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

What is "wrong" with these new subcompacts?

8696 messages,  Last post on Dec 08, 2009 at 8:52 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

#8326 of 8696 Re: hmm [stewpidaso] by dtownfb Apr 15, 2009 (8:32 am)
Replying to: stewpidaso (Apr 15, 2009 5:02 am) Nawww. I'm sure a Malibu into an Aveo would have the same results.   maybe they only tested cars built by companies that will still be in existence after May 31st????
#8327 of 8696 Re: Soulless [steve_] by ateixeira Apr 15, 2009 (10:20 am)
Replying to: steve_ (Apr 15, 2009 8:21 am) I bought out-the-door for $23.8k, this a Touring PRHT with the suspension package.   Drop another $2500 off that price, you get to $21.3k, out the door remember. Can't believe it's April, Spring, and they lower the price like that.   Plus, you could get the cheaper soft top (more than a grand off), not pay for the suspension package ($430 at invoice), and go for the Sport model (more than a grand off again), which is also cheaper.   You're easily in to the teens. And it's a sports car, not an economy car.   Honestly at prices near the ForTwo you'd have to be crazy to pick the Smart. Replies to this message: steve_ (Apr 15, 2009 12:55 pm)
#8328 of 8696 Re: Soulless [ateixeira] by steve_ HOST Apr 15, 2009 (12:55 pm)
Replying to: ateixeira (Apr 15, 2009 10:20 am) I'd love it I'm sure, but it's not quite practical enough for the better half. Most of the used ones around here are in the low teens.
#8329 of 8696 Re: hmm [stewpidaso] by plekto Apr 15, 2009 (1:02 pm)
Replying to: stewpidaso (Apr 15, 2009 5:02 am) notice the vehicles they used in this test were all foreign manufacturers   No, it was: Mid-size Honda versus compact Honda Mid-size Toyota versus compact Toyota Compact Mercedes versus sub-compact/minicar Mercedes   The results would have been the same running an Aveo into a G6 or a Focus into a Mustang. Small always loses and at best comes out somewhat even. There's no realistic way to make a 2000lb car do well versus a 3500lb sedan. But we all knew this, really. VW Bugs were deathtraps. And so were the fist Hondas. And so was the Suzuki Swift/Geo Metro. And so was the Ford Escort. And...   I'd personally recommend a much more realistic test, though. Rear impact at 35-40mph and the car sitting 3-5 feet away from a concrete wall(or say a big truck). This sort of accordion effect crash is extremely common. But I'd expect the same results, pretty much.
#8330 of 8696 was reading by nippononly Apr 15, 2009 (3:44 pm)
a bit more of the press coverage of the IIHS small car tests, and I noticed this near the bottom of the response from the Smart Cars president:   "Customers drive small cars for reasons other than fuel economy, including value, parking convenience, and fun, he added."   Darn right they do!
#8331 of 8696 Re: hmm [stewpidaso] by scwmcan Apr 16, 2009 (4:00 am)
Replying to: stewpidaso (Apr 15, 2009 5:02 am) if you didn't notice they picked "mini" cars that were top rated in their standard crash tests and used midsized cars from the same company that were also top rated, they wanted to show the best of one size hitting the best of the other size, I also don't see any american branded "mini" cars out there (besides the Aveo which was not rated well in crash testing) so it would be hard to test a car that doesn't exist. To me the most intesting this was how badly the Camary did compared to the other mid sized cars, the dummy's head hit the teering wheel through the air bag, and the seat tilted forward, not quite as severly as the yaris but still not good, I have a feeling that toyota has some work to do in the area of safety (scary when you consider it is the top selling car in America) Scott
#8332 of 8696 I wonder... by igozoomzoom Apr 16, 2009 (6:45 pm)
What if they had tested a Volvo C30 (2-dr hatchback) against an S80 (near full-size)? Replies to this message: andre1969 (Apr 17, 2009 5:07 am) igozoomzoom (Apr 17, 2009 5:35 am)
#8333 of 8696 Re: I wonder... [igozoomzoom] by andre1969 Apr 17, 2009 (5:07 am)
Replying to: igozoomzoom (Apr 16, 2009 6:45 pm) I imagine the C30 would have held up fairly well, at least better than the tested cars. Aren't they actually fairly heavy, for small cars?   My guess would be that it would be about the equivalent of running a Civic into an Accord, or a Corolla into a Camry. The smaller cars would still "lose", but would come off better than a Fit or Yaris. Replies to this message: igozoomzoom (Apr 17, 2009 5:35 am)
#8334 of 8696 Re: I wonder... [andre1969] by igozoomzoom Apr 17, 2009 (5:35 am)
Replying to: andre1969 (Apr 17, 2009 5:07 am) The C30 weighs about 3200lbs and the S80 is 4100lbs, so there's about 900lbs difference. The S80 is just over 2feet longer than the C30, but only 7in difference in wheelbase (probably because the C30's rear doesn't have an overhang since it's a hatchback.   I think it'd be interesting because the smaller car would perform as well as the larger one...then again, a large Volvo is probably the equivalent of a six-star rating on a five-star scale!

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