Article Comments - 2008 Scion Xb Full & Long Term Test

35 messages, Last post on Feb 08, 2009 at 12:30 AM

You are in the Scion xB Forum. Your Host is kcram

What is this discussion about? Scion xB, Wagon

Full Test: 2008 Scion Xb - Our test car has been equipped with Scion's top-of-the-line, Pioneer tuner/CD/DVD/navigation system with iPod and aux hookups. It's not as confusing to use as it is to say, and it makes the five-hour trek to college pretty pleasurable. (more)

Long-Term Test: 2008 Scion xB - The 2008 Scion xB is the very definition of hip. After all, it's the successor of the 2004 Scion xB, which made "hip" and "econobox" usable in the same sentence. And while most manufacturers struggle to create this kind of cult following, Scion's unique box effortlessly draws the dollars of the fashionable and the utilitarian alike. (more)

Outline

Messages Page 1 of 4: 1; 2; 3; 4; Prev; Next; Last

#1 of 35 Article Comments - 2008 Scion Xb Full Test by KarenS HOST May 31, 2007 (10:08 am)
Check out our full test for the 2008 Xb and let us know what you think. Full Test: 2008 Scion Xb
#2 of 35 Nice article, but found some goofs by smithchuck Jun 01, 2007 (7:13 pm)
I see some significant goofs in this road test (and/or on your specifications pages), although apart from them, it's a good article. 1) On page 1 you say "despite having grown almost a foot in overall length...". On the Second Opinion page, Josh Jacquot's last paragraph says the car is "shorter." 2) On page 1 you say "the difference lies in front-seat legroom, which has increased 4.6 inches." Your specs pages say the 2008 has 41.3 inches of front legroom, while the 2006 has 45.3--the car's a foot longer and it LOST 4 inches of front legroom? 3) On page 1 you say "rear-seat space is still at a premium" and I consider the orginal xB as almost limousine-like in back, and I'm over 6 feet tall. Other reviews I've seen have also stated that the xBs are amazingly roomy for their exterior dimensions. Maybe you mean rear-seat WIDTH is at a premium, for 3 adults, but assuming your specs pages are correct, rear leg room hasn't changed (at 38 inches, which is more than you'll find in the Honda Accord and only .3 inches less than a Camry). 4) On page 1 you say it's "10 percent thirstier when it comes time to fill the gas tank." Your road test's "Specs & Performance" page doesn't say what you got for actual mpg, but using the EPA ratings for the 2006 vs. the 2008 automatic models (30/34 vs. 22/28, respectively), I calculate it to be almost 27% thirstier in the city (the 8 mpg difference divided by the old 30) and almost 18% thirstier on the highway (6 divided by the old 34). Not a good direction to be heading (although still not down in SUV territory). Anyway, I think it was a fair report on what sounds like a good (if still odd-ball) little car. ...Chuck Replies to this message: dk76 (Jun 01, 2007 9:01 pm) smithchuck (Jun 01, 2007 10:49 pm) lonestarcody (Jun 01, 2007 11:07 pm) smithchuck (Jun 01, 2007 11:39 pm) smithchuck (Jun 01, 2007 11:54 pm) dk76 (Jun 05, 2007 11:54 pm) and 1 more...
#3 of 35 Where do you guys get the facts? by dk76 Jun 01, 2007 (8:52 pm)
"In 2004, we were surprised to find our test xB equipped with traction control. With its second-generation xB, Scion has upped the gadgetry content further, and now there's vehicle stability control." "Electronic brakeforce distribution is now on board, along with brake assist to clinch the calipers tight during panic stops." ----------------------------------------------------------- The first generation xB has the Toyota Star Safety System which includes anti-lock brakes, brake assist, electronic brake distribution, vehicle stability control, and traction control STANDARD. Talk about being lazy or smoking crack, did you wiki, google the facts for you article, made it up as you wrote this article? -----------------------------------------------------------
#4 of 35 Re: Nice article, but found some goofs [smithchuck] by dk76 Jun 01, 2007 (9:01 pm)
Replying to: smithchuck (Jun 01, 2007 7:13 pm) 4) I guess math wasn't your strongest subject in school. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to realize that 10 percent decrease in fuel efficiency is an understatement when you're comparing a 1.5L to a 2.4L engine car that weights more. Replies to this message: smithchuck (Jun 01, 2007 10:49 pm)
#5 of 35 Re: Nice article, but found some goofs [dk76] by smithchuck Jun 01, 2007 (10:49 pm)
Replying to: dk76 (Jun 01, 2007 9:01 pm) dk76: is your critique of the math addressed to the author of the original article or to me? If it's to me, then maybe you can show me where my math is incorrect. I completely understand that a much heavier car with a bigger engine is normally going to have lower fuel efficiency--that wasn't my point. I was trying to figure out how the author came up with their statement of "10% thirstier." Seems to me it's 2-3 times that, unless I miscalculated, which is why I said how I got my figures.
#6 of 35 Re: Nice article, but found some goofs [smithchuck] by lonestarcody Jun 01, 2007 (11:07 pm)
Replying to: smithchuck (Jun 01, 2007 7:13 pm) "1) On page 1 you say "despite having grown almost a foot in overall length...". On the Second Opinion page, Josh Jacquot's last paragraph says the car is "shorter."" In height, not length. 2) On page 1 you say "the difference lies in front-seat legroom, which has increased 4.6 inches." Your specs pages say the 2008 has 41.3 inches of front legroom, while the 2006 has 45.3--the car's a foot longer and it LOST 4 inches of front legroom? Yes. It has less legroom and the car is a foot longer. Way to go Scion. Take a great car and screw it up to cater to your average joe driver rather than the people these cars appealed to in the first place. They should have ported over the new bB instead of creating this monstrosity. Replies to this message: smithchuck (Jun 01, 2007 11:39 pm) smithchuck (Jun 01, 2007 11:54 pm) dk76 (Jun 05, 2007 11:54 pm) smithchuck (Jun 06, 2007 6:41 pm)
#7 of 35 Re: Nice article, but found some goofs [lonestarcody] by smithchuck Jun 01, 2007 (11:39 pm)
Replying to: lonestarcody (Jun 01, 2007 11:07 pm) lonestarcody: >> height, not length. Ahh, thanks for clearing that up. The ambiguities of the English language.... tall <-> short long <-> short
#8 of 35 Re: Nice article, but found some goofs [lonestarcody] by smithchuck Jun 01, 2007 (11:54 pm)
Replying to: lonestarcody (Jun 01, 2007 11:07 pm) P.S. The first review I read of the new xB was not too flattering: http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?p=3729 although Road & Track seemed to like the changes: http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=6&article_id=5350 (and by the way, to dk76--the "truth about cars" review mentioned above also says that the gas mileage is down about 25% in the city, but then they also note that this is "'06 adjusted"--I forgot that the EPA just changed how they calculate mpg, so a 2008 car probably has a lower EPA rating even when compared to an identical 2007 or earlier version). Replies to this message: dk76 (Jun 05, 2007 11:54 pm) smithchuck (Jun 06, 2007 6:41 pm)
#9 of 35 Re: Nice article, but found some goofs [smithchuck] by dk76 Jun 05, 2007 (11:54 pm)
Replying to: smithchuck (Jun 01, 2007 11:54 pm) Sorry for the misunderstanding smithchuck, I was just agreeing with you and that the writer is an idiot for stating that is was only 10% when it obviously wasn't. Replies to this message: smithchuck (Jun 06, 2007 6:41 pm)
#10 of 35 Flawed Review! by johnzocco Jun 06, 2007 (12:23 am)
There are so many mistakes in this review that I truly wonder whether Edmunds did their homework on the '08 Scion xB. I don't think so! I won't go into detail as to how many errors there were in Edmund's review. Suffice it to say that Edmunds needs to get its act together on this one. I just bought an '08 Scion xB with automatic transmission. I also happen to own an '06 Scion xB Release Series 4.0 with 5-speed manual. I love both wagons. The '08 xB is roomier in front and in the back, and also the cargo area is larger. It is also faster, has a smoother more complaint ride, and is much more quiet. It has more standard equipment than the old xB, in particular 4-wheel disk brakes (the old one had front disks and rear drums), side airbags & curtains, tire pressure monitoring system, cruise control & a seat height adjustor for the driver's seat. These were sorely lacking in the 1st generation xB. However, just like everything else in life, you can't have it all. The new xB weighs over 600 lbs. more than the old one, has a larger engine, therefore, fuel economy takes a hit. I am averaging about 26 mpg in mixed driving. My '06 xB averages about 31 mpg. Like I said before I love both my xB's, but the new one overall is better. Test drive one, then you know what I'm saying. As far as looks go, I like them both. That's my take on this! Happy driving!