Ask the Car People.SM


The Forums Test Drive Team - READ ONLY

203 messages,  Last post on Jun 14, 2008 at 7:22 PM

You are in the Automotive News & Views-Archives Forum.

What is this discussion about? Sedan, Wagon, Van

     Meet the Forums Test Drive Team!
 
The Forums Test Drive Team members will bowl you over with with their reviews! This discussion is "read only," therefore, only the Team members may post reviews.
 
The founding members of the Forums Test Drive Team: varmint, ateixeira, backy, rsholland, paisan and blueguydotcom

Messages Page 21 of 21

#200 of 203 Re: Anyone interested? [pat] by ateixeira

Apr 04, 2008 (10:53 am)

Replying to: pat (Apr 03, 2008 12:54 pm)
Already signed up!

#201 of 203 2008 Saturn Astra XR 5-door by backy

May 24, 2008 (4:05 pm)

Having read that the new Astra is the best small car ever sold by GM in the U.S., I decided to check it out, since I need to add another car to the family fleet this fall and would prefer a small 5-door hatchback. I originally planned to test the base XE Astra, but when I saw that the XR was only a few hundred dollars more and had sharp-looking alloys vs. barf-inducing plastic covers, I decided to try the XR.
 
The test car was a blue 5-door with 4-speed automatic as the only major option. Fit and finish seemed good inside and out. Doors closed with a solid "thunk" and the paint was glossy and smooth. The black interior was dressed in low-luster plastics, many of them soft to the touch. I'm not a fan of the faux silver dash trim fad, but the silver-colored center stack and trim strips on the dash did brighten up the otherwise dark interior.
 
I was able to find a comfortable driving position using the height-adjustable seat and telescoping steering column, but to do so required me to put the seat down near the floor and the wheel all the way out to get sufficient thigh support. (As the seat moves up, it also tilts the seat bottom forward--a common problem with manual seat height adjusters). The wheel was thick and grippy, but plastic ( a leather cover would be nice in a car that exceeds $18k). The center stack was a maze of dark grey buttons and knobs--definitely worth checking out the owner's manual. They had a smooth, quality feel however. The information screen atop the center stack looked somewhat old-tech with its amber readout, but it did sport an easy-to-read instantaneous mpg meter and temperature readout. Unfortunately, I never figured out how to change the display during the test drive. (The salesman joked about the complexity of the center stack later.)
 
Rear seating was mixed--enough toe and knee room when I sat behind myself (5'10"), but the seat is relatively low so thigh support was poor. Also, there was no center armrest. It would be fine for two kids or small adults, but I wouldn't want to spend a lot of time back there.
 
Luggage space was compromised somewhat by the sloping roofline, but it had enough room with the seats up for a family's weekly grocery shopping trip or weekend excursion, and the rear seats fold down 60/40 if more capacity is needed.
 
On the road, the 138 hp engine with slushbox pulled leisurely but had sufficient power for around-town driving and interstate cruising. The car's chassis seemed very solid, with small bumps transmitted only as muted "thunks". However, almost every bump caused a faint, plasticky buzz from someplace--probably the dash. It wasn't too obvious but did detract from the otherwise solid feel. The car tracked straight and cornered with assurance, with minimal body lean. I would say the car's handling was its strong suit. The turn signal was a typical European design, but not common in the U.S.: flip once for three flashes (lane change), flip harder to keep the turn signal going, and flip again to cancel the turn signal (or have it cancel after the turn). It took a little getting used to but seemed very logical (as those Germans are ).
 
The EPA sticker on the car said 24 city, 30 highway--not very good for a 1.8L, 138 hp I4. But on the highway, crusing around 65 mph, I was able to get the instantaneous mpg meter to read upper 30s to low 40s on level ground with a light touch on the throttle. So the little four-banger might be able to do much better than its EPA numbers with a light foot.
 
Safety-wise the car has six airbags, OnStar, and ABS standard. Stabilitrak (ESC) is a $495 option that was not on the test car.
 
Verdict: I agree with those who have called the Astra the finest small car GM has ever sold in the U.S. Its best features are a well-controlled and fairly quiet ride, precise steering, and high-quality cabin. The rear seat could be more hospitable and the control layout more intuitive, and some folks may want for more power or another cog in the automatic gearbox, but I think it's an interesting alternative to the other five-door compacts in this class such as Matrix/Vibe, Mazda3, Impreza, Rabbit, and (soon) Elantra Touring.

#202 of 203 2009 Toyota Corolla LE by backy

Jun 14, 2008 (4:56 pm)

With gas prices over $4.00 across the U.S., fuel-efficient cars like the 2009 Corolla are being snapped up like hotcakes. That was obvious when I stopped into my local Toyota dealer to take one for a spin today. There was only one Corolla available for test-driving--a stripped LE automatic. The sales rep apologized, noting that Corollas (even used ones) were jumping off the lot as fast as they came in. Fortunately, I wanted to drive an LE automatic anyway, and lack of power windows, VSC etc. did not alter the basic driving experience.
 
The test car listed at just over $17,000 including destination. It had floormats and that's about it. But there's some important equipment standard, including a tilt-and-telescope wheel, six airbags, ABS, and a trip computer with both instantaneous and average mpg readouts. The telescopic wheel, new for 2009, was greatly appreciated because it allowed me to get comfortable behind the wheel--something I could never do on the 2003-8 Corolla. The added safety equipment was welcome also. VSC (Toyota's stability control) is still a hard-to-get option, according to the sales rep, but he told me the dealership is pushing for Toyota to increase the allocation of VSC-equipped cars in the future.
 
I drove the car through a variety of suburban streets and urban freeways. The sales rep guided me to roads with a mix of surfaces, which I appreciated. The Corolla's strong suit is a smooth, quiet ride marred only by slight tire "thrumms" and some wind noise outside the driver's window. If it is not the smoothest-riding small car, compared to the likes of Impreza and Elantra, it is very close. It has been compared by many to a "mini-Camry", and that is how it drives. The electric-assist steering seems super-lubricated, which also means it seems a bit detached from the road, but not excessively so for a family car. Some owners have complained that the Corolla seems to wander on the road. I didn't have any problem in that regard, although the car lacked the crisp handling of competitors like the Civic and Mazda3.
 
The control stalks work with the traditional Toyota precision and smoothness. However, other controls, including the HVAC dials and shifter, betray cost-cutting efforts, with a cheap, plastic-y feel. The shifter and its plastic trim felt flimsy. In fact, most of the interior bits looked and felt cheap, and hard. The worst offender was the hard plastic front center armrest, which makes a durable cover for the center storage bin but is an inhospitable place for elbows. Happily, there are padded spots on the doors for elbows. The dull grey cloth interior seemed thin. The back seat was uncomfortable for me when sitting "behind myself' (5'10"). My knees touched the front seat, but the main problem was that the seat is fairly low, so my thighs were unsupported. There's no rear center armrest, but two flimsy cupholders pop out of the center console. Trunk space is quite good for a small car, although it would be more usable if struts had been used for the lid instead of steel hinges that take up trunk space.
 
But what is the main reason Corollas are jumping off dealer lots? Because of its class-leading fuel economy numbers: 27 city, 35 highway EPA. So I decided to check out the Corolla's efficiency. Mid-way through the test drive, with the engine warmed up and right before we started the urban freeway part of the test loop (which should be optimal for fuel economy), I reset the mpg meter. About ten miles later, as we pulled into the dealer lot, I noticed the meter read 38.8 mpg. An excellent showing on a brand-new engine, above the EPA highway number. But then I got curious, and I decided to repeat that part of the test loop with my 4-year-old Elantra automatic (EPA 21/29). I got 41.0 mpg. The Corolla's FE should improve after break-in, but I expected it to fare better than it did against the old Hyundai.
 
That got me to think, who would be the best fit for the Corolla? A single person, couple, or young family (with 1-2 small children) who wants a smooth, quiet, reliable, basic, economical small car that has all the latest safety features available. And someone who plans on selling the car within 3-4 years, so resale value is particularly important. For those requirements, I think the Corolla is a fine choice. For others, e.g. people who need a rear seat that can accomodate adults in comfort, or would like more feature content for their dollar, I think there are better choices.

#203 of 203 2008 Kia Optima LX vs. 2009 Hyundai Sonata GLS by backy

Jun 14, 2008 (7:22 pm)

The Optima LX and Sonata GLS are both on my shopping list, so I took advantage of an open Saturday afternoon to drive both back-to-back over the same course. Both cars were basic trims: the Optima LX with automatic, and the Sonata GLS with automatic. The Kia stickered for a bit over $18k, and the Sonata for just under $20k. But note the Optima did not include ABS or ESC, which are standard on the Sonata. They cost $600, but to get that package you also have to get a $1000 Appearance package with 17" alloys, fog lamps, and some interior upgrades. So an Optima with full safety gear costs just $5 less than the Sonata GLS. And the Kia sales rep told me that Optima LXes are hard to find with ABS/ESC.
 
I drove the Optima first. The driving position, aided by a height-adjustable seat and tilt/telescoping steering wheel, was comfortable, with good lumbar support (not adjustable). The interior was nicely finished, with padded dash, a good-looking wheel with audio controls (leather covered with the Appearance package), simple and smooth controls and stalks, and clear gauges (blackout gauges on the Appearance package). The light grey cloth seats felt and looked good, with a nubby texture that I think would be durable and hide dirt well. There's several covered bins with damped doors, dual lighted vanity mirrors, padded door and center armrests, and other little touches that don't make you feel as if you are in a car that lists for a little over $15k after the $3000 rebate.
 
The back seat of the Optima had plenty of leg room for me (5'10") and the cushion is chair height, providing good thigh support. There's also a fold-down center armrest with covered cupholders. The trunk is roomy, expands via the 60/40 rear seat, and had gas struts supporting the lid.
 
Driving the Optima was a pleasant if not exhilarating experience. It moves out smartly with the 2.4L I4 and five-speed automatic; you can hear the engine wind but it's a muted growl. The transmission shifts unobtrusively. There's a Shiftronic manumatic feature if you want to shift for yourself (I didn't try it). The ride is fairly firm but complaint, but tire noise is evident over even small bumps. The Optima takes corners with little body lean and seems well-planted on corners--it's no sport sedan, but just fine for a mid-sized family sedan. It felt like a bit bigger, heavier, more solid Elantra SE. At 65 mph, the engine loafs along at 2000 rpm, which bodes well for fuel economy (the tester had no mpg meter). Acceleration to highway speed is adequate even at partial throttle, and at cruise the cabin is quiet except for the muted tire "thumps" over expansion joints, a little wind noise from the A pillar or mirror, and faint engine noise. Directional stability is excellent.
 
The Sonata was next up. There are some similarities between the two cars, as they are about the same size (the Sonata is a little bigger inside and out), and they share powertrains, although the Sonata's 2.4L I4 has been upgraded for 2009 with a bump in hp (162 to 175; the 2009 Optima will benefit from the same mods).
 
The Sonata's interior has been redesigned for 2009, and features a handsome dash and center stack, new gauges with blue lighting, a USB port (Optima has an aux input), XM radio, and super-sized dual cupholders. Like the Optima, the Sonata has some covered bins (including two big ones in the center stack) with damped covers. The interiors of both cars had a quality look and feel, with a slight edge to the Optima because of its richer cloth seats (Sonata had a rather dull grey cloth, which didn't look as nice or feel as durable as that in the Optima). Also, the Sonata GLS doesn't offer a telescoping wheel as does the Optima LX (Sonata SE and Limited have it). However, I was able to find a comfortable driving position in the Sonata with its height-adjustable driver's seat. The Optima was more comfy overall, mainly because the Sonata's seat back pressed into my kidneys on each side while the Optima had more even lumbar support (the Sonata didn't have the optional power seat with manual lumbar adjustment).
 
The back seat of the Sonata was at least as comfortable as the Optima's and had a tad more legroom. The Sonata's trunk is also a bit bigger than the Optima's, and like the Optima it expands through the 60/40 rear seat and has gas strut lid supports.
 
The driving feel of the Sonata is distinctly different from that of the Optima. I felt as though I were driving a much larger car--not just a bit bigger by the numbers. The car is more isolated from the road than is the Optima, and the handling a bit less crisp than the Optima's. It was not an unpleasant feel, but overall I prefer the Optima's ride and handling--maybe because I happen to prefer smaller cars. Although the Sonata's suspension was quiet and tire noise was muted, there was a rattle in the dash and another somewhere else in the interior that I heard over any bump. They detracted from the driving experience.
 
In the end, I prefer the Optima to the Sonata. I like the driving "feel" of the Optima better, I prefer its driving position, and I like the fact that, for the same list price as the base Sonata, I get features like 17" alloys, fog lamps, blackout gauges, trip computer, and a telescopic wheel with audio controls. Others may prefer the slightly bigger interior and trunk of the Sonata and its more isolated ride, and may like the interior design or exterior styling of the Sonata better than the Optima's. The Sonata does have a slight edge in fuel economy 22/32 EPA vs. 21/31 (that difference will disappear with the 2009 Optima I4). At current pricing, the Optima LX 5AT with ABS/ESC package and Appearance package stickers for $16,990 including destination and after the $3000 rebate. The Sonata GLS 5AT with no options stickers for $18,495 after the $1500 rebate (deduct $500 more for Hyundai owners, which I am). Interestingly, the Optima also has a higher profit margin than the Sonata. My choice would be to take the Optima and the extra $1000+.

Messages Page 21 of 21

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement