Ask the Car People.SM


Low End Sedans (under $16k)

3871 messages,  Last post on Dec 30, 2011 at 10:54 AM

You are in the Sedans Forum.

What is this discussion about? Toyota ECHO, Chevrolet Aveo, Kia Rio, Nissan Sentra, Honda Fit, Hyundai Accent, Toyota Yaris, Kia Spectra, Suzuki Forenza, Sedan

Messages Page 372 of 388

#3703 of 3871 Edmunds' 2007 Aveo LT First Drive by backy

Oct 23, 2006 (8:50 am)

Edmunds.com just published a first drive of the 2007 Aveo LT sedan:
 
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FirstDrives/articleId=117227
 
There is one curious thing about this review I think. They go on and on about the lack of standard ABS, yet only one four-door in its class, the Fit, has ABS standard. It's optional on Accent GLS, Rio, Yaris, Versa, Spectra, and Forenza. It's even optional on more expensive cars like the new Sentra and the Corolla. So why ding the Aveo on this point?
 
IMO what they should have hit Chevy on, and hard, is the lack of side curtain airbags. They aren't even available as an option! Yet they are standard in the Accent, Fit, Rio, Spectra, and Versa, and available on the Yaris. I think that omission is unforgivable on a new-for-2007 model.
 
But Chevy did make features like cruise, aux input jack, lumbar support, and even a sunroof available. So at least drivers in the Aveo can be comfy if not safe.

#3704 of 3871 CR's Low End comparo by backy

Nov 06, 2006 (10:17 am)

I finally found a store that had CR's December issue with its comparo of the Accent, Fit, Rio, Versa, and Yaris. They tested 11 cars in all, including a Focus ZX3 MT from the next class up just to see how the low-end cars compared to it. They tested an AT and MT version of each of the other five cars.
 
I thought it was one of CR's better comparos. They hit just about all the plusses and minuses I've experienced when I drove these cars. One thing I wished they had done is test an Accent SE instead of the GS. The Accent SE has standard ABS and better handling than the two Accents they tested, and price-wise it would have fallen mid-pack among the tested hatches. It also would have eliminated some of CR's gripes about the GS, e.g. lack of ABS, not-particularly-agile handling, and lack of a rear-window wiper.
 
I thought it was interesting about how close the top four finishers among the AT cars were. Just 3 points separated the Versa SL, base Fit, Rio LX, and Accent GLS. Also interesting was how the rankings were in order of price, with $2445 separating the #1 car from the #4 car. The Yaris was the 2nd-most-expensive AT car tested, but wound up ranked 6th (behind the previously-tested xB), 13 points behind the Accent GLS. What that tells me is that a buyer can pretty much select from any of the top four cars based on personal preferences and price and still get a very nice small car. And those who want top fuel economy, don't want (or can't find) a Fit, and can overlook the Yaris' shortcomings can go that route.
 
On the MT cars the ratings were more clear-cut. The Fit Sport was the runaway leader with 75 points, beating the next-best car in the class (the xB) by 20 points. (The Focus ZX3 got 62 points.) Below the Fit and Focus, the next four cars--xB, Rio5, Versa S, and Accent GS--were very close, with 3 points separating the xB from the Accent. The Yaris hatch 8th in the group, between the xA and Aveo LS, at 36 points. The rankings of MT cars also followed pricing order pretty much, with the three most expensive cars taking the top 3 spots, then two more cars a little over $14k, then the last 4 cars at $13k or just below. The Yaris was the lowest-priced car at $12,569, and one has to wonder how it would have done with more equipment. (However, the Yaris sedan had much more equipment including ABS but still finished last among the tested AT cars.)
 
CR "recommended" only the Fits, the xB, and the Focus. The Fits performed very well and CR has some reliability data on them, since the car debuted here last April. The xB and Focus performed well enough in CR's tests and have at least Average Predicted Reliability (xB is Much Above Average). CR would have recommended the Versa, Rio, and Accent but can't yet because they are new designs and they don't have reliability data. They didn't recommend the Yaris because it didn't perform well enough in their tests (nor did the xA, Forenza, or Aveo tested previously).
 
The other thing that CR made clear in the review was the value of ABS, at least with these cars. They tested some of the cars with and w/o ABS, and they recorded much longer stopping distances in both wet and dry conditions without ABS. They mentioned this prominently in the review, and noted that ABS is hard to find on the Versa, Accent GS (not offered at all), and Yaris. The Fit was the only tested car with standard ABS on all trims, and I think that must have garnered some points with CR.

#3705 of 3871 Re: CR's Low End comparo [backy] by bobw3

Nov 06, 2006 (10:49 am)

Replying to: backy (Nov 06, 2006 10:17 am)
It's funny how the manual Fit was so much of a clear winner, but the Fit auto was #2 in a close race. I think one of the reasons was that the Fit auto was a base version, and the Fit manual was a sport version. I'm guessing if they picked a Fit auto in a sport version, then it might have been the leader in the auto category as well. But I agree that it was a pretty fair comparison, and similar highs and lows to my experience and other reviews I've seen.

#3706 of 3871 Re: CR's Low End comparo [bobw3] by backy

Nov 06, 2006 (11:05 am)

Replying to: bobw3 (Nov 06, 2006 10:49 am)
Yes, a Fit Sport auto might have picked up a few more points, but I think it's clear anyway from the review that CR feels the Fit is the head of the class in this group of cars, with the Versa, Rio, and Accent all pretty close together--pick one for whichever best meets your requirements. I'd tend to lean to the Fit, Accent, or Rio if for nothing else just because it's easier to find them with ABS than the Versa or Yaris, although I have a personal preference for the Accent vs. the Rio.

#3707 of 3871 Re: CR's Low End comparo [bobw3] by herotakesafall

Nov 08, 2006 (10:15 am)

Replying to: bobw3 (Nov 06, 2006 10:49 am)
If they tested a Fit auto sport and an Accent Auto SE, I actually think the Accent would have won the whole comparison. It has many more extra features than the difference between the base and sport Fit, plus it adds 16" alloys and a special sport-tuned suspension. If those things add up to points, it'd stand to reason the Accent SE would have topped the ratings.

#3708 of 3871 Re: CR's Low End comparo [herotakesafall] by backy

Nov 08, 2006 (1:09 pm)

Replying to: herotakesafall (Nov 08, 2006 10:15 am)
I still think the Fit would have won the MT category, if for nothing else because of better shifter feel and more flexible cargo-hauling. But I think it would have been a lot closer than it was.

#3709 of 3871 Fit/Yaris/Versa/Aveo/Rabbit/Accent/Rio by occupant1

Nov 24, 2006 (8:44 pm)

I guess of these the Fit would be the winner IMO. It looks good, it drives good, and it's a Honda. Why not?
 
I can't get over the beautiful front end and the HIDEOUS rear end of the 2007 Aveo sedan. I guess I don't like the Altima type taillamps with the chrome reflector visible. I'd swap the bulbs out for clear and put red translucent film over the lenses. And then worry myself into a drunken stupor over resale value and Daewoo quality.
 
The Yaris has the odd center-mounted instrument cluster, so it's out. I'd buy a no-options Corolla CE before I'd touch a Yaris.
 
The Versa is a great looker, kinda like a micro-sized Quest minivan. Too bad it isn't a 3-row seater like the Mazda5. It's great in everything but gas mileage. And the only reason to get a tiny car is to try for 40mpg on the open road and know you'll get about 30 in town.
 
The Accent and Rio are the cheapest, and have the best warranties, but at what cost? What good is a ten-year 100,000 mile warranty if it spends half that time in the dealer's service department?
 
The Rabbit is cute, but the electrical troubles worry me.
 
But for ME...my $16,000 would buy about 53 20-year old beaters. Cavaliers, Escorts, Neons, and who knows what else comes up that cheap in the future. If I get only three months out of each of them, that's just over 13 years of service.
 
Will the little new cars hold up that long, being driven 2000-3000 miles or more per month? Will the clunkers lose their clunk? Will the Steelers go back-to-back in the Superbowl?
 
If someone held a gun to my head and made me buy new, I'd go for the Corolla CE 5-speed and be boring but reliable.

#3710 of 3871 The Corolla is reliable but really defines by iluvmysephia1

Nov 24, 2006 (9:02 pm)

boring in automobiles. Yikes that is one vanilla-plain looking car.
 
The Steelers may not even make the playoffs, much less win back-to-back Super Bowls. They needed a huge assist from the unscrupulous ref's to even win the 2006 Super Bowl, too.

#3711 of 3871 Edmunds' Most Wanted: Accent and Rio by backy

Dec 03, 2006 (4:57 pm)

The Accent and Rio share Edmunds.com's Editor's Most Wanted Award for Sedans under $15k:
 
http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/mostwanted/2007/117166/article.html

#3712 of 3871 MOST WANTED " HA" by moparblue2

Dec 03, 2006 (8:11 pm)

that is because they do not make the Echo any more. we have 2000 Echo & 2004 Echo they are both 5 speeds. 2000 Echo has 146000 trouble free miles. 2004 Echo has 38000 trouble free miles on it. try that with a Accent or Kia Rio.

Messages Page 372 of 388

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement