What is "wrong" with these new subcompacts?

alltorque · January 2008

First off, Happy New Year to one and all. Just back from Christmas in Dublin, (we went to stay with our daughter). No driving so just had to sample the Guinness - a few times :sick: .

Anyway, back on-topic. Interesting to see the debate about gearing. My previous car - Skoda Fabia vRS, (basically a rebodied VW Polo with the 130bhp 1.9TDi), did have a 6-spd manual and would happily cruise at just over 2300rpm at 80mph and still pull fairly strongly in 6th. Drop to 5th and you're off. That's where small, gutsy diesels pay off. My Wife's Jazz 1.4, (Fit), has the 7-spd CVT transmission with the option to play at F1 drivers with the flappy-paddle shifters, (which she nevers uses - but I do if I can prise the keys out of her hand

). More for fun than any real dynamic improvements.

6-spd manuals are increasingly common here in Europe in this sector........along with small diesels, of course. We see the Jazz as the overall class leader and the MINI is badly hampered by it's lack of space vs Jazz. The Accent is still considered pretty low-rent in a sector that seems to spawn new models almost weekly and the Smart ForTwo is really just a novelty act.

High fuel prices, (circa $8+ per US Gallon equiv), and taxation based on CO2 emmissions are real market drivers. At some stage I guess the same factors may drive your market.

lilengineerboy · January 2008

Models like the Lexus IS and Toyota MR2 are much more sporty (and sporty-feeling) than the more mainstream models you've mentioned.

The MR2 has been discontinued since 2005 and the IS has very limited manual transmission availability. Toyota isn't in the business of sports/sporty cars, they are in the business of mainstream cars that are all basically the same.

lostwrench · January 2008

The Yaris beats the Fit on the crash test ratings? Oh, c'mon. Check those crash test star ratings again.

lostwrench · January 2008

I used to drive my father's 1956 Chevy with 3 on the tree. 3 on the tree was good for something, that is rocking the car when stuck in snow.

ttai · January 2008

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1RCL2zCVmU&mode=related&search=

here ya go.

ttai · January 2008

Watch the tests and guess which car this magazine picked as sub of the year.
Should be obvious, right?

http://www.cars.com/go/video/player.jsp?makeid=18&year=2007&modelid=8235&locatio- n=MW_L_2007_Honda_Fit.flv&aff=national

http://www.cars.com/go/video/player.jsp?makeid=47&year=2007&modelid=8242&locatio- n=MW_L_2007_Toyota_Yaris.flv&aff=national

lostwrench · January 2008

Thanks for the link to the excellent crash test videos. Your post and videos are based on tests conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, and mine on tests conducted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which uses the 1 to 5 star rating system. It appears that these two crash testing facilities do not agree on the Yaris. The NHTSA gives the Yaris only 4 stars for frontal impacts and only 3 stars for side impacts. Not good.
Isn't it amazing how all the cars in the videos became air-borne after the frontal impacts? Scary. I think I'll be looking at larger cars.

boaz47 · January 2008

I don't know what to think. NHTSA'S NCAP site gives the Fit a 5 star rating for both the driver and passenger for a front end crash test. The give both the driver and passenger a 5 star rating for side impact and a three star rating for rear passengers in a side impact. For the Yaris hatch they give a five star rating for front impact for both the driver and the passenger but only a three for side impact for the same two people. Seems the Honda does better according to the government test site. The Versa did worse in frontal impacts but better in side impacts than the Yaris.

As an example a Tahoe gets 5 stars across the board.

snakeweasel · January 2008

3,000 rpm at 60mph is pretty standard for four-cylinder cars.

Not to sure about that. My Elantra wagon will be well over 70 MPH at 3000rpm. At 60 I am barely over 2500 RPM. That has a 2.0 liter 4 banger.

stever · January 2008

3 on the tree was good for something, that is rocking the car when stuck in snow.

The '57 Chevy I learned stick on (got my license earlier on an automatic) belonged to a friend. I managed to bury it up to the rear axles on a soft shoulder one afternoon trying to avoid puddles on a county gravel road. Water was seeping in the rear floorboards. A logging truck came along after an hour and jerked it out.

It it had been a subcompact like the Tercel I used to drive, we could have pried it up and pushed it out. :P

lilengineerboy · January 2008

Isn't it amazing how all the cars in the videos became air-borne after the frontal impacts? Scary. I think I'll be looking at larger cars.

The smaller cars bounce like that becuase they are distributing the force, not absorbing it. In larger vehicles, they absorb (and transfer) all of that force. If you are running into a stationary object, having less mass is a good thing.

lilengineerboy · January 2008

As an example a Tahoe gets 5 stars across the board.

And what is the Tahoe's rollover rating relative to a Versa? What are the differences in roof crush standards for an "SUV" versus a passenger vehicle?

ttai · January 2008

The best way to survive an accident is to avoid one in the first place. I have more control in a small car. I've seen way to many flipped over SUV's on the highway. Since oil just hit $100/barrel yesterday, I think we'll be seeing less Tahoes on the road.

hudsonthedog · January 2008

The MR2 has been discontinued since 2005 and the IS has very limited manual transmission availability. Toyota isn't in the business of sports/sporty cars, they are in the business of mainstream cars that are all basically the same.

My point was that you can't complain that mainstream products are, well, mainstream. Just because there's no sporty character in a company's most successful products doesn't mean the company can't make fun-to-drive vehicles. The IS and the late MR2 are examples that they can make these sorts of vehicles.

ateixeira · January 2008

I agree.

While few admit it, most people just want a point A to point B car.

People here almost seem to be angry with Toyota for filling that need, but just look at their sales! They're giving people what they really want.

Don't get mad at them for filling a need. That's called business savvy.

boaz47 · January 2008

Oh I fully realize a roll over is more likely in a SUV or truck than a Yaris or Versa or Fit. I was just pointing out the frontal and side impact statistics from the NCAP site. In one you are more likely to get hurt in a side impact and the other a roll over. What is more likely? Unless you have a Jeep in which case there is a reason for a roll bar.

podred · January 2008

Here's my take. Let's step back from the raw data and remember that life is full of risks. Testing data aside, that's why they are called accidents and all the testing in the world will only remotely represent what actually occurs in an accident on the road. There are so many variables in the way the two vehicles come together, at what speed, at what angle, on a smooth paved road or?, etc. After all everyone knows that small cars in general are going to suffer more damage if hit by a large car / suv / truck / bus / semi truck.

So bottom line is if safety is something you worry about, forget about anything in the subcompact or compact, or even mid size class for that matter. I know I own 5 body shops and see the horrors of severely wrecked vehicles daily. Including all the blood and guts they come in with after the body(s) have been removed. It's not pretty.

Go out and buy yourself the biggest, heaviest, gas guzzler available, feed that beast at 12mpg and you'll have the best chance of surviving an accident. No worries.

Mr_Shiftright · January 2008

But you know, if you repeated all those tests, and just varied the angles and speeds by 10%, I bet you'd get a whole other series of results.

Vehicle dynamics are too complex to judge by one crash one time under constant parameters.

All you really get here is some rough form of "relative" safety among cars. Better than nothing, and I do pay attention to these results, but hardly conclusive and nothing sure enough to deem a car "safe" or give me, at any rate, any peace of mind out "there".

podred · January 2008

I agree.....Very Well Said !

podred · January 2008

CVT Transmissions like in the Versa are in their infancy as far as being implemented in automobiles. So with that in mind, I think they did a pretty good job with theirs. However after driving the car myself, I find that they have a long ways to go before they get my auto buying dollars.

podred · January 2008

First of all please understand that when I say advantages, that it's simply from my viewpoint based on my personal preferences. Regarding my thoughts on the Yaris Coupe vs Corolla Sedan, after looking up the stats on the EPA site, I find the interior room is only two cubic feet larger on the Corolla. That was before I went to see a Yaris, and get in and drive the car. Because I'm 6'3" I highly doubted that the Yaris would work for me. Once I got in and drove one I was very pleased as I have much more room in it, than I do in my 2005 Mini Cooper S.

As far as advantages, for me I like the styling of the Yaris and that's it's a 2 door coupe. It's just different enough to have a distinctive appearance, and I like the window lines, body lines and roof line profiles. The mileages difference is not that important to me, as anything that gets over 30 is terrific compared with my other cars like my Ferrari F430. The fact that a Corolla is a sedan is terrific for families etc, however I simply wanted a small sporty city car with good mileage, that is a coupe and is made by one of the most respected and successful car companies today.

Which brings us to your next comment about "smirking" at the S on the back of the Yaris. I'm with you on this one. As a hard core, very experienced car collector / driver, & ex- racer, I know that the Japanese, and the domestics as well, is most instances simply tack on badges with little meaning. A perfect example of this is the unlimited use of the word "Limited" on nearly every top of th line Toyota model.

As far as it's meaning vs "Si" on a Honda we must keep things in perspective as you cannot buy a new Honda Civic "Si" for the same low price as a Yaris "S". And they cannot be compared as they are two very different vehicles for completely different target markets.

I know, I have a new 2008 Honda Civic Si Coupe.....see, I was completely honest when I said I'm a very (sic) car addict....:)

podred · January 2008

Please understand that when I shared about the various cars I currently own, I was not bragging, in fact I put it quite modestly. So what if I own many similar vehicles? I have the right to own whatever I want. My passion is automobiles and all the varieties of experiences they provide from a driving, power delivery, and handling standpoint, just to name a few areas of interest.

A brief bit of background, I grew up in a motor sports / racing family, so that's what we did. Build and race cars. Restore and collect cars. It's my hobby, and overwhelming passion, not unlike people who have sailboats, planes etc. As a high net worth individual I have the means to enjoy the luxury of buying all the cars of interest to me. I find just as much fun in trying small inexpensive cars, as I do the mid range, luxury range, and exotic price point vehicles. As such, the fact that I purchase inexpensive cars as well as extremely expensive models, proves I'm no car snob or simply buying them for my ego. I buy them to enjoy the experience and then move on and try out another make & model of car.

So anyone who chooses to be critical or doubt that I own these vehicles is being judgmental and speculating, which reflects more on them than on myself. In addition I could care less what anyone else thinks. I'm here for the fun of it and to share with others, who may not have the luxury of owning a lot of cars which in turn then provides one with a lot of experience from which to draw upon.

I'm here to contribute, enjoy the well written posts of others and see what others perspectives are. After all in the end, from my perspective it's not about the cars, it's about the people. The fellowship of car enthusiasts is what I enjoy more than anything else. The fun of attending car shows, participating in the various owners clubs and all the good social activities that come with people who share a common interest.

Cheers....

thegraduate · January 2008

CVT Transmissions like in the Versa are in their infancy as far as being implemented in automobiles. So with that in mind, I think they did a pretty good job with theirs. However after driving the car myself, I find that they have a long ways to go before they get my auto buying dollars.

Have you driven wth the CVT in the Altima, Maxima, Murano, Rogue, Sentra, etc?

From what I've witnessed, the CVT in the Murano is an excellent transmission (a friend just bought a used one with 65k miles on it).

podred · January 2008

I forgot to comment on your question I quote here:
"I guess mainly it seems a little redundant to have a Civic SI AND a Cooper S. Do tell - are they very different drives besides the torque curves?:

This is a great question!
And it reflects just why I enjoy actually buying cars of similar specs to drive and compare over a period of time. In this case the two cars we are talking about here are like night and day. The are only similar on paper. The actual real world difference is striking.

Mini Cooper S
This car is hands down one of my absolute favorites of any car in my collection.
It is beyond any question a tremendous amount of fun to drive and is very, very fast. I have always found it fascinating and quite interesting to compare the difference in the actual driving experience vs. what the spec sheets reveal in the various road tests. Especially since I read Road & Track, Car & Drive etc, and have been doing so for the last 25 years. The Mini has nearly all of it's torque delivered around 2000 rpm, therefore when you floor the accelerator from a dead stop, it really pushes you back in the seat and takes off with great authority and speed.

Civic Si Coupe
The Si on the other hand moves away from a dead stop with little urgency and is rather sluggish until the tach hits 5,000 rpm at which point it takes off like a rocket. The frenetic pace demands you be ready to shift quite soon, and keep the engine in a very narrow power band of a few thousand rpm by rowing through the six speed gearbox quickly which requires a lot of concentration. Fine for the race track but hardly fun and relaxing in real, normal over the road driving . The Cooper on the other hand is ready at any speed, in any gear to jump in response to added throttle input. Because the torque is delivered down low in the rpm range, you have more time between shifts which makes it much more enjoyable to drive. One minute you can be driving very relaxed in the slow lane, then upon the need, you can accelerate very quickly to make a passing or maneuver of avoidance.

Then there is the factor of styling. I personally find these cars equally appealing. The Mini is the height of recreating the "look" of the original car. The Civic on the other hand is the height of modern design. Just one look at each of the two cars interiors and the difference could not be more striking. I love them both. As one who focuses on the tach more than the speedo (which only requires a quick glance) I like that both these cars have a large tachometer positioned directly in front of the driver.

These two cars could not be more different. And that is the precise reason I enjoy collecting all types of cars.

Cheers....

podred · January 2008

Good question!

Yes I have driven the cars you have listed. I have a very close friend with the Murano and I find that the very best of any CVT I've driven. However we must remember that it's superior because this is a much more expensive vehicle therefore the mfg had more money to put towards a better CVT.

That said, I still would not own a CVT (yet). Mostly because I am very familiar with the mechanics of this type of gearbox, and do not like the sound and overall characteristics they display, as they keep the engine in a more controlled & narrow rpm range. Almost like a diesel semi truck.

I like the traditional sound of winding out an engine towards the red line, then hearing it drop in rpm as the next gear is engaged. To my ears it's automotive music.... especially in cars like my Porsche 911 Turbo, Ferrari F430, and others. I could liken it to the difference in sound between a well tuned Harley vs a well muffled Honda motorcycle. The Harley has that deep guttural sound of power and dominance, whereas the Honda is rather soul less. Don't get me wrong I have an appreciation for both and their respective strengths, it's just that I like to hear a motor.

Back to the CVT topic, time will tell just how long it will take to bring this type of transmission to the point of great reliability. Finally I do understand their application since due to the fact that they control engine rpm, they can assist in reducing emissions which is a positive thing. However from an auto enthusiasts standpoint, they "take all the fun out of it".

podred · January 2008

I'm with you regarding the Maxda3 Hatch. That's a very fun car. I have driven a couple of them and been very impressed.

I must admit that in some instances I avoid cars from manufacturers that can be a bit dodgy. It's like the surgeon that has the inside view and knows what can go wrong while operating on someone. As a former dealership auto mechanic who worked his way up to Owning a few Dealerships (true confessions, one of which was Toyota) I know the ins and outs of various brands and how their techs are trained (or not trained as the case may be) as well as how the companies themselves are faring. If it were not for the strong support and co-ownership from Ford, Mazda would be in trouble here in the US. Why? Not because they do not produce good cars, but more because there were a number of years when the styling did not appeal to many Americans and they operated in the red for a very long time. Thus receiving good service and proper repairs on your Mazda is a much riskier proposition than driving into the local Toyota dealer where they have plenty of money to send their techs to training and the resources to maintain good equipment in the shop and men who know how to use it.

However there is one qualifier, IF and that's a big IF, the Mazda dealer has one or more techs that are auto enthusiasts, then you are likely to enjoy excellent, competent service and repairs. This is the ultimate scenario. So in this particular case (with Mazda, Chrysler, Subaru, Buick, Volkswagen, just to name of few of the weaker mfgs in the service category) the service you receive is truly on a dealer by dealer basis. If you have a way to find out if the dealer near you is a good one, then you are all set and it's fine to buy that particular brand as you can be assured that your car will be taken care of.

thegraduate · January 2008

Back to the CVT topic, time will tell just how long it will take to bring this type of transmission to the point of great reliability. Finally I do understand their application since due to the fact that they control engine rpm, they can assist in reducing emissions which is a positive thing. However from an auto enthusiasts standpoint, they "take all the fun out of it".

I'm with you on wanting to see just how reliable they really are. I am pleased not to have heard of problems out of them, really at all, over the last three years. Not that I know of, anyway.

As far as how they take the fun out of it from an enthusiast's standpoint, isn't the true enthusiast going to go with a manual-equipped vehicle?

hudsonthedog · January 2008

Go out and buy yourself the biggest, heaviest, gas guzzler available, feed that beast at 12mpg and you'll have the best chance of surviving an accident. No worries.

Or....go out and buy a nimble yet reasonable sized vehicle that gets good gas mileage and LEARN HOW TO DRIVE and AVOID getting into an accident. It's worked for me so far.

hudsonthedog · January 2008

CVT Transmissions like in the Versa are in their infancy as far as being implemented in automobiles.

An "infancy" that has lasted nearly half a century so far. CVTs (transmission is already in the name) have been around since DAF introduced the Van Doorme CVT in the 1950s. Modern CVTs in Nissan and Audi vehicles are excellent transmissions, if you don't want to shift gears yourself.

podred · January 2008

Regarding your comment I quote here:
As far as how they take the fun out of it from an enthusiast's standpoint, isn't the true enthusiast going to go with a manual-equipped vehicle?

Absolutely!
In fact this is my major complaint with Toyota, as they are so conservative that even though the Yaris is "offered with a manual trans" very few are actually available. (and this applies to any Toyota model with a manual transmission listed as standard equipment).

It's the biggest compromise I was forced to make, when I purchased my Yaris there was not one 5 speed Coupe in stock anywhere in the state where I live (CA) and we are a huge market for Toyota. Nor was there any on the manifest of cars coming into the port for the next two months. As far as ordering a car, I have had less that good luck with that process with mass producers like Toyota.

However in their defense I do understand that the mainstream Toyota buyer has absolutely no interest in anything other than an automatic. Therefore Toyota's tendency to stock automatics makes perfect sense from their side of the fence. The sales numbers reflect it and in the end that is what business is all about.

podred · January 2008

Your comment:
"Or....go out and buy a nimble yet reasonable sized vehicle that gets good gas mileage and LEARN HOW TO DRIVE and AVOID getting into an accident. It's worked for me so far."

I could not agree more, I do the exact same thing.

However let's not take my earlier comment out of context as I was addressing the people who worry about safety and make it tops on their list. My entire comment from that post is below:

"So bottom line is if safety is something you worry about, forget about anything in the subcompact or compact, or even mid size class for that matter.
Go out and buy yourself the biggest, heaviest, gas guzzler available, feed that beast at 12mpg and you'll have the best chance of surviving an accident. No worries"

Me? I'm a sports car fan and love small cars. Thus I will simply take my chances and enjoy!

lostwrench · January 2008

If you are running into a stationary object, having less mass is a good thing?

lilengineerboy · January 2008

If you are running into a stationary object, having less mass is a good thing?

F=MV^2

snakeweasel · January 2008

And what is the Tahoe's rollover rating relative to a Versa?

Be truthful, how many rollovers have you ever seen? I can only think of two in the last two decades and both have been sports cars.

boaz47 · January 2008

Your explanation of Toyota's success aligns pretty well with my take on the subject. But there very success is achieved using the same principal that has limited sub compacts and small hatches from becoming popular in the US for more than 30 years. Unless you care to include SUVs in the hatchback family.

every time they try to introduce a new sub compact or a hatch the American consumer shows some interest but nothing to write home about. Then they add a few ponies and maybe a few pounds and a few inches and the new and improved sub compact starts selling. Only now it is a compact or the size of a standard compact. even the Mini only looks like a mini but is bigger. Having driven one of the originals I can attest that the new mini has about as much in common with the old mini as a new Thunderbird has with the origional 55-56. Yes it looks like an old cooper but it is way bigger and has a lot more in the inside than the old one.

I used to run Auto cross in a 1963 sprite and I can not tell you how happy I was when the 64 cooper S was moved out of the 1 liter class. It was bad enough getting waxed by the 970 cc standard S. When they went over 1000 cc and finally to 1275 cc they had to race with the bigger MGs and Triumphs. Still the only options might have been floor mats. However the origional was only 120 inches long 80 inch Wheel base and something a bit less than 1500 pounds. So what has happened to sub compacts? The BMW mini is a bit more than 2 feet longer and 1100 pounds heavier and has an additional 100 HP. The Sub compact only sells well in the US when it starts to look more like a standard compact. Or when people are afraid of gas lines.

I will give them this, they keep trying to release sub compacts but the consumer keeps leaving them as soon as someone offers more HP, or more comfort, or a bit more room. It always happens and ten years from now we will see a whole new crop of Sub compacts to replace the ever increasing size of the Reo or the mid sized xJ that replaced the origional xA. The American consumer can be slowed but hardly ever stopped from wanting something bigger than a sub compact. Unless it is for a second or third car then people will buy just about anything.

boaz47 · January 2008

I have seen a few more, living in the mountains. But the last one was a Saab. However like you I see more sports cars over on their sides. Once again that is because mountain roads seem to cause sports car drivers to make mistakes they shouldn't make.

lilengineerboy · January 2008

Be truthful, how many rollovers have you ever seen? I can only think of two in the last two decades and both have been sports cars.

It snowed pretty good Monday night/Tuesday and the roads still weren't so good on Wed early morning...

1 upside down Dodge Ram, 1 Hyundai the one smaller than a Sonata but bigger than an Accent in the ditch right side up, 1 upside down Trail Blazer tangled up with a Jeep Grand Cherokee, and 1 upside down Explorer tangled up with a Volvo I couldn't tell what it was.

We got a good snow one Sunday night in December, and that Monday going to work I saw 3 SUVs with the rubber up, 2 pickup trucks, and a few midsize sedans parked at the guard rail.

My commute is ~35-45 minutes in good weather depending on traffic, these were both over an hour (mostly because of the accidents). I saw no passenger cars inverted (crunched and stuck, yes, but all were shiny side up).

hudsonthedog · January 2008

However the origional was only 120 inches long 80 inch Wheel base and something a bit less than 1500 pounds. So what has happened to sub compacts? The BMW mini is a bit more than 2 feet longer and 1100 pounds heavier and has an additional 100 HP. The Sub compact only sells well in the US when it starts to look more like a standard compact.

While the new Mini is considerably larger than the original, it's still a subcompact. Nobody's going to confuse it's tiny (compared to most of the rest of the US market) size with any compact or midsized car. It LOOKS like a subcompact because it still IS a subcompact...no matter how much it weighs (because of safety regulations) or how much larger it is than the diminutive original or how much you may pine for a 1,500-pound, 10-foot long car.

Oh...and it sells in the US as a subcompact. Hmmm...kinda takes the wind out of your argument, doesn't it?

podred · January 2008

Kudos for the great post!

You bring up a lot of very valid and interesting points.

I too had one of the original Mini Cooper S models, and as you said, they were a lot smaller and simpler than the current version. No doubt about it.

Every time I go to Europe on business, or to Italy, or for that matter Germany, I simply drool at all the great cars there. The public has such a different outlook there than the people in the US. The get all the good cars and they deserve to. However that said, it's a shame that the US buyers make it impossible for those same cars to be shipped over here and enjoy the type of sales numbers it would take to keep them here.

ttai · January 2008

3 this year. All suv's.

snakeweasel · January 2008

Oh I see cars in the ditch all the time after bad winter storms. But thats not the same as a roll over.

The Hyundai you are thinking of is the Elantra.

nippononly · January 2008

"However that said, it's a shame that the US buyers make it impossible for those same cars to be shipped over here and enjoy the type of sales numbers it would take to keep them here. "

You can say that again! If GM winds up bringing the Corsa over here intact, I will be very interested to see how many they can sell here.

We really need to get the new Suzuki Swift GT on the market here, then the Cooper would finally have a proper competitor to butt heads with!

And thanks, by the way, for your comments on the Civic SI v Mini Cooper. My intent was never to criticize or question your choices, but merely to wonder aloud at the motivations one might have for purchasing three seemingly similar vehicles. I think that was before I had quite figured out the extent of your personal car collection! May I ask how many you currently own?

Civic SI and the Cooper S are on my B-list for my next purchase in a couple of years, when transaction prices have perhaps come down a bit....

lilengineerboy · January 2008

Oh I see cars in the ditch all the time after bad winter storms. But thats not the same as a roll over.

Oh, if its in a ditch on it's wheels it doesn't count, if its on its head, it counts. The last time I saw a car on its roof was going down 101 by Gonzales some lady in a Lancer hit the ditch and flipped. The passenger compartment was almost totally intact.

Thats the difference between cars and SUVs, cars require a "trip" to roll, they have to hook their wheels on something, or fall off of something while SUVs don't require a trip to roll.

The Hyundai you are thinking of is the Elantra.

Yes, thats what it was, it was a 5 dr hatchback with three confused looking foreign nationals hovering about it.

snakeweasel · January 2008

if its on its head, it counts.

I wouldn't say that it counts in every instance. A lot of ditches around here are deep enough that if a car goes in at a direct enough angle it will naturally end up on its front end.

Yes, thats what it was, it was a 5 dr hatchback

Ah a wannabe station wagon, why oh why did Hyundai stop making the wagon?

podred · January 2008

And thanks, by the way, for your comments on the Civic SI v Mini Cooper. My intent was never to criticize or question your choices, but merely to wonder aloud at the motivations one might have for purchasing three seemingly similar vehicles. I think that was before I had quite figured out the extent of your personal car collection! May I ask how many you currently own?

Your Welcome, that's the only reason I mention my collection is in the event that someone has a question and would like to hear from someone that actually owns and drives a particular make and model, I'm more that happy to pass on my experience.

Thanks for the clarification regarding your question why I have three similar vehicles, a question that by the way is not unusual to hear coming from my wife......ha....ha...ha....bless her, she puts up with my auto obsession. But then again, she gets jewelry..... I take good care of her. The joke in my family is that I don't smoke, drink, or cheat on her..... I simply buy a large number of cars. Which brings me to your question of how many. I hesitate to state that number as I really don't want to be flamed but hey........ my current collection numbers 64.

Cheers....

nippononly · January 2008

"I hesitate to state that number as I really don't want to be flamed but hey........ my current collection numbers 64."

Hey, the more the merrier, I always say! :-)

(spoken like a true CCBAer)

thegraduate · January 2008

You should create a Carspace.com page!

boaz47 · January 2008

"Oh...and it sells in the US as a subcompact. Hmmm...kinda takes the wind out of your argument, doesn't it?"

Oh not at all. The mini cooper is only one example. And it is also a vehicle that has a niche almost all to itself. Still it is bigger than the origional. From the beginning I have stated that the new sub compacts to survive have to get bigger or add HP. In most cases they do both sooner or later. Scion has proven the point as has the Mini. To the Mini's credit it has only gained 200 pounds or so and the S has maybe 9 or ten more ponies. But 172 HP isn't bad for that size car. Just maybe best in class. The Scion on the other hand went from the 108-109 HP xA to the 128 HP xD and the xB went from 108-109 hp to 158 HP. It is almost a natural trend in what is bought by American consumers. I even predict that the fit will have more HP by the next generation presented to the US. I believe the xD had to get extra ponies because the Versa already had more HP than the old xA.

A better test to how Americans will accept sub compacts with 100 hp motors will be when the Smart hits in full stride. I just don't believe a sub 100 HP car will make it with todays American consumer. If the Smart survives two generations it will have to get more ponies and bulk up a bit other wise they will continue to lose money as they have every where else they are sold.

qbrozen · January 2008

my current collection numbers 64

Good grief! I can understand your hesitation. My and my wife's families make fun of me for having 5!

Where the heck do you keep them all?

ateixeira · January 2008

I don't think more mass hurts rollovers. A high center of gravity does, but not necessarily mass. You would need more energy to roll it, i.e. higher speeds.

Think about it - some of the worst cars are the lightest ones - the Suzuki Samurai for instance.

Also, the Smart ForTwo tipped in that moose-avoidance test, so they widened the suspension and made stability control standard.

In crash tests the Ford Escape tipped over in a side impact.

It's the LIGHT cars with the high center of gravity that most often roll.

What is "wrong" with these new subcompacts?

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles