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

What is "wrong" with these new subcompacts?

8564 messages,  Last post on Oct 23, 2009 at 10:37 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

#7473 of 8564 Re: Me, bash huge SUV's? [nippononly] by andre1969 Apr 07, 2008 (12:44 pm)
Replying to: nippononly (Apr 07, 2008 11:33 am) the Corolla's EPA numbers make it appear that its mileage is almost identical to the Yaris/Echo's, but in real world use the smaller models are producing some fantastic figures and very few below 35, whereas many Corolla drivers report much lower numbers. It is much harder in the Corolla to get those 40-plus mpg numbers   How does the Civic "real world" mileage compare to its EPA estimates? I don't know what it's rated at these days, but I remember the 2006-2007 numbers had it at 30 city/40 highway for the automatic. I remember being really impressed by that. While it's really not much better than the 30/38 my uncle's Corolla was rated at, I found the Civic to be a lot more comfortable.   I've sat in stuff like the Yaris, xA, Fit, Echo, etc at car shows, and they're just too cramped for my tastes, so I think the Civic is about as small as I could reasonably go. One of my coworkers briefly had a 2009 Corolla S. I sat behind the wheel one day, and it definitely felt more comfortable than my uncle's '03. Legroom was still tight, but the seat felt more substantial, and a bit higher off the floor, which helped. The steering wheel also telescoped, which was nice.   Unfortunately, my coworker went through pickup truck withdrawal with the Corolla. He traded an '04 Tundra on it, and just couldn't get used to it. So last week he traded on a brand-new Tundra with the 5.7!   Oh, I do have to confess a certain fondness for the Nissan Versa. I still like the driving position of the Civic better, though. The Versa would be an awesome car to be chauferred around in, though. Backseat legroom felt a lot better than many midsized and even some so-called full-sized cars! Replies to this message: plekto (Apr 07, 2008 1:13 pm) nwng (Apr 08, 2008 8:58 am) alltorque (Apr 09, 2008 7:20 am) lemmer (Apr 08, 2008 7:58 am) ateixeira (Apr 08, 2008 9:36 am)
#7474 of 8564 Re: Me, bash huge SUV's? [andre1969] by plekto Apr 07, 2008 (1:13 pm)
Replying to: andre1969 (Apr 07, 2008 12:44 pm) The Yaris is actually not a lot smaller than a VW bug. It looks small, but it's quite large compared to cars like the first generation Civics, Mitsubishi Mirage, Suzuki Swift, and the like. At my work someone has one and it's only a foot or two shorter than a Civic, which isn't a tiny car anymore.   But the real improvement is the back seat if you get the optional interior package(comfort package or similar, IIRC). This gives you a reclining and sliding rear seat that is far more spacious when slid back PLUS has more headroom as well than in a Matix(!). It fits four adults quite comfortably, which is astounding. There's no shoulder room, so essentially a 2+2. Quite an amazing little car, and in Canada and elsewhere, where they sell the 4 door version(why not in the U.S.???), it is a far better can than the Fit/Jazz for many people.   P.S. The reason the Fit/Jazz sells so well in Europe is that it can be had with a better TDI engine than the Yaris. Most everyone buys this model. In the U.S., the Fit is kind of a red headed stepchild. Not quite frugal enough, not quite inexpensive enough. Replies to this message: nwng (Apr 08, 2008 8:58 am) alltorque (Apr 09, 2008 7:20 am)
#7475 of 8564 Re: Me, bash huge SUV's? [andre1969] by lemmer Apr 08, 2008 (7:58 am)
Replying to: andre1969 (Apr 07, 2008 12:44 pm) Saturday, I drove my Pilot around with a total of 8 people in it. Do I get credit for 160 MPG on a capacity basis (20 mpg X 8 people)? There is something to be said for carpooling. Replies to this message: ateixeira (Apr 08, 2008 9:36 am)
#7476 of 8564 Re: Me, bash huge SUV's? [plekto] by nwng Apr 08, 2008 (8:58 am)
Replying to: plekto (Apr 07, 2008 1:13 pm) didn't the yaris has a 1.2 DI diesel in europe? Replies to this message: alltorque (Apr 09, 2008 7:20 am)
#7477 of 8564 Re: Me, bash huge SUV's? [lemmer] by ateixeira Apr 08, 2008 (9:36 am)
Replying to: lemmer (Apr 08, 2008 7:58 am) Yes, and we've done the same in our van.   We have even taken entire road trips with 2 families in the van. Once to Dutch Wonderland in PA, and twice to Ocean City, MD.   On both occasions we would have had to take 2 compact cars to fit both familes, because at least 7 people went on each of those 3 trips.   The van returns about 26-28mpg with a heavy load like that, so I doubt even a pair of Prius hybrids would beat the people carrying efficiency of a loaded minivan.
#7478 of 8564 Re: Me, bash huge SUV's? [nippononly] by podred Apr 08, 2008 (10:25 am)
Replying to: nippononly (Apr 07, 2008 11:33 am) the Corolla's EPA numbers make it appear that its mileage is almost identical to the Yaris/Echo's, but in real world use the smaller models are producing some fantastic figures and very few below 35, whereas many Corolla drivers report much lower numbers. It is much harder in the Corolla to get those 40-plus mpg numbers, even though both are rated around 35 (both were previously rated 41) for highway use. So Corolla is not your best example for how efficient small cars can be,   This statement above is somewhat contrary to my personal experience. However as we all know, driving habits play a big part, in the mileage returned.   I have both an 07 Corollla and 08 Yaris hatchback. The Corolla has 10 k on the odometer, and Yaris has 7 k, both automatics.   Due to the fact that both of these cars are far more comfortable that they often get credit for, the four of us, Mom, Dad, son, and daugther were riding along, thus the same load in both cars. The kids are 6 & 8 yrs old.   I tested them carefully (on the same 255 mile round trip route to grandma's house) while duplicating my driving style as close as possible to negate "driver influence" . Also just for sake of satisfying my (admittedly OCD personality ) I performed these two comparison runs using the same fuel pump at the same gas station to fill up immediately before the test and immediately after the test. One run was made on Saturday, the next run on Sunday. Both in clear weather and maintaining an average speed on the freeway of 72mph. About 21 miles of each trip was in city driving, the balance on the freeway.   The result? Corolla trip mpg = 39 Yaris trip mpg = 46   Numbers that I'm very happy with.   Finally after it's all said and done, my long time experience with over 14 different Toyota models, I've owned over a log period of time, from Avalons, Highlanders, Tundras, Camrys, Corolla's and now Yaris, the bottom line is this in the one make (of many in my collection) that continuously costs the least to own over a period of five years or longer.
#7479 of 8564 What's wrong with this picture? by bottgers Apr 08, 2008 (12:08 pm)
A co-worker of mine just bought a brand new '08 Corvette. He said he's already gotten 30 MPG with it. It seems to defy all laws of physics that a fire breathing, 430 HP V-8 sports car can achieve 30 MPG, and yet little dinky cars like the Yaris and Fit only get high 30's to low 40's. Compared to numbers the 'Vette achieves, these little econo-boxes should easily be getting 50-60 MPG. What's wrong with this picture? Replies to this message: texases (Apr 08, 2008 12:14 pm) bottgers (Apr 08, 2008 12:36 pm) british_rover (Apr 08, 2008 2:24 pm) ateixeira (Apr 09, 2008 6:47 am) texases (Apr 09, 2008 6:58 am) bumpy (Apr 09, 2008 7:41 am) andre1969 (Apr 09, 2008 8:23 am) bumpy (Apr 09, 2008 9:36 am)
#7480 of 8564 Re: What's wrong with this picture? [bottgers] by texases Apr 08, 2008 (12:14 pm)
Replying to: bottgers (Apr 08, 2008 12:08 pm) Recent Vettes are good at highway mpgs: low Cd + light weight (relatively) + super high gearing = decent cruising mpgs. Now ask him what he gets around town when he's having fun with it! Replies to this message: bottgers (Apr 08, 2008 12:36 pm) british_rover (Apr 08, 2008 2:24 pm)
#7481 of 8564 Re: What's wrong with this picture? [texases] by bottgers Apr 08, 2008 (12:36 pm)
Replying to: texases (Apr 08, 2008 12:14 pm) I'm sure his mileage drops considerably when he's honkin' on it, but still you'd think if a performance car can get 30, these econo-boxes should get much better than they do. Replies to this message: british_rover (Apr 08, 2008 2:24 pm)
#7482 of 8564 Re: What's wrong with this picture? [bottgers] by british_rover Apr 08, 2008 (2:24 pm)
Replying to: bottgers (Apr 08, 2008 12:36 pm) The Vette has enough torque to cruise at 70 mph with the RPMs under 2,000. A little 4 cylinder just can't do that. The 4 cylinder doesn't make enough torque in the low RPMs to maintain a 70ish mph cruising speed so it has to be geared to pull RPMs in the upper 2,000 to low 3,000 rpm range.   Now throw a small turbo diesel 4 cylinder into the equation and then the situation changes. Now that motor can make decent torque right off idle and pull in high gear at low rpms.

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