By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
I just find nothing more aggravating than having to help my power windows up when they don't feel like working, or being stuck in an uncomfortable/dangerous place when the power seats go bust. They're unnecessary.
On the other hand, a few option packages can make a low-level car a lot more liveable. The Altima they gave me was a special package with CD and lots of power options that turned a really basic car into something pleasant to drive.
Of course any car would feel like unrestrained luxury after the Metro.
Hey, those Grand Ams can be kind of spiffy. One of the first new cars I tested was a '90 Grand Am with the HO Quad 4/5-speed and I wish I'd bought it instead of the Cutlass I got rid of almost immediately.
Well, I did mainly highway driving with that Civic, and never used the A/C, because it was springtime in California, and pretty cool. I averaged about 28-29 mpg with that Civic. In contrast, I could easily get 22-23 mpg out of my Dart on the highway, even with the A/C on, despite the fact that it probably weighed about 700-800 lb more, and its automatic transmission had one less gear. And to add insult to injury, the Dart was faster, both in 0-60 and 1/4 mile. I know, I tried out the Civic ;-) Hey, it was my younger, more ignorant days... About the only thing the Civic did better was that, at say 100-110 mph, it felt a bit more stable. Also, it was quiter at those speeds, mainly because of less wind noise (but a harder-straining engine)
But anyway, I figure if a tiny car like that is only going to get about 5-7 mpg better than my Dart, but not be as comfortable or as good of a performer, what good is it? That slight mileage improvement just didn't seem worth it to me. Then again, gas was cheaper back then, and my biggest financial obligation was probably my car insurance. I might think a bit differently about it today, though!
Well, they listened, they made it, and all those people that had been whining for years, did NOT run out and buy one. It was the 318Ti. It met all of the criteria that was asked of it. And nobody bought it!!!
It was looked at by the very people that "demanded" it as "a cheap, stripped down, entry level car." EXACTLY what they asked for.
The bottom line is people as a whole want all of the options. I wouldn't buy a car unless it is loaded myself. The 60s / 70s are over...........for most of us.
Ask and you shall receive, and then realize you didn't really want it in the first place.
There's my rant. Thank you for your concern ;-)
2009 BMW 335i, 2003 Corvette cnv. (RIP 2001 Jaguar XK8 cnv and 1985 MB 380SE [the best of the lot])
I could handle not having lots of torque. The Lincoln LS V6 I'm leasing now needs lots of revs but that's okay, I had plenty of torque in the GTP but the LS is better. And it gave over 20 mpg on my vacation, not bad.
I had a ride in a 318 Ti and was impressed with the overall performance and refinement but the looks turned me off--too stubby, too obviously entry-level and (for me) too young.
Once on a vacation to Yosemite I slept in the back of my '73 Ventura (Nova) hatchback. They were practical cars. Of course, that's how I hurt my back so maybe sleeping in one wasn't its best use.
I do remember those 73-74 Nova hatchbacks, one of my neighbors had one. The cool thing about those was that you really couldn't tell a hatchback from a coupe, except for the badge on the C-pillar.
It seems that if you buy a small American car, it is generally suffering from build quality problems. The medium size cars tend to have so-so build quality. The big cars have much better quality. German and Japanese cars seem to carry their quality pretty much equally throughout the size range.
For example - the BMW 3, 5, and 7 series are different sizes and different levels of luxury, but all quality cars.
Smaller American cars seem to be of inferior build quality compaired to their larger models.
One of the first modern small cars I drove was a '91 Corolla and man was I impressed with how good the car felt, how well engineered it was. It was just a low line stripper with manual steering but it felt "of a piece". You didn't get the feeling that someone in accounting said "they'll never notice if we cheapen that".
I felt that again when I drove a '93 Civic EX. Neither car was exciting, but the smoothness and evident attention to detail were truly impressive. You'd suspect that if a car maker gave that much attention to its entry-level cars that the more expensive models would be real jewels, and in fact the 2002 Camry V6 is a work of art in its own way.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
The GM car that's more in the Civic/Corolla price range is the Grand Am. I owned one and the Grand Am doesn't have that same quality feel, although it makes more of a visual statement than the Japanese sedans. Just depends on what you're looking for, refinement or styling excitement.
The closest GM came to making a small luxury sedan is/was the Olds Alero, and like the Intrigue it's apparently one of GM's better efforts. The uplevel Alero GLX probably sells for around $21k now while both the A4 and 325 start at around $27k MSRP (and at least in my area that's just the starting point).
The Alero got good reviews for its driving characteristics when it first came out. The GLX comes standard with leather, automatic and V6 so it offers more stuff for less than the Germans.
However, both the A4 and 325 have great engines and that's one of the things GM would need to have a competitive small luxury car--using a V6 that harks back to the Citation wouldn't make it. Also Alero is FWD and while the base A4 supposedly comes that way too, the local Audi dealer told me they don't sell anything but AWD.
Another example of what it takes to (not) compete with the A4 and 3 series is the Infiniti G20, a small luxury car with Euro driving characteristics and great quality but its FWD and relatively weak engine keep its transaction price in the low $20k range.
I think in the $25-30k sports sedan market GM wants to compete with the Bonneville, at least based on its brochure.
Whatever happened to the DOHC 3.4 based on the Citation engine? That was an exceptional engine with a 5-speed behind it--powerful, linear, smooth and making great noises--and very unhappy with an automatic. That would doom any GM engine of course. Maybe the gearing was too tall or it needed a looser torque converter.
In '93 I saw a new, never titled '91 Grand Prix GTP in a dealer's showroom, a very attractive car with DOHC, 5-speed, loaded. What a great driving car and yet it had sat for two years. You couldn't even finance it as a new car.
That wasn't too uncommon with GM cars in those days. I also ran across a '91 Firebird 350 that had been untitled for two years. Plenty of power but rattled like a tin can, much like the '95 I eventually bought.
I've heard that the 3.4 DOHC wasn't too reliable, compared to the pushrod version, and particularly the Buick 3.8. Once GM finally massaged the 3.8 up to around 200 hp, I think that's when they figured the DOHC 3.4 was redundant in their lineup. From 0-60, I think they performed about the same although, predictably, the 3.4 was more responsive at higher speeds.
I remember driving a Lumina Z-34 around 1993 or '94. That thing felt fast as heck!
No quality engineering here, let's just make it cheap!!!! Way to go GM, just a little further in the toilet.
Another case of soiling a famous name. Like the mighty Barretta, HAHA! Is it true that they paid big $$$ to use that name?
I loved the old way where you could factory order some pretty uniqie vehicles.
But I wonder if any of those oddball cars really have a market these days, 427 Biscaynes excepted. If a special-interest car doesn't fit a certain pattern no one really wants it.
More elegant seat upholstery with more colors offered than grey or beige. Would make some of these dreary exterior colors easier to deal with.Base Corolla has seats that belong in a Dentist's office, the "upscale edition" you get one pathetic seam down the middle of each seat.Might as well be stitched up out of burlap or flour sacks!!!!
How about vinyl upholstery for those who don't want to pay the price of leather, but want the easy cleanablility and longevity of something like Naugahyde????
I wish for that build to order type vehicle as well.There is so much crap on these cars today [oh good grief do I sound like a geezer or WHAT?]driving up the price, someone please strip off some of that junk so we can start over!
But you're right, with most cars you've got a choice of Emotionally Repressed Gray or Silent Majority Taupe, usually in a fine grade of mouse fur. Audi is the one big exception to this.
No doubt, the other major factory is the increasing hamstringing of design via regulation. Between safety, smog, gas mileages rules, etc. we are slowly limiting choices and perhaps narrowing down to a few 'spec' cars. I expect the history of general aviation has some lessons which could be applied here.
In the U.S. (one year only, I think), they built Golfs with every major panel a different color.
Any clue how that was done? My guess is that they dip the main shell one color, and paint all the other pieces off the car, mixing them up in the case of this model.
Alternately, the whole car was painted, and then a few were pulled off the line, the fenders and doors pulled, and then mixed.
Out in the weird world of VW stuff in South America, I think that both Harlequin Jettas and Harlequin Beetles (!) exist.
I expect that there's several coffee table books' worth of goofiness about VW submodels if you look into Mexico/Brazil/South America generally and South Africa. Make me think of those treasure hunts that Hot VWs magazine used to go on for NOS parts in South America. Very cool idea.
2. Swing-away steering columns
3. Seats that pivot for easy in-out
4. Power hard tops
5. Gullwing doors
6. Engines that common folk can repair
1. Pushbutton transmissions
(Witness the trend to steering wheel shift buttons -- same basic concept but infinitely cooler)
2. Swing-away steering columns
(Several luxury makes' steering wheels swing up when you exit the car; they also have several memory settings for seat height, steering wheel position, etc.)
3. Seats that pivot for easy in-out
(Nice feature on the mid-70s Monte Carlos, but I'm not aware of any today)
4. Power hard tops
(Several models already have these, with more on the way)
5. Gullwing doors
(Lamborghini has used these for over 30 years -- actually scissor doors, which are more useful)
6. Engines that common folk can repair
(While it helps to have an engine analyzer nowadays, frequent tune-ups are no longer necessary, and if you maintain your car properly, repairs should be few and far between)
Swiveling entry seats go way back to the 1930s and Hudson.
Gullwing doors look cool but are insanely impractical. Scissor doors are a nice concept, because you don't have to worry about hitting the car next to you. Anyone who's ever owned an American coupe knows about this.......
Bring back the sport articulated seats that used to be available in the '80s Thunderbird and Mustang. I'd like to see good seats in a car that costs less than $40k. Maybe I've just looked at the wrong cars.
The Infiniti G20 had good seats too and since we got it for well below list (everyone does) it was a good $5k cheaper than a marked-up Camry. Of course, the Camry probably holds its value better but my wife sells her car every 15 years or so. And the G20 is fun.