What is "wrong" with these new subcompacts?

ateixeira · June 2012

Remember when econoboxes came with 12" wheels?

I think 15" is about as small as they come now, and 17" are not uncommon with compacts.

andre1969 · June 2012

I think those big wheels might be one reason you may never see very many truly small cars again. For a car to be nimble, the front wheels need to be able to make a very sharp turn. But, the bigger the wheel, the more wheel well opening you need, and that's going to make for a wider car.

And, unless you want some serious encroachment into the passenger cabin from those wheel wells, you need to punch out the wheelbase a bit, as well.

stever · June 2012

My '82 Tercel had 13" wheels. 15's were big back then and cost a lot more. I could put a set of tires on the Tercel for around $100, but choices were limited.

Even today, TireRack only has two choices ($46 and $54).

andre1969 · June 2012

Back in the 1980's, 15" wheels were limited mainly to full-sized cars, pickups, and vans. And even in full-sized cars, they weren't always a given. For a few years in there, the big Crown Vic and Grand Marquis came standard with a 14" wheel. I think the base tire size was a 205/75/R14. Some 15" tires were pretty puny, as well. The full-sized 1979-81 Mopars used a 195/75/R15 standard. That's probably hard to find these days. I just checked tirerack and they don't have it, at least.

Even the next size up, 205/75/R15, which was once a common size on the downsized big GM cars, and optional on the Fords I believe, is pretty rare these days. Tirerack only lists 7, and three of them are trailer tires. I dunno what would happen if you put a trailer tire on a car, but I have a feeling you're not supposed to! :P

stever · June 2012

Fuzzy memory but I think my '74 CJ-5 had 15s. I remember happily scoring some take-offs at a service station after someone had put mudders on their Jeep.

I bet one of my old Tercel tires would handily fit in the compact tire space in the trunk of most modern cars. Except cars don't have spares period any more, especially smaller cars. (USA Today)

ateixeira · June 2012

My Miata has no spare. I don't take it very far from home, but if I did, hmmm, that would definitely be a concern.

kyfdx · June 2012

CJ-5 definitely had 15" wheels.. I think I had 15 X 11 wheels on mine..

My '84 Porsche had the upgraded 16" size... lol

ateixeira · June 2012

Think about how much less unsprung weight it had to deal with, though.

I think they've gone overboard. I was shopping for compacts and had to avoid the high end models just to get away from 17" rims with low profile tires. DC has a lot of potholes and that's the one regret I have with my Miata (16" and 17" were available, I wish I'd gone smaller).

Going back to the early SE Miata, you could get 14" BBS rims that weighed around 10 lbs:

http://www.wheelweights.net/

How much do you think my 17"s weight? More than double, I bet. It's not listed but more are in the mid 20s.

Some of the 20" plus wheels are 30 lbs plus. Crazy.

kyfdx · June 2012

19" wheels on compact SUVs.. that's silly, I think.. (Tiguan)

I have 18" on my current car, and that's overkill... the rear tires are over $300 each!! (looks great, though..lol)

ateixeira · June 2012

And I thought the $200 tires for our Forester were bad... :sick:

stever · June 2012

I wonder what the typical rim size is in Mexico, where there seem to be more subcompact Ka type cars (not to mention old Bugs). Taller sidewalls would be handy there with all the bad roads though.

Also wonder what they call two Ka cars parked next to each other in Mexico.

andre1969 · June 2012

Also wonder what they call two Ka cars parked next to each other in Mexico.

I dunno, but park one of them little 2-seat Audi roadsters to the left of 'em, and it gets even better. :P

ateixeira · June 2012

That's Peru, not Mexico.

qbrozen · June 2012

my '79 CJ7 had 15 x 10s.
'85 300Z had 15s
'85 MR2 has 14s
'98 Volvo had 16s, which I thought were perfectly sized.

ateixeira · June 2012

It's funny - our Forester and Miata have 17"s.

The big Sienna has 16"s.

nippononly · August 2012

have to come up with a new thread for the proliferating vehicles being sold here that are even smaller than traditional subcompacts?

When the ForTwo came out, it was an aberration and we just included it in discussions here. Then came the Fiat 500, and it got thrown in here as well. Now the iQ has been out for more than half a year, and the Spark has just come along. I think of all of these as "microcars", although I don't know that that is a category that is recognized anywhere. And I single out the Spark as perhaps bridging the two classes, because even though it is tiny (no trunk at all - the back seat headrests touch the rear glass) and only children could fit in the back seat, it DOES have four doors.

I don't know how well any of these models will do in sales individually, but I am hopeful that as America downsizes back to more rational-sized vehicles, subcompact sales wil pick up now that there is a growing class of cars EVEN SMALLER than them... :-)

stickguy · August 2012

could just do what the rest of the world does, and call them A, B, C.

bpizzuti · August 2012

What, you mean be like everyone else? Be like EUROPE? Are you a communist? Do you not love America? How dare you! :P

hpmctorque · August 2012

I read a review of the Spark, and it said that it's shorter than the Fiat 500. Can't recall exactly how much shorter, but I think it was something like 3" shorter. The review was positive, with no serious drawbacks. I see quite a few 500s now, but I haven't seen a Spark yet.

hpmctorque · August 2012

I looked up the specs on the Spark and Fiat 500 and the Spark is longer, 144.7" vs. 139.6" The Spark is also 1.2" taller, but the Fiat is 1.2" wider than the Spark, and weighs a little more. The Fiat also has a bigger engine and 16 more hp. All and all, though, they're pretty comparable, from a functionality standpoint.

Just for fun, I looked up the specs of the rear engine, RWD Renault Dauphine, a somewhat popular Import in the late '50 - searly '60s. Dimension wise it was fairly close to the Spark, but it had 30 hp vs. 85 for the Spark, and weighed just 1,324 lbs. (no power anything or safety features) vs. 2,269 for the Spark. The Dauphine was actually 10.3" longer than the Spark, but the Spark is 2.9" wider and 4.3" taller. Interesting comparisons.

nippononly · August 2012

I have already seen Sparks on the road, driven mostly by baby boomers from what I could see. The thing seems like a fairly good deal for what it is, even if the engine is very low-powered and the mileage is hardly any better than the next class of cars up.

If you really need to squish it into tiny parking spots, it's just the right size. And it's certainly a better value than the iQ.

nippononly · August 2012

Subcompacts were the segment with the highest-percentage increase for August sales:

As a result, the subcompact segment recorded the biggest increase in sales: in August this year, 57,300 subcompact models were delivered in the States, up 42 percent compared to the same month in 2011.

Is that on track for more than half a million sales per year?! Subcompacts??!!

Things are definitely looking up. ;-)

http://carscoop.blogspot.com/2012/08/rising-gas-prices-push-us-buyers.html

ateixeira · August 2012

No surprise, I saw regular gas at $4.11 this morning. Yikes.

They'll drop again if gas goes down, though.

The catch with A segment cars is that you get diminishing returns. I think it's because they are still required to meet the same safety and emissions standards as bigger cars, yet in a smaller package.

That means they may be 20% smaller, but they're not 20% cheaper. Maybe more like 10% cheaper.

stickguy · August 2012

they also often don't return better mileage than a "real" car a class up, or at least not enough difference to make it worthwhile.

michaellno · August 2012

they also often don't return better mileage than a "real" car a class up, or at least not enough difference to make it worthwhile.

To maintain the low price point, the Spark uses a 4-speed auto and 5-speed manual whereas the Sonic and Cruze have 6 speeds in both gearboxes.

This, of course, hampers fuel economy.

hpmctorque · August 2012

It'll be interesting to see whether the A Class cars depreciate faster than the B class ones. The Smart doesn't count, in my opinion, but the Fiat 500 and Spark will be the ones to watch. The MINI is in a class by itself, but it holds its value surprisingly well.

nippononly · August 2012

The catch with A segment cars is that you get diminishing returns. I think it's because they are still required to meet the same safety and emissions standards as bigger cars, yet in a smaller package.

That means they may be 20% smaller, but they're not 20% cheaper. Maybe more like 10% cheaper.

True, but have you SEEN the base price on a new Spark? Pretty darn low - I'm thinking it must be the least expensive new car sold in America at this point, or pretty darn close to it. $13,5 to start, and that's with A/C, power windows, and a stereo, not to mention the obligatory ABS and a gazillion airbags.

hpmctorque · August 2012

I imagine that Sparks will be cross-shopped against Fiat 500s and used Class B cars.

ateixeira · August 2012

Versa starts at $10,990 but then things like wheels and tires are optional.

Sonic hatch starts at $14.8k, Spark starting at $12.2k. I guess that is a fair amount, $2600 less.

Spark also looks like an angry mosquito while the Sonic is too anonymous looking, so that might help the little one. The look stands out more.

gagrice · August 2012

http://www.youtube.com/embed/ik9AtJQXaHQ?rel=0

benjaminh · August 2012

+1 Nice.

I hear the next gen Mini, due in 2013 as a 2014 model, might have as its standard powerplant a 3 cylinder turbo. Hwy mpg would be up to a hybrid, but performance would be the same as this version....Sounds good.

ateixeira · August 2012

Problem is 3 bangers have all the inherent balance of a cat stuck on the blade of a ceiling fan.

hpmctorque · August 2012

Balance shafts smooth them out. They're probably still not as smooth as an I-4 throughout the rev range in neutral, but I imagine the vibration wouldn't be noticeable, or not an issue, under load.

ateixeira · August 2012

I can say that because I owned one when I was a poor college student. I was getting around 46mpg, not bad.

hpmctorque · August 2012

Did you own a Metro? The 3-cylinder Geo Metro didn't have balance shafts. The Subaru Justy did.

nippononly · September 2012

is going to "do a Mini" on its lineup in the next year: add a four-door lengthened model and a small crossover with the turbo engine. They will share the crossover with Jeep for the 2014 MY:

TURIN, Italy -- The United States will get four more versions of the Fiat 500 subcompact in the next two years.

This fall, a turbocharged 500 joins the lineup. Early next year, Fiat will begin sales of an electric. In mid-2013, a four-door, five-seat, high-roof 500L will join the range. In 2014, Fiat will add a 500X small crossover.

My question is, if they plan to start selling a "Turbo", what is the Abarth and how is it different?

The 500L looks weird - the Clubman and Countryman look much better....

http://www.autonews.com/article/20120903/OEM04/309039988/fiat-plans-4-more-versi- ons-of-500

hpmctorque · September 2012

Excellent question! The Abarth is smaller and lighter than the models that will be introduced, and, therefore, quicker and more nimble. Couldn't your comments also apply to the MINI models? I understand your point, though, because I've asked myself the same thing. You can be sure that marketing will differentiate each model and place each in its intended role.

Just as MINI has done an excellent job of segmenting the market, Fiat will try to follow a similar script with the 500.

alltorque · September 2012

The Abarth 500 is a little flying bomb and it's crazy brother the Abarth 500 EssEss is just that - crazy. On side-by-side testing it is outgunned by the MINI Cooper S but said to be "A lot more involving and the one you would choose to drive for sheer pleasure"

I guess they named it EssEss as SS still has unwelcome connotations here in Europe.

Off topic but Ford have now announced their new B-Max 5-door compact - somewhere twixt a Fiesta and a Focus with sliding rear doors. Best power unit is said to be the 999cc 118bhp gasser. Not a rocket ship but more than adequate for it's intended market. Have a Googletm for details.

stever · September 2012

Looks like a Honda Fit with sliders. Perfect. I can picture people cramming into tiny parking lot slots and then exiting by the sliders when there's not enough room to open the front doors.

michaellno · September 2012

My question is, if they plan to start selling a "Turbo", what is the Abarth and how is it different?

The turbo will have 135HP; the Abarth 160HP.

ateixeira · September 2012

Even older, it was a Chevy Sprint, before Geo existed.

The last year they had a Chevy Sprint Metro, which was the most fuel efficient model, that bridged the gap to the Geo name change.

robr2 · September 2012

...and the Turbo will have a softer ride than the Abarth. Oh and no model with a Scorpion on her neck trying to distract you....

hpmctorque · September 2012

Different name, but same engine, though, right?

hpmctorque · September 2012

Regarding the SS connotations, Chevy started using that model designation decades ago. Always wondered about the sensitivity of that, even though it meant Super Sport.

As for the B-Max, if I'm not confusing it with another model, we'll get it in hybrid version, to compete with the Prius. Some please correct me if I'm wrong on this. Anyhow, I'd prefer the standard, non-electrified one.

nippononly · September 2012

Aha! 135 hp vs 160, I missed that part, thanks!

ateixeira · September 2012

My 1986 Sprint had a whopping 48hp 1.0l engine.

Later Geos made up to 55hp, though I'm not sure what changes were made to get up to that explosive level of power.

hpmctorque · September 2012

Upon further checking, it's the Ford C-Max that'll be sold only as a hybrid in the U.S., not the B-Max. The European version of the C-Max is gasoline powered.

alltorque · September 2012

You're obviously not worthy of the Ford B-Max.............or the VW Up!, SEAT Mii or Skoda Citigo. Joking; no offence intended. The three latter are all from VW Group and share mechanicals but not bodies. All are very capable city+ cars and very aggressively priced, (well, for Europe). Needless to say, the VW is the most expensive.

Things are getting very interesting over here, particularly for small, inexpensive, relatively roomy cars with small gasoline engines and VW Group is leading the way.

hpmctorque · September 2012

Interesting. I like to see VW bring the UP to the U.S., but it doesn't look like they'll do it.

nippononly · September 2012

How about them bringing the Polo here first? It's built in Mexico and sold all over Latin America, you would think the cost would be low enough to sell it profitably in the U.S., and they are one of the last major automakers NOT to have a subcompact for sale here.

In fact,, I think they may officially be THE last...Versa, Yaris, Fit, Accent, Rio, Sonic, Spark, Fiesta, Fiat 500, VW ????

Who did I forget?

What is "wrong" with these new subcompacts?

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles