Chevrolet Spark

[pandus13]

Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
Do you know of any high performance car with instruments on center of the dashboard ?

yep, it's called, toyota yaris/world car
i think there is one making 420 hp somewhere (track only toy)

 

[SwampSurvivor]

I like the layout of the Spark's interior. The current generation Spark's interior is much more welcoming and comfortable than the last one.

Definitely like it over the layout of the civic. The Civic isn't the end-all be-all of cars, that's for sure.

I'd take a Fit or a Spark over a Civic any day. Preferably the Spark since it's a good bit cheaper.

 

[Andrew1972]

I think mainly rental car companies have a few as loss leader, pizza and car parts delivery places and fleets use them.

Around here they are a rare bird as personal car. I think the issue is they are not much cheaper then a more substantial base model Cruze with all its mark downs.

Glad you found your dream chariot to the grave. Definitely varies.

 

[Nate1979]

It can't be any worse than this hideous interior of the Tesla Model 3.

 

[HTSS_TR]

Originally Posted By: Nate1979
It can't be any worse than this hideous interior of the Tesla Model 3.





This is a prototype, not a pre-production. Tesla didn't finish the design until few weeks ago. It's supposed to have head-up-display, we will see the actual instrument on the next unveil of the pre-production copies.

 

[ARCOgraphite]

IThe rental I had Just drove BAD. I L-U-V and cherish small, light cars of the 70s and 80s. Al's 5-speed will help, but the Spark is greatly missing that small car je ne sais quoi.

The Civic is a different class. I wouldnt want one. Mr Soichiro Honda is roiling in the grave over what his fun-to-drive small cars have become.

Evidence a truly stunning and wonderful gamechanger: The 1983 Civic (my roommate owned one).

 

[Al]

Originally Posted By: meadows
Keep us up on quality, MPG, etc.

I went over it with a fine tooth comb. It is a very well engineered vehicle. I realize all new vehicles are made with the same technologh and as such fit together like a watch. The engine and transmission are all aluminum. It will be very easy to spot any HG leaks.

It drives like any vehicle, relatively quiet at normal speeds. I jhave not driven it past 60 mph. It is very stable and handles very well. The ride is firm but not uncomfortable. For me perfect. Wheels are 15" an d tires are very good. It has traction control and stability control, OnStar, HotSpot WYFI. Diagnostics that you can call up on your tablet or Computer. Has rear window wiper washer. The cvoolant system has the surge tank pressurized so you know positively that the radiator is full.

The shifter is very very smooth. The clutch is a bit lighter than I would like. It automatically turns headlights on it desired. I am just flat out amazed that it is so inexpensive. I believe you can get the basic model for $11,600 if you try. I paid $12,240 bc it was the only one within at least hundreds of miles that were silver, manual, and zero options.

Lastly, it is really fun to drive. If you are even mildly interested, check one out. I feel confident than anyone with an open mind that appreciates quality will be likewise impressed. I know my bro-in-law is a small car hater..so folks like him won't give it a look. He likes tanks. But honestly its basically a 2 seater and as such the driver/Passenger compartment are quite spacious.

Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
Oh, Al, I forgot I owned a Justy 3 cyl. That was fun. Only 5900 bucks new.

I am/was AlleyCat on Subaruforester.org

Lol..IO remember you. I got a bit peeved with a couple mods and left for 8 months but eventually came back and post a little..but not much.

 

[JTK]

Al, I know it's going to be awhile before she's broke-in yet, but what MPGs are you seeing with the new Spark?

 

[4WD]

Eventually - instead of having the transgender dash - it will be cheaper to put a steering wheel on both sides.
Then when she is telling you how to drive ......

 

[Al]

Originally Posted By: JTK
Al, I know it's going to be awhile before she's broke-in yet, but what MPGs are you seeing with the new Spark?

34 around town. At 60mph on the flat highway it "says" 47. In 'my' experience I don't see much improvement as it breaks in. That's just me.

 

[addyguy]

Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
IThe rental I had Just drove BAD. I L-U-V and cherish small, light cars of the 70s and 80s. Al's 5-speed will help, but the Spark is greatly missing that small car je ne sais quoi.

The Civic is a different class. I wouldnt want one. Mr Soichiro Honda is roiling in the grave over what his fun-to-drive small cars have become.

Evidence a truly stunning and wonderful gamechanger: The 1983 Civic (my roommate owned one).

My mom had one just like that - 1984, 1.3L, 5-speed, exact same color.

It 'inspired' my years later to buy the same car - 1986 blue 3-door with a 1.5 CVCC and a 5-speed. Drove it for 2.5 years until it was wrecked, just a great car.

Civics are NOT what they used to be, but the Fit is what the Civic used to be...

 

[dlayman]

Originally Posted By: addyguy
Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
IThe rental I had Just drove BAD. I L-U-V and cherish small, light cars of the 70s and 80s. Al's 5-speed will help, but the Spark is greatly missing that small car je ne sais quoi.

The Civic is a different class. I wouldnt want one. Mr Soichiro Honda is roiling in the grave over what his fun-to-drive small cars have become.

Evidence a truly stunning and wonderful gamechanger: The 1983 Civic (my roommate owned one).

My mom had one just like that - 1984, 1.3L, 5-speed, exact same color.

It 'inspired' my years later to buy the same car - 1986 blue 3-door with a 1.5 CVCC and a 5-speed. Drove it for 2.5 years until it was wrecked, just a great car.

Civics are NOT what they used to be, but the Fit is what the Civic used to be...


The Fit? No way. My wife has one. It's not fun to drive. Its slow, rides harshly,is noisy, and handling is numb. Front row seating is extremely cramped. I've lost count of how many recalls. Solid rear axle with no adjustable alignment caused it to eat rear tires every 10k until I finally threw a "fit" and demanded Honda replace the axle. A built in Mexico CVT that is loud and unresponsive. Not one of Honda's better efforts. The Civic has its faults and may not be want you want it to be but it is a far better value. And the 9th generation, though widely criticized, is a very comfortable car that has demonstrated outstanding reliability. The 10th will likely eventually achieve excellent reliability after another year or two of improvements.

Mid 1980's Japanese hatchbacks were really good cars. Incredible value. I had a 1984 Tercel hatchback. Got outstanding mileage, outstanding reliability, plenty of legroom for the driver and it could just swallow cargo. Honda and Mazda had similar great offerings.

 

[HTSS_TR]

Originally Posted By: dlayman
The Fit? No way. My wife has one. It's not fun to drive. Its slow, rides harshly,is noisy, and handling is numb. Front row seating is extremely cramped. I've lost count of how many recalls. Solid rear axle with no adjustable alignment caused it to eat rear tires every 10k until I finally threw a "fit" and demanded Honda replace the axle. A built in Mexico CVT that is loud and unresponsive. Not one of Honda's better efforts. The Civic has its faults and may not be want you want it to be but it is a far better value. And the 9th generation, though widely criticized, is a very comfortable car that has demonstrated outstanding reliability. The 10th will likely eventually achieve excellent reliability after another year or two of improvements.

Mid 1980's Japanese hatchbacks were really good cars. Incredible value. I had a 1984 Tercel hatchback. Got outstanding mileage, outstanding reliability, plenty of legroom for the driver and it could just swallow cargo. Honda and Mazda had similar great offerings.

Many drivers who bought Civic was for its performance/handling, not for ride. The 9th generation Civic didn't do very well in that category, but the 10th generation does.

 

[dlayman]

Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
Originally Posted By: dlayman
The Fit? No way. My wife has one. It's not fun to drive. Its slow, rides harshly,is noisy, and handling is numb. Front row seating is extremely cramped. I've lost count of how many recalls. Solid rear axle with no adjustable alignment caused it to eat rear tires every 10k until I finally threw a "fit" and demanded Honda replace the axle. A built in Mexico CVT that is loud and unresponsive. Not one of Honda's better efforts. The Civic has its faults and may not be want you want it to be but it is a far better value. And the 9th generation, though widely criticized, is a very comfortable car that has demonstrated outstanding reliability. The 10th will likely eventually achieve excellent reliability after another year or two of improvements.

Mid 1980's Japanese hatchbacks were really good cars. Incredible value. I had a 1984 Tercel hatchback. Got outstanding mileage, outstanding reliability, plenty of legroom for the driver and it could just swallow cargo. Honda and Mazda had similar great offerings.

Many drivers who bought Civic was for its performance/handling, not for ride. The 9th generation Civic didn't do very well in that category, but the 10th generation does.


I would agree with that. If someone was looking for sporty handling and performance as a top priority, and chose the 9th Civic, they didn't do enough test driving. The 10th is much better in those areas, but the 9th did have its strengths. And the Fit is definitely not a cheap and cheerful zippy fun to drive car by any means. Even the 9th Civic beats it in those categories.

 

[Al]

After 1600 miles it has gotten (calculated) 38.4 mpg. Most trips are going 5 miles to town and back. Only one trip..65 miles each way. It got 42.5 on that one. A really great car so far. The only thing I don't like about it is its dark interior...carpets, seats, and dash.

 

[simple_gifts]

Human nature is funny. Spend $57K for a car and everyone is happy; spend $12K and there is a potential for 4 pages of 'you shudda....'

Pretty soon, I'll be scoping out a new ride; this wasn't on the list, but i might give it a look.

In the end a car purchase sometimes is made viscerally; whether it be 57K or 12.

 

[SR20DE]

Originally Posted By: dlayman

The Fit? No way. My wife has one. It's not fun to drive. Its slow, rides harshly,is noisy, and handling is numb. Front row seating is extremely cramped. I've lost count of how many recalls.


Hmm, we had a 2011 Fit Sport that was fun to drive and handled well, though I will agree on your other points. We didn't have the CVT though (ugh). I guess the latest generation went downhill a bit (it certainly did on the styling, looks like a shrunken minivan).

 

[Al]

Originally Posted By: simple_gifts

Pretty soon, I'll be scoping out a new ride; this wasn't on the list, but i might give it a look.

Look at it very carefully...underneath, engine compartment, fit of everything. I think you will be impressed.

 

[pandus13]

Originally Posted By: simple_gifts
Pretty soon, I'll be scoping out a new ride; this wasn't on the list, but i might give it a look.

Whoa, I just saw your Echo got to 400,000 miles....

Good Horsy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Srt20]

A friend has a Spark I think. Not positive but it's one of those pretty small Chevys. It says turbo on the back, so I assume it's a turbo?
Anyway, I'm a truck guy, the smallest vehicle I've owned in the last 15yrs has been a 3 row SUV. I drove the Spark about 5 miles a month or so ago. It's a nice little car. Seemed well put together, nice infotainment stack, leather (pleather?) seats, fairly peppy engine.
I did think the road noise was loud and it rode kind of rough, but then again, I'm used to vehicles with wheelbases longer than the overall length of the Spark. So I can't really complain about that.

I think it makes an excellent city type car.