Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views What is "wrong" with these new subcompacts?
8153 messages, Last post on Nov 08, 2008 at 2:29 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
|
|---|---|
|
Replying to: boaz47 (May 08, 2008 7:12 pm) 2008 Yaris 2293 lbs Curb weight/106 hp = 21 lb/hp 2003 RSX 2800 lbs Curb weight/160 hp= 17.5 lb/hp 1995 Miata 2400 lbs curb weight/140 hp =17.1 lb/hp Not a huge difference there...don't get me wrong, I think the Yaris is ugly as sin, but eh, a lightweight car is fun to drive as witnessed by the Miata, which isn't what most call fast. The life of the car depends on the person as well. For someone like yourself the advantage is you aren't a family person. If you were the average family man with two adults and 2.5 kids a sub compact can't be your primary transportation. It could get you to and from work, that is point A to point B. 5 days a week. For me it would make a good week day car but it doesn't allow for a life style that includes dirt bikes, boats, quads or even camping. Nothing smaller than an Outback would fit the bill. It depends on how often that feature is required. I have to bring home lumbar from Home Depot, I guess I need a F250 at least...or I could put some of it in the back of the wagon or on the roof rack or rent the $9/day trailer from uHaul for the 2 times a year I do that. The rest of the time, I get 30 mpg. Bikes go on the hitch rack or on the roof rack. The roof rack takes a FE hit when I am using it, but not as bad as having to stuff the bikes in the back of a van. Shoot a Yaris requires too many compromises for winter sports and maybe even surfing. The Yaris requires a $200 roof rack, and no compromises in that respect. Yes I have been in a Echo and a Camry, the Camry is more comfortable when taking five people to lunch or driving to Del Mar for opening day. And how often does that happen? I don't think the Camry is what we are worried about here, because frankly the difference in FE isn't all that noticeable.
|
|
|
Replying to: boaz47 (May 08, 2008 7:12 pm) But isn't that what makes them a sub-compact? You can't hold the small size against them because that is what defines them. If it was bigger it would be a compact and wouldn't get included in this conversation  Your points on fuel economy are well made though. I think a good question to ask in the US is not 'what is wrong with these sub-compacts?' but 'why do we have so little choice and options in these sub-compacts?'. Put a 1.2l diesel into one of those and you'll have mileage second only to a scooter (heck, it virtually IS a scooter!). The top sub-compacts in the rest of the world are not available here (Fiat 500, Ford Fiesta, Renault Clio, Peugeot 205, VW Polo, Nissan Micra) because there was never perceived to be a market here. That doesn't mean that sub-compacts are 'bad', just that gas has been cheap here and income higher here for decades. Spiralling gas prices (oh, wait- yup- hit another new high today!) will make some changes in our buying habits. Like you say, if you are into car-camping or motor-cross, there may not be a sub-compact in your future. For everyone else, it is getting increasingly hard to accept that there will be a sub-25mpg car in your future. It's not like gas prices have any reason to go down again, this is not the 70's supply-reduction model, this is the China/ India demand-escalation model. 
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: lilengineerboy (May 08, 2008 8:04 pm) 2003 RSX 2800 lbs Curb weight/160 hp= 17.5 lb/hp 1995 Miata 2400 lbs curb weight/140 hp =17.1 lb/hp " THANK YOU! To your examples I would add the most obvious and perhaps most pertinent: 2008 Mini Cooper 2546 lbs curb weight/118 hp = 21.5 lb/hp. Go ahead, try to convince me the Mini Cooper isn't a sporty car. Go ahead....I'm right here......still listening....... There's a LOT more to sport than going really fast in a straight line. In fact, that's the most BORING aspect of sport IMO. I will say one more thing too: much has been made of the disappointing fuel economy of today's subcompacts, and I won't disagree it ought to be much better. But it is important to ADD that in identical use, cars like Yaris and Fit will save you 30% (somewhat more for all city use, somewhat less for all highway use) on your gas bills vs the most efficient 4-cylinder midsize cars out there. These days 30% could be a cool $20 bill in your pocket at EVERY FILL-UP.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: nippononly (May 09, 2008 6:55 am) |
|
|
Replying to: nippononly (May 09, 2008 6:55 am) I am not saying the sub compacts can't save you fuel. But the topic is what is wrong with the sub compacts we could get but what is wrong with the ones we have. Some people like little cars, obviously I am not one of them. But I understand what they were created for. Entry level economy. Sports Compact Car, Motortrend and Car and Driver don't classify them as "sporty" cars they might say, they are sporty, Considering,. Calling them sporty is very subjective unless you can show some class leading racing results to back it up. Not what they feel like but what they do. Don't worry I don't expect people that are interested in a Yaris to be part of the SCCA sedan series because it isn't designed that way.  The new sub compacts we now see simply don't offer much more than the compacts we already had, unless you are counting more choices. Because the Civic, Corolla, and Sentra are not new sub compacts. And if I were to use your same logic wouldn't I get a Prius? I would save gas over every sub compact on the market every time I filled up city or highway. I wold be in one very ugly car and none of my shooting friends would talk to me but I would save gas and put 20 bucks in my pocket. And people are telling us a Prius is a mid sized car. I have already started saving on fuel by driving the little Pontiac 4 banger for in town errands. Before I moved down from the mountains to a small desert community I was filling up the Tahoe once or twice a week. The Pontiac got gas maybe every two weeks. Now I can go three weeks between fill up for the Tahoe and three weeks for the Pontiac. That will not be the case when I hit the road at the end of the month but it will be when I am in town. But until they come up with a sub compact that offers plug in hybrid mileage I think I will save my money. Or maybe I can find a old Metro or Diesel Rabbit and save even more fuel that a new Fit would. That is part of the whole problem. The new sub compacts simply haven't delivered on the fuel mileage promise.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: boaz47 (May 09, 2008 4:21 pm) Well if it were, they wouldn't sell too many Miatas or RSXs at twice the price, now would they?! boaz, you're a tough nut to crack. I continue to believe that 3/4 of the time you are either playing devil's advocate or missing the point on purpose.  But hey, remember when I posted all the slalom times of "sport" versions of larger cars, ALL of which were knocked to the curb in the slalom by the $15K Fit, MANY of which cost a pretty penny? Sport CAN be part of the equation, depending on model. The thing to keep in mind here is that we are discussing a whole class of cars, not just one model.
|
|
|
Replying to: nippononly (May 09, 2008 5:34 pm) Here is the deal however. What we are getting is not a big improvement over what we already have. These little puppies aren't the mileage champions in times of high fuel prices. Would they be good to tow behind a motor home? Sure and you could save money to boot. But as a only vehicle? Maybe for the more stoic among us. Remember I didn't bring up the flowery praise for a Yaris sports car. That was pure hyperbole. Would a sub compact make a good commuter or even a city car? I guess they would. But the origional question wasn't what are sub compacts good for but what are their faults. So the question has to be did the "new" subcompacts deliver on being the best fuel sippers in the last 40 years? Did they come in at prices below the Koreans and Aveo? Do they meet the needs of the average American family of two adults and two and a half kids as a primary car? I am not sure some of them would take two cars seats let alone two and a booster. For the more established families can they tow your toys? Do any of the new Sub Compacts come in AWD or 4wd, at least the old Justy did if you were planning on hitting the slopes in the winter. Sure they may be bringing a few small diesels over and maybe some plug in hybrids but they aren't here yet so we can hold the applause till they are. If there is any intention of moving people out of their mid sized cars into sub compacts there will have to be more incentive than we we are seeing now. Truck people will always be truck people and sub compacts more than likely will not be able to change that unless our sport market for weekend recreation folds. What I get from much of this whole question is sub compacts may not be what we wanted but it is the best we can do for now. And that sounds a bit like second best to me. Or do you see it differently? Is the sub compact as useful as a primary car for the one car family as a mid sized car? In general and for the majority of the consumers? Have a good weekend. I need to get my air conditioning serviced before our trip. I plan on doing a lot of traveling this summer and maybe even trying the old route 66 trip. I might get a laptop and keep in touch but I am not sure just yet.
|
|
|
Replying to: boaz47 (May 09, 2008 7:30 pm) Scott
|
|
|
Replying to: scwmcan (May 10, 2008 3:53 am) I do understand some that are buying them in hopes of "greasing the wheels" for new sub compact offerings. I just don't agree that we as customers should have to do that. |
|
|
My specific response to the title of the thread is : Nothing Is Wrong! They are what they are, Today's Subcompacts. They are different than the cars of the past, and while one can certainly compare them, just what is the point? The title is not "What is "wrong" with these new subcompacts _as compared_ to subcompacts of the past. And yet that is the majority of the debate going on here. The cars of the past were not subject to the smog / emissions / safety rules of today. And on and on it can be argued. So I say todays cars are better than having no subcompacts today. Would I like better mileage? Of course. Would I like more sporty styling and performance? Most definitely. However when I make statements about todays cars it is in the context of the cars of today, not those of years ago. Arguments: There are so many variables simply amongst the wants, needs, values & perspectives of each buyer / owner that those considerations alone are enough to keep us debating for a very long time. Relativity: My past comment about the Yaris hatchback being sporty is a comment I stand by. Notice I did not say it was a high performance sports car. I did say that mine is relatively underpowered, as compared to Today's Mini Cooper S, which I also own. Now that's more like a sports car, yet it's over twice the price of my Yaris, so it should be. Not only that I bought each of them for drastically different reasons and usage. So why compare? My points: 1) An an ex-racer, I bought the Cooper S to hop-up even further and turn into a car for Track Days on the various Race Courses I frequent on Track Days. 2) I bought the Yaris, because the funky look reminded me of how much I enjoy funky looking cars, just for fun. A plain jane around town ride, that is inexpensive, I don't have to worry about (I'm very OCD when it comes to my "special cars") and that I could park anywhere, no worries. It's my fun city car, that I drive once in a while, not as a daily driver. 3) The kids are grown and out of the house, so I have no need to carry more than 2 people most of the time, therefore I get to buy 2 door coupes, which by nature are far more sporty looking that a 4 door car, or the wagon like Fit. Which I happen to really like, but avoided because of the body style. 4) I purchased my F40 Ferrari New, because I am a car enthusiast, not an ego maniac, or a poser. I know how to DRIVE the F40. In addition, I do not drive that car around town regularly, as obviously it draws a crowd no matter where you stop. And I would never let it out of my sight. Therefore that is another car I reserve for one of two purposes. Long runs with other exotic car owners, and track days. 5) The other cars in my collection are quite varied, small, medium, and large. As I do have a 2003 MBZ S-Class Sedan for evenings out in the city with friends. But again, not a daily driver as my ego doesn't require me to drive a high end car, to make me feel complete. Nor do I require it to impress others. I could care less. I buy cars because it is my passion, my hobby, my reward for years of hard work. Some people buy yachts, or airplanes, I buy cars. Therefore my wants and needs are quite different than someone who is looking for a single car to perform everything needed. 6) Yes, I do own and use a daily driver. It's a 2006 Corvette Coupe. A car that is common enough to not draw a lot of attention. A car the has good performance, is fun to drive, and while not economical on fuel, I am not focused on fuel costs. It's convenient that I can it have easily serviced and repaired at any of the GM dealers about town. It works for me, and thats what matters. Cheers....
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views What is "wrong" with these new subcompacts?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2009 Nissan Versa
2009 Toyota Yaris
2009 Honda Fit
2009 smart fortwo
2009 MINI Cooper
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
