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

What is "wrong" with these new subcompacts?

8677 messages,  Last post on Dec 03, 2009 at 5:50 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

#7459 of 8677 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 8677 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 8677 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 8677 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 8677 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 8677 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...
#7465 of 8677 Re: Me, bash huge SUV's? [podred] by steve_ HOST Apr 06, 2008 (5:55 pm)
Replying to: podred (Apr 06, 2008 1:45 pm) 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.   I first drove to Alaska in '73 in a VW Bug back when the Alcan was gravel. It's all paved now and I've driven it in three wagons, a compact Tercel and two minivans.   Now, you may need an SUV if you live in Maine. (AP) Replies to this message: busiris (Apr 06, 2008 6:14 pm)
#7466 of 8677 Re: Me, bash huge SUV's? [steve_] by busiris Apr 06, 2008 (6:14 pm)
Replying to: steve_ (Apr 06, 2008 5:55 pm) And I drove all the way to the Arctic Circle in 1998 on a Harley Davidson Road King. There are rougher roads in my home state of Georgia than in Alaska....
#7467 of 8677 Here's a little known fact about the new by iluvmysephia1 Apr 06, 2008 (8:47 pm)
SmartForSomeone. It is 4.5ft shorter than the VW Beetle! I read that in the May '08 Car and Driver magazine. Yikes. Pert-near 5 feet shorter than the VW Beetle? This car is t-i-n-y.   I actually saw one in my little SE Arizona cowtown the other day. It took a left at the busiest intersection in town and headed uphill towards the I-10 on ramp/switchchange.   Perhaps if one loved VW Beetle's in their hey-day and wanted to re-live some of the glory they could nab one of these mini-cars. Did I read that it weighs some 2,300 lbs.? Or was that only 1,800 lbs.? Too heavy, but that no doubt helps it in it's endeavours to pass crash testing.   Oh, the magazine article mentioned that there is a Smart Cabriolet. The C&D testers didn't particularly like getting the car in to the top-down mode, though. Didn't exactly go smoothly. But it eventually worked, exposing small, stick-like C-pillars, but it was an actual Smart-vertible. Weird little rig, it really is. Too small for this padre, but, I don't dislike it. The Mitsubishi i-MIEV all-electric under development doesn't look all that much bigger, but if I pulled dimensions on both cars I have a feeling the i-MIEV would dwarf the SmartFor by quite a few feet, not just by quite a few inches.
#7468 of 8677 Re: Me, bash huge SUV's? [podred] by andre1969 Apr 07, 2008 (5:19 am)
Replying to: podred (Apr 06, 2008 1:45 pm) 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?   Last August, two friends and I went out to Cedar Point in Ohio, in a 2006 Xterra 4wd. Fuel economy averaged about 20 mpg. About 3 years ago, the three of us went down to Florida in my 2000 Intrepid, and on that trip probably averaged about 27.5 mpg. We ended up taking about as much luggage both times. I'd say that the only advantage to the Xterra was that we could reach the cooler in the back, so we could get food and drinks out of it without stopping. With the Intrepid, we had to not only stop, but partially unload the trunk to get to the cooler!   Dunno if that little bonus was worth the mileage penalty, though! Replies to this message: nippononly (Apr 07, 2008 7:51 am) andre1969 (Apr 07, 2008 8:31 am) nippononly (Apr 07, 2008 11:33 am) and 7 more...

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