Compact car analysis

[cchase]

I am leaving out things such as resale value, reliability, driving experience, etc since none of it is objective. Even resale value might be able to be relatively compared but since I am looking at all "new" vehicles its impossible to state objectively some kind of future resale value. We all know that Toyota and Honda could create the biggest piece of junk the world has ever known and it would still have class-leading resale value.

As far as the Golf vs the Jetta - it's fine that the Golf comes out a bit cheaper but usefulness or not, it's in another segment and likely isn't getting cross shopped with 4 door sedans.

Originally Posted By: zyxelenator
Cheapest Fiat 500 Pop $15,500 101 bhp +1000 for auto tranny.
Mpg 30/38 stick
27/34 auto
you are skipping sentra, versa,yaris,smart,fit,rio,elanta,fiesta,veloster.
Even dough they called "subcompact" they not much smaller.


Again, the Fiat is a hatchback, not a 4 door compact sedan. Same goes for the Versa, Rio, Fit, and Veloster. The Smart, Yaris, and Fiesta are in a different class. It's fine that they "aren't much smaller" but since they're in a different class I can't objectively call them competition for the same market.

 

[cchase]

Originally Posted By: Spazdog
You have to get the Mazda3i Touring to get the 155 hp SKYACTIV-G
Manual $18,450 27/39
Automatic $19,300 28/40

You are paying more than you would for a Focus S, Jetta S, Civic LX, or Cruze LS, but you are getting more too. You'd have to go up to a Corolla LE to get close but you'd still be short on horsepower.

The Kia Forte comes in at $15,200 ($16,200 automatic) It's a little short on fuel economy: 24/34 manual, 26/36 automatic.

But the Subaru is the one in that class that suprises. 27/36 mpg. That's carrying the added weight of it's all wheel drive. It starts at $17,495

The 150 hp Suzuki SX4 sedan doesn't make the cut. I think it's closer to a subcompact, doesn't feel like it has 50 more hp than a Mazda2, and has unimpressive fuel economy. Good price though.

The Lancer DE has similar fuel economy to the Suzuki. 26/34mpg


The vehicles you mentioned are all good choices. However, for the practical purposes of this comparison I'm considering the Mitsubishi and Suzuki to be too "niche" relatively in terms of volume leaders.

I skipped the Kia since I already had its twin on there and didn't think the Kia would stack up that much better since its fuel economy is substantially lower. The Mazda is too much money compared to everything on this list.



Again, just to be clear, I'm not considering any of these cars. I was just interested in comparing them on these grounds objectively.

 

[cchase]

Originally Posted By: Tim
Have you driven these vehicles?

Your analysis is fine, as far as it goes. But living with a vehicle for years, and the joys/frustrations that come with it can completely eclipse a few dollars in initial cost, depreciation, etc.
Tim


I haven't driven any of these cars. I've been in past generations of some of them but none of the current offerings. If I was going by past experience you couldn't pay me to take a Jetta, Elantra, or Corolla. But I understand some of these offerings have changed substantially in the past 3 years.

As far as the actual vehicle ownership, of course this is a huge factor but unfortunately not one I can look at objectively. Over time I suspect the Japanese offerings will have lower operating cost and the VW will quickly become the most expensive to own. However, there's no way to quantify that when looking at a new car and removing all past experience and bias.

In doing this research, I am struck by the fact that the Civic is still by far the "best" in this group under these parameters.

 

[Spazdog]

Originally Posted By: cchase

The vehicles you mentioned are all good choices. However, for the practical purposes of this comparison I'm considering the Mitsubishi and Suzuki to be too "niche" relatively in terms of volume leaders.


I didn't include the $16,845 Mazda 3i Sport because it still has the older 148hp MZR (25/33 - 24/33mpg) but in retrospect, it does compete with the smaller Cruze LS 1.8, flat outpowers the Corolla, and is better across the board than the Jetta S 2-point-slow.

Driving dynamics should be as good if not better than the Jetta. Many battle lines have been drawn about that with the Mazda against the Jetta and Golf. 2.0 vs 2.0, 2.5 L4 vs 2.5 L5, turbo vs turbo.

The leering grin on the front fascia is starting to grow on me... a little. I'm just not as horrified when I see it. My wife thinks it's a good looking car. Then again, she thought her 2001 Eclipse GT was a good looking car and that I am a good looking man....so,

I'm still in on the Impreza. It doesn't meet the price point but it has AWD for very little more cost.

I might have included the Sentra too. Nissan is supposed to come out with a new version. Renault content unknown.

 

[jmsjags]

Originally Posted By: cchase
In doing this research, I am struck by the fact that the Civic is still by far the "best" in this group under these parameters.

the civic is getting an emergency refresh because Honda even thinks it falls short. your research is not very scientific at all

 

[sciphi]

It's nice to have all these choices. It lets us all get what we can afford both financially and otherwise.