Last post on Jul 16, 2009 at 4:31 PM
You are in the Sedans
What is this discussion about?
Chevrolet Cobalt, Ford Focus, Honda Civic, Hyundai Elantra, Honda Fit, Mazda MAZDA3, Toyota Corolla, Toyota Yaris, Nissan Sentra, Sedan
#882 of 1205 2008 Focus and Astra
Sep 28, 2007 (4:01 pm)
Edmunds.com has first drives of the 2008 Focus and Astra on their main page. Looks like both are better than the cars they replaced, and Edmunds says the Astra is the best small GM car ever sold in America. I suppose that could be considered "faint praise", but it's a positive sign for GM.
The Focus has apparently lost its sporty handling and has become softer, and also quieter, and has an updated interior and exterior. The signature feature on the new Focus appears to be Sync. Oh, and blue accent lighting in cup holders ala Scion. The target market is pretty clear.
The Focus coupe looks better to me than the sedan and could be a good buy if Ford has updated the safety along wiht everything else. The Astra five-door starts at $16k with a lot of equipment (ABS, ESC, 16" wheels etc.).
Will they be good enough to compete with the Civic, Elantra, Lancer, Rabbit, Sentra et. al.? And of course the new Corolla coming in a few months?
Edit: I just priced out a Focus coupe with AT equipped as closely as possible to an Elantra SE (one of my favorites in this class), and the price tag is just under $18k, or a little more than the Elantra. And ESC is not available on the Focus, but standard on the Elantra SE. Not so good a deal after all.
#883 of 1205 Re: Civic fuel economy experience [aviator48570]
Nov 10, 2007 (5:59 pm)
what was your usual cruising speed for this trip?
#884 of 1205 Re: Reliability [steve333]
Nov 11, 2007 (4:58 am)
"Toyota and Honda have been slipping in reliability the last few years, especially Toyota."
Yes they have been slipping. Their quest to sell the most has really hurt their build quality. As I have said before, they have peaked as an auto maker and now others are just as good or better. The last five years have not looked too good for this company and hopefully this will spread the wealth to others, and loosen perceptions.
Nov 12, 2007 (5:54 am)
I've been off this board for several months although my 01.5 Elantra GT hatch now has 75,000 miles and is going strong. What is the latest on whether or not we will see a hatch again or will it be a wagon? Also, does anyone know if Hyundai has any plans to come out with its own version of the Rondo?
On another matter, does the 01 hatch have a cabin air filter for the a/c and if so, how often should it be replaced? What about the fuel filter in terms of replacement?
#886 of 1205 Re: HATCH [mpgman]
Nov 12, 2007 (7:26 am)
The Elantra Touring, due in early 2008, will be more like a little wagon than a hatch, in that the rear end is stretched out compared to the hatch variant (which apparently we won't get). There's photos of it in the Elantra discussions.
The '01+ Elantras have provision for a cabin air filter, but at least in the early cars of that generation, they did not come from the factory with the filter. But it's pretty easy to replace, based on what I've read in the Elantra maintenance discussion here--just need to pop out the glove box--it's behind it. I think there's photos on the replacement steps in the owner's manual, but I don't have ready access to it now.
(You might want to ask the questions re Elantra maintenance in the Elantra discussions, you might get more responses.)
#887 of 1205 xD = Acceptable on IIHS frontal crash test
Nov 13, 2007 (12:06 pm)
Here's a surprise: the Scion xD got only "Acceptable" on the IIHS' frontal offset crash test. It's one of the few cars of any size that have been tested in recent years that did not achieve "Good" on that test. That seems incredible to me, given this is a new design and Toyotas have typically done very well on crash tests. It did get "Good" on the side crash test, however. Which leads to a question...
Is the IIHS biased for certain manufacturers? Case in point: the xD was recently introduced. Yet the IIHS has already run both frontal and side crash tests on the car (apparently the IIHS itself did the frontal crash test; sometimes the manufacturer does it and reports the results to the IIHS.) Some other small cars, introduced over a year ago (e.g. Elantra and Sentra), have not had side crash tests yet. And we're not talking about low-volume niche cars in the case of the Elantra and Sentra. I wonder if the IIHS favors some manufacturers, such as Toyota, over others when it decides which cars to test when?
Nov 16, 2007 (12:14 pm)
A reporter is interested in talking with owners of the Chevy Malibu, Ford Focus, Toyota Corolla, or Nissan Sentra who are also parents. If you are interested in commenting on your experience, please reply to jfallonedmunds.com no later than Thursday, November 27, 2007 and include your city and state of residence, the model year of your vehicle and the age of your child/ren.
#889 of 1205 Re: xD = Acceptable on IIHS frontal crash test [backy]
Nov 24, 2007 (6:20 pm)
I think their only "bias" is that of which car is most "popular" in sales terms? The degree of sales translates into a bigger need for data. Just a guess on my part?
#890 of 1205 Re: xD = Acceptable on IIHS frontal crash test [lucynethel]
Nov 24, 2007 (8:27 pm)
That doesn't explain why the IIHS would test cars like the Honda Fit, with relatively low sales numbers, soon after introduction but has not tested (for side crash) the 2007+ Elantra and Sentra, with much higher sales, more than a year after they came out. Another example is the Altima. It is one of the top ten in sales, yet nearly a year after the latest design debuted, the IIHS still hasn't tested it for side impact. But it tested the 2008 Accord right away. It's possible Honda paid the IIHS for an earlier test on the Accord, and maybe the Fit; that is an option if an automaker wants a test earlier than the IIHS' schedule. But a year is a long time to wait for tests on cars as popular as the Elantra and Sentra, and Altima also. IMO.
#891 of 1205 Re: xD = Acceptable on IIHS frontal crash test [backy]
Nov 25, 2007 (5:03 am)
The logical conclusion to what you are saying is that if you are sure that your car will pass the crash tests with flying colors, you will pay to have it tested early. If you think that your car will do poorly, you will try to cover up the anticipated poor showing as long as possible by not paying to have it done early.