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

What is "wrong" with these new subcompacts?

8653 messages,  Last post on Nov 27, 2009 at 6:22 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

#8080 of 8653 Re: The 1998 Sephia design, pictured as the [iluvmysephia1] by thegraduate Sep 28, 2008 (1:18 pm)
Replying to: iluvmysephia1 (Sep 28, 2008 1:06 pm) Kinda funny, actually, I think the better looking, more aggressive, and more distinctive Sephia is definitely the earlier model, not the '98 Escort-ish overly round newer model.   Replies to this message: andre1969 (Sep 28, 2008 1:23 pm) thegraduate (Sep 28, 2008 1:32 pm)
#8081 of 8653 Re: The 1998 Sephia design, pictured as the [thegraduate] by andre1969 Sep 28, 2008 (1:23 pm)
Replying to: thegraduate (Sep 28, 2008 1:18 pm) I prefer the earlier model Kia, too. It reminds me a bit of an early 90's Nissan Sentra. Replies to this message: thegraduate (Sep 28, 2008 1:32 pm)
#8082 of 8653 Re: The 1998 Sephia design, pictured as the [andre1969] by thegraduate Sep 28, 2008 (1:32 pm)
Replying to: andre1969 (Sep 28, 2008 1:23 pm) The roofline has some early '90s Lincoln Continental in it, a sharp look I always liked.
#8083 of 8653 The earlier model is more plain by iluvmysephia1 Sep 28, 2008 (1:39 pm)
yet still looks good to me. In person the '96-'98 Kia Sephia looks better than it does in pictures.   How bout y'all as to the '88 Chevy Sprint or the '88 Ford Festiva(built for Ford by Kia Motors of South Korea)? BTW-did Chevy build the Sprint theirselves?   I'd like to know if you like the Festiva's body design more, or the Chevy Sprint's body design? I prefer the Ford Festiva design, though, as I recall, I did like the Chevy Sprint bodystyle, too. These two cars were the first two new cars I considered buying, that being in the late 80's of course. I would've only bought one of them if I did buy one, BTW.   As things turned out, my first new car ended up being a 1994 Ford Escort wagon, in brilliant blue paint. Decent small wagon it turned out to be. Replies to this message: andre1969 (Sep 28, 2008 1:42 pm) lilengineerboy (Sep 28, 2008 3:27 pm)
#8084 of 8653 Re: The earlier model is more plain [iluvmysephia1] by andre1969 Sep 28, 2008 (1:42 pm)
Replying to: iluvmysephia1 (Sep 28, 2008 1:39 pm) How bout y'all as to the '88 Chevy Sprint or the '88 Ford Festiva(built for Ford by Kia Motors of South Korea)? BTW-did Chevy build the Sprint theirselves?   The Sprint was built by Suzuki Motors. Of the two, I think the Sprint was more attractive. But I thought the Festiva was laid out a bit better. One of my friends in college had one, and I rode in it a couple times. Roomy little sucker, up front at least. The Sprint seemed more cramped to me. Replies to this message: lilengineerboy (Sep 28, 2008 3:27 pm)
#8085 of 8653 Re: The earlier model is more plain [andre1969] by lilengineerboy Sep 28, 2008 (3:27 pm)
Replying to: andre1969 (Sep 28, 2008 1:42 pm) What I miss are vehicles like the Sprint Turbo or the Suzuki Swift GTI. The Mitsubishi Mirage Turbo and its Dodge brother were fun too as was the Mazda 323 GTX and the original and second generation Civic or CRX SIs. I think that is a by-gone era though, and having anything be small AND fun seems to be beyond the realm of the current marketplace. In Europe they have the Focus RS and I think they have an upgraded Fiesta as well. Those would be something that might actually be fun to drive, as opposed to sephia's example of being fun to not-drive.
#8086 of 8653 Re: oh for PETE'S SAKE!! [boaz47] by nippononly Sep 29, 2008 (9:15 am)
Replying to: boaz47 (Sep 27, 2008 8:05 am) Yes, the CVT is going to be insidiously tempting to manufacturers of subcompacts in the next few years, I fear.   As for the ongoing debate of Metro vs Festiva, I would definitely go with the Metro, which was of course a rebadged Suzuki Swift, a car I very much wish was being sold new in the States today. Too bad we have until some indefinite future date to see that car stateside again...   Having said that, I will add that I had a friend with a Festiva, which she called Snoopy due to its weird looks, and try as she might she just could NOT kill that car - despite years of total neglect it was still going strong at 150K without any powertrain work except for new axles (the CVs were finally shot just prior to that mileage) Replies to this message: boaz47 (Sep 29, 2008 11:52 am) nippononly (Sep 29, 2008 12:02 pm) lilengineerboy (Sep 29, 2008 7:54 pm)
#8087 of 8653 Re: oh for PETE'S SAKE!! [nippononly] by boaz47 Sep 29, 2008 (11:52 am)
Replying to: nippononly (Sep 29, 2008 9:15 am) "Yes, the CVT is going to be insidiously tempting to manufacturers of subcompacts in the next few years, I fear."   It is the simplicity and projected lightness that makes it so tempting. That and the predillation the Japanese have for single automotive lines and limited engine and transmission options. Nissan is the tip of the iceberg I believe. Hybrids have given the CVT a boost even though they aren't true CVTs. As more cars move towards hybrid, fuel cell and EV the light weight requirement will move manufacturers towards simpler light transmissions.   For small cars and sub compacts to make it in the modern market they have to get lighter and provide far better fuel mileage than they do today. Yes they get better fuel mileage than a mid sized car but not enough over a compact to overcome the American consumers price per pound mind set.   Look at the happy horse manure we had in this forum with the predicted coming of the Smart. It was going to put the sub compact on the map with outstanding fuel mileage in excess of what a Yaris or fit could get by 10 MPG. Well it is here and they have had them on the road long enough and it simply hasn't lived up to the hype. 40 MPG just isn't good enough to give up a back seat. There is a reason it has been in the red in Europe for all these years and if they don't find a way to get 60 MPG from that little thing in will end up in the red after four or five years hear as well. Replies to this message: nippononly (Sep 29, 2008 12:02 pm) lilengineerboy (Sep 29, 2008 7:54 pm)
#8088 of 8653 Re: oh for PETE'S SAKE!! [boaz47] by nippononly Sep 29, 2008 (12:02 pm)
Replying to: boaz47 (Sep 29, 2008 11:52 am) Don't forget though that the CVT still has not reached weight parity with the manual. Just as one example I pulled up the Versa here at Edmunds: the curb weight is 2718 for the 6-speed manual, 2758 for the CVT, so the manual still has the edge.   And when I began all this talk I was referring to the Yaris 5-door, which will be at Toyota dealers soon, and is not a CVT but rather an antiquated 4-speed auto. Still, it is a small step forward, as it becomes the new champ of fuel economy among 5-doors available in the US. One day soon Toyota will feel the pressure from Honda and will begin putting 5-speed autos in all its cars (and dare I hope for a 6-speed manual or two as well? Their press release earlier this year indicated they had a pretty dandy new lightweight, compact 6-speed ready for use in the '09s) Replies to this message: lilengineerboy (Sep 29, 2008 7:54 pm)
#8089 of 8653 Re: oh for PETE'S SAKE!! [nippononly] by lilengineerboy Sep 29, 2008 (7:54 pm)
Replying to: nippononly (Sep 29, 2008 12:02 pm) One day soon Toyota will feel the pressure from Honda and will begin putting 5-speed autos in all its cars (and dare I hope for a 6-speed manual or two as well? Their press release earlier this year indicated they had a pretty dandy new lightweight, compact 6-speed ready for use in the '09s)   Don't hold your breath. Cars peaked in the 90s. The 1998 BMW E36 M3/4 (a sub-compact, in theory) was the peak of automotive revolution and we have been forced into evolutionary steps since then. Very sad.

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