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

What is "wrong" with these new subcompacts?

8679 messages,  Last post on Dec 03, 2009 at 11:21 AM

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

#7455 of 8679 Re: five stars in the side crash test [steve_] by ateixeira Apr 04, 2008 (10:44 am)
Replying to: steve_ (Apr 04, 2008 7:27 am) 4 stars are not bad, really, but in a world where you sort of expect Kias to get 5 stars, that might be seen as a negative.   I'm surprised it got 5 stars in that side impact, look at the intrusion.
#7456 of 8679 Re: five stars in the side crash test [steve_] by lostwrench Apr 04, 2008 (2:12 pm)
Replying to: steve_ (Apr 04, 2008 7:27 am) Did you see the rollover rating? Only 3 stars! Replies to this message: andre1969 (Apr 05, 2008 4:02 am)
#7457 of 8679 Advantage???? by karsick Apr 04, 2008 (5:34 pm)
Can someone tell me why the Smart would ever be preferred over a Yaris or Fit? (beyond the minor advantage in parking, that is) Replies to this message: bumpy (Apr 04, 2008 6:06 pm)
#7458 of 8679 Re: Advantage???? [karsick] by bumpy Apr 04, 2008 (6:06 pm)
Replying to: karsick (Apr 04, 2008 5:34 pm) Mileage, weight reduction, interior room, customization.
#7459 of 8679 Re: five stars in the side crash test [lostwrench] by andre1969 Apr 05, 2008 (4:02 am)
Replying to: lostwrench (Apr 04, 2008 2:12 pm) Did you see the rollover rating? Only 3 stars!   I'm surprised about that, too. I figured a smaller, lighter car would do better in a rollover test, since you don't have all that weight crushing down on the roof. I guess something else could have happened though, like the crash test dummy's head coming into hard contact with some part inside the car that could have dealt a serious injury to a live person?   I've noticed a similar thing in the frontal crash tests, where sometimes the car itself looks like it held up really well, but the seatbelts just didn't do a good job keeping the dummy in place, so it bounced around and hit the door sill or roof pillar or some other hard object.
#7460 of 8679 Re: Me, bash huge SUV's? [nippononly] by explorerx4 Apr 05, 2008 (3:10 pm)
Replying to: nippononly (Apr 02, 2008 9:31 am) one of the ways i view my suv is an alternative to flying and then renting something to drive. i think there are plenty of suv owners that view it the same way. it is probably not obvious to those who have different life styles. Replies to this message: podred (Apr 06, 2008 1:45 pm) steve_ (Apr 06, 2008 5:55 pm) busiris (Apr 06, 2008 6:14 pm) andre1969 (Apr 07, 2008 5:19 am) nippononly (Apr 07, 2008 7:51 am) and 9 more...
#7461 of 8679 Re: Well, that sort of just [sandbyme] by explorerx4 Apr 05, 2008 (3:38 pm)
Replying to: sandbyme (Apr 03, 2008 5:33 am) of course, the emissions are not too friendly in today's world.
#7462 of 8679 Re: Me, bash huge SUV's? [explorerx4] by podred Apr 06, 2008 (1:45 pm)
Replying to: explorerx4 (Apr 05, 2008 3:10 pm) You have brought up a very interesting point. While I'm not one to bash any type of vehicle, as I believe that all have certain purposes they serve well when used for those scenario's, your example does make sense to a certain degree.   After reading your post, I ask myself this question: If it's used for a long distance trip. Why not use a large sedan or crossover which in many cases saves quite a bit of fuel due to the lighter weight and more aero bodystyle?   One response as to why not to use a sedan or crossover, is if one is driving over particularly rough terrain. Say perhaps a trip to Alaska.   So yes, while it could be argued or justified in a wide variety of ways, I do believe that the mainstream driving public sees so many SUVs as nothing more that todays' version of the typical Mom's Minivan for Soccer trips, used on smooth paved roads, that they've lost sight of the group of people for whom the SUV is truly useful and being used accordingly.   Finally when I look around the city I live in, the enormous amount of SUV's being driven in the city are largely examples of those young men (and some not so young) that have very small egos, suffer from insecurites, all of which demand a large vehicle so as to make themselves feel strong, confident, whole and in charge. So sad, that it takes a 40k to 60k vehicle to accomplish that. There are more H2 hummers on the road here than I would have ever imagined.   Conversely, it puts a very broad smile on my face when we meet up at the local gas station as I watch their bill for fuel exceed $130, when mine's less than $70. in todays economy, the price to feed ones ego, is very high.   Cheers Replies to this message: steve_ (Apr 06, 2008 5:55 pm) busiris (Apr 06, 2008 6:14 pm) andre1969 (Apr 07, 2008 5:19 am) nippononly (Apr 07, 2008 7:51 am) andre1969 (Apr 07, 2008 8:31 am) and 8 more...
#7463 of 8679 Re: What is "wrong" with these new subcompacts? [harrychezt] by deerebilt Apr 06, 2008 (5:10 pm)
Replying to: harrychezt (Jan 10, 2006 9:55 pm) WANT CHEESE WITH THAT! WANT AN ECONOMY VEHICLE OR A TANK CANT HAVE BOTH Replies to this message: lilengineerboy (Apr 06, 2008 5:48 pm)
#7464 of 8679 Re: What is "wrong" with these new subcompacts? [deerebilt] by lilengineerboy Apr 06, 2008 (5:48 pm)
Replying to: deerebilt (Apr 06, 2008 5:10 pm) Eh hmm an all caps response to a two and a half year old post...

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