Last post on Oct 23, 2013 at 1:23 PM
You are in the Sedans
What is this discussion about?
Chevrolet, Ford Focus, Honda Civic, Hyundai Elantra, Toyota Corolla, Mazda MAZDA3, Nissan Sentra, Kia, Volkswagen Jetta, Car Comparisons, Sedan
#257 of 300 Crash safety
Dec 17, 2011 (5:53 am)
The IIHS Top Picks for 2012 are out and looks like compacts in general scored very well:
All the new designs are Top Picks, but the old Sentra missed the cut. Interestingly, the score for the Sentra dropped after 2010 MY even though the design of the car hasn't changed.
Even some of the smaller cars got on the list, e.g. Fiesta, Fit, Sonic, Yaris. The new Accent and Rio didn't make it... side protection not good enough. Something for Hyundai/Kia to work on.
Based on this, and looking at the details behind the scores, plus my test drives to date, the Focus SE and Impreza hatches go up to the top of my shopping list. Elantra and Cruze did well on the crash tests also, but I'd rather get a hatch all else being equal. Mazda3 Skyactiv 6MT will get strong consideration, if the ride quality is acceptable (haven't driven it yet). Fit could be an option as it's really fun to drive with a stick and exceptionally versatile, but the noise level inside is a mite high for my taste.
#258 of 300 Re: Buick Verano [m6user]
by Kirstie@Edmunds HOST
Dec 19, 2011 (10:11 am)
Keyword search does it - but for the record, we've put in a request for the Verano and other new models to be added to the drop-down make/model search.
#259 of 300 2007 Sentra starting problem
Dec 19, 2011 (1:43 pm)
I have a 2007 Sentra that has a starting problem. The car will intermittingly start fine and then I shut if off go into a store or run an errand and try to start the car but it does not start. I give if a few minutes and it will start. I hear the fuel pump kick on.
Anyone know what may be causing this problem?
#261 of 300 Re: Buick Verano [plekto]
Dec 22, 2011 (10:29 am)
Sorry, but it does belong here. I believe Edmunds decides which car belong where in these discussions....not you. Cars are marketed by manufactures not the EPA and most people consider those to be the categories. Why you are so hung up on what the EPA says is beyond me.
I explained before that the EPA puts the Bentley Continental Flying Spur(about $200k by the way) in the same midsize category as the Chevy Cruze. Nobody in their right mind would say they are in the same category. One is almost twice the size/weight as the other and is marketed as a large luxury barge while the other is marketed as a small economy car. Why would anyone want them to be in the same size catergory for discussion purposes? Just because the EPA says they have the similar passenger/cargo volume.
I don't think anyone(besides you possibly) would argue that the Elantra, Corolla, Mazda3, Cruze and the Buick Verona(Cruze based) don't belong in the same discussion category. But the EPA has some in compact and some in midsize. Totally silly. In fact the Mazda3 sedan is compact and the Mazda3 5 door is midsize according to the EPA. Again, silly.
Dec 22, 2011 (11:09 pm)
I agree with much of what m6user says about the compact market class vs. EPA size categories. One caveat though. When discussing 5-door hatchbacks they are measured using total interior volume (to the roofline) and that nearly always results in a higher interior volume versus sedans with a conventinal trunk. Even a Hyundai Accent 5-door goes into the midsize class on interior volume but the EPA normally "adjusts" 5-doors down to their correct market class.
Also, with more and more "large compacts" hitting the road, we might need to redefine what this class of vehicle really should be. The 2012 Jetta at 112 cu.ft. of volume is a good example - as it is significantly larger than a new Focus or Corolla. Almost a size class larger. As other manufacturers build these "mid-size compacts", a new C/D segment may be born.
The new Elantra and Jetta are family size sedans in Europe. The paradigm is shifting in the U.S.
Jan 03, 2012 (8:39 am)
A reporter is looking to interview midsize or small car owners who recently switched from Honda or Toyota to Chrysler, Ford or GM. Email predmunds.com no later than Thursday, January 5, 2012 with your daytime contact information and a few words about your decision and your experience so far.
#264 of 300 Re: Silly? [dodgeman07]
Jan 08, 2012 (8:16 am)
The other day I saw a Cruze next to a Volvo 850. The Cruze (Verano/etc) made the Volvo look like it was anorexic by comparison. Sure, the Cruze looks all small and round by today's standards, but cars really have all gotten fat and massive over the last 20 years. To the point where even something like a Yaris is larger than an old VW Bug.
Wheelbase 2685 mm 105.7 in
Length 4671 mm 183.9 in
Width 1814 mm 71.4 in
Height 1483 mm 58.4 in
Weight 1497 kg 3300 lb
Volvo 850 wagon
Wheelbase 2665 mm 104.9 in
Length 4660 mm 183.5 in
Width 1760 mm 69.3 in
Height 1415 mm 55.7 in
Weight 1330 kg 2932 lb
Yes, that 850 Wagon is/was smaller in every measurement.
What really happened is that so few cars fit in the compact and sub-compact categories simply because they aren't being made that small any more. The same thing happened in the 60s, you'll remember. Cars became truly massive to the point where a normal sized car from the 50s suddenly looked like a toy by comparison.
#265 of 300 Re: Silly? [plekto]
Jan 08, 2012 (8:59 am)
Upsizing of cars has been happening for a long time. For example, when Accord was introduced, it was a sub-compact by today's standards--just 162 inches long. Now it's nearly 195 inches long--almost 3 FEET longer--and has the interior room of a full-sized car by the EPA measurements.
The Accord is a good example of a "tweener" car. It's considered a "mid-sized" sedan by most people, but is long and roomy for its class. Another example is the Verano, and also cars like the Elantra and Jetta: smaller than today's "mid-sized" cars outside, but with the interior room of a mid-sized car per EPA numbers.
As cars have been upsized, our definition of what a "compact" is and what a "mid-sized" car is have changed also. We could continue to use definitions from 35 years ago. Or we could adapt to the reality of today's automotive market.
#266 of 300 Re: Silly? [backy]
Jan 08, 2012 (3:14 pm)
The average American has grown a lot since the 60s as well. That was fifty years ago and people have been getting larger. The small suburb where I live has several linemen on it's high school football team that are over 6'4" and weigh close to and over 275 lbs. When I went to high school in the same size town I don't think we had anybody on our team over 6'1" and nobody weighed over 200. It's just a fact that not only have we gotten large in overall size but weight is even more pronounced as detailed in media left and right. Hence bigger cars just to provide room for this bodily expansion. That is but one reason. Could people cram themselves into the subcompacts of yesteryear? Sure, if they had to but that's not the case.
Another reason is safety impact standards. It's still easier to protect occupants with a little room and bulk around them. You have to have somewhere to put all those crushzones and airbags. And still another reason is that longer wheelbases usually provide a smoother ride than a short wheelbase and most people like smooth rides.