You are here: Forums Automotive News & Views What is "wrong" with these new subcompacts?

What is "wrong" with these new subcompacts?

8700 messages,  Last post on Dec 08, 2009 at 7:41 PM

You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires

What is this discussion about? Nissan Versa, Toyota Yaris, Honda Fit, smart fortwo, MINI Cooper

#21 of 8700 Re: Mr.Shiftright... [Mr_Shiftright] by andys120 Jan 12, 2006 (3:03 pm)
Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (Jan 12, 2006 11:47 am) great city car   I imagine it is, and that takes me back to my city dwelling days and those of you who haven't driven a small car thru the cut and thrust of city traffic have no idea how much fun it can be.   I lived in Manhattan for 8 years and never considered owning anything bigger than a sub-subcompact sports car.   Now if I were doing a lot of interstate driving I'd look for something else but there are millions of people who use their cars mostly for commuting or driving in dense urban areas, they should consider subcompacts.
#22 of 8700 The problem by boaz47 Jan 15, 2006 (1:50 pm)
only as I see it is Sub-compacts almost have to be a second car. It might be great for commuting in heavy traffic but the absolute popularity of cars like the Accord and Camry indicate people are far more interested is something bigger.   Many of us do remember the joys of small cars in heavy city traffic. I can remember the last time I was in LA with one of my friends in his Miata. He allowed me to drive because he was from out of state and didn't know the city as well as I did. At almost every light all I could see in my rearview mirror was a bumper or license plate from a SUV or Truck. There is no advantage to parking a small car in LA because parking on the street is almost non existent. You have to find a parking lot or structure.   I will admit they tend to be better on fuel but still I would never consider one for my only car unless I was retired and lived in a planned community. Then I guess I would be like so many other retired people and have a Motor home or huge SUV for vacations and weekend trips.   I think sales figures in the US pretty much reflect my reasoning on this. Replies to this message: Mr_Shiftright (Jan 15, 2006 3:12 pm) andys120 (Jan 15, 2006 4:28 pm)
#23 of 8700 small cars by harrychezt Jan 15, 2006 (2:15 pm)
bac from 87-early 90's, small vehciles were "in", at least when I was in the military, in Virginia Beach area, in general, that is. from what i recall , larger trucks were about the size fo say a 90's S-10. Not HUMMER sized things, unless it were a dump truck, or school bus   Not now.... if vehicles were 80's sized, I might not feel unsafe in a Fit, Accent,etc.
#24 of 8700 Re: The problem [boaz47] by Mr_Shiftright HOST Jan 15, 2006 (3:12 pm)
Replying to: boaz47 (Jan 15, 2006 1:50 pm) not all sub-compacts are like that though. In some you sit quite high up and they're absolutely fine up to about 80 mph. The only limitation that would make some of them "second cars" are: a) they might not be too much fun to drive and b) their size won't accomodate a family of four very well.
#25 of 8700 Re: The problem [boaz47] by andys120 Jan 15, 2006 (4:28 pm)
Replying to: boaz47 (Jan 15, 2006 1:50 pm) You're correct in supposing that with rare exceptions subcompacts in America are relegated to "second-car" status. Given that there are more motor vehicles in the USA than there are people (IIRC) why aren't more of those second, third and fourth cars subcompacts?
#26 of 8700 it's true by nippononly Jan 15, 2006 (4:44 pm)
the whole "high beltline, high roof" thing where carmakers are trying to give people the high driving position of SUVs in cars has led to high arching roofs, and seats you don't sit down in, but rather just slide over to. So feeling cowed by large SUVs and trucks is not necessary just because you choose to drive a subcompact.   And you know, a great deal is said all the time about people wanting vehicles big enough to stuff all manner of poeple and gear into, but hey! Marriage and child-bearing rates are both on the decline! There are lots of people who just plain don't need all that space! Even childless couples don't need that much space. Now if you feel you do I have no quarrel about that - only you know what you use your car for. But rather than just ASSUMING that "bigger is better", as most Americans do, and never stopping for a second to examine your priorities, how about considering that if you mostly drive around solo, or with just you and a spouse in the car, you don't REALLY need all that space. And perhaps you could take it a little easier on the planet, save a whole bunch of gas money, and buy in to maneuverability all in one shot by buying SMALLER instead.   Whew, maybe I oughtta go into sales. Replies to this message: logic1 (Jan 18, 2006 6:25 am) onthefarm (Feb 24, 2008 3:24 pm)
#27 of 8700 Nippon, by boaz47 Jan 15, 2006 (7:33 pm)
You could only sell cars to people of like mind however. *S* Those of us who know you also know that anytime a micro car is even hinted at being produced you put on your cheer leading costume and wave the pom-poms. People simply don't think like the Amish and only look at what they need. It is what we want that drives us. If that weren't the case advertising wouldn't work and companies wouldn't need to spend all that money selling us the next best tooth brush. You aren't talking to someone who hasn't tried what you are asking. Living in Southern California I completely sold out to Motorcycle commuting for more than twelve years. I never drove my car to work if I could help it. I had a ISDT suit that kept me warm and dry and a full face helmet to keep the wind off of my face. The problem was that I was at a complete disadvantage to every other kind of vehicle out there. I was knocked down three times before I decided I would rather fight fire with fire. After a MD looked me right in the eye and pulled into my lane forcing me into the highway cones at 60 MPH, and yes rubber hurts like heck at 55 to 60. I called my wife and asked if she thought we could get a Pickup and sell the bike. We got one that weekend. Mind you I had been getting twice the MPG of most VW for many years yet even that wasn't worth it. We also had to drive my wife's car on the weekends or any road trip requiring luggage. Were we live you simply cannot beat a motorcycle for city traffic or parking. But was it worth it? Today I would have to say no because while large vehicles may have some inherent safety issues when it comes to one on one the big car always wins out over the little car when the two come bumper to bumper.   As far as to why more people aren't getting sub compacts when there are more cars than people it seems to be that for many the first car is a camcord size car and the second car is a truck or SUV. For many years my second car was Dodge RamCharger with a slight lift and one bad looking brush guard up front. Believe me people thought twice about cutting me off. The only accident we ever had in the Ram was when a woman managed to slide into the front of our truck while my wife was driving a friend to the store on a snow covered road. My wife drove the Ram home and we had it towed to replace the steering box, left front fender and bumper. The brush guard held up so well we just had to rub off the other cars paint. The Grand Am that hit us was hauled away with a stick and a spoon. Well at least a flat bed tow truck. In a perfect world maybe small sub compacts would catch our imagination but not in todays buying culture. we live in a world where accident are going to happen, not one where they may happen. Knowing that I for one would like a bit more protection than a car like a Rio might offer. Replies to this message: carlisimo (Jan 15, 2006 7:58 pm) nippononly (Jan 16, 2006 12:55 am)
#28 of 8700 Re: Nippon, [boaz47] by carlisimo Jan 15, 2006 (7:58 pm)
Replying to: boaz47 (Jan 15, 2006 7:33 pm) I think what's wrong with subcompacts is simply that they're the bottom of the barrel. They're the low end, and you get what you pay for. There's no way a car in the low teens can compare favorably to a $20k car.   The Mini is popular, and by most measures a good car. You pay more, you get more. Not in size of course, so it's not a car for everybody, but a lot of people are very happy with theirs. Why? It's not sold as basic transportation. Replies to this message: nippononly (Jan 16, 2006 12:55 am)
#29 of 8700 RE: Nippon, by boaz47 by jlawrence01 Jan 15, 2006 (9:30 pm)
People simply don't think like the Amish and only look at what they need. It is what we want that drives us.   Most Amish are driven around in 15-passenger vehicles by paid drivers ...   Why bring up the Amish as they don't OWN vehicles? By the way, perhaps the reason why most Amish have substantial capital resources is they DON'T own motor vehicles? Replies to this message: boaz47 (Jan 16, 2006 8:28 am)
#30 of 8700 Re: Nippon, [carlisimo] by nippononly Jan 16, 2006 (12:55 am)
Replying to: carlisimo (Jan 15, 2006 7:58 pm) I dunno, sometimes more money just gets you more metal. Look at the Fit - it will cost $13K in base form, have a better equipment level than the Civic DX and about the same power to weight ratio. It will just be smaller, not the "cheap option" in any other way than price.   Compare the Yaris sedan and Corolla, you will come to a similar conclusion. Then go back and repeat the exercise using the Camry and Accord in their most base trim levels, again the tiny cars will come out looking OK. I would submit to the group that it is so ingrained in America to assume the smallest car is the cheapest and the least worthy, no amount of evidence to the contrary will really make an impression on us.   Or at least, not the modicum we have available to us now. Maybe the next year will change a few minds on that score. I hope so. What we really need is a group of proper premium hatchbacks to give the Mini a run for its money, and then we would see just what $17-19K can buy you if you are willing to sacrifice a little cargo room in the process. But oh no, not in the land of "bigger is better"...   Boaz, you are right of course, as always! Now here's something for me to really bring the pom poms out for - the folks in the Subaru crew seem to think it is possible that Subaru will bring its little kei car here, the R1 or something like that. Now that is a TRUE subcompact. I really want to see that 50 mpg barrier broken by SOMETHING in America besides diesels, hybrids, and motorcycles. I just hope they make a sport package available with bigger rims and tires, and 4-wheel discs.   I am hopeless....

You are here: Forums Automotive News & Views What is "wrong" with these new subcompacts?