 Nov 15, 2006 (10:18 am)
Bookmark | Reply | E-mail Msg
Replying to: bobw3 (Nov 15, 2006 10:10 am)
Nothing fun about driving an interstate in the first place, IMO.
I can't even tell you my estimation of the personality who looks to freeway driving as fun driving, save maybe in sightseeing mode, I guess.
No, I'm talking about in town and around the periphery. Suburban and inter-rural; curvy roads or at least taking turns of some kind is where the joy is to be found - in the most banal of locales.
A smaller car with great handling makes everyday tasking much more palatable, IMO, than any isolation booth on wheels, regardless if it's fast or not...
Replies to this message:
• bobw3 (Nov 15, 2006 10:22 am)
#3845 of 3847 Re: Well [wale_bate1] by bobw3 Nov 15, 2006 (10:22 am)
Bookmark | Reply | Edit | Delete | E-mail Msg
Replying to: wale_bate1 (Nov 15, 2006 10:18 am)
A smaller car with great handling makes everyday tasking much more palatable, IMO, than any isolation booth on wheels, regardless if it's fast or not...
Exactly!! And there are lots of small cars out there for less than $20 that will give you this sort of fun.
#3846 of 3847 Re: Well [bobw3] by qbrozen Nov 15, 2006 (10:26 am)
Bookmark | Reply | E-mail Msg
Replying to: bobw3 (Nov 15, 2006 9:38 am)
why did you reply to my post with that quote?
The reply button is not to be abused, mister. That's 3 minutes in the penalty box for you!
check the little links at the top of each post. If you ever want to see what someone is replying to, you just click the link.
In your 9:38 post (#3841), you replied to my 9:08 post, which had nothing to do with a corolla or bmw. I saw my name in the title of your reply, which is why i caught my attention.
And my 10:26 post is in reply to your 9:38 post, not your 10:18 post. Again, you just need to click the link where it says "reply to: ...." if there is ever any confusion.
Properly used tools are happy tools.
'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
i did ... when i hit the "reply" button on that message. ;b
As long as the discussion stays on the topic, I think most people can figure it out.
but wouldn't "all" be a much better number than "most"?
personally, i rely heavily on the "replying to:"
i follow too many threads (in between stopping to do actual work) to remember what was on the page before.
PLUS, you have to remember what we're talking about here. Its a very broad topic with many different threads going on at the same time.
Its not a big deal. I mean, i was obviously joking a bit. But it can get confusing to see someone's name in the title of a post and it has nothing to do with what they were talking about (or contains a quote that was not from that person).
'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
Heck, it gets to the point around here that I don't even get to push my '85 Silverado to its fullest capability, let alone a performance car!
Well, okay, there's one moment on my way into work, where I have to make a right turn from my side street onto a 4-lane divided road with a 45 mph speed limit. That's about the only time I get to take advantage of its ~12 second 0-60 time, and even there, chances are I won't make it to 60, unless I want to rear end somebody. Or if I'm lucky enough to turn on that road between packs of traffic, I might be able to get up to 60-65 for a brief moment, until I catch up to the pack in front of me.
Maybe a sporty car would allow me to take the turns quicker, but that's a moot point too. The vast majority of the time, the biggest factor slowing my down in corners is the traffic in front of me, and not any inherent failing in the truck itself.
And I guess you could argue that something that big would have marginal brakes, but that's not necessarily true. At least, about a month ago, I got to experience first-hand that I can stop my '85 Silverado quicker than the girl behind me could stop her 2000 Infiniti! Witness Exhibit A. I wish I had a picture of Exhibit B, but trust me, Exhibit B was in the body shop for a much longer amount of time than Exhibit A was! :P
Ninety-five percent of the enjoyment of a BMW can be had with a Honda Civic SI or Toyota Celica GTS, at 1/2 the cost.
Nah. For most of the masses, the enjoyment of the BMW is in the name, and that pretty little propeller badge on the hood. Snob appeal, all the way. No Honda or Toyota is going to deliver that, no matter how good the actual car wearing the badge is. :shades:
People always say that, but I have to disagree. The BMW is a better drive in some ways, it's not JUST about snob appeal for many owners.
Having said that, are all the BMWs ridiculously overpriced for what you get in the context of how you can use it on the American roads? Yes, absolutely.
Still, I would like to see BMW finally bring the 1-series here, maybe at around $23-25K (gasp! Sacrilege! I know. :-)). Then maybe you would see some of these subcompact-dislikers (didn't want to say haters! :-P) change their tone all of a sudden. The fact is, superlative subcompacts are being sold right now all over the world. But the general American opinion of these little cars is at least half based on the fact that we get a VERY watered-down selection of subs here in the States. :-(
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
How is this super expensive?
Not necessarily true.
My wife and I make a comparable income to my sister and brother in law. We drive two (purchased, making payments) Saturns, while they drive a (leased) Honda Pilot and a (leased) BMW 530i.
Could we afford a BMW? Not at the current moment, what with child support and another kid in college, but in a year from now, I probably could.
Of course, they live in a house valued north of $900K (San Diego), while ours recently appraised at just over $200K (Denver suburbs).
Having said that, it's entirely possible that my next car may be smaller than my current one (Saturn L300). Why? The potential of better mileage, a more 'sporty' drive and more creature comforts for the same cost than a 'stripped' BMW or Audi (or Ford or Chevrolet or Dodge, for that matter).
Again, the average American family pulls in about $50K/year, or a little over $3K/month after taxes. This is the real American market.
Agreed, to a point. Before gas bumped up to the $3/gallon range in the late 90's, I suspect lots of "real" American families were leasing gigantic SUV's and pickups that got 12/14/16 MPG. I know because we did it - first an Expedition, then an Explorer. Lots of folks do it for 'status'; I'm not ashamed to admit that we probably fell into that trap.
The Explorer got traded in for a Focus .. almost double the mileage (30MPG vs. 16) for 50-60% of the payment .. and, being a stick, the Focus was a heck of a lot more fun to drive!
Still, I would like to see BMW finally bring the 1-series here, maybe at around $23-25K
Surprisingly, I agree with that statement! Same with the MB B-class that is available in Canada. Would love to see more 'premium' compacts and sub-compacts here in the states, to compete with the Mini.
Who needs yet one more small FWDer to choose from?
The one-series intrigues, but given my current car and what I like as well as what one takes in a package to get what one likes, I'd be looking at it more in the $32K-$37K range, or about what I'd gladly/ecstatically spend on an A3 3.2Q, were it RWD.
i guess it depends from your post, on how you interpret 'worth'.
About a year and a half ago I bought a used AMG Mercedes for about the price of a new Corolla. I smile almost every time I drive, and about half the time I don't even turn on the radio, just to listen to the car. It's worth it to me...
And to all those previous posts, I'm only comparing NEW cars. If you're going down the road of comparing a new Corolla to a used BMW at the same price that's a whole different topic, but in general, I wouldn't want to have the repair costs of a used BMW.
Audi said it was impossible but Top Gear did it.
Impossible Audi Part one
800 miles on one tank of diesel
Gotta love that! Diesels are great tho with mileage. Thanks for giving mehope that my fit will exceed 40 mpg.
Yeah.. possible.. Heh.
I got 40 mpg out of a 1987 LeSabre once. Ended up going to my friends house and suddenly I realized that it was 20 miles to his house and then twenty back to the gas station(DUH). 1400rpm, drafting every semi I could, letting it roll down hills, and so on.. made it.
Love Top Gear. Great show.
Actually, I'd imagine a Versa can easily top $16K. About two months ago I was at the local Nissan dealer and they had one Versa on the lot. It was a bit over $16K, and while it was decently equipped, it didn't have a sunroof, and I'm sure there were a few other things it was missing.
Still, not a bad car. Personally I'd go ahead and spend the extra $2-3K to get into a basic Altima (although with the '07 Altima out they might be more than that now), but then I prefer a bigger car.
I haven't checked out the '07 Sentra yet, but I'd definitely take a Versa over the '06 Sentra, and probably a Corolla as well. The Versa's seating position was still a bit sub-standard for my tastes, but I'd rank it above the Corolla and way above the '06 Sentra. I like the Civic though, although it gets a bit more pricey.
With inflation being what it is, $3K might not seem like much money these days, but it's still enough to be a make-or-break decision with many people buying a car. An extra $3K might be more than what they're willing to pay. Or more than they can qualify for on a loan.
The Versa also isn't the best example to use as a subcompact, either. It's considerably larger than the xA, Yaris, and FIT. I'd consider it more of a borderline compact.