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?
8691 messages, Last post on Dec 04, 2009 at 1:39 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
as far as I'm concerned, what's wrong with these new subcompacts is what's ALWAYS been wrong with them...they're just small! By and large, they're not meant to be comfy, spacious 4/5 passenger cars (IMO the "true" 6-passenger car has been a myth, for about 30 years now...that's what minivans are for) They're meant to be economical, maneuverable little cars with a back seat designed for children or occasional adult use, or just folded down to expand the trunk space. They're not meant to be family cars. Cars for singles, couples with small children, or as a second car for a large family. One thing I have noticed though, with all cars, is that the seating position has been changing over the years. Cars are starting to trade generous lateral stretch-out room and a low seating position for a more upright, truck-like position with less stretch-out room. Now because of the way they measure legroom, they can still come up with some pretty decent published measures. FWIW, they measure legroom from the base of the accelerator pedal to the center of the back of the seat cushion, or something like that, so published legroom won't tell you how far away the firewall is, how intrusive the dead pedal or wheel wells are, etc. For a taller driver that likes to stretch out, these upright seating positions can feel cramped. I had a 1991 Civic for a rental years ago, and I actually fit pretty comfortably in it. I haven't tried out the '06 Civic yet, but the '01-05 felt horribly cramped to me. Now the '01-05 was better in the back seat, but it seemed like they sacrificed the driver's comfort to improve the back. And IMO, the driver's seat is one area that should NEVER be compromised. |
|
|
|
|
bumpy's remarks: low weight is its own reward, in terms of handling and fun. One of the best reasons to buy one of these little cars, ESPECIALLY if you commute to a job. They are efficient, big enough to carry people occasionally but mostly designed to serve solo commuters (some 90%+ of all car commuters). And of course, if you need to put kids in the back, which is the only reason I ever use the back seat, there is plenty of room for that. Mileage has been a bonus in the past with these tiny cars, but it seems that today most automakers have decided that Americans won't accept any car, even a low-priced one, that can't beat a midsize family sedan to 60 mph, and hence we have mid to high 30s for combined mpg, and cars that can do 0-60 in 9 seconds or less. To people like me that is a bummer, but in the context of the market, it is average or above for cars, and fast for trucks (and as we know, there are PLENTY of solo commuters out there in trucks - if they were in a subcompact instead, they could in many cases DOUBLE their fuel efficiency overnight).
|
|
|
|
|
I find the Scion xA quite spacious in front and adequate in the rear. Headroom and shoulder room are non-issues but leg room in the rear can be a bit tight---but really no worse than a 3 series BMW if the front passengers have their seats all the way back. Some sub-compacts are far more intelligently designed than others but ALL will have to compromise somewhere. With the xA it's cargo space behind the rear seats. |
|
|
Replying to: nippononly (Jan 11, 2006 8:03 am)  Actually, one thing I do remember about the Echo that my uncle test drove, was that for the tiny external dimensions of the car, it was pretty roomy inside. I remember my uncle drove, I rode shotgun, and the sales guy was in the back seat. Now my uncle's only like 5'9", and the salesguy was pretty short too, but with me being 6'3" and having the seat all the way back, there was still a little room back there, in kind of a Dodge Dart hardtop sort of way. There wasn't a whole lot of room to stretch out, but the tall seating position helped a bit. It had what I'd call a useable back seat...a seat where I could fit back there, even with the front seat all the way back. Of course, using that definition, it would vary from person to person, as we all come in different shapes and sizes. As for a BMW 3-series, well that IS a subcompact! I rode in one a few years ago, and it was comfy up front. However, I doubt if you could even get an infant's car seat behind me, let alone an adult. Interestingly, one of the smallest cars that I felt could hold four people in reasonable comfort was the Dodge Neon. I can fit comfortably up front, and even with the seat all the way back, can still fit in the back. Now, the seats themselves aren't that comfy, but those little suckers are roomy. Now, the Neon sucks in other ways, and honestly I'd probably put up with a Corolla just to get the better reliability/fuel economy/etc, as it's still tolerable for my body. But then, neither the Corolla nor the Neon would really be considered subcompacts these days.
|
|
|
|
|
I would buy a subcompact if: 1) 50% of the vehicles on the road weren't SUVs and trucks. 2) if one would have a comfortable front seat for me. The Echo doesn't cut it as it is so small. The Neon is comfortable but not reliable. 3) They would mount the driver's seat in the middle of the sedan ala Britian's Invacar. Personally, I don't care about the backseat as it is never used in my car. |
|
|
|
|
you got an '05 Scion xA? Manual or automatic? What color? Congratulations, BTW! I researched that car for months and now am focusing on a '06 Kia Rio LX sedan in 5-speed form and either in Silver, Tropical Red or Sapphire Blue color. I'm leaning towards the Sapphire Blue one at my local dealer. The new Rio's offer a lot of safety equipment(they really have the airbag thing covered completely, good, IMO, for a small car like the Rio) standard and get 32-35 mpg. Interestingly, the Scion xA offers a lot of the same good things. When I see an xA out on the road I have to do a double and triple-take on it. It is an unusual looking sub-compact but an interesting one as well.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: andre1969 (Jan 11, 2006 5:27 pm) Hehe, liked that one did you?  Funny thing is, to me the Echo's driver's seat is spacious and comfortable. I compared it to the new Civic's seat, and even the non-sport versions are heavily bolstered, so that I don't fit well in the seat. I wouldn't be comfortable in that thing for long trips, whereas a few hours in the Echo would be no problem. When I adjust the front seat for me, however, it is all the way back in the track, so I could see how tall drivers wouldn't like it. And with the seat all the way back like that, the rear seat has enough room for me to sit down, but I wouldn't want to sit there for very long, maybe a quick half hour trip or something, but that would be about it. Something like the Corolla has a lot more room than this, as does the Neon. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: iluvmysephia1 (Jan 11, 2006 11:36 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (Jan 12, 2006 11:47 am) |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: carlisimo (Jan 12, 2006 11:53 am)
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views What is "wrong" with these new subcompacts?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Nissan Versa
2010 Toyota Yaris
2010 Honda Fit
2009 smart fortwo
2010 MINI Cooper
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
