Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Economy Sedans (~$16k-$20k)

17810121324

Comments

  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,290
    Without RPM, torque means nothing.

    Without torque there is no RPM's. Since torque is the force turning something you need torque to get RMP's.

    The combination of torque*rpm divide by a constant number is HP.

    True HP cannot be measured it is a function of torque.

    When talking about engines, torque means nothing if the RPM is not mentioned at the same time.

    Same can be said of HP.

    However, HP is different. It's the combination of both RPM and torque.

    No its not a combination but a function. The more torque the more HP you have or the greater the RPMs are the more HP you have. HP is nothing without torque.

    Fact is you have to turn the flywheel to get the car moving and that is torque. Torque is what turns the engine and moves the car. HP doesn't move you forward, torque does.

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

  • heroletherolet Member Posts: 22
    Of course, it can be measured. It's just not as easy as measuring torque. Remember highschool physics? ENERGY HEAT POWER!

    "Same can be said of HP. " No, just showed you in my previous thread. 300ft.lb@2000rpm and 300ft.lb@4000rpm mean totally different thing. but 200HP@5000rpm and 200hp@8000rpm generates about the same energy.

    400ft.lb@2000rpm doesn't push as hard as 200ft.lb@5000rpm. That's why RPM need to be mentioned to make a torque figure meaningful at all. But 200HP@anyRPM means almost the same (suppose the transmition is IDEAL), the rpm doesn't really have to be mentioned here.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    An example in the auto world: Prius. Great low-end torque, especially for a car its weight. Not so fantastic 0-60 numbers. Why? Not much horsepower. Also, max torque peaks early.
  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,290
    I wouldn't call 82 pounds of torque great no matter where it lies on the curve.

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

  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Be sure to include the torque from the electric motors also... 82 + 295 (from 0-1200 rpm).
  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,290
    Yeah but the electric motor isn't in use for the entire time the car is accelerating to 60.

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

  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    It could be--its main purpose is to augment acceleration. But the peak torque is only up to 1200 rpm.

    If you want to have more discussion about the Prius, let's move it to the Prius discussions.
  • spmrebelspmrebel Member Posts: 130
    Active headrestraints are over rated. Having properly adjusted headrests is more important than active headrests.

    I meant between 06 Spectra and 06 Elantra. Anyway, even the 07 Elantra and current gen 06 Elantra or 06 Spectra shar a lot in common. It can be easily observed. Remember the platform of the HD (07 Elantra) is derived from the XD platform (01 thru 06 Elantra). Essentially the wheel base was stretched by 3 or so inches.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Active head restraints aren't a cure-all, nor is any single safety feature. But I'd rather have them than not have them. I'd also rather have an adjustable head restraint for every passenger in the car, which the 2007 Elantra has and the 2006 Spectra does not (no head restraint for the center rear passenger).

    According to Hyundai, the chassis for the 2007 Elantra is "all-new". Not only is it longer than the XD chassis, it is 49% stiffer than the XD's. That means it is significantly different than the Spectra's chassis.

    The difference in crash worthiness between the Elantra and Spectra can be seen by comparing the results of the crash tests for the 2006 model cars. Even though the 2006 Elantra was designed in the late '90s, it outperformed the much newer Spectra in crash tests:

    NHTSA
    Elantra: 5/4/5/4
    Spectra: 4/4/4/3

    IIHS:
    Elantra: Good/Poor/Poor
    Spectra: Acceptable/Poor/Acceptable

    (The IIHS ranks the 2006 Elantra above the 2006 Spectra in its rankings of Small Cars.)

    I think it is a pretty safe bet that the new 2007 Elantra will fare even better than the 2006 Elantra in crash tests.
  • silvermzda3silvermzda3 Member Posts: 17
    Happy Fun factor. These are all under $20k, if you want to find the best one for you then test drive them all. maybe weed out a few that you don't like from the start, but go and test drive them, and pick the one that speaks to you and the way you drive. the Mazda had the right mix for me. but i sacrificed a few mpg's for a sportier ride. some people don't drive 'sporty' thus may not appreciate the firmer ride. take the known factors, price, mpg, style, HP, torque, options/features, and determine the happy fun factor the only way you can, by test driving. And don't let the dealers push you into one before you decide.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Agree 100%. That's why I always chuckle when someone says the #1 reason they bought a particular car was because of good predicted resale value. :)
  • spmrebelspmrebel Member Posts: 130
    HD is a derivative of XD platform. Similiar to Tiburon platform is a derivative of XD. 100% new is stretching the truth.

    Let hope the 2007 is better than 2001 Elantra got when they tdo the NHSTA and IISH testing. The first rounds of NHSTA testing back in 2001 were not what Hyundai or anyone expected - they were pathetic. We have seen the same issue on 2006 Sonata which barely outdid 2000 model year.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    The first rounds of NHSTA testing back in 2001 were not what Hyundai or anyone expected - they were pathetic.

    The NHTSA ratings on the 2001 Elantra were 4/5/5/4--the same as for the 2006 model except the front ratings are flipped. If those were "pathetic", for a car designed in the late '90s, what do you think of the 2006 Spectra's 4/4/4/3 ratings, for a design that debuted in 2004?

    The 2000 Sonata didn't receive complete test scores from the NHTSA, but the similar 2002 model got 4 stars across the board. The 2006 model got five stars across the board. I think that's a considerable improvement. Just as the IIHS ratings showed huge improvement: from Acceptable/Poor/Poor for 2000 to Good/Acceptable/Good in 2006. And I expect the 2007 Elantra will show improvement as well.
  • spmrebelspmrebel Member Posts: 130
    It may have been IIHS. Anyway, Hyundai was given 3 chances and at the end there scores were still poor.

    First time airbags didn't fire correctly. 2nd time airbags fired correctly but seat track came loose and seat moved. 3rd time agency (NHTSA or IIHS) did not want to conduct test but Hyundai convinced them and supplied the car. This did pass but was not good.

    The first test for 05/06 Spectra is much better than first test of XD generation.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Your memory is off. You are referring to the IIHS frontal offset crash tests on the Gen 3 Elantra. The final result, for the 2004-06 models, was "Good". Also, the details of the tests are not as you described. For example, on the first test of the 2001 Elantra, the airbags did fire correctly, but fired late on the 2nd test. Here's where you can find all the facts:

    http://www.iihs.org/ratings/ratingsbyseries.aspx?id=318

    The first test of the '05/'06 Spectra, a car that is a generation ahead of the XD Elantra and was designed after the IIHS side impact tests were created, should have been much better than those of a car designed many years earlier. However, they weren't. A "Poor" score on side impact for a recent design with side bags and curtains is unexplicable. And with a couple of tweaks, the Gen 3 Elantra outperformed the newer Spectra even in frontal impacts. That is hard to understand also. Kia has had two years to update the Spectra to get decent crash test results. They haven't done it.
  • spmrebelspmrebel Member Posts: 130
    Thats the one. Kia probably didn't have the luxury of convincing IIHS to be able to retest the Spectra like Hyundai had with Elantra. Hyundai had 3 chances. But I remember the seat dislodge from the tract in one of the crashes with is concerning. IIHS is a much better real world test than NHSTA

    Looks like they may have an issue similiar to Hyundai maybe with side curtain airbags. I wonder if Kia has new programming for side curtain airbags. Hyundai has had 2 recall campaigns in the last year or so on the front airbags.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Where do you get your information--do you just make it up as you go? ANY carmaker can request a re-test by the IIHS--but the carmaker has to pay for the test. Usually when a car does poorer than the carmaker expects on the IIHS testing, the carmaker responds immediately (as Hyundai did with the 2004 Elantra when there was a problem on the frontal tests). And the IIHS for its part holds back on releasing the test results until the re-test is done.

    We don't know if Kia has new programming for side airbags because they haven't supplied a car to the IIHS for a retest, and they haven't announced a recall to fix cars already on the road. As for Hyundai, they have not had two recall campaigns in the past year for the front airbags. They had a reprogramming recall about two years ago, as a result of the IIHS tests on the '04 Elantra. And they had a recall on the OCS sensor (not airbag) more recently.

    It would be nice if Kia would take action to beef up the crash protection on the Spectra, don't you think? I would think the lessons Hyundai learned on the Gen 3 Elantra's crash test problems would have taught the folks at Kia a lesson. I guess not.
  • spmrebelspmrebel Member Posts: 130
    I was thinking the same of you. You tend to pull a lot out of the air.

    I read that Hyundai protested the IIHS testing and supplied the thrid car to them.

    There were two recalls related to front air bags. One right after I purchased the car which I had done in April of 2005 and the OCS sensor which came out around a year ago. There was a class action lawsuit on this. I have the paperwork but have yet to get it done. The OCS sensor by the way is related to the passenger front air bag as its the sensor to determine the weight of the passenger and to automatically enable/disable it.

    I will call Kia and find out if there are any recalls for the car or any service bulletins.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    :surprise: Hyundai protested the first IIHS testing, back in 2001, because they thought the "injuries" on the dummy's legs should not have been as high. That's why the IIHS ran the 2nd test--and it kind of backfired on Hyundai because the driver's airbag deployed late on that one. Because of that, the IIHS ran a third test.

    I gave you the link to all these details earlier--I am not pulling them "out of the air."
  • germancarfan1germancarfan1 Member Posts: 221
    I find it humerous that you both feel the need to argue over which car is the safest of the bottom feeders. Though I do find it laughable that the Kia Spectra can only muster an "adequate" in Frontal testing by IIHS, let alone its Poor side impact rating. The fact is both cars are awful. Let's move on.
  • patpat Member Posts: 10,421
    Actually, the best thing to do if posts don't interest you is just skip them instead of suggesting that people stop making them. Also, it would be nice if you drop the "bottom feeder" comment. I would appreciate that.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    That both cars are "awful" is an opinion, not a fact.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    The fact is both cars are awful. Let's move on.

    No surprise that you said that (using recent history as a guide), but keeping the pointless comments (that have no supporting info) to ourselves will make this a much more useful and entertaining discussion.
  • patpat Member Posts: 10,421
    Let's get back to talking about the cars, please.

    If you've got a problem with a post, please skip it. Feel free to email me if you find it inappropriate.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    What is the latest word on when we might see the new Corolla stateside in dealerships?
  • bamacarbamacar Member Posts: 749
    Edmunds says Spring 2008 instead of Spring 2007.
  • elantralimitedelantralimited Member Posts: 2
    Does anyone know when the limited trim line will come out? I am in Ohio and one dealership was suprised they did not have one, another expected one soon. I called Hyundai USA direct and they did not even seem to know!
  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    Reactions to the very interesting C/D comparo of $18K sedans? I was shocked to see where the Sentra landed, but overall, a very well done comparison test, IMO. Expected lauding for the Elantra's room and fit and finish. The only comments I found incongrous were those on the Corolla being hard to keep up on the interstate (acceleration better in half the measures than the winning vehicle's), and the "LOWS" comment on the Rabbit's back seat, given the high score in the actual ratings and no text reference.

    ~alpha
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    I don't have my C&D yet, so don't give away the finish!!! :)
  • mz6greyghostmz6greyghost Member Posts: 1,230
    I'll give you a clue: The winner is not what you think it is (well, it took me by surprise anyway...) :)
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Other than Elantra, Corolla, and Sentra, who else in the test? I'd assume Civic...?

    EDIT: I just got my mag in the mail... gonna go read it now!
  • mz6greyghostmz6greyghost Member Posts: 1,230
    I'd assume Civic...?

    The Mazda3 and VW Rabbit.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Just read it, and I'm really not as surprised. I am a little miffed that they don't cite the Rabbit's fuel economy at all in its review... The economy of that car is its biggest downfall.

    The Elantra interior looks great, best I can tell. I look forward to seeing it at the auto show this weekend.

    Nothing surprising in the review of the Civic or Corolla.

    The Sentra's review amazed me; I expected it to be sportier than the Civic. Instead, they call it a mini-Town Car several times. Not what I'd hoped to see from Nissan.

    I did like how they referred to its styling, calling it "Plump and puffy, ready to burst out in a giggle." That made me roar with laughter...

    Now that I look at this, I am more surprised than I said 8 lines ago... the (insert winner here for others who don't want it spoiled) won the comparo?
  • mz6greyghostmz6greyghost Member Posts: 1,230
    The Sentra's review amazed me; I expected it to be sportier than the Civic. Instead, they call it a mini-Town Car several times. Not what I'd hoped to see from Nissan.

    This will be taken care of when the SE-R and Spec V models come out, this spring.

    I like how the Mazda3 still did very well, despite being the second-oldest design in that group. I'd take one over any others in that group in a heartbeat.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    I like how the Mazda3 still did very well, despite being the second-oldest design in that group. I'd take one over any others in that group in a heartbeat.

    The Mazda 3 is definitely a diamond in the rough of compact cars for sporty shoppers. The article cites tire noise, something I noticed on a friend's 2004 3s sedan that also has 17" wheels. The tires are Noisy with a capital N relative to the Civic. On the other hand, the Civic's styling is incredibly polarizing. While it appears to have hurt it in the testing, I'm glad to see Honda step out and take a risk on styling instead of being bland!
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Hint: the winner of a comparo of "six $18k sedans" was... NOT a sedan. :surprise:

    I think that, given C/D's preferences, the finishing order was predictable (except their calling the Mazda3s "too sporty"), although I too was surprised to see the Sentra in last place. IMO it is far superior to the Corolla except in fuel economy.

    As often happens in these comparos, they don't stick to their own rules. They set out to test sedans that sticker under $18k, so what do they do? Three of the cars stickered OVER $18k (and there was no way of avoiding it with the Mazda3s Touring), and one of the cars wasn't even a sedan! Predictably, the most expensive cars finished on top. Although that probably made little difference here, as anyone could have predicted that the sharpest-handling cars would finish on top, as they always do in a C/D comparo.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Although that probably made little difference here, as anyone could have predicted that the sharpest-handling cars would finish on top, as they always do in a C/D comparo.

    Yes, but remember who the target readers are, 'car enthusiasts.' People who read the magazine are much more likely to prefer a good handling car over a soft-riding one. I really believe that C&D and Motor Trend DO put a bias towards good handlers, but I don't think it is much of a secret.

    I was happy to see the Civic NOT completely loaded like every Honda they ever test seems to be. This one came in UNDER the price cap, AMAZING!
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    True on the Civic, but had they equipped the Elantra similarly to the Civic (i.e. GLS trim) it would have cost only $15.5k, well under all the others in the test.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    It was better equipped than the Civic AND was cheaper than the others... I think the Elantra made a great showing for itself, despite the ranking.
  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    You should read the editorial by Csere in the same issue. Fleet vehicles are decreasing, and it is often very difficult to find samples with precisely the right equipment. As noted in the actual text, neither GM nor Ford could produce anything in stick for the comparo, though I doubt either the Cobalt or Focus would have finished highly, (esp. given that the Focus finished behind the Corolla in the LAST - Nov '02 - small car comparo).

    Had Mazda been able to supply a $17,685 3s Sport instead of Touring, I doubt if things would have changed, and price was one of the dings that C/D listed against the Mazda anyway. The Sentra also crossed the $18K threshold but finished last, so I don't agree that the most expensive cars finished on top.

    Have you driven the new Sentra? I haven't yet, but I was really surprised to see its last place finish, behind the Corolla which debuted in March '02 - a full 16 months before the next oldest Mazda 3 (which would have been my personal choice, given that I disagree with V-Dubs use of a thirsty and none-too-powerful 5 cylinder).

    For what its worth, and for those that haven't received their C/Ds, this comparo has been on their website since yesterday, which is why I initially mentioned it.

    ~alpha
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    They could go out and buy a car if the manufacturer can't supply one. That is what some other organizations that do car reviews do.

    Maybe the Mazda3i Touring, with its 16" wheels, wouldn't have been considered "too sporty" by C/D, and the price would have easily fallen within the $18k limit--as would the Mazda3s Sport.

    The Sentra was only over $18k because of the equipment on it. The 2.0S easily fits under $18k with a modicum of equipment such as ABS.

    I did drive the new Sentra and posted a review in the Sentra vs. Elantra discussion (because I compared it to the Elantra). I really can't understand why they ranked it below the Corolla, unless they really hate its styling that much.
  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    "They could go out and buy a car if the manufacturer can't supply one. That is what some other organizations that do car reviews do."

    Besides non-profit, no-ad Consumers Union, I can't think of any publication, print or otherwise, that does this for their regular Road Tests or Comparisons.

    They could also ORDER direct from the factory, I suppose, but really, there are limits to practicality.

    For what it was worth, I think they did a fine job reviewing a decently level playing field. The ratings and text do a pretty good job of explaining how the Sentra rated below the ancient Corolla, and it was obviously more than styling.

    ~alpha
  • moparbadmoparbad Member Posts: 3,870
    $18,883 for a new 2007 Camry CE automatic at Carmax.
    Very good choice for a economy sedan IMHO.
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 19,250
    some keep drinking that c/d koolaid.
    i used to, but gave up. my life is much better now. :)
    so, alpha, which of the comparo cars have you driven?
    2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Or how about saying to the manufacturer, "If you don't supply a car that fits under our $18k limit, we won't include it in our test." Also, since C/D broke some of their own rules (e.g. price limit and included a hatchback in a test of sedans), they could have eased up on another rule and allowed an automatic car or two into the test.

    Based on the scores, the Corolla topped the Sentra mainly because it was one tick better in C/D's view in a few categories: trunk space (1 cubic foot bigger; no extra points for Sentra's handy divider I guess); fit and finish; rebates/discounts (what a surprise, the Sentra is brand-new and the Corolla is 4+ years old); engine NVH (personally I thought the Sentra's engine was very smooth and quiet); transmission; handling; and ride. But the biggies were 3 points in Corolla's favor for each of mpg and as-tested price. The last is a joke. C/D tested a stripped Corolla LE without ABS and maybe (C/D wasn't clear on this) side bags and alloys--the Sentra had all those and more. If the two cars had been comparably equipped (still with an advantage to the Sentra in some features like Bluetooth), the price difference would have been only $45.
  • harrycheztharrychezt Member Posts: 405
    is for less than 20K, I could get a new Optima 5 speed/auto-manual, and the I-4 Does get 34MPG hwy, where as the smaller Sentra is similar MSRP, and gets 36 MPG(and as for warranty, well, Kia wins that catagory).

    take care/not offense.
  • targettuningtargettuning Member Posts: 1,371
    Last fall when I was in the market for a fuel efficient car I looked at the Corolla as a possible first choice. In our marketing region (mid-atlantic)Toyota refuses to supply cars to the dealers with several "available options" that are really unavailable. These are things persons driving in the snowbelt states such as MD,PA,NY etc. would like to have i.e. ABS, traction control, and side impact air bags(well, these are useful anywhere). After imploring the dealer to try to find a car with some or all of these "options" for several weeks I gave up. He stated that all the cars thus equipped were going to the southern marketing regions among others where not a flake of snow almost ever falls. This policy by Toyota may have changed since then, I don't know. So, maybe C&D's problem in finding other than a "stripped" Corolla without ABS etc. may be due to the fact they operate out of a snow belt state. They may have had better luck if their headquarters were in California or Florida.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Actually for less than $20k you could get a number of mid-sized cars, including the lower-end Accord, Camry, Malibu, G6, Galant, Sonata, Fusion/Milan, Mazda6, and probably others I'm not mentioning. Some of these could even be V6 models. I think the intent of this discussion is to discuss cars that list at around $16-20k and are in the so-called "compact" car class.
  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    All save new Sentra and Elantra. I would go 3.

    ~alpha
  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    You bring up a good point regarding C/D's scoring system. 20 points are alloted for 'As-Tested-Price', but only 10 are allotted for 'Features and Amenities'. The Sentra did make one point up relative to the Corolla for having greater feature content, but one could extrapolate that if both categories were worth twenty points, the Sentra would have made up two. (Or conversely, if both were 10, the Corolla may have only gotten 1 point better for 'As Tested Price' instead of 3). Still, even if they scored equal on both 'ATP' and 'FaA', the Corolla would have had the higher score.

    I agree that C/D shouldn't have put the 'Sedans' moniker on the cover (they did, correct? I don't have the mag in front of me), but I see no reason why the Golf, uh, I mean, Rabbit... shouldn't have been included. The text itself doesn't mention sedans, so I think that was more of a headline faux pas "Let’s round up the whole class of compact four-doors, equip them with all-natural U-shift-’em gearboxes, and enjoy driving while we compare choices at the low-budget end of the market."

    ~alpha
This discussion has been closed.