What is "wrong" with these new subcompacts?

plekto · December 2010

You might also check out the Nissan Versa and Sentra, which have $2000 and $2500 in rebates currently. The Mitsubishi Lancer has $2000 off. All are worlds better than a Yaris. Lower cost for a better vehicle due to the rebates. The winner, IMO, is the Versa.

Here is another sobering thing to consider when about the Yaris:
http://www.iihs.org/research/hldi/composite_cls.aspx?y=2006-2008&cls=2&sz=1&sort- - - =all

The Yaris is among the highest in terms of payout for injuries in an accident. It's simply put, a tin can. Most small cars are as well, though the Versa hatchback is fairly decent. That's why it gets my pick. The fit is better as well, but it's several thousand more and Honda never offers incentives. Note: a score of 100 is average, and it is weighted. A score of 200 is almost 4x as bad as a score of 100. Look at the last three columns. Personal Injury, Medical, and Bodily Injury. That score of 207 is horrendous. A Civic averages 127 by comparison. The Versa Hatchback is quite a bit better.

It really is the 2000s version of the VW Beetle. Small, cheap, frugal, but God help you if you get hit in one.

http://www.carsdirect.com/build/options?zipcode=91107&acode=USC10NIC102A0&restor- - - e=false
That price includes delivery. $11,923 is going to be hard to beat, IMO.

But if you really want safe AND good mileage, just get the Civic.

kyfdx · December 2010

Life is short... get the MINI!

igozoomzoom · December 2010

Just to let you know- a 2011 Nissan Versa S 5-door with 6-speed manual and the Power Plus Pkg (power windows & locks, cruise control, keyless entry, door pockets and padded door armrests) stickers for $15,250 but TrueCar.com is showing it for $11,995 after the $2k rebate. It's a much better looking and driving vehicle than the Yaris. Worth a look if you haven't considered it already!

plekto · December 2010

Yeah, Minis used to be a good deal if you got the base model with not much on it. But now they start at $20K(and out the door with tax is pretty much $25K now), and for that much money, let's be hones. There's a LOT of CPO cars out there that blow the Mini away - and quite a few new ones as well.

If you want a really inexpensive of wheels with a manual transmission, the Versa and the Elantra(at the end of the year when they have incentives) are hard to beat. Second would be a Civic or Fit, and the Patriot if you want a super-cheap SUV.(that gets nearly 30mpg!)

Me? I'd sacrifice 5mpg for twice as good in a crash.

note - about the data on that site... A typical SUV is in the 50-80 range, which skews the data. A Camry is around 120 or so as a result. And anything tiny is at a huge disadvantage as most midsize and large cars approach 4000lbs, and many SUVs are nearly 5000lbs now. I'd be scared silly to drive with my son in a car that small. $300 or so in gas a year just isn't worth it.(the medical co-pay alone will suck up that in extra money since you'll get injured more in a tiny car than a normal sized one)

ateixeira · December 2010

The honest answer is "No" because you simply get diminishing returns the more you spend.

However, having said that, life is short. Don't buy any car you don't love.

If it were strictly about price, get a CPO Mazda3 or something.

nippononly · December 2010

Of course, it wasn't until 2009 that Toyota gave the Yaris 6 standard airbags and ABS, which would put it on a more equal footing with other models. And of course the IIHS data is for 2006-08 Yarises....

I drove a rental Versa recently and would put to the absolute bottom of the class except for Aveo. I would take a Fiesta over a Versa. But you are right, the price is a good one. Was looking at a 6-speed Versa with power package recently, which had a sticker of around $16K. Take away the $2000 rebate and get another $1000 off it from the dealer, you are down to $13,000 which is a very good price, if still $1500 more than the Yaris. Either way, the drive in the Versa is the least pleasant if you have my priorities, so it's not in contention.

I do think that if I manage to drive a Fit Sport this weekend, I should drive a Mini again to get the back-to-back impression. The Mini is such a great car, but of course the price they are asking reflects that.....

nippononly · December 2010

Trying to stick to a right-size car here, not creep up to compacts like the Mazda3, thanks! But it's a good recommendation - the Mazda3 is easily the best car in its class for people who like to drive.

The only car in the compact class that might get close to the 40 mpg I am looking for is the Civic, and there are what, 40 BILLION of those on the road? Talk about seeing your car everywhere. Not for me. Besides, I test drove one of those a few months back and I think the glow is definitely off the rose at this point - that is a model overdue for big updates.

Don't buy any car I don't love? I like that advice a lot, but the problem is I am fairly convinced there isn't anything sold today I would love. In every class of car, control is being taken away from the driver, road feel and driver controls are receding, being computerized, everything made robotic. One of the advantages of the subcompact class it that because it is under such price pressure, the fewest of those types of changes have crept in thus far.

plekto · December 2010

Yes, there are 40 billion of them. You can also customize it quite a lot if you feel the need to do so.

Yes, I know they Yaris has more airbags. It still doesn't change the data much, as what we're interested in is injury rates and not fatality rates which is the interesting part of that site. It doesn't use "stars", but instead closely follows what physics tells you is likely to happen(though there are exceptions of course). 30% of all accidents involve a SUV or commercial vehicle. All that matters is how your car does versus one. And sub-compacts are honestly too small, IMO, to be considered any more.

Stepping up to the size of a Civic/Fit or a Mazda 3 or similar offers you a world of protection by comparison.

Note - you might consider dropping a couple more MPG and getting a CPO or similar Civic Si. Few people have one and you'd be looking at the previous body style. Or get the CNG Civic. Free carpool access for life, essentially zero emissions, and a cost-adjusted 70mpg combined.(being that CNG is half the price of gasoline) Almost nobody has one, either.

They are 25K new, but half the fuel cost ads up quickly:
12K miles/year:
172 "gallons" of CNG (price adjusted to equal gasoline)
That's $550 a year fuel savings at today's prices(and trust me, they're NOT going down) The home fueling device drops it to roughly 1/3 the cost of gasoline.

You also can get a hefty tax credit for the home fuel device as well as the vehicle itself. It's a complete win-win unless you absolutely must "commute" more than 250 miles a day. There are about 1000 or so CNG fueling stations in the U.S., and the car comes with them programmed into the GPS. (it's a Civic EX with NAV)

The reason you get one is simply that you can keep it for twice as long as a Yaris and laugh at the idiots trying to eek out every last MPG in their microboxes.

edit - also, you could "settle" for 35mpg in a CNG Crown Vic/Grand Marquis. These are easily available for 10-12K a couple of years(3-5 max) used. Getting 35-40mpg equivalent out of a giant boat like that is awesome. And proof that we're simply using the wrong fuel in our vehicles - CNG is awesome. Save the planet and do so in a giant armored tank of a car that can fit 6 people in it - and still have nobody inside :P

iluvmysephia1 · December 2010

riding dynamic but that face is so clownish I'd never even test drive one. Besides Mitsubishi makes a better driving car than Mazda, anyway, end of this particular battle. Period.

plekto · December 2010

That is true. The Lancer is the basic for the top rally racing car out there. Of course, it's also really not good unless you get the AWD version, and that's way out of the budget.

ateixeira · December 2010

I forget the publication, but they tested a bunch of fuel efficient cars and Mazda3 2.0i stood out as being the most fun of that bunch. Was it Edmunds?

Agree about control being taken away. Electric Power Steering is a good example - too numb for my tastes.

nippononly · December 2010

Yeah, I remember the comparo you are referring to, but I also don't remember whether it was Edmunds or someone else.

Unfortunately, they and I differ on what can be considered fuel-efficient. The Subaru gets me 29 mpg, which I would call mediocre and unacceptable for a commute car. Likewise, the high-20s mpg they manage to get from most of those compact cars with 2L engines is not good enough for me, even if I would probably average 30-32 mpg in such a car. Very average.

As for Lancer vs Mazda3, I have driven both and I beg to differ vociferously. The base FWD Lancer has clunky controls and clunky handling by comparison with the Mazda, which has more fluid, precise controls and a very nimble manner for its size. Had a rental Lancer that I really came to dislike after a few days, although that probably was partly due to the CVT in that model - I really despise CVTs. I thought the way the engine and CVT were programmed to behave was notably more obnoxious than the way Nissan sets up their CVT-equipped cars.

If I were willing to replace the Echo with a car that got worse gas mileage, the Mazda3 would be a top contender in the 3i Touring trim level. I can get a stick and a moonroof in that trim, and still maybe make 33-35 mpg as a running average.

But since I'm not, the pursuit of a right-size car continues, and I have just discovered that both Honda dealers near me have taken delivery of a single manual shift Fit Sport this week, so it may yet be possible to drive one of those again for the back-to-back impression.....

stickguy · December 2010

bringing up EPS reminded me of another pet peeve. Making changes with negative results (overall) to try and get a fractional improvement elsewhere (in this case, as is often the case, in the MPG on the sticker).

Honestly, how many real world additional MPGs can EPS add? is it enough to offset the inferior functionality, and the added complexity 9and who knows about safety issues with teh system vs. traditional hydrolic). Given how many cars have been roasted for lousy steering feel, it is hard to see the true beenfit.

I put keyless start in the same catagory. Seems like a solution to a problem that did not exist, with other consequences.

meanwhile, the ral culprit to improving MPG is the fact that cars keep getting porkier. In the latest car magazines (I get them all) there was a test on the new 5 series BMW. Basically they did not like it, and said that it had gotten fat, bloated, and not fun to drive. IOW, it was losing the traditional BMW values, and was now a shrot wheelbase 7 series.

and not hard to see why. The "mid size" 5 series (about the size of an acord?) weighed in at about 4,400 pounds! And the SUVs (X5) are pushing 2.5 tons. I think the new X3, a compact, is pushing 4,500.

simplify a little drop some tonnage, and you won't need 350HP to keep up with traffic, and guess what? better MPG!

at least the Miata seems to be going the right direction. They had a piece on the upcoming new design, and it is supposed to weigh 2-300#s less (down to about 2,200). With I beleive a smaller engine.

stickguy · December 2010

well, I had a nice rant there, but I guess none of th e cars I discussed were sub compacts. The Mazda 2 seems to be the one that is the most dedicated to small engine (100HP) and light weight, but it does not seem to really get very good mileage relative (must be efficiency or gearing). I wonder though if the stick will beat handily the EPA #s?

the cruze is another gross offender. 3,200#s? Mid size weight, compact back seat, and a dog with the sub compact engine.

The elantra for a compact seems to be setting the standard. Plenty of room and power, and 40 on the highway. ANd various reports have indicated that it is a realistic number. Wonder if it has to do with being only about 2,600-2,700#s?

and given the comparable price, a heck of a lot more car (room, comfort, etc.) for similar money and comparable gas mileage to a mini car.

I guess Nippon is used to an Echo, but you couldn't pay me to spend significant time driving a Yaris.

ateixeira · December 2010

I read the same thing, so I'm also looking forward to the ND Miata.

They could even offer a 2.0l tuned to run on regular, the engine from the Mazda3 2.0i basically.

May not be worth it for the small volumes, though.

nippononly · December 2010

I guess Nippon is used to an Echo, but you couldn't pay me to spend significant time driving a Yaris.

I hear you, LOL! Small cars can be an acquired taste, but either way there's not much to enjoy in a Yaris except perhaps the low low price. I mean, $11,5 is its biggest selling point.

But some of the others in the class have other things to recommend them, and despite the first impression you get of the Mazda2, it is one of them. Zippy and really fun to push through corners and curves. It's no Mini, but it's also more than $5000 less than a Mini. And I would put almost anything up against the Mini for handling and fun-to-drive factor.

iluvmysephia1 · December 2010

I guess we all have different tastes and desires in cars, and that's what helps make Edmunds and other car websites so fun and worthwhile going to and participating in. I am just sold on the "jet-fighter inspired" grill on the 2008 and/on Lancers and when I compare one to the Mazda 3 I find the difference huge and a killing note for the Mazda. I really like my cars to be attractive and it is beyond just slightly important to me. That's all. The ride on the Lancer is fluent and way above average for me, especially with my Pirelli P-Zero Nero M+S Pinna's.

Now, taking things down to where nippononly is desiring to go, the subcompact range, the real star of this particular Edmund's thread, Mazda does a much better job with their 2 than their 3 in body design, IMO. I would for sure test drive a Mazda 2 and a Ford Fiesta if I was really serious about getting a rig in this body size. And the 2 would have an even shot as it would stand right now against the Fiesta. Mitsu doesn't sell that small of a car in America but does elsewhere, like their Colt, for example.

Like I said, just peering into the window of the 2011 Ford Fiesta S sedan I got cramped, uncomfortable feelings. Wouldn't rule out a pop under to subs one day but it's gonna be many, many, many moon down the road for this NE Nevada padre.

stickguy · December 2010

I just read the last issue of Consumer reports, and they tested gas savers. Included were the fiesta (auto sedan and stick hatch), Mazda2 (AT and stick), and the Honda CRZ (got panned) and a jetta diesel.

pretty much said the fiesta was a good highway car, but not all that much fun. the mazda was the opposite,but the Ford actually got better mpg.

iluvmysephia1 · December 2010

oh yeah, I've read those reports and I believe them, but would of course do my own test drive. The Honda Fit would be out of the running because of it's clunky looks. VW doesn't even make a list of mine because of their crappy reputation for reliability, though VW does do a good job in the bodystyling department IMO.

Yeah, I liked the looks of the Mazda 2 when I first saw initial internet shots of it. And it has a good, solid shifter with clean shift-settles, which is really important. Supposedly better than the feel of Fiesta's shifter. Really, because of that last reason, I would probably put the Mazda 2 in first place on my NA subcompact list, barring some strange reason I wouldn't enjoy my test drive of the small car. It comes in that cool metallic green color that the Fiesta comes in, too. Looked like the price came out to around $16,795 or numbers to that effect, decent pricing like the Fiesta, too. It would be between the Mazda 2 and the Ford Fiesta to me in this class. The test drive would be huge in making the decision.

nippononly · December 2010

the Honda Fit. Got the chance to test drive one today, and if what you value most is a driver's car (as opposed to looks or price) the Fit is head and shoulders above the rest. The first time I drove one was very soon after the present model came out, more than 2 years ago, and I had forgotten just how great this car is.

Shifter? FABULOUS. Like a rifle bolt into every gear, no slop, much MUCH better than any of the other cars I drove. The clutch is great too - perfect engagement, easy to read, easy to modulate, and light overall.

The steering really makes this car stand apart - yes, it's electric, and compared to sports cars and sporty models I'm sure it's not as good, but it gives the most feedback and has the least on-center numbness of any of the cars I drove this week. Perfectly weighted, unlike all the rest. As for the handling, that may be the biggest advantage this car has over the rest of the group: NEVER clunky over potholes or bad pavement, not jittery on the highway, but also the fastest through curves and corners with the least body roll. I'm pretty sure this is the only one of the group that had indie rear suspension, which probably contributes, and it may also be the only one of the group with a rear stabilizer bar.

The Fiesta still gets the nod for the interior - the Fit has a lot of hard surfaces, and only a bare covering over hard plastic for the driver's armrest, without any padding. But the Sport does have a standard cushioned armrest for the driver's right arm. The controls are easy to use, USB and iPod hook-up are in the glovebox and and iPod can be controlled through the stereo. But it has no Bluetooth and of course nothing like Ford's fabulous Sync.

You get more engine noise in the Fit than any of the other cars, especially on the highway where the engine turns slightly above 3000 rpm in top gear to go 65. But overall you get less tire roar and no wind noise that I could detect, so it kind of evens out with the other cars. The engine is very willing to rev, loves to rev in fact, which is part of the fun of owning a Honda in my experience. It revs high enough at 65 that you can go up a fairly substantial grade without down-shifting, which is kinda nice.

Also, the interior is very spacious, an aspect common to all these cars and very welcome given their small exterior size. The Fit's seating position is more minivan-like than the Fiesta's and the Mazda's, but the seat is great - perfectly bolstered to hold you in place and firm with great lumbar support. Unlike the Yaris, I could see myself driving the Fit all day without getting sore.

Yes, the Fit looks like a microvan where all the others I drove look sleeker. I dunno how important that really is to me at this point - I bought a car on looks once before (the Matrix) that I ended up hating after a short time because it drove like crap. Every time you drive the car you experience how it DRIVES, but the only time you see the outside styling is when you look back over your shoulder after you parked it. The driving is 90% of your experience of the car, the looks are 10% of it.

One thing I found out which evens the score with the other cars on a point that is important to me: for 2011 the Fit Sport has standard stability control. I had thought that was an advantage the much cheaper cars had over the Fit, but for 2011 Honda has caught back up.

Turns out my local dealership (where I drove this one) took not one but two stick-shift Sports into inventory, so they have a white one and a magnesium (gun-metal gray) one in stock. The guy was trying hard to sell me one on the spot, but I told him I still had one more car to test drive before I made my decision, so we left it at that. I think I would want the bronze/orange color anyway, or maybe the deep purple (officially called blackberry or something) if they still make that color.

Of course, it's a 2011 so there are no advertised promos on it. I figure they would sell it for $17,000 without too much fuss (sticker is $17,6), maybe a bit less if I pushed.

Which leaves me to ponder: is this car worth $5000-5500 more than the Yaris? Is it worth $2000 more than the Mazda? The Fiesta I have ruled out because it doesn't emphasize the driving characteristics I prefer (lively handling, lots of feedback from the controls, peppy acceleration at around-town speeds) in a car in this class.

It's funny but maybe not surprising that in the end, the cars' sticker prices are very reflective of the amount of merit each car has - the bargain basement car has a bargain basement price, the most expensive car is also my first choice. Go figure, huh?! ;-)

crkyolfrt · December 2010

I enjoyed reading your review. I drove a Fit 2 years ago. I could relate to much of what you said, although I find I am too big for most of all the seats in small cars. The seat backs aren't too bad but do tend to squeeze me narrower in the back than i prefer, and seat bottoms are not only too narrow, but too short to boot lacking thigh support. This has to be one of the most common seat shortcomings in most new cars under 40k bucks.

As to your question though, a seat makes or breaks a car at almost any price unless you rarely drive anywhere and do short trips only. I'd say you have already made up your mind and according to the priorities you mentioned, u are on the right track. If a manual shift is a priority, then how it shifts is also huge because you use the shifter so much. Are they 5 or 6 sp? I forget.

Oh..but I will say that an uncomfortable left rest for your (either) elbow or lack of room is also huge, especially for me.

stever · December 2010

I enjoyed the review too. My wife and I weren't so enamored of the Fit Sport when we took one home overnight a year and a half ago (though it was much better than the AT Fit we tried). And we both got seat time in the Fit Sport with just the driver in the car. I remember the shifting being fine and the pep was ok. Just something about the whole package that didn't click.

We both liked the manual Matrix a lot when we test drove it (the 2.4l one). We didn't like the Versa much. Probably boils down to us just liking bigger cars (although we both really liked our '82 Tercel).

Different strokes....

lilengineerboy · December 2010

So I was absent for a bit from the boards and I saw a conversation about highs and lows of the Transit Connect go by. I thought that was pretty interesting because I never really thought of a utility van as a civilian transport. In Michigan, they really push the ability to reconfigure the cargo area to meet the needs of a particular industry.
The thought of using it for a minivan (other than taxi) didn't really crossed my mind. There is only seating for 5 and it seemed that the for a minivan, it takes 3 rows/7-8 passengers.
It also has an incredibly high profile. That doesn't make for stellar fuel economy. It does do better than an Econoline or Ranger/S10, with a pretty hefty payload.

stever · December 2010

I've had "five passenger" minivans since 1989. And I only had to toss one bench from one of them. The '89 Voyager SWB we had was a 5 seater from the factory. It's a great configuration if you carry more stuff than people. A big tall wagon if you will, but with sliders. Like the TC.

stickguy · December 2010

nice review. I have never driven one, but I do recall magazine reviews that indicated it was not a great highway car (maybe it was darty or wandering?) But, maybe the ESC helps that.

Hey, if you like it, that is all that really matters. Other than the 5K or so in your pocket!

the fit does seem to have the most interior room, and flexible cargo area.

nippononly · December 2010

Well part of my test drive involved about 8 miles in each direction on the freeway (it was rainy today and the salesman was bored, so I got to go on a half hour test drive with him) and it never darted or wandered. That is despite the winds we were having today. So I think they might have just been reaching for something negative to say.

I would say the Fit's negatives are the interior materials and the amount of engine noise at highway speeds, but both are manageable and where they shorted these aspects of the car, they more than made up for it in the mechanicals and chassis.

I guess I should add that in choosing the cars I wanted to look at, I left out the Aveo and the Accent. I couldn't bring myself to drive an Aveo - it has not been notably updated since its debut years ago despite GM's advertising to the contrary, and I drove one for almost a week way back when I was in a rental for some reason I forget. Horrendous, worse than Yaris in every way, but of course the cheapest one of all in this class, so it has one redeeming feature at least.

I have driven an Accent SE and don't like it for lots of little reasons, but it is more fun to drive than a Yaris or a Fiesta. I didn't drive it again now because even if it came out on top there is no dealer anywhere near me and I don't want to be more than 25 miles from the nearest dealer when I need warranty service, regardless of brand.

As for the "5K in my pocket" remark, it is a solid chunk of change, eh? Enough to make one consider very carefully one's priorities! :-)

crkyolfrt · December 2010

I had an AWD Matrix with the auto (only way u could get AWD) and 1.8 Corolla engine. It ran very strangulated in the Matrix, due to floor pan design differences over the Corolla (had a down sized forward premuffler/cat) and even moreso in the AWD model because the exhaust was forced to sneak around a maize of IS bits which the FWD models didn't have. Totally changed the character and breathing abilities of the engine. So not only urge suffered due to some extra weight, but so did FE.

I demo drove a manual FWD Vibe and was not impressed with the shift linkage at all. I have driven worse but knew it would bug even if I had considered a FWD (i wasn't).

Interestingly enough, I also spent some time in an 08 5 dr Versa rental. Over a month in it actually. The seat bottoms were so bad I thought a 400 pounder had kneeled their knee into the centre of it with all their weight. Before I left the lot I sat in the passenger side and it was almost as bad! The car only had 3000 miles on it. So before i left town I went over to the Nissan dealer to see if they all were bad. They were! Except the top line model had ever so slightly better seats ,but barely. To this day I am shocked, cuz in almost every other regard I was considering buying a new Versa to replace my totalled X Trail. Altho i knew i would probably regret going without AWD i have had for 22 years. My rationalization was better FE etc and hopefully while I had it, a turbo dsl something neat and affordable AWD would surface, like a 4 door mid-sized p/u with about a 2.7 litre inline 4 cyl, std tranny 5 or 6 spd, with Japanese roots. (I'll die of old age first likely). But what a great car in most other repsects. It was an auto, the 4 speed, thank goodness not the CVT, had a pretty strong running 1.8 and over a couple thous miles of totally varied driving in heavy city often and numerous long highway trips , and all the while not really trying for FE it still averaged 37 ImpMpg, so about 30 US. And I drove it pretty fast most times. It had certain well thought out extras that simply worked well that I have not seen in any other cars, especially in its price range...for example, it had two adjustable dash vents that was the perfect choice for hot humid evenings at night when you didn't need the cool air on your arms, and if you chose defrost position it would keep fogging the windshield, so these vents were place up high on the flat top of the dash, but kept the cold air from hitting the windshield and you could adjust it away from you and it was far enough away that it didn't chill your arms. Just a great idea and surprised more mfgrs don't copy it.

Remember the prev gen Tercel to your 82? They went 78 to 82 i think, they were great little cars, the engine was placed longitudinally in the front. (north to south) The stick went right into the tranny with no linkage. I had a 72? Corolla 1200 it reminded me of.

stever · December 2010

We didn't get the X-Trail down here in the States, but I liked the one or two I've seen. Boxy, not frou-frou at all, good size. And I'm partial to Nissan drivetrains.

I never got to test the 1.8l in the Matrix/Vibe but we were interested in it for the mileage.

I'm back in snow country again and I must admit the AWD Outback is getting a lot more use than our FWD minivan. But the van is top heavy and just heavier in general I think. It's more comfy but doesn't feel like the better choice this time of year, even with newer all-seasons on it.

I only had to chain up the FWD '82 Tercel a few times in 17 years - had that one during my Anchorage years. I think the lightweight FWD subcompact cars with skinny tires tend to do pretty good in snow country.

tifighter · December 2010

I had an 81 Tercel hatch, and it was a solid snow car. Skinny tires rule.

I noticed the Transit Connect has pretty skinny tires and a lot of ground clearance...I wonder what it is like in the snow?

Gimme: I think you might be thinking of the Toyota Starlet. Even smaller than the Tercel, and RWD.

tifighter · December 2010

And speaking of Starlets, here's one for you Nippon. Who needs a Fit when you can get this RWD bucket of fury in SSF, and its cheap too. With a stick! Check out the tasteful mods-
81 Toyota Starlet

crkyolfrt · December 2010

Nope, not the Starlet...the Tercel was FWD, it used a ring and pinion off each fr side of the tranny. It would have been good for 'go' in snow cuz engine was cantilevered sort of like when VW did that with their Fox. Made for great go, but made the rear ends a bit light to come around.

My old 1200 was a RWD though. Wish i had it still. I'd drive it in the summer. Dead simple car to work on. In those days of having owned VW bugs with marginal heaters in the winter, the Corollas were welcome relief. It belief to this day that those cars and Datsun 510's all contributed in a big way to the success of Toyota and Nissan to this day.

isellhondas · December 2010

Very well written review and I agree with all that you said.

The only thing I didn't like about selling Fits was the miniscule markups.

If we sold one for MSRP, there was only a 400-600.00 markup over invoice.

But that didn't matter to the customers who wanted to pay even less than that! I didn't care either. It would have been a "mini" either way!

stever · December 2010

Skinny tires are cheaper too. :-)

Love the Starlet ads. The seats in the one you linked are worth more than the rest of the car.

nippononly · December 2010

I LOVE that CL ad! I am falling all over the place laughing right now. The Tercel and the Corolla 1200 before it were GREAT, and I would consider laying down actual dollars for a well-kept one even now (especially a Corolla 1200).

The Starlet was never all that, IMO. A crappy little crapbox that was in the early 80s the VERY rare exception to Toyota's bulletproof reputation for reliability.

And this will probably disappoint all the folks on the board here, but I'm considering going with the Yaris. It is a known quantity (to me, having had an Echo all these years) that will cost $5000 less than the Fit. While the Fit is definitely the better car, no question about it, I am having a very hard time convincing myself it is $5000 better for what will mostly be a daily commute and local driving car for me.

Feature content is almost the same between the two, except I go without the alloys on the Yaris. Interior quality is about the same. So it comes down to settling for the car that isn't the better driver.

$5000 hangs in the balance.......still not done thinking about this, but that's the way I'm leaning right now.......

tifighter · December 2010

Glad to entertain. FYI, I saw a used 09 Fit 5MT Sport/Navi at Berkeley Honda. Not sure there's a lot of incentive to buy one over new since used Hondas are rarely deals, but hey, now you know.

nippononly · December 2010

Without even looking at Berkeley's inventory page, I can very confidently predict that unless the car has more than 50K miles, it is advertised at a price that is HIGHER than what MSRP would be on a new one, if Honda still offered a manual-shift NAV-equipped model. And that's even knowing that Berkeley's advertised prices are actually better than most, usually.

Used Hondas SUCK as a used car value. If you want a Honda, you buy a new one, or else a very very used one for a couple thousand bucks. Any Honda in the age range of 1 day - 10 years is a bad value indeed.

Seems like the same is true for Mini Coopers.

lilengineerboy · December 2010

And this will probably disappoint all the folks on the board here, but I'm considering going with the Yaris. It is a known quantity (to me, having had an Echo all these years) that will cost $5000 less than the Fit.

You have to get what makes you happy based on your terms and how you define value. I know there are folks who feel a sense of pride when they driving knowing the deal they got or how little it is costing them. People get happy driving a Prius because they feel they are saving the world. If saving 5k over 5-10 years helps you like your car, go for it.

How much time do you spend in the car? How many miles do you put on a year?

igozoomzoom · December 2010

Is the Mazda2 out of the running because of price? According to Truecar.com, the Mazda2 Sport MT is selling for as low as $13,500 in some markets. Mazda has $400 Marketing Support (cash to dealer) thru 1/3/2011, so that's another $400 off the price.... The only thing missing from the Sport is cruise control.

I realized something very odd when I was checking out the prices for the Mazda2. I know all the cars in this segment have tiny profit margins, but $500 to $800 markup (difference between Invoice and Sticker Prices) seems to be the range. The only exception is the Mazda2....the markup ranges from $184 on the Sport 5MT to $219 on the Touring AT...even at full sticker, the dealer can't be making anything even with holdback factored in...what's the point of even trying to sell them???

Actually, the sales numbers for the Mazda2 are a pretty good indicator that dealers aren't even attempting to sell them....November was the fourth full month that is has been on the U.S. market and total sales as of 11/30/2010 is- 2,187!!! October was the high point so far with 629 sold but they only moved 462 in November...

Mazda has been offering deep discounts and incentives on the 2010 MZ3 and even more so on the 2010 Mazda6. It was possible to buy a 2010 MZ6 i Sport 4-door AT for a few bucks under $15k...less than the Mazda2 Touring AT. A few months back, you could get a 2010 Ford Fusion S w/ AT for less than a 2001 Ford Fiesta SE w/ AT- and most buyers probably still bought the Fiesta...especially since it comes in classy colors like Bright Magenta and Lime Squeeze...not to mention Yellow Tri-Coat.

plekto · December 2010

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bestworst.shtml

The Yaris gets 29/36 mpg.
The CRZ, the Mini, the Fiesta, and the Golf/Jetta all beat or equal its MPG figures.

Mini - $21K - too expensive.
CRZ - $20K - too expensive.
Jetta - $15K - OK price-wise, but VW reliability(that said, my best friend's Golf has been problem free)

Fiesta - $13-14K. Roughly the same MPG (28/37)better... well, everything, and about the same price. Also, Ford has been very reliable recently. I'd buy this over a Yaris any day.

*note*
Actually, if you price a Yaris, it's MORE money as Toyota has taken a page from GM's book and makes you pay for EVERY last option. Just getting the Power package which is the absolute minimum (unless you like only FM radio and no CD and manual windows and so on) takes you upwwards of 15K. The Fiesta has it all standard.

2011 Ford Fiesta SE 4dr Sedan (cars direct)
Net Cost: $14,721

That's with delivery and is $1K less than a Yaris Sedan. It has power windows and a MP3 player.

I completely forgot about this somehow and it's really a no-brainer. The doors on the Yaris alone make me cringe - it screams 90s econobox. And the Fiesta is a solid little tank that gets the same MPG. For less cost. Win-win all the way around. (and the Fiesta has better paint colors as well)

crkyolfrt · December 2010

A few excerpts from your other post right after your test drive of the Fit:

"and I had forgotten just how great this car is."

"Shifter? FABULOUS. Like a rifle bolt into every gear, no slop, much MUCH better than any of the other cars I drove. The clutch is great too - perfect engagement, easy to read, easy to modulate, and light overall."

of course with "daily commute and local driving" you rarely use a shifter and the clutch.. [sarcasm]

"The steering really makes this car stand apart - yes, it's electric, and compared to sports cars and sporty models I'm sure it's not as good, but it gives the most feedback and has the least on-center numbness of any of the cars I drove this week. Perfectly weighted, unlike all the rest."

who needs good on-centre feel anyway? Numbness is no big thing..

" As for the handling, that may be the biggest advantage this car has over the rest of the group: NEVER clunky over potholes or bad pavement, not jittery on the highway, but also the fastest through curves and corners with the least body roll. I'm pretty sure this is the only one of the group that had indie rear suspension, which probably contributes, and it may also be the only one of the group with a rear stabilizer bar."

"The engine is very willing to rev, loves to rev in fact, which is part of the fun of owning a Honda in my experience. It revs high enough at 65 that you can go up a fairly substantial grade without down-shifting, which is kinda nice."

hills smills, the other cars have lower gears

But my favourite is this one:

"Unlike the Yaris, I could see myself driving the Fit all day without getting sore."

Seems to me you made quite the case for the Fit. Factor in that if events in your life change and you traded or sold the car prematurely, the Fit will have the better resale value too. One thing that might hurt resale on any of these small cars is the manual, but I know that all these small cars with tiny engines with A/C on, (and especially if you have one or more passengers) the manuals get a lot closer to their FE ratings than the autos do, because so much throttle is stuffed with the autos all the time.

One other thing..alloy wheels do add more than just looks to a car. They allow the suspension to do its job with less intrusiveness cuz of the lesser unsprung weight. That is likely why it felt better over broken pavement. But, I am not a fan of lo profile rubber, which they use often lately for looks. They are expensive, ride stiff, cost fuel mileage, and easy to dent a rim on potholes. So if the alloys only came with the lo wide rubber, that is when I'd choose the steel wheels instead.

The other benefit of alloy's is cuz they are lighter, they contribute to better FE. Most noticeable in stop and go.

isellhondas · December 2010

Are you sure there is a 5000.00 difference?

There is next to nothing profit on Fits so that just doesn't sound right!

Settling for the wrong car can be a mistake. You will quickly forget what you paid anyway.

ateixeira · December 2010

I'm with isell, get the one you love, plus I doubt it's really $5k less once you add equipment to the Yaris. I think tires cost extra, LOL.

nippononly · December 2010

The Yaris gets 29/36 mpg.
The CRZ, the Mini, the Fiesta, and the Golf/Jetta all beat or equal its MPG figures.

Mini - $21K - too expensive.
CRZ - $20K - too expensive.
Jetta - $15K - OK price-wise, but VW reliability(that said, my best friend's Golf has been problem free)

Not sure if you realize that your words here are misleading, but the Jetta/Golf that beats the Yaris for fuel economy is the $23K diesel, not the $15K crapmobile gas trim.

nippononly · December 2010

The Mazda 2 is out of the running because for only $1500 more the Fit is a much better car. As for the prices you mention for the Sport, this model is like all the ones I tested: the base trim is very different from the next trim up because of tiny, squishy tires. All of these models have a cheap starter trim (the Mazda's is the Sport) with smaller rims and skinny tires with tall sidewalls. And it is noticeable in the drive - I have driven a Yaris with the 14" rims, a Fit with the 15s, and a Mazda2 Sport (is it 14" or 15" on that one? I think 15") and I'm not interested. So for me it would be the Touring or nothing (also because of the cruise on the Touring, and the much better seats).

Of all these cars I think the Mazda is the best-looking, but I swore I would never buy a car again based on looks.

nippononly · December 2010

LOL! Yes, you are right about everything you said (or implied with sarcasm!). :-P

I am still weighing it, but if I decide to go with a Fit, I am going to wait a year to put more cash together for the down payment.

As far as low profile tires, the ones on the Fit are 185/55s, and the ones on the Yaris are 185/60s, so it's not a huge difference even though the Yaris has steel wheels.

Since taking the drive I have discovered that the Fit has a torsion beam rear just like all the other cars here, so the salesman was just talking out of his rear end when he told me it has an independent rear suspension. But it DOES have a rear stabilizer bar, which is fairly unique in this group.

And I am sometimes in this car for a couple of hours or more at a time, so the seat is a significant consideration. I do about 18K miles a year in my Echo currently.

For all the folks questioning the $5000 difference, it basically comes down to end-of-year cash incentives from Toyota and dealers' willingness to discount the 2010s more deeply than they normally would because the calendar is about to turn over.

Normally the difference between the Yaris w/ power package and the Fit Sport is more like $2500, but currently Toyota is running an extra $1500 incentive and the dealer is discounting well below invoice to sell the remaining 2010s.

If I had to pay $14,5 for the Yaris there is no question I would be giving it a miss. And perhaps I will give it a miss anyway, still mulling it over.....

isellhondas · December 2010

When cars are sold cheaply there is always a REASON.

They aren't selling well and there is always a reason for that as well.

ateixeira · December 2010

Torsion beams have advantages, FWIW - look at the cargo area of the Fit and you'll see just how space efficient they are.

ateixeira · December 2010

To be fair it could just be an older design, or styling, lots of subjective stuff.

However, I happen to hate the center-mounted gauges so I'll blame those, LOL.

isellhondas · December 2010

Yeah, it looks like a cyclops!

crkyolfrt · December 2010

True, but in this case the 'reason' might be public perception of Toyota lately. And of course some of the new competitor's offerings.

I am not afraid of Toyota personally (but have more guarded reservations in the last few years, but not because of their UA news) But as a major purchase, I don't turn a blind-eye to my purchase in terms of potential lost value in my car either. So if you can save upfront to help fend off potential loss later, that makes good economic sense. All this...assuming you like the car and it suits you. Unfortunately tho, Toyota in some ways would seem to have been resting on their laurels the last 2 or 3 years, and have turned out cars with subpar paint jobs and rather plain (read cheaper) interiors also.

I don't worry too much about outside aesthetics of a vehicle. Of course it would be nice if made me feel good walking towards it, but if its look is mediocre and it made me feel good behind the wheel, then that is what I weigh my decision on. Now here is where I might sound like a bit of a hypocrite, but it is only because of having to have AWD. My present CRV gives me AWD and a std tran but it irritates me in so many other ways, I am annoyed with myself that I settled with it. At the time I was racking up a big rental bill for over a month after my prev car was insurance totalled. I say settled, because the seat is too small for my body, the shifter (and even clutch take-up) is not your usual Honda smooth, direct feel that you get in the Accords and Civics and Fits, I hate the swinging rear door, the car is excessively noisy inside (I feel like i need to fill the whole car with cardboard boxes to try to quiet it down) the stereo is mediocre even tho it was optioned up apparently, the windshield defrost doesn't hit low enough on the windshield to keep ice and snow from building up (THAT one is a huge hate) and also it blows no def air at all when you choose floor heat. It doesn't take but slight wisp of warm air to keep the WS clear in cold wx, and after you are warmed up and thawed out and underway, you want the heat on the floor but not have your A/C compressor kick in and cost you FE, so having a hint of warm air on the WS in floor mode is a big oversight. The 08 Civic was the same. These are design flaws that in prev generations of cars, Honda used to be good at and covered those bases. And its brakes in fact aren't very good. (altho to be fair come spring when the wx is better I need to get in to them to see if i have seizing calipers or something altho don't feel drag at the wheels). And I dread doing oil changes cuz of where the filter is buried up in behind the hot exhaust manifold and other bits that try to slice your wrists open, on the back of the motor. I hate that spare tire hanging off the rear door. The entire rear door assembly is just terrible for anyone who lives with ice and snow. No matter how well you try to clear around the seals, when you open it it dumps ice snow and everything right into the car and either a) adds moisture the crappy def has to deal with or b) starts melting all over everything if the car was warm.

Now the car does have strengths tho. It has a very smooth engine which loves to rev and will offer ok FE even doing so. It has not bad headlights for vision on lo beam (not something you can assume lately) and fairly cold A/C, altho the heater is slow and mediocre. It has really good paint. Its ride and handling I would rate just ok to good and it even has IS. And, while I don't really care that about looks or the fact that i drive what many consider to be a 'girls car' haha, this generation of CRV's I think are as handsome (if i were to use the word loosely) as they've ever been.

anyway...i know i got a bit derailed here, nippon...and knew it was happening, lol, but i thought that some of these points people miss when they are car shopping so it might help a little. Of course a lot of my beefs were to do with ice and snow and u are in CA i think.

I know one thing tho. if I do decide to replace my car, I am going to peruse the daylights out of whatever i check out and i will not be in a rush. Sounds like you have time on your side too if u are willing to wait to put more down if you go with the Fit. Good luck with whatever u decide on.

What is "wrong" with these new subcompacts?

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles