Last post on Dec 30, 2011 at 9:54 AM
You are in the Sedans
What is this discussion about?
Toyota ECHO, Chevrolet Aveo, Kia Rio, Nissan Sentra, Honda Fit, Hyundai Accent, Toyota Yaris, Kia Spectra, Suzuki Forenza, Sedan
Aug 09, 2004 (12:13 pm)
I ended up purchasing a Toyota Echo - I compared, Kia Rio, Ford Focus, Saturn Ion. I liked the Saturn Ion the best, as far as the ride, and its clutch. But I wanted a reliable car with a proven history and the Ion was new and didn't have a history. Consumer reports rated the 2003 Echo high on reliability. I drove the Kia Rio and didn't like the ride, or the interior. The car is 169.9" x 65.9" whereas the Echo is 163.2 x 65.4 so the Rio is about 3 inches longer than the Echo - but even with the driver's seat all the way back on the Rio I found the ride uncomfortable. My left leg was bent at an uncomfortable angle, and it was bumping into stuff on the drivers side door - I just thought that it was cramped. The specs say that the Rio has 42.8" legroom and the Echo has 41.1" legroom - but it seemed to me that the Echo has more legroom for the driver. It's amazing that the Echo which is 3" shorter had a more comfortable interior - at least for me, I'm only 6"1'. I can't see why the Rio gets such poor gas mileage compared to the Echo - except its 400 lbs heavier.
I didn't try the Hyundai - I owned a Hyundai Excell and it was the lowest quality car I've ever owned and my experience with the Service department at the dealership was the worst I've ever had in my life.
I did recently drive a Chevy Aveo... (after I purchased my Toyota Echo). The specs say that it has about the same legroom as the Echo (41.1") but I put the seat all the way back and it seemed that it had more legroom than the Echo. I didn't like the clutch - alot of unecesary travel in the clutch IMO. And I didn't like the shifter. I was also disappointed in the gas milage 27 / 35. My Echo is rated 35 / 43 - I actualy average 37mpg. If I had to guess what I'd get with an Aveo - I'd say it'd probably be 30 or 31. Teh fact that the Aveo's engine is Korean kinda scares me too - I've heard good reviews and bad reviews anout Kia and Hyundai quality. I only know that I owned a Hyundai Excel and the thing was not a very good car and the Service department treated me poorly when I brought it in for warranty repairs.
I also put a fair amount of money into the car after the warranty was up.
After my experience with the Hyundai - I wanted to get a high quality car with a proven record of reliabiltiy. I wanted to have as little liklyhood as possible of having to take it into the shop and I was willing to pay more money for that quality.
#2709 of 3871 Re: low end sedans [jojomonkeyboy]
Aug 09, 2004 (12:33 pm)
The ECHO is one of the most reliable low-end cars, so since that was key for you and you wanted high mpg, the ECHO was a good choice.
However, you might be surprised at what has happened to Hyundai since the Excel days. Reliability has improved greatly, with most models ranked at least Average and some Above Average in reliability by Consumer Reports. Hyundai is now one of the top brands for initial quality according to JD Power; Hyundai even topped Toyota in its latest survey.
But if I were to compare the ECHO to Hyundai based on the Excel, I would have bought an ECHO too!
Aug 15, 2004 (4:38 am)
I don't think Hyundai topped Toyota in the latest survey. Unless there is a latest survey ou there that I don't know about. Hyundai got a lot of hype because of the vast improvement it had from its former position of very low quality, and it tied Honda for the initial quality survey. From what I understand, the initial quality survey turned out not to be a good predictor of long-term quality for Hyundai:
http://www.fool.com/News/mft/2004/mft04063008.htm?source=eptyholn- - k303100&logvisit=y&npu=y
#2712 of 3871 Re: J.D Powers [jojomonkeyboy]
Aug 15, 2004 (8:13 am)
I am referring to the latest JD Power IQS survey. On a nameplate basis, Hyundai did better than Toyota, topping not only Toyota but also Infiniti, Mercedes, Audi, BMW, Volvo, Acura, Mazda, Scion and many others. Hyundai was 7th overall by nameplate, behind only Lexus, Cadillac, Jaguar, Honda, Buick, and Mercury.
I tried to provide the link from the JD Power site but the site seems to be down; it is www.jdpower.com if you want to look for yourself. I prefer to look at the raw data rather than let Motley Fool et. al. tell me what I should think about the data.
Keep in mind that the long-term test results are measuring cars designed and built several years ago. Hyundai's big push on quality didn't start until 1998, and they started redesigning most of their cars in the 2001 model year so what will be interesting to see is if the long-term reliability starts climbing over the next few years based on those models. There is evidence from Consumer Reports' reliability studies that this is in fact happening. In their reliability survey of three-year-old cars (2001s), Hyundai ranked mid-pack. In the 2003 survey, they ranked ninth, with 14 defects per 100 cars vs. 9 for Lexus, 10 for Infiniti, 10 for Honda, 11 for Toyota, 13 for Acura, 13 for Mazda, 13 for Buick, and 14 for Saturn and Nissan. Do you think those other automakers are hearing footsteps?
Aug 15, 2004 (8:21 am)
I think American automakers are in trouble because they were /are being squeezed by the Japanese on the high end when it comes to superior reliability, and are being squeezed by Korean manufacturers on price.
Now that Korean car makers are improving quality, what niche do American auto makers fill? I don't dispute that Korean makers are improving quality. I just don't think they've attained the level of quality that Toyota has, Toyota has focused on quality for a long time, I don't think making a last minute push for quality is going to catch them.
#2714 of 3871 Re: J.D Powers [jojomonkeyboy]
Aug 15, 2004 (12:47 pm)
I agree the Korean automakers haven't reached quality pairity with Toyota (and Honda), measured by long-term reliability. The initial quality is in the same ballpark, and design is catching up. Take a look at Edmunds.com's recent road test of the "new" 2004 Kia Spectra to see an opinion as to how close the Koreans are coming to the Japanese automakers on quality.
The U.S. automakers, or some of them, aren't giving up on small cars. The new Cobalt will be a big improvement over the Cavalier. The Focus is one of top small cars, and its reliability has become pretty good. We'll have to wait to see what DC does with the Neon--it's sorely outclassed now.
Aug 15, 2004 (5:44 pm)
Can you get the J.D Powers Initial Quality survey from their site?
I don't think so, I think you have to pay for it...
But what's very very latest? The one that came out April 28th is the latest right?
http://www.jdpower.com/awards/industry/pressrelease.asp?StudyID=8- - 54&CatID=1
"Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc. continues to be the highest-ranking corporation in IQS"
Hyundai, which jumps an impressive 16 rank positions from 2003, makes "the most significant advancement, improving 29 percent year-over-year to rank seventh".
I'd like to see the actual numbers. I think that Hyundai is beating other auto makers in the RATE of their improvement - not in the actual quality.
It's not surprising that they could make such dramatic improvements considering how low their quality was. But at a certain level a maunufacturing company begins to run into the law of dimishing returns. On a scale of 1 to 100, it takes much less effort and inginuity to improve your quality from a 10 to 15 than it does from 97 to 98
#2717 of 3871 Re: Initial Quality survey [jojomonkeyboy]
Aug 16, 2004 (11:23 am)
Please see http://www.jdpa.com/news/releases/pressrelease.asp?ID=2004037
for the actual numbers. They indicate, as I stated before, that on a nameplate basis Hyundai topped Toyota, 102 vs. 104 in problems per 100 vehicles. On a corporate basis, i.e. when Lexus is included, Toyota edged Hyundai and Honda 101 to 102. The next-highest corporation was BMW with 116.
Why do you say Hyundai is beating other auto makers on only the rate of improvement and not actual quality? The JD Power IQS study is clear that both the rate of improvement and the actual quality of Hyundai's vehicles has improved markedly since 1998. The 102 number is an actual number of problems per 100 vehicles, not a rate.